U.S. court dismisses climate change lawsuits against oil companies

Authored by reuters.com and submitted by lintujen_sukulainen
image for U.S. court dismisses climate change lawsuits against oil companies

(Reuters) - A federal court in California dismissed climate change lawsuits by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland against five oil companies, saying the complaints required foreign and domestic policy decisions that were outside its purview.

Smoke is released into the sky at the ConocoPhillips oil refinery in San Pedro, California March 24, 2012. Picture taken March 24, 2012. REUTERS/Bret Hartman

San Francisco and Oakland sued Chevron Corp, Exxon Mobil Corp, ConocoPhillips, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, and BP Plc last year seeking an abatement fund to help the cities address flooding they said was a result of climate change.

Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California said in the ruling that the dangers raised by the complainants were real and worldwide, and both parties accepted the science behind global warming.

“(However), the problem deserves a solution on a more vast scale than can be supplied by a District Judge or jury in a public nuisance case,” Judge Alsup said.

The suit was one of several filed by cities and local governments around the country that argued in part the production of fossil fuels had led to rising tides that damaged shorelines, roads and other properties requiring remediation.

Alsup, who held a primer on climate change during the case, wrote that although scientists agree burning fossil fuels is raising ocean levels, the suits “could interfere with reaching a worldwide consensus” on the social pros and cons of fuel use.

Chevron, which took the lead in fighting the case, called the decision “important and well-reasoned” and said although the ruling is not binding on other courts, judges in similar cases “should follow Judge Alsup’s lead and dismiss their cases as well,” according to spokesman Sean Comey.

Richard Wiles, executive director of the Center for Climate Integrity, an advocacy group that supports the lawsuits, called the decision disappointing, but added: “This fight is just getting started and we expect to win.”

A Shell spokeswoman said the company regards climate change to be a complex problem, which is not an issue for the courts but requires sound government policy.

The case is City of Oakland V. BP, Chevron and others, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 17-CV-06011.

LumpyWumpus on June 26th, 2018 at 15:59 UTC »

They had a weak case and a weak argument. So of course they lost. This shouldn't even be news. There was no way it would ever go the other direction.

lazytime3643 on June 26th, 2018 at 15:29 UTC »

This title is kind of misleading. The lawsuits were in order to make multiple oil companies give funds to San Francisco and Oakland to help pay for recent flood damages. The main argument by the cities was that the flooding was due to climate change which is due to the oil companies they subpoenaed; however, that would be very hard to decisively prove given there are multiple factors resulting in climate change. I personally feel their claims are valid but you're not going to win a lawsuit with that argument.

Anon01110100 on June 26th, 2018 at 13:22 UTC »

You can't fight them in court, they'll out spend you on lawyers. You can't fight them in government, they bought more lawmakers than you. You can fight them by buying their competitors' products though. It's expensive, but you can buy renewable energy sources. Every dime you give to renewables is a dime they don't get. It's slow, but it's a direct hit to their pocket book, which is exactly where you want to hit them. It's becoming more affordable all the time, and it's growing in popularity. These guys will be out of business one day if you make the switch. Give those assholes the finger by going green.