The oil companies want you to believe that California’s recently filed lawsuit, accusing them of decades of deception regarding global warming, is a “hypocritical…Hollywood-and-foreign-billionaire-funded” attempt to “hinder the state’s energy supply and hamper economic growth.” Well, it’s not surprising they would say that, is it?
Filed on Friday in San Francisco County Superior Court, the lawsuit targets five major oil companies and their subsidiaries. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, after the lawsuit was filed, stated, “The undeniable climate crisis they have caused, from extreme heat to drought and water shortages, demands that they take responsibility and pay for the damage.”
Naomi Oreskes and Geoffrey Supran, in Science Magazine, confirmed that the climate projections made by Exxon Mobil scientists between 1977 and 2003 were incredibly accurate and skillful in predicting the subsequent rise in global warming temperatures.
California’s lawsuit is just one of many, filed by numerous municipalities, states, and the District of Columbia across the United States. Despite the industry’s claims that these lawsuits are futile, citing scattered unfavorable rulings, none of these cases have reached a final conclusion. Big Oil should be worried because if just one of these lawsuits succeeds, it could pave the way for a significant financial reckoning, forcing the industry to pay for mitigation and abatement programs. Remember the multibillion-dollar reckoning the tobacco industry faced? Well, this could be even larger.
The oil lobby is quick to shift blame for petroleum-driven global warming onto the public, arguing that our unrestrained demand for gasoline-powered cars and other fossil fuels is the real culprit. However, a similar argument did not spare the tobacco companies from their responsibility for promoting smoking and hiding information about its health effects. The tobacco industry eventually faced a $246 billion settlement with state governments over 25 years. Therefore, it is essential to closely examine the California case, which holds Exxon Mobil, Shell, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, BP, and the American Petroleum Institute accountable as defendants.
The California lawsuit doesn’t directly accuse the oil industry of causing global warming. Instead, it aims to hold the companies accountable for deceiving the public by suppressing the information their own scientists were providing about the harmful effects of burning fossil fuels.
The oil companies’ campaign against climate science has had a significant and detrimental impact. They published statements, pamphlets, and briefs that deliberately portrayed climate science as uncertain and unsettled.
As a result, right-wing politicians have been given the confidence to question the validity of global warming findings, turning the climate crisis into a partisan battleground.
Had these deceptive practices not occurred, policies could have been implemented that would have accelerated the transition to cleaner energy sources. This would have been beneficial for California and the entire nation, through increased public pressure for investments in renewables.
Contrary to the assertions of Exxon Mobil’s CEO Lee Raymond, the oil companies were well aware of the severe consequences of human-caused global warming. Exxon Mobil’s own scientific staff had warned about these threats as early as the 1970s. Naomi Oreskes and Geoffrey Supran state that ExxonMobil accurately foresaw the dangers while simultaneously orchestrating lobbying and propaganda efforts to delay climate action.
Instead of addressing these revelations, the oil industry responded by launching attacks against those who exposed the truth, including the jurisdictions that filed lawsuits against the energy companies.
The Independent Petroleum Association of America attempted to create controversy by promoting a “bombshell” report from Fox News that Leonardo DiCaprio’s nonprofit foundation had contributed funds to some of the litigation against the oil companies.
Global warming litigation is relatively new, and the judicial system is still struggling to fully comprehend and handle it.
As a result, judges have made decisions where they acknowledge the validity of the plaintiffs’ arguments but are unsure of how to proceed with their claims.
The most effective legal strategy for these lawsuits to succeed is still uncertain.
The California lawsuit alleges violations of various state laws, including public nuisance, pollution, misleading advertising or marketing, fraudulent business practices, product liability, and negligence.
In the meantime, the oil industry persists in deceiving the public about the reality of global warming and its lackluster efforts to address the crisis.
Both BP and Shell, who had claimed to be leading the charge in transitioning to renewable energy sources, have quietly reneged on their commitments to significant investments in solar and wind energy.
The oil industry has also persisted in its attempts to weaken state environmental regulations. For example, oil and gas producers in California have qualified a referendum for the 2024 state ballot that seeks to overturn a law establishing a minimum distance between new oil and gas wells and areas where people live and work.
In other words, the day of reckoning for the oil industry may not be immediate, but it is essential that it happens.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
