The oil companies involved should stop selling as many of their products as they can in the three counties, especially the gas stations. That’d work out really well for the counties and their employment and tax stats, wouldn’t you say?
(Daily Caller) Three California counties sued 37 of the world’s largest oil and coal companies Monday for damages related to global warming-induced sea level rise.
Marin County, San Mateo County and Imperial Beach filed separate, but virtually identical, lawsuits claiming that oil companies bear responsibility for the sea level rise harming in coastal counties. County lawyers claim flooding is more frequent and beaches are eroding more rapidly.
The counties want reimbursement for current and future financial losses from sea level rise, in addition to punitive damages. The plaintiffs don’t set a specific number for damages, but estimate they’ll need at least $54 billion dollars over the coming decades.
“This is a long-anticipated move in climate litigation,†Michael Burger, executive director of environmental law at Columbia University, told The San Francisco Chronicle. “You’ll find pieces of it in other cases, but bringing it together like this is different than what’s been done before. You can expect there will be a great deal of interest in how this litigation proceeds.â€
San Francisco is a mere 1.94mm per year in rise, equating to .64 feet of rise over 100 years. This pretty much covers for both the Marin and San Mateo areas. For Imperial Beach, near San Diego, SD is running at 2.15mm per year, equating to .70 feet over 100 years. Exactly average for the Holocene. Those numbers should be at least double to triple during a Holocene warm period.
In order to prove their case, the counties will have to find a specific connection between harm from global warming and the actions of each energy company. Additionally, they’ll have to show that the issue cannot be handled by government regulations.
What they’re probably doing is attempting a shakedown of the oil companies. And the oil companies have better lawyers who are employed by the companies to deal with stupid lawsuits.
If we assume that
global warmingclimate change is real, and that the burning of fossil fuels is the cause, then this lawsuit begs the question: just who has been burning the fossil fuels?The oil producers burn relatively little petroleum in production, plus some more in transporting petroleum products to market. With the actions of the oh-so-noble environmentalist left in blocking pipelines, petroleum companies have resorted to transporting more oil by rail, which means more diesel engines running.
But the people who are burning the vast majority of the petroleum products are the consumers of oil, including the residents of Marin, San Mateo and Imperial Beach counties, to power their automobiles and run their air conditioners and electronic gadgets. Exxon and Shell did not force them to choose commuter lifestyles, nor to buy gasoline-powered, rather than electric cars (which burn fossil fuels anyway, simply at the power plant rather than in the internal combustion engine).
This lawsuit is along the same lines of suing Budweiser because some consumers choose to drink until they get stinking drunk, suing Miller Brewing Company because some consumers become alcoholics.
So sue back. Identify the individuals who are behind this (politician or not) and sue them.
Simplest defense…ok, show me the actual measured, raw data proving “globull warming”… models, hair-brained theories, and altered data not allowed.
with all the bs in san fran and taxes and regs in california, maybe the state is sinking