3 ms·
Aha, so the answer is that once something has happened, it's fine. But if a change is proposed, it can be stopped, or at a minimum much more costly and delayed.
by epistasis 3y ago
Aha, so the answer is that once something has happened, it's fine. But if a change is proposed, it can be stopped, or at a minimum much more costly and delayed.
What an odd and counterproductive thing for an "environmental" law to do when the very status quo is what must to be changed to protect the environment.
- solardev 3y agoIts intent was to place guardrails/checks and balances around new development that could potentially damage fragile ecosystems. (It's still used this way a lot) In actual use, though, it's often also (mis-)applied and weaponized by NIMBYs who just hate changes of any sort. Affirmative (as opposed to preventative) environmental laws also exist, such as the solar subsidies discussed in the article, CAFE (fuel economy) mandates, etc. They're just different. Anyway, I don't mean to lecture, lol, just point out that sometimes laws can be weaponized against their original intent.