Category — Technology

Assateague Coastkeeper et als. v. Alan and Kristen Hudson Farm and Perdue Farms Incorporated, Civil Action WMN-10-cv-0487, D.Md. (slip op. dated July 20, 2010).

Defendant Perdue Farms Incorporated (“Perdue”) unsuccessfully sought dismissal of this Clean Water Act citizen’s suit, even though it did not own or directly operate the Hudsons’ chicken growing operation. This case thus extends citizen’s suit liability to parties, like Perdue, who are not directly responsible for water pollution but have sufficient control over the water-polluting activities of their contractors. [Read more →]

The recognized environmental benefit of utilizing renewable sources of energy is the primary driver for investment in renewable energy projects.  However, the development of renewable energy projects may also involve significant environmental challenges as well.  Even “environmentally-friendly” sources of power, such as wind and solar, can have environmental consequences and may also be subject to various environmental laws and regulations.  [Read more →]

From Green Business Bureau Blog:

Why does green tech, and the IP that protects it, play such an important part in every-day business decisions? Take the following illustration:
 
Some years ago, I was lead counsel for a well-known government-related entity (“GRE”) in a “paleo” green tech litigation. Responding to societal and regulatory pressures, the GRE was utilizing a simple and effective technique for removing millions of square feet of vinyl asbestos tile from its facilities. But after commencement of the project, the GRE was sued for infringement of a patent on an invention coincidentally (?) made by an employee of one of the project subcontractors. You may think this sounds a bit fishy; so did we. The suit was ultimately settled for nuisance value. [Read more →]

From Green Business Bureau Blog:

When a major manufacturer spent millions to develop a new, environmentally friendly line of products, this was a reflection of modern society’s focus on “green tech”.  Over and above the improved product itself, the green tech embodied in it was also a highly valuable asset.  [Read more →]

After months of anticipation, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) released its 563-page proposal for regulating the disposal and management of coal combustion byproducts (“CCBs”) from coal-fired power plants.  Instead of offering a single approach, EPA requested comments on two options for regulating CCBs.  The first would regulate CCBs as a new “special waste” subject to many of the requirements for hazardous waste, while the second would regulate CCBs in a manner similar to typical solid waste, subject to far fewer and less stringent environmental requirements.  EPA would lead the first approach, the various States the second.  Either of EPA’s proposed options represents a seismic shift toward more comprehensive and expensive requirements for CCBs disposal and management.  And for certain utilities, EPA’s regulatory proposal effectively signals the end of ash pond disposal for CCBs. [Read more →]