The US state of California has sued five major oil companies for allegedly lying about the socio-economic consequences of the use of fossil fuels. California is requiring the companies – Exxon Mobil, Shell, BP, Chevron and ConocoPhillips – to pay money into a fund to compensate for the damage caused by global warming.
According to the 135-page indictment against ‘Big Oil’ filed in the Superior Court in San Francisco, a civil court, the companies already knew in the 1960s the consequences of burning coal, oil and gas. But in public statements and advertisements they downplayed the risks. In the 1970s, the oil companies also started to spread disinformation about climate change more and more actively.
According to the California Attorney General Rob Bonta, the companies have “fed us lies and distrust to further increase their record profits at the expense of the environment. Enough is enough”.
Governor Gavin Newson said the companies have done everything they can to “conceal the fact that they have long known how dangerous the fossil fuels they produce are for our planet.” Newson believes that “California taxpayers […] not have to foot the bill for billions of dollars in damage – wildfires that wipe out entire communities, toxic smoke that blights our air, deadly heat waves, record-breaking droughts that dry up our wells.”
Hurricane Sandy
It is not the first time that an American government has sued oil companies for the consequences of their activities. After Hurricane Sandy, which caused billions in damage to the city in 2012, New York attempted to hold oil companies accountable and to help pay for the repairs. But the court ruled in 2018 that although climate change is a fact that is not denied by the companies, a debate about it does not belong in the courtroom, but in the American Congress.
Also read this analysis the increasing pressure on oil companies
This is also the defense of the American Petroleum Institute (API), the oil industry’s interest group. Commenting on California’s decision to go to court, API Vice President Ryan Meyers called it a “coordinated campaign to pursue pointless, politicized lawsuits against an American basic industry and its workers.” Meyers said the lawsuit is nothing more than “a distraction from important national conversations and a colossal waste of resources for California taxpayers.”
In a statement, Shell said it realizes that action against climate change is necessary and that the group wholeheartedly supports the transition to a low-carbon society, but not through lawsuits. “Tackling climate change requires a joint, society-wide approach,” said Shell.
Milieudefensie v Shell
From Pakistan to Portugal and from Peru to Norway, gas and oil companies all over the world have been taken to court in recent years because of the climate damage they cause. One of the best-known cases, also internationally, was that of Milieudefensie against Shell. That case was won by Milieudefensie, and an appeal will be filed soon. Sustainability organization Urgenda previously successfully challenged the Dutch state in court to induce it to adopt a more active climate policy. In both cases, the complainants appealed to human rights – such as the right to life – which are threatened by climate change.
A study by Columbia University in New York shows that the number of climate lawsuits worldwide doubled between 2017 and 2023. Many of these cases take place in the US. Last month, young climate activists in Montana won a case against that state for allegedly doing too little to combat the harmful effects of climate change. In doing so, they invoked the right to “a clean and healthy environment” included in Montana law.
#California #suing #major #oil #companies #role #climate #change