556 research outputs found
Sort by
Is Bitcoin the New Gold? The Two May Be More Similar than You Think, Including Their Value, Uses, and Deleterious Effects on the Environment
Full text linkIn the 1850s, the Gold Rush started in the United States, and in 2010, an analogous phenomenon, the Cryptoboom, began. Similar to the Gold Rush, Bitcoin’s initial boom was marred by the deleterious effects that mining for valuable coins had on the environment, but there are steps that can be taken to mitigate the negative effect cryptocurrencies have on the environment. Cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin and the blockchain technology that powers cryptocurrencies, have been widely embraced by many people, corporations, and even entire governments for a multitude of reasons. Some have embraced the fruits of blockchain to use as a decentralized currency for buying and selling, some have used cryptocurrencies as an investment to generate profits, some have used blockchains to create digital assets, and others have used blockchains to store records and databases. For society, due to the limitless applications, the invention of blockchain technology may be on par with the printing press, the steam engine, and the internet. Unfortunately, the process of creating, maintaining, and transferring cryptocurrencies has an enormous adverse effect on the environment.
The pattern of destructive and wasteful behaviors that accompanied gold, silver, and coal mining now accompanies cryptomining, and a major environmental catastrophe is looming in the future. The electricity and computer parts required for cryptomining create an astronomical amount of carbon dioxide emissions and electronic waste, which further increases the threat of a climate disaster. However, all is not lost. There are steps that can be taken to mitigate these environmental impacts. These steps include government intervention in the form of regulations on carbon emissions and tax incentives for using sustainable energy sources, private sector innovation, which includes manufacturing more durable specialty GPUs and switching to proof of stake, and initiative by individuals, which encompasses reusing and recycling parts used for cryptomining
Municipalities Could Provide Valuable Second-Life Uses of Electric Vehicle Li-Ion Batteries While Legislators and Manufacturers Refine Safe Recycling and Disposal Practices
Full text linkAs consumers are embracing emerging electric vehicles (EVs) as an important step to take in combating climate change, the reality is that the EV solution has some serious short-term issues to address, especially when evaluating the lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) that power most EVs. This comment first discusses the potential problems associated with the lack of recycling and disposal technology as well as regulations that are available for EV LIBs. Even though consumers and regulators alike are supportive that fossil fuel-burning internal combustion engines need to be replaced with cleaner transportation options such as EVs, policies, and proclamations are still subject to the intricacies and timelines of evolving technology. That means that until EV technology becomes routine, recycling practices and associated legislation are subject to too much fluctuation to create concrete standards. So, what does society do with the EV LIBs between now and that future time? One answer this comment provides is that sustainability-committed municipalities could promote valuable second-life reuse options for EV LIBs. Furthermore, this comment suggests Orlando, Florida, is an excellent example of a pioneer city to exhibit how to incorporate spent EV LIBs within their self-governing powers and in conjunction with the technological partnerships they have cultivated with industry and academia. By linking the city’s commitments to sustainability, renewable energy, and innovation, Orlando has an opportunity to show other cities in Florida and across the U.S. how local self- governed municipalities can solve newly evolving issues associated with these advancing technologies in the void of federal and state legislation, regulations and mandates
TRIAL BY COMBAT IN THE MODERN WORLD
Full text linkThe ancient practice of trial by combat was abandoned hundreds of years ago and has never been employed in America. Yet this has not stopped litigants and others from demanding trial by combat—a tactic which, while infrequent, implicates deeper questions of the history of American law. In the past several years, several high-profile demands for trial by combat have prompted media attention and caused several commentators to suggest that trial by combat may be an option for civil litigants. Most coverage and commentary only focuses on each instance of trial by combat as they arise—without attention to other examples of demands or references to trial by combat in modern American law.
No more. This Article provides a systematic discussion of modern demands and references to trial by combat in American courts. From cases in the early 1800s, to Rudy Giuliani’s infamous call for trial by combat on January 6, 2021, this Article surveys demands and mentions of trial by combat, and how courts have treated such demands. This Article examines what motivates parties who seek trial by combat, noting that the popular television series, Game of Thrones likely plays a role. This Article then examines parties’ legal arguments for trial by combat, finding that they ignore relevant precedents and take a skewed view of history.
Recent demands for trial by combat prompt widespread media coverage—coverage which often suggests that trial by combat may be a possibility for litigants. This Article provides historic context for this discussion and, following a systematic review of cases involving or referencing trial by combat, concludes that such demands are not only legally baseless, but that they almost invariably will harm the demanding party’s case. Still, this Article does not count out the possibility that parties may privately contract for a dispute resolution method that mirrors aspects of trial by combat—particularly if such a contract is crafted in a manner that puts both parties on an equal playing field and minimizes the chances of physical harm. While physical trial by combat between parties or champions may be a historic relic, the possibility for parties to agree to virtual trial by combat or similar dispute resolutions remains. And even though demands for trial by combat in court are likely to fail, this has not stopped litigants from making them for centuries, and parties will likely continue to do so in the decades and centuries to come
Comment: Doe v. Woodard and its Impact on the Circuit Split Surrounding Social Workers’ Inspections of Suspected Victims of Child Abuse
Full text linkTime to Panic! The Need for State Laws Mandating Panic Buttons and Anti-Sexual Harassment Policies to Protect Vulnerable Employees in the Hotel Industry
Full text linkHow to End the Cycle of Domestic Violence: Policies Focused on Children
Full text linkThere is an alarming amount of people who witness childhood domestic violence, and when children are exposed to domestic violence, they are subjected to a cycle of violence and trauma that exists in families for generations.1 However, society does not focus on trauma-exposed children to help break the cycle of domestic violence, even though child witnesses and victims become future abusers and prison inmates. This paper explains the cycle of domestic violence and its traumatic effects, examines the problems and limits of the law in respect to family intervention, and concludes with policy solutions focused on assisting children exposed to domestic violence in order to break the detrimental cycle. Just by witnessing domestic violence in their homes, children are subject to traumatic experiences and can become future abusers and victims because they fall into the cycle of domestic violence. What if society’s solutions focused on the children? The next generation? The seeds of the cycle
\u3cstrong\u3eWatery Grave: One of the Death Care Industry’s Greenest Options is Still Illegal in Thirty-one States and That Needs to Change\u3c/strong\u3e
Full text linkAlkaline hydrolysis is an eco-friendly cremation alternative that uses water, a gentle chemical solution, and heat to break down bodies instead of fire. It has a carbon footprint that is 75% less than that of standard cremation and eliminates the possibility of soil and groundwater pollution created by traditional burials. The problem is that it is illegal and unavailable to citizens in at least 31 states. This comment examines the history, process, and legality of alkaline hydrolysis while proposing the rapid federal or mass state legalization of the method as a solution to many of the problems the death care industry is currently facing
