ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL BLOGS

Eat a sandwich, contribute to global warming...

A study by the University of Manchester concludes that our taste for sandwiches may not be politically correct.

The study says that the processing, packaging and refrigeration of meats such as bacon, ham and sausage that go into various sandwiches leave a carbon footprint that harmfully affects the environment. See http://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/what-is-the-environmental-impact-of-your-lunch-time-sandwich/ .

So don't be surprised, when you next order a sandwich at your favorite restaurant, if someone labels you a "climate-change denier." To assuage your guilt, buy some carbon offsets every time you eat a sandwich, like Al Gore does to balance out his petroleum-emitting private plane rides.

California Assembly Member Ian Calderon, D-City of Industry, has introduced legislation (Assembly Bill 1884), which provides:

"SECTION 1. Section 114082 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:

114082. A food facility where food may be consumed on the premises shall not provide single-use plastic straws to consumers unless requested by the consumer."

In its present iteration, a waiter who violates this prohibition commits a misdemeanor and could face up to a $1,000 fine and up to 6 months in jail. Presumably, the food facility/its owners or operators could also be punished with a misdemeanor prosecution. A little bit much?

Calderon's office says that he is considering eliminating or at least reducing the punishment.

California Assembly Member Phil Ting, a Democrat, has introduced Assembly Bill 1745, which if enacted would outlaw the initial registration of petroleum-fueled vehicles as of 2040. Only vehicles with zero emissions could be registered. There are certain exemptions; see http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB1745 .

The LA County Superior Court is now hearing a controversy over whether Proposition 65 requires warnings on coffee, which includes the chemical acrylamide. Defendants from the coffee industry are arguing that the chemical is excluded from regulation because it qualifies under an exemption for chemicals produced in he cooking process under certain circumstances. The Judge is considering the issue and apparently will issue a written opinion. How soon the opinion will be issued is unknown.