Modern food, energy, and water (FEW) systems are the product of technologies, techniques, and policies developed to address the needs of a given sector (e.g., energy or agriculture). Wastes from each sector are typically managed separately, and the production systems underlying FEW have traditionally treated pollution and waste as externalities simply diffused into the ambient environment. Integrative management that optimizes resource use presents opportunities for improving the efficiency of FEW systems. This paper explains how FEW systems can be optimized to (1) repurpose or cycle waste products, (2) internalize traditional externalities, and (3) integrate wastes with resource inputs across systems by diverting waste by-products from one system to meet demands of another. It identifies the means for Bclosing the loop^in production systems. Examples include management of legacy wastes from fossil fuel industries (coal and natural gas) and integrative designs for advanced renewable systems (biogas from waste, bioenergy from CAM plants, and solar). It concludes with a discussion of how studying the governance of such systems can assist in tackling interconnected problems present in FEW systems. New governance arrangements are needed to develop solutions that can align with regulatory frameworks, economics incentive, and policies. Four aspects of governances (property rights, policy design, financing, and scale) emerge as tools to facilitate improved institutional design that stimulates integrative management, technology innovation and deployment, and community development. The conclusion offers a framework through which integrative management of FEW systems can be linked to value chains in closed-loop systems.

With the forces of globalization as a backdrop, this casebook develops labor and employment law in the context of the national laws of nine countries important to the global economy - the US, Canada, Mexico, UK, Germany, France, China, Japan and India. These national jurisdictions are highlighted by considering international labor standards promulgated by the International Labor Organization as well as the rulings and standards that emerge from two very different regional trade arrangements - the labor side accord to NAFTA and the European Union. Across all these different sources of law, this book considers the law of individual employment, collective labor law dealing with unionization as well as the laws against discrimination, the laws protecting privacy and the systems used to resolve labor and employment disputes. This is the first set of law school course materials in English covering international and comparative employment and labor law.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

A significant challenge to the transmission providers reported bythe National Electric Reliability Council (NERC) will be to maintainadequate levels of reactive support for the transmission system in theera of open market competition in the U.S. Unlike real power (MW),the reactive component of power (Mvar) cannot be easily transmittedover longer distances and must generally be supplied at the locallevel.Without adequate reactive power support, portions of the electricpower system can be susceptible to potential voltage collapse or insta-bility according to NERC. Sources of reactive power include generators,synchronous condensers, transmission lines, capacitors, and very spe-cialized reactive support devices generally known as static var compen-sators (SVCs).Demand for reactive power is shaped by the size and type of de-mand, power transactions across the transmission system, and the load-ing of transmission facilities. This demand for reactive power is growingnationwide

The independent power (IPP) industry faces the highest dimensionof political risk, regulatory uncertainty and market challenges in its briefdynamic history over the next five years. A number of key market issuesin the U.S. driven by regulatory changes are pending for resolution im-pacting the long term health and performance of the industry.Originally, the industry was spawned by the provision of strongregulatory and tax incentives to promote successful non-utility genera-tion and development. These initial inducements were overtaken by theforces of competition and project development through the provision ofregulatory market supports, competitive bidding and least cost planningat the state level.Finally, competitive market forces were in control during the pastdecade as power matured into more of a commodity industry with price(through marketing and trading) becoming the critical arbiter of service.This created the current transitional environment in the U.S. in whichregulatory risk is at the largest level the industry has faced in its briefhistory. When converged with the threats of overbuilding and plum-meting asset valuations, the combination, until 2005, could be deadly.Frequently, IPP developers have faced regulatory risk and its con-sequences in the development of international projects during the pastdecade. Special forms of political risk insurance coverage and support-ive government programs have been established to manage the volatil-ity and uncertainty associated with the political and regulatory dimen-sion of project development in international markets.