1983年，馬里蘭、維吉尼亞、賓州三州州長、哥倫比亞特區市長以及環保署簽訂乞沙比克灣協定（Chesapeake Bay Agreement），成立乞沙比克灣計畫執行委員會，正式展開整治計畫，經過20多年的努力，流域各州政府也都加入整治計畫，但除了防止繼續惡化外，並沒有太大的改善。
一直到美國前總統歐巴馬稱乞沙比克灣是國家寶藏，並在2009年5月時發布針對保護和復育乞沙比克灣的行政命令，這個行政命令才使得政府機構有法源依據，進而可以更加密切地合作，環保署也訂定了乞沙比克灣流域聯邦政府土地管理原則（Guidance for Federal Land Management in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed），這雖是針對聯邦政府土地而訂，但其延伸用意則希望以聯邦政府帶頭，各州、地方政府、保育區、流域內的組織、團體、農民和公民等，也都能依循此原則而行。
美國環保署在2010年12月公布乞沙比克灣污染量控制計畫（Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load, TMDL），這個計畫以2025年完全恢復為長期目標，雖然是個長達20多年的計畫，但規劃上由先前經驗得知，施行策略應隨目標達成進度與外在條件而隨時調整之，也就是所謂的適應性管理（Adaptive Management），所以也訂定了在2017年污染減量60%的中程目標，以及計畫期間每2年依現況更新的短程目標。
根據乞沙比克灣基金會（Chesapeake Bay Foundation）2010年的報告，在乞沙比克灣計畫執行之前，馬里蘭州和賓州損失的牡蠣產值超過40億美元（約1220億新台幣），而在執行了30年之後，馬里蘭州和維吉尼亞州的海鮮產業年產值已可達20億美元（約610億新台幣），也為當地經濟增加4萬1000個工作機會。
國際環境法中心 （Center for International Environmental Law，下簡稱CIEL） 去年9月出版Fueling Plastics的系列報告，重鎚點出石油和化工行業一直躲在暗角，造成全球膠災。CIEL指出，以上業者早於70年代知悉廢棄塑膠對海洋生態的威脅，但往往以塑膠成品與其無關為由，拒絕承擔減塑責任，更甚者，代表埃克森美孚、陶氏化學等業者利益的美國化學理事會 （The American Chemistry Council）三番四次出資反對立法限用購物塑膠袋。
前面提到的1999年，Ecopower 取得比利時Eeklo市的合約，投資了3座大型風機。市議會要求競標的過程必須要有市民參與空間，並要共同擁有設備。同時也讓利害相關者參與獲得訊息，包括市民、環保團體、諮詢委員會、市議會等等，因此形塑了永續能源和氣候行動方案（sustainable energy and climate action plan） 。而方案本身也獲得市民的高度認同，而前述的風機也是方案的其中一項，
Chevron Defeated in Ecuador’s Constitutional Court
QUITO, Ecuador, July 31, 2018 (ENS)
In a benchmark pollution case, Ecuador’s Constitutional Court has rejected Chevron’s final appeal of a $9.5 billion pollution judgment that found the company deliberately dumped billions of gallons of toxic oil waste onto Indigenous lands in the Amazon rainforest.
The unanimous 8-0 decision, issued in a 151-page document published July 11, was a total victory for the Indigenous groups that brought the case and a rejection of all of Chevron’s claims.
The Court rejected Chevron’s allegations that it was victimized by fraud, and the court threw out the company’s claim that Ecuadorian courts had no jurisdiction over the matter.
Ecuador’s Constitutional Court, which deals only with Constitutional issues, is the third major appellate court in Ecuador and the fourth court overall in the country to uphold the trial-level decision against Chevron, which was issued in 2011. Ecuador’s highest civil court, the National Court of Justice, has ruled unanimously to affirm the judgment against Chevron.
The class action case against Chevron was spearheaded by the Frente de Defensa de la Amazonia, the Amazon Defense Front, a grassroots group representing 80 Indigenous peoples and farmer communities in Ecuador’s northern Amazon region.
The case was originally filed in 1993 in federal court in New York against the former oil field operator Texaco, now part of Chevron Corporation, on behalf of an estimated 30,000 rainforest villagers. But in 2001 a U.S. federal judge moved it to Ecuador’s courts at Chevron’s request after the company accepted jurisdiction there.
“This decision is another huge victory for the people of Ecuador in their historic two-decade battle for environmental justice against the world’s worst corporate polluter and rogue operator,” said Luis Yanza, a Goldman Prize winner who initiated the lawsuit against Chevron in U.S. federal court in 1993, and serves as president of the Frente de Defensa de la Amazonia, Amazon Defense Front.
“No country should ever do business with Chevron until the company first pays for the harm it caused to the people of Ecuador,” Yanza said.
Patricio Salazar, the lead Ecuadorian lawyer on the case, said, “Justice has prevailed over Chevron’s illegal attempts to engage in constant attacks on lawyers who defend the Indigenous communities rather than litigate in good faith on the merits. It is now highly likely that Chevron will pay every last dollar of the judgment against it, as it is legally and ethically obligated to do.”
After eight years of proceedings slowed by Chevron’s strategy of deliberate delay, Ecuador’s trial court relied on 105 technical evidentiary reports to find in 2011 that the company poisoned a 1,500 square mile area of the Amazon with carcinogenic oil waste.
Thousands who live in the rainforest, including many Indigenous peoples, have died of cancer while tens of thousands must endure what is one of the world’s worst ongoing public health catastrophes.
Photo: Jonathan McIntosh / Rainforest Action Network
Ecuador’s government, which received royalties from Chevron’s operation of 400 well sites, has been of little help to the victims. Medical care in the affected region is non-existent, and many people perish from cancer without even visiting a doctor and after receiving no treatment, said Steven Donziger, the Harvard educated U.S. legal representative of the Ecuadorian communities, who has taken dozens of trips to the affected area.
“Chevron has caused a humanitarian crisis in Ecuador of epic proportions that is ongoing to this day,” he said. “Tens of thousands of people will die in the coming years if nothing is done to clean up the pollution. The world must pay attention and Chevron shareholders and management must act immediately to address this worsening problem.”
Chevron has refused for years to pay the Ecuador judgment, now worth $12 billion with interest. Company officials have threatened the Indigenous groups with a “lifetime of litigation” if they persist.
The latest Ecuadorean court decision is also a major blow to controversial Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
In 2014, Judge Kaplan ruled that the $9.5 billion Lago Agrio judgment leveled against Chevron by Ecuador’s highest court, was obtained by way of fraud and coercion.
Kaplan relied on false testimony from an admittedly corrupt Chevron witness to find that the Ecuador judgment was procured by fraud. Kaplan refused to seat a jury of impartial fact finders, and he refused to consider any evidence of Chevron’s environmental contamination in Ecuador.
But Kaplan’s decision was disproven after evidence emerged that Chevron paid large sums to Alberto Guerra, a former Ecuadorian judge booted from the bench after he admitted taking bribes. Guerra was moved with his family by Chevron to the United States and later admitted lying on the stand after being coached for 53 days by Chevron lawyers headed by Randy Mastro at Gibson Dunn.
Kaplan based his core findings largely on Guerra’s false testimony. And Kaplan remains the only judge in the world to have ruled in favor of Chevron.
Seventeen Ecuador judges, who had access to a fuller evidentiary record than Kaplan, ruled in favor of the affected communities. Twelve judges from Canada, including the country’s entire Supreme Court, have also ruled in favor of the Ecuadorians on various technical issues.
The Ecuador decision confronts Chevron on the brutal human consequences of both its original environmental crimes, which the Court emphasizes were not the result of an accident, but rather of deliberate operational decision-making designed to save money and enrich the company’s shareholders and executives, and the additional offense of its two-decade campaign of distraction and delay.
The Ecuadorian plaintiffs also have picked up several appellate victories in Canadian courts as they attempt to collect Chevron assets in that country to force compliance with the Ecuador judgment.
Taipei, Taiwan, July 20, 2018 (TEIA)– Taichung Port is going to extend its current outer breakwaters further into the ocean to accommodate a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) import terminal proposed by Taiwan Power Company and Port of Taichung, Taiwan International Ports Corporation, Ltd. [1]. The proposed reclamation ground reaches 50 hectare in area and may have significant impacts to the environment, which include intercepting Taiwanese Humpback Dolphin (Sousa chinensis taiwanensis) migratory corridor. Shun-Kuei Chan (詹順貴), Deputy Minister of Taiwan Environmental Protection Administration, worries that heated debates over this issue are on the way.
A compulsory Phase Ⅱ Environmental Impact Assessment for this expansion plan passed during the 334th meeting of Taiwan Environmental Protection Administration's Environmental Impact Assessment Review Committee (hereafter called Review Committee) on July 20th, 2018. The standard operating procedure of fulfilling a Phase Ⅱ Environmental Impact Assessment, as regulated by Taiwan's "Environmental Impact Assessment Act", comprises: Holding public explanation meeting; Defining the scope of assessment; Drafting environmental impact assessment report; Conducting on-site inspection; Calling for public hearings; and then Completing environmental impact statement review.
Taichung Port is going to extend its current outer breakwaters further into the ocean to accommodate a Liquefied Natural Gas import terminal. It may intercept Taiwanese humpback dolphin migratory corridor. Excerpted from the submitted environmental impact assessment report.
Taichung Port, situated between Dajia and Dadu River Estuary, is located inside the preannounced “Taiwanese Humpback Dolphin Major Wildlife Habitat.” It is also within the Taiwanese humpback dolphin migratory corridor. Jeng Ming-Shiou(鄭明修), a member of the Review Committee, comments that whether the dolphins in the vicinities are able to “make a turn to avoid obstacles or not[2]” would be a critical issue.
Having obstacles, such as gigantic underwater structure or deeper water depth, some dolphins may swim around these obstacles but some may just make a U-turn. The change of migratory behavior may lead to a segregation of the Taiwanese humpback dolphin's already small population. A segregated population may lead to loss of genetic diversity and then ultimately extinction of the species. Jeng reminds that conducting ethological study on Taiwanese humpback dolphin is critical to the species' survival.
The LNG import terminal plan is a joint development between Taiwan Power Company and Port of Taichung, Taiwan International Ports Corporation, Ltd.. In the materials submitted to the Review Committee, the developers promised to monitor and record underwater acoustics, food sources, as well as at sea survey and on-land observation for the Taiwanese humpback dolphin. To carry out the work, the going-to-be recruited experts are, Chen Chi-Fang (陳其芳) for underwater acoustics; Shao Kwang-Tsao (邵廣昭) for food sources; plus Chou Lien-Siang (周蓮香) and Lee Pei-Yi (李佩沂) for at sea survey and on-land observation. Mitigation, prevention, and protection plans for intercepting the Taiwanese humpback dolphin migratory corridor will be provided when its Phase II Environmental Impact Assessments initiates.
Members of the Review Committee put a special request to the developers prioritizing how to avoid disturbing local wildlifes, such as Taiwanese humpback dolphin, in Taichung Port and its vancinities. Specific action plans or alternative resolutions for underwater noisy, water quality, water temperature, the dolphin's food sources, and intercepted wildlife habitat mitigation should be provided. Additionally, local aquaculture, terrestrial ecology, bird species, and underwater cultural heritage should be incorporated in the Phase Ⅱ Environmental Impact Assessment.
![Chesapeake map By Kmusser [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], from Wikimedia Commons](http://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1799/43831740962_630b517361_b.jpg)
