From Courthouse News
July 18, 2017July 18, 2017 Big Oil, California, Global warming, Greenhouse gas
LOS ANGELES (CN) — In a legal assault similar to the one that won multibillion-dollar awards from Big Tobacco, two Bay Area counties and a coastal city blamed Chevron, ExxonMobil and three dozen other oil, gas and coal companies for climate change and rising sea levels that threaten communities on the California coast.
In separate lawsuits in separate superior courts, San Mateo and Marin counties and the city of Imperial Beach claim the fuel companies created a public nuisance by hiding for nearly 50 years that fossil fuel production was heating and damaging the earth.
The first-of-their-kind lawsuits accuse the companies of knowingly carrying out a “coordinated, multi-front effort to conceal and deny … those threats” by discrediting scientific evidence about climate change and spreading doubt among the public and regulators.
The defendants — which include, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Citgo, Conoco Phillips and Peabody Energy (coal) — “promoted and profited from a massive increase” in the use of fossil fuels as that use “caused an enormous, foreseeable, and avoidable increase in global greenhouse gas pollution” that has led to “a wide range of dire climate-related effects, including global warming, rising atmospheric and ocean temperatures, ocean acidification, melting polar ice caps and glaciers, more extreme and volatile weather, and sea level rise,” the plaintiffs say.
None of the fuel companies was available for comment after business hours Monday and none had issued a statement in response to the lawsuits.
The three lawsuits, each just under 100 pages, are largely identical. They were all filed by the San Francisco law firm of Sher Edling, working with San Mateo County Counsel John Beiers, Marin County Counsel Victor M. Sher and Jennifer Love of McDougal, Love, Boehmer, Foley, Lyons & Canlas of La Mesa as city attorney of Ocean Beach. Imperial Beach’s lawsuit was filed in Contra Costa County Court. All the lawsuits were filed on behalf of the plaintiff entities and on behalf of the People of California.
The public nuisance claims are similar the lawsuits that states and cities brought in the 1990s against tobacco companies. But similar lawsuits have fared poorly against energy companies so far.
The Supreme Court blocked a lawsuit by nine states against six major energy company polluters in 2011, and the Ninth Circuit used different grounds in 2012 to toss a suit from a tiny Alaskan village against 22 energy companies.
Each new lawsuit provides about a dozen pages of scientific information, charts and tables showing that the use of fossil fuels exploded over the past 50 years, and tying the increase to rising pollution, temperatures and sea levels.
The municipalities say the 37 defendants “are directly responsible for 227.6 gigatons of CO2 emissions between 1965 and 2015, representing 20.3 percent of total emissions of that potent greenhouse gas during that period.” A gigaton is 1 billion tons.
“Accordingly, defendants are directly responsible for a substantial portion of committed sea level rise … because of the consumption of their fossil fuel products.”
Each lawsuit spends another 30 pages asserting that the defendants, particularly ExxonMobil, knew fossil fuels were warming the globe and raising the sea level as early as the 1960s, but tried to obscure the information to profit from it.
For instance, they say that ExxonMobil and Chevron developed taller, sturdier offshore drilling platforms and planned for structures that could withstand ice forces, “allowing for drilling in previously unreachable Arctic areas that would become seasonally accessible.”
ExxonMobil came under fire after investigative news reports made similar charges in 2015. After those revelations, officials in Massachusetts and New York subpoenaed the company for records related to the allegations.
What Exxon knew and when it knew is came up during Senate hearings to confirm former CEO Rex Tillerson as secretary of state.
Marin, San Mateo and Ocean Beach say rising seas pose a significant threat to them because all are on the coast.
HT/Bob
Ah, yes – the false equivalency tactic. Go forward on a presumption, and skip discussion of the presumption altogether.
How many times have you seen THAT one?
American Electric Power Company Inc., et al.
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010/10-174
“UNANIMOUS DECISION FOR AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY INC., ET AL.
MAJORITY OPINION BY RUTH BADER GINSBURG”
The justices’ argument is essentially that the plaintiffs did not have standing?
That sounds reasonable. The unanimous decision is that the EPA has proper jurisdiction.
Got to reverse that endangerment finding.
If pollution means ‘harmful to life’, and ‘all life as we know it’ is Carbon based, then:
Carbon Pollution is equal to saying: Carbon is harmful to Carbon Based Life Forms
………………………………………………………………………………………………
Water Pollution –> something is fouling the water
Air Pollution –> something is fouling the air
Carbon Pollution –> ???
Carbon pollution: this has been Climate Barbie’s mantra in Canada,as lawyer-trained ( not in science) Minister of the Environment and Climate Change throughout her term. She was appointed in PM Trudeau’s gender-balanced Cabinet… Justin Trudeau of the “let’s pay the guy who killed Chris Speer $105 millions” Trudeau…you know, that guy. Idiots both.
???–> something is fouling the brainwaves?
Din, Din, Din…ye’re a better man than I am, Gunga Din.
The endangerment finding actually protects the industry from nuisance lawsuits like these.
First that have to show that any damage has been done, good luck with that.
Let me guess….none?
They’ll use statistics and megadata and make some up. It doesn’t have to be real or accurate. Jurors are people who are missing Jerry Springer to hear the case.
Models with lots of makeup.
(Maybe even tree rings in their ears.)
No damages, no legal standing…law suit not heard.
“No damages, no legal standing”
Well yeah, that might be a bit of a problem. As might be the fact that no one thinks SLR in the past 50 years or so has been more than maybe 15cm (6in). But we’re talking lawyers here and making their BMW payments is going to be a bit tough if the lawsuits get thrown out early on. They will, trust me on this, have some strategy to counter their technical lack of standing.
OTOH, the big energy companies employ a few lawyers of their own.
That’s right, Mr. Boder. To have standing to sue, the plaintiff must have suffered a bona fide injury.
The alleged injury:
cannot be proven — at all.
They are just wasting their donors’ and taxpayers’ money in filing this claim.
They hope it is the process that is the punishment. But I don’t think they have the same resources as ESSO, et al.
RoO: Government has all the resources in the world. And they do not have to answer to shareholders. Just bullsh*t the voters.
Calif has had no sea level rise. PERIOD
Sorry Ms Moore, but the plaintiffs’ bona fide injury is “committed” sea level rise. Guess the court will have to keep working the case for about 50 years to see if it is real.
And the irony is that Californians suffer much more injury from Climate alarmism than from Climate Change.
Along the CA coast there is much more danger of landslides than sea level rising. Consider the stretch of PCH near Monterey that was buried under a recent slide, and a decade ago when the town of La Conchita was wiped out by landslide.
Rhee….yes.! and both occurrences were due to higher than average rainfall. can that be related to higher CO2 levels ? [ BTW , I don’t like the ‘carbon’ reference…Carbon is a black solid , having many industrial uses. CO2 is a gas, critical to plant life.]
More oil has naturally seeped into the ocean off of Santa Barbara County than anywhere from 80 to 120 Exxon VALDEZ spills. It is still seeping, along with Methane and other chemicals. Flew over the channel last week and one can see the oil sheens off of the seeps, drifting in the currents. Who can I sue????
That’s what virtual reality is for.
first they
sorry
And just how much, exactly, did the Plaintiffs benefit from their utilization of the defendant’s product over the last 50 years??
Yes…The Whore and the John..Equal responsibilty…
If you want to be picky, the production of oil doesn’t produces insignificant amounts of greenhouse gasses. The burning of fossil fuels by the consumer does.
John D. Rockefeller with his cans of Standard Oil should be a hero to anyone that wants to “Save the Whales”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2010/11/05/the-man-who-saved-the-whales/#3f2b75b7596f
Very appreciated. Thanks for the history.
Great ironic twist to explode some yuppie Green heads. What did kerosene and other petroleum-based lighting fuels replace? All-natural whale blubber!
Also saved our forests… thanks fossil fuel! GK
Wonder how much the People’s Republik Of Kalifornia would scream if the energy companies suddenly decided to stop selling oil, gas, and natural gas in the stat?. Just cut them off.
That might be a good way to show the benefits of fossil fuels prior to trial. Present a before and after analysis at trial.
I keep telling people this would solve the problem immediately. However, since oil company execs have the same amount courage as the Republicans do, they won’t go there. As long as they can still make tons of money, it will not happen. Oil does not care.
Well, that might not be so easy, considering that CA is a big producer of petroleum and its refined products. There are several large refineries just south of Los Angeles, and a big one in Richmond near San Francisco. We are pumping oil hand over fist from the region, and off-shore rigs dot the coast line as well.
Hard to keep oil from selling in CA seeing that this is where a good bit of it comes from.
Don’t stop selling oil and oil products in California, just the three counties that are footing the court battles.
But that would consitute a conspiracy in restraint of trade. Then they could be sued for that.
Or if they stopped operating period. There are plenty of jobs here in the “awl bidness” – prospecting, drilling, extraction, transport, refining. Oh, and Chevron HQ … can’t forget that.
Well, to some degree the oil companies that have jumped on the Green band wagon deserve this. Hypocrisy deserves hypocrisy. I hope they sue the crap out of themselves… LOL
Oh, wait, I hate lawyers too…they get rich. Never mind.
Meanwhile the innocent “*I just want to drill for oil” companies should be left out.
The legal system needs an adjustment to stop frivolous lawsuits. How about “a losing plaintiff must pay defendant’s legal expenses”? That should also make a health care more affordable.
Congress and the state legislatures are between 90 and 95% made up of lawyers.
No way any law that cuts back on the income of lawyers would ever pass.
It’s that way in some countries……….
I have long advocated for just such a law. Or at least requiring plaintiffs to post a bond equal to the economic loss due to the pendency of the lawsuit if they do not win; pro rata damages for nominal win.
Or at least a time limit on how long a civil case can stay open. One year from the date of the plaintiff’s original filing. Cases that time out before a verdict is reached would be automatically found in favor of the defendant and the plaintiff fined for wasting the court’s time.
Ancient Athenian courts had a variation of this for certain civil cases, where the plaintiff would be fined if less than 1/3 of the jury voted in his favor. (Athenien juries consisted anywhere from 300-1000 citizens and verdicts were decided by majority vote.)
“a losing plaintiff must pay defendant’s legal expenses”
That is how it works in smart countries, like Australia. Oh, wait we have South Australia. Make that “smart, once upon a time.”
Robert. You might find this joke humorous. The reason they bury lawers 12 feet deep is because deep down they’re not so bad.
Exactly, what sea level rise? Also, I live in Marin County and there isn’t anything that can be damaged by a Tsunami.
Calif has had no sea level rise. PERIOD
Also, no change in ANY rate before amy possible GHE.
Stop selling all oil products in these counties.
California will be a fun place to live with no fuel of any type available. All of the plaitiffs will stop doing business in the state while the litigation drags on.
No, they won’t. They just raise the cost of fuel and pass it on. Drug companies, tobacco companies and oil companies just factor lawsuits into their business expenses. Tobacco suffered virtually no damage. People still smoke—on TV and everywhere. The harm continues, but it’s not about harm. It’s about stealing money from a corporation. It’s actually pretty simple—corporations just pass on the cost and you end up costing the people of the US. They have no recourse to stop the process, except give up tobacco, medicine and heat. It’s income redistribution through courts. Dead people don’t matter—you can keep right on polluting, etc, and having people die. As long as you pay the money.
I’m not too familiar with the US Constitution, but I believe that only Congress can levy taxes. However, it appears that now the judiciary can levy taxes as well.
After the Big Tobacco lawsuits, several hundred billion dollars in damages were levied on the tobacco companies. Now, all the tobacco companies together, on a good day, are worth less than one hundred billion. No problem, the money was raised by increasing the price of each cigarette. So today, when you buy a pack if cigarettes, part of what you pay goes to the government. This is called a tax (if it walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck). However, this tax was mandated by an action of the judiciary, not by Congress. Strange that Congress, to the best of my knowledge, has never objected to this usurpation of their rights.
It would seem that the judiciary is girding its loins to do the same again, since the precedent has already been set.
**No, they won’t. They just raise the cost of fuel and pass it on.**
That would not make the point. I would shut down all shipments of fuel to California until they see the light. Let us see how they run on solar.
Gerald: Yes, but there’s not an oil corporation out there with the balls to do that.
Roger: Congress objected to the individual mandate and the fine associated with it in Obamacare, so the Supreme Court called it a tax and ran it through the IRS. Congress is basically ornamental, except they have the check book. Of course, they never balk at spending and never balance the checkbook. When Obama was in, Obama was king. Now that Trump is in, the courts rule the US.
Only SCOTUS has constitutional authority to exist independently of the other branches. All lower federal courts exist solely at the pleasure of Congress. A bill to defund, disband, and restructure the entire lower court system? Now that would be a real nuclear option.
See my earlier post regarding the fact that CA is a large petroleum producer. You can’t cut CA off. It makes it’s own oil, gasoline, and CNG.
And no, the plaintiffs won’t stop doing business in CA either, even IF the suit continues, they are located here.
Rocketscience … CA does not make it’s own oil, gasoline and CNG. Not yet, not until the state takes over (socializes) the companies that in fact do own the oil, gasoline, and the resources to get it out the ground, and to market. CA might be willing to do that and it fact might have to, to be able to afford their own idiocy. But that didn’t work well for Venezuala.
Simple: The court – if it gets that far – should rule that the verdict will be dependent on the state of sea-level in, what, 70 years’ time. And if it has caused the ‘damage’ claimed the case is proved. But if not, the descendants of the plaintiffs should pay up.
So why doesn’t California do more to Reduce Global Warming and Reduce CO2 Emissions and Create Water? It is simply done by Increasing it’s Natural Gas Energy Efficiency. Instead of venting all the hot combusted exhaust into the atmosphere, recover the heat energy and utilize it, and vent cool exhaust. Some days the exhaust can even be cooler than the outside air temperature. We call that mass cooling.
For every 1 million Btu’s of heat energy that is recovered and utilized from the exhaust, 117 lbs of CO2 will not be put into the atmosphere.
In every 1 million Btu’s of natural gas that is combusted are 5 gallons of distilled water. Today most of that water is being vented into the atmosphere where it will come down as rain in the Mid West and on the East Coast.
http://www.SidelSystems.com
Californians want to drive to work or where ever.We need natural gas to produce electricity and to be warm or cool. We want to eat those foods and drink beverages that are processed by those industries. We need those industries to stay in California and employ people here.
Who is paying these lawyers? It better not be the taxpayers, those employed by the above, and who want to drive to work.
Al Gore, Michael Mann and Jim Hansen to be called in as “expert witnesses”, if it were ever to come to a case in Court. That would be something!
Then the Oil Co’s could counter that with Nils-Axel Morner, Christopher Monckton, Richard Lindzen and a few more to finally start a Debate under Oath. Sparks will fly! Pretty easy to demonstrate that none of these “experts” was able to forecast with any kind of precision what the climate would do on any time scale so far. Failed miserably, all of them. Could be the final nail in the coffin for the alarmists. Most of the accused have been bending over backwards to please the Greens for years, little love was returned for that apparently.
But as the article already indicated, this case will probably be thrown out.
Jim Hansen predicted that the Major Degan would be underwater in…what, 2000? Bring in a photo of the expressway and display it while he testifies.
Big Al and his global warming gang all in court together! Will Mr. Mann finally unleash his data and prove us all wrong? Will ‘big oil’ be going for costs? I can’t wait to watch this all on YouTube. Oh, and what about poor old King Coal. Must be miffed having not been invited to the party.
I live here in the boring old UK but boy do I love California. Always something new. Never a dull moment!
A lawsuit on rising sea levels was a major plot element in Michael Crichton’s “State of Fear”. Without major aid from the government in general, as there was in the tobacco lawsuit, it is a loser case.
More and more, the Greenie scumbags are resorting to lawfare, in a last-ditch effort to save their Greenie ideology.
lol- it’s not like they believe their argument. they just see how they can be a spoiler and get a settlement.
this is the price of appeasement on the part of the oil company CEOs. they act weak and they are identified as prey.
now, backed into a corner, will they finally stop trying to placate? it can’t be done. will they learn the hard way?
Never. They just factor the costs in and consumers pay for it.
You can bet your bippy these lawsuits are being backed by those wanting to push the Greenie agenda. And if successful, guess what, they now have precedence. And prepare for an onslaught of these bogus lawsuits.
yup- cuz the theory of ‘precedents’ is that 500 wrongs make it right!
Three Cheers For Oil/Gas/Coal!!! Maybe the oil, gas, and coal industries could sue the state of California for suing them, when the oil, gas, coal industries have given the state’s citizens one of the highest (once The highest) standard of living in the world. These industries are also credited for playing a critical role in winning WWII. Americans owe these industries a debt of gratitude for consistently (let’s forget 1973, eh…) providing economically critical products to the American public as Americans have demanded. CA, and all states should give these industries a parade.
And a WAY-TO-GO, Nuclear Power!, too. 🙂
Janice,
Yes, it goes without saying, well almost. 🙂
Anyone who uses “climate” and “CO2 ” in the same sentence is an activist. They must be confronted. They’re also licking their chops over the “opiod” settlement in the not-too-distant future.
That sounds interesting. The down side might be all the people in pain who are not going to be in favor of living in extreme pain just to make politicians and leaders richer. Never mess with people who have nothing to lose—it does not end well.
That “One minute Physics” was excellent! The only thing it missed was tradewinds and tides. But it was thorough in the complex gravity field. I especially liked that bit about how the complex models avoid such problems as a GPS receiver telling you that you are 100 feet below sea level when on the beach in Sri Lanka.
I was recently exposed to this problem when visiting the Royal Observatory in Greenwich England. My iPhone Compass app said that the Prime Meridian marker was at longitude 0d 0′ 05″ west. Ric Werme told me the problem was the gravitational vertical, by which the observatory’s telescopes depended upon for their observations, does not pass through the geodetic center of the earth. The GPS references use a plane through the center and meets the observatory’s prime meridian somewhere in space. As a result, the GPS prime meridian is about 100 feet east of the marker in the observatory’s ground.
Thanks for that explanation Stephen. I was using Google Maps to look at the Prime Meridian in Greenwich and noticed something a miss. I thought it must have been an error of the maps not matching the earth actual position but didn’t know why. I have learned more about just about everything from this blog.
Is that the stench of an Eric Holder that I smell from a distance?
f* me running;these are some damned stupid people…
not stupid, disingenuous and desperate to suckle at the teat with the rest of the grubbers.
California is a weird entity. They are one of the biggest users of Fossil Fuel in the World
Arguably California are the worlds Fossil Fuel Gluttons.
The rest of the world just shake their heads when California talks Pollution.
California would have to be the worlds premier polluters in every conceivable way.
“in the use of fossil fuels as that use “caused an enormous, foreseeable, and avoidable increase in global greenhouse gas pollution” that has led to “a wide range of dire climate-related effects, including global warming, rising atmospheric and ocean temperatures, ocean acidification, melting polar ice caps and glaciers, more extreme and volatile weather, and sea level rise,” the plaintiffs say.”
So show the proof! Should be interesting. Having said as some one already stated oil companies will still make money no matter what so will as usual just roll over and play dead.
Environmentalists vs organic black blob. Strange optics.