Natural Resources Law Commons^™

Water, Water, Anywhere?: Protecting Water Quantity In State Water Quality Standards, Julie F. Youngman

Indiana Law Journal

Although much of the earth’s surface is covered with water, less than one percent of water is available for human use. Water is becoming progressively scarcer worldwide, as demand increases and pollution, drought, and climate change jeopardize access to clean water. The United States is no exception to that trend. Effective regulation of water supplies can blunt the impacts of water scarcity. This Article suggests that states can—and should—regulate instream flows and lake levels in their federally-mandated water quality standards, with an eye toward conserving scarce water resources. Regulating water quantity as an element of water quality is not only …

Draining The Flooded Markets: Tariffs, Suniva & Solar Energy Investment, Michael A. Stroup

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Demand for solar energy in the United States has increased significantly over the past half century. Despite the falling costs of solar infrastructure, the United States solar energy market is at a turning point. In 2017, two insolvent U.S. solar manufacturers, Suniva and SolarWorld America, successfully petitioned the International Trade Commission (ITC) to invoke Section 201 of the 1974 Trade Act. The two U.S. manufacturers argued that a surplus of imported Chinese solar panels has driven the cost of solar infrastructure too low and forced them out of the market. The ITC responded by recommending tariffs on global solar photovoltaic …

Fracking And The Rural Poor: Negative Externalities, Failing Remedies, And Federal Legislation, Matthew Castelli

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

This Note examines the relationship between the rural poor and the negative externalities of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”). It asserts that the rural poor are disproportionately burdened with fracking’s negative externalities and that comprehensive, national regulation is needed because current legal methods are insufficient to internalize these costs. The argument is made in four parts: describing fracking’s externalities; assessing their impact on the rural poor; analyzing current legal regimes; and proposing an equitable regulatory framework based on cooperative federalism.

Fracking produces three main categories of negative externalities: water, air, and land contamination. Water contamination can be caused by migration of fracking …