Caught lying: NYC climate lawsuit really IS about restraining industry, not saving the planet

From Energy In Depth, by Lea Giotto,

A top environmental lawyer for New York City says that the goal of the City’s climate litigation efforts is to restrain industry activity, an apparent contradiction to what the City has stated in recent legal filings in federal court. This admission could have a significant impact on the case moving forward.

Susan Amron, chief of the environmental law division of the New York City Law Department and counsel for the City in its climate lawsuit, made these comments during a session titled “Climate Change, the Courts and the Paris Agreement” that convened in New York City last week for Climate Week NYC.

In front of an audience of lawyers, activists and elected officials, Amron said:

“So, we’re not saying you can’t use fossil fuels, that’s a different part of the city’s efforts, but what we’re saying to the companies is that if you’re going to promote fossil fuels that you need to internalize the cost that these fossil fuels are imposing on cities, and New York City in particular. And really what we’re trying to do is affect the bottom line- the financial equation for the use of fossil fuels.” (emphasis added)

Amron’s “bottom-line” comment echoes how Mayor Bill de Blasio described the lawsuit on Senator Bernie Sanders’s podcast back in January:

Senator Sanders: “What are you guys doing – what role can you play in taking on the fossil fuel industry?”

Mayor: “I’ll say this for New York City. We just acted, and I want to urge every city, every county, every state to do the same – divest. Divest from the fossil fuel industry. Let’s help bring the death knell to this industry that’s done so much harm. Like the tobacco companies that were successfully sued decades ago. We’re also suing five of the biggest including Exxon Mobil for example who systematically poisoned the Earth, knew about it, covered it up, explained it away, tried to hook people more and more on their product. We think that what every city can do and every locality – use your litigation power to go at these bad actors and get the resources back. We’re looking for billions to make up for what they’ve done to us.” (emphasis added)

On the panel, Amron also spoke to de Blasio’s “We’re looking for billions” comment and shed light on exactly how much the City is hoping to extract from fossil fuel companies through its lawsuit:

“[W]e’ve estimated the cost over the next 10 years for programs that are either in planning or getting underway to be about $20 billion. That’s not economic losses; that’s just the cost of protecting the city over the next several decades.” (emphasis added)

New York City’s lawyers – namely Matt Pawa and Steve Berman of the Seattle-based law firm Hagens Berman – are fully aligned with Amron and de Blasio. In an interview with VICE last year, Berman said the climate lawsuits have “the potential really to bring down fossil fuel companies” and could absolutely secure a big pay day:

“As our interview came to a close I asked Berman to describe the best-case scenario for all this. ‘Imagine if I could get ten or 15 cities to all sue and put the same pressure on the oil companies that we did with tobacco companies and create some kind of massive settlement,’ he said. He acted as if it was the first time he’d thought of the idea. But I got the feeling it wasn’t.” (emphasis added)

The comments from Amron, Mayor de Blasio and Steve Berman could prove troublesome for the City’s lawsuit, as the complaint explicitly denies that the City is seeking to restrict ongoing business operations:

“The City does not seek to impose liability on Defendants for their direct emissions of greenhouse gases, and does not seek to restrain Defendants from engaging in their business operations.” (emphasis added)

Since de Blasio’s appearance on Senator Sanders’s podcast, New York City’s lawsuit was dismissed from federal court in New York by Judge Andrew Keenan. Whether de Blasio’s comments influenced the outcome of the suit in any way is unknown, but the fact that they are in complete discord with what is stated in the City’s complaint is indisputable.

Amron’s affirmation that New York City’s goal is to “affect the bottom line” and destroy the industry altogether, just as de Blasio said, could also create challenges for New York City’s appeal of Judge Keenan’s decision, which is slated to begin in front of the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals soon.

Listen to Amron’s comments in full by using the link below:

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

96 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Grietver
October 1, 2018 3:33 pm

“Let’s help bring the death knell to this industry”
You must be detached from reality to say this. After a natural disaster, the first thing they do is to restore electricity. Then everything else can start rolling.
Removing energy from a functioning city is the opposite of helping. It will be horrible for the people.

Reply to  Grietver
October 1, 2018 4:10 pm

And… If the repair crews can’t get fuel for their vehicles, the electricity won’t get restored… 😎

BuckWheaton
October 1, 2018 4:07 pm

“Climate change” converges far more towards socialism than to remediation of the biosphere.

Kramer
October 1, 2018 4:53 pm

I listend to a live youtube broadcast a few days ago that I found on Tom Nelson’s twitter feed (it was painful to listen to). It was about the oil companies and suing them. At one point, I heard them say that (I’m paraphrasing from memory) that the strategy is to sue and sue until something works and sticks.

Bastards.

thebigelectrician
October 1, 2018 7:11 pm

“When the US is doing 5 billion tons in emissions out of 37 billion global, cutting back on US emissions to protect the Florida shore is ridiculous.”

Good point. Because they individually make so little difference, we should all stop paying our taxes.

Linda Goodman
October 1, 2018 7:53 pm

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme & architect of the UN Oil for Food Scandal

“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis.” – David Rockefeller, Club of Rome executive manager

“The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.” – emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.” – Club of Rome

De Blasio: The Earth Was My First Real Cause
“[T]he new mayor wants to make his own mark, which is why his administration set a new target of reducing emissions 80 percent by 2050, a target in keeping with United Nations recommendations. “I felt we had to speed up the pace,” de Blasio said. “I felt we had to do something dramatic and material. Again for our own needs and for the role we play in the world.”
https://www.wnyc.org/story/earth-leaders-mayor-de-blasio-environment-and-his-peer-group/

June 3, 2017
New York City mayor affirms city’s plan to carry out Paris climate agreement commitments
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/bill-deblasio-affirms-paris-climate-change-commitments-donald-trump-a7771266.html

Barbara
Reply to  Linda Goodman
October 1, 2018 8:53 pm

There is a 1,000 MW “extension cord” work-in-progress from Quebec to supply NYC with electricity.

jorgekafkazar
October 1, 2018 10:03 pm

Sounds like abuse of process to me. If so, look for a multi-billion dollar lawsuit.

michael hart
October 1, 2018 10:06 pm

I’m pretty sure they can see the insanity of the argument as well as any one else outside the environmentalist brain. Of course it’s just about the money but they probably also know the chances of a win are very small even though the potential jackpot is large.

I’m guessing they’re hoping the companies will just pay them some money to shut up a bit. There is plenty of precedence for this and the oil companies have already been stupid enough to agree about the science. This just encourages the extortionists to press on until the companies show a bit of backbone or some cash.

“You probe with bayonets: if you find mush, you push. If you find steel, you withdraw”
― Vladimir Ilich Lenin

Ed Giugliano
October 2, 2018 11:36 am

I lived through the blackout in NYC of 13 July 1977 and watched the neighborhood next to mine (Bedford-Stuyvesant) self-destruct with rioting and major fires. That was NOT a very nice experience. We lived in a wooden house, had no means of self-protection, and no where to run. More recently, inner city Baltimore experienced the same thing.

To purposely increase the risk of that happing to a major city is reprehensible, and maybe criminal. Especially if it amounts to no good purpose other than green-washing.

thebigelectricvan
October 3, 2018 4:29 pm

“The September 2018 anomaly was a not-so-alarming +0.26 deg C above the 1981 to 2010 average.”

Since it is well known that a hurricane cools the waters in its track, using the entire month of Sept will give the answer you want, which, of course, is wrong. You need the daily temps and I know that Stokes has told you how to do that.I