Court rejects California limits on ship emissions
Environmental
[##_1L|1396189939.jpg|width="120" height="88" alt=""|_##]A federal appeals court Wednesday rejected a state regulation that reduced emissions from ships, dealing a blow to California's attempt to combat one of the major sources of smog-forming pollution in the Los Angeles region. The ruling means that the state must seek federal approval before imposing pollution limits on the thousands of cargo ships, cruise ships and other marine vessels that visit its ports.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that California's new regulation is preempted by federal law. The Clean Air Act allows California to set its own standards for various vehicles and engines if it receives waivers from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The state argued that in this case it didn't technically need a waiver, but the judges disagreed.
Ships sailing into the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are considered a major source of particulates, nitrogen oxides and sulfur, pollutants that cause the region to frequently violate federal health standards.
Microscopic soot from diesel engines can lodge in lungs, triggering heart attacks, asthma and other cardiovascular and respiratory problems, scientists say. Diesel exhaust has also been linked to lung cancer.
The ruling is the second setback in two months to California's efforts to combat air pollution rather than wait for federal action.
For four decades, the state has adopted its own regulations for cars, trucks, factories, consumer products and other sources of air pollution, often prompting the federal government to set similar standards.
Microscopic soot from diesel engines can lodge in lungs, triggering heart attacks, asthma and other cardiovascular and respiratory problems, scientists say. Diesel exhaust has also been linked to lung cancer.
The ruling is the second setback in two months to California's efforts to combat air pollution rather than wait for federal action.
For four decades, the state has adopted its own regulations for cars, trucks, factories, consumer products and other sources of air pollution, often prompting the federal government to set similar standards.
Related listings
-
Top court debates Exxon Valdez damages
Environmental 02/28/2008Nearly 19 years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill fouled Alaska's Prince William Sound, the Supreme Court debated Wednesday how much money the company responsible for the disaster should pay in punitive damages.A jury in Alaska said $5 billion. An app...
-
High court to hear Exxon Valdez damages case
Environmental 02/26/2008For many in this coastal town, the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster was an event so crushing that hard-bitten fishermen still get teary-eyed recalling ruined livelihoods, broken marriages and suicides.But mostly, people in Cordova talk about the discouragi...
-
Court Ruling May Delay Power Plant Mercury Clean-Up
Environmental 02/14/2008Clean-up of power plant mercury emissions may be slowed in the short run by a Feb. 8 federal appeals court ruling, but the market clearly believes the clean-up will be increased in the long run. Investors showed immediate enthusiasm for Pittsburgh-ba...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.