[ad_1]
Shanton Alcaraz, of the Salvation Army’s Northwest Division, gives bottled water to RV-living Eddie Norby and invites him to a nearby cooling center for food and drinks during a heatwave in Seattle, Washington, US, June 27, 2021.
Karen Ducey | Reuters
Multnomah County, Oregon, is suing oil and gas companies Exxon MobilAnd coincidenceAnd chevronBP, ConocoPhillips and related organizations for damages caused by 2021 Pacific Northwest Heat Dome. Multnomah County said these and other fossil fuel companies and entities operating in the area are largely responsible for exacerbating the deadly heat event.
“Combined historical carbon pollution from the use of defendants’ fossil fuel products was a material factor in causing and exacerbating the heat dome, suffocating county residents for days,” Multnomah County claims, according to A written statement released Thursday.
The lawsuit was filed against Anadarko Petroleum (Acquired by Occidental Petroleum in 2019), American Petroleum InstituteAnd BPAnd chevronAnd ConocoPhillipsAnd Exxon MobilAnd Coach IndustriesAnd Petroleum MarathonAnd McKinsey & CoAnd incentivizeAnd Occidental PetroleumAnd Peabody EnergyAnd coincidenceAnd Space age fuelAnd Total Majors USAAnd Valero Energy And Western Petroleum Association of States.
Multnomah County is seeking $50 million in actual damages, $1.5 billion in future damages, and an estimated $50 billion for a “weatherproofing” fund for the city, its infrastructure and public health services in preparation for future severe weather events.
Starting June 25, 2021, Multnomah County has had three straight days with temperatures reaching 108, 112, and 116 degrees Fahrenheit, respectively. Each of those days was about 40 degrees higher than the regional average and were the hottest days in the county’s recorded history.
A heat event is called a A heat dome is a weather event Because of the high pressure system, which in this case prevented the blowing of cold sea winds and also prevented the formation of clouds.
Multnomah County says the heat caused 69 deaths, property damage, and was a drain on taxpayer resources.
Several climatologists have researched the cause of the heat dome and they all said that this event was due to excessive carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels, says the plaintiff.
“The heat dome, which cost so many lives and losses, was not a normal weather event. It did not happen just because life can be cruel, and it cannot be justified as a mere secret of God’s will,” the suit states. “Instead, the heat dome was a direct and foreseeable result of Defendants’ decision to sell as many fossil fuel products as possible over the past six decades and lie to the county, the public, and the scientific community about the catastrophic harm that pollution from these products to the Earth’s atmosphere and the county’s atmosphere would to cause.”
Jessica Vega Pederson, Chair of Multnomah Countyseeks to protect the people of the province she represents.
“This lawsuit is about accountability and fairness, and I believe the people of Multnomah County deserve both. These companies knew their products were unsafe and harmful, and they lied about it,” Pederson said in a written letter. Claim statement. “They benefited greatly from their lies and let the rest of us suffer the consequences and pay damages. We say enough is enough.”
The case is being brought by three law firms with expertise in catastrophic damages litigation: Worthington & Caron PCAnd Simon Greenstone Panatier PCAnd Thomas, Kuhn, Newton and Frost.
Prosecutors allege that the defendants committed negligence, fraud, and created a public nuisance.
Bill Forte of North Sky Communications works on a fiber optic line during a heat wave sweeping across the Pacific Northwest in Lake Forest Park, Washington, US, June 26, 2021.
Karen Ducey | Reuters
“There are no new laws or new theories to be asserted here. We claim that the defendants broke old laws, and we will prove it to the jury,” Jeffrey Simon, Partner at Simon Greenstone Panatierhe said in a statement.
According to Roger Worthington, Partner at Worthington & Caron.
“We will show that the normal use of fossil fuel products over time has imposed huge, unquoted and untraded social, economic and environmental costs on the county. We will show that they were aware of this price and, rather than fully informing the public, deceived us. And we will ask the jury to decide what If it is fair to hold polluters responsible for these increased avoidable costs, Worthington said in a written statement.
“We are confident that once we show what fossil fuel companies knew about global warming and when and what they did to deny, delay, and deceive the public, the jury will not let fossil fuel companies get away with their reckless misconduct,” Worthington said.
Defendants say that the case in court will not help
Exxon says the lawsuit is nonproductive.
An Exxon spokesperson told CNBC that “lawsuits like this one continue to waste time and resources and do nothing to address climate change.” “This action has no impact on our intention to invest billions of dollars to lead the way in a measured energy transition that takes the world to a net zero carbon footprint.”
The American Petroleum Institute, an industry trade group for the oil and gas industry, defended the work of its components in making energy available to consumers, calling the lawsuit, like Exxon, nonproductive.
“The record of the past two decades shows that the industry has achieved its goal of providing reliable and affordable American energy to American consumers while significantly reducing emissions and our environmental footprint.” Ryan Meyers, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, APIto CNBC in a statement. “This persistent, concerted campaign of unmerited lawsuits against our industry is nothing more than a distraction from important issues and a colossal waste of taxpayer resources. Climate policy should be debated and decided by Congress, not the court system.”
Chevron’s legal counsel called the suit counterproductive and unconstitutional.
“Meeting the challenge of global climate change requires a coordinated policy response. These lawsuits serve as a distraction from developing international policy solutions,” Theodore Boutros, Jr. of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcherto CNBC in a statement. “The Federal Constitution prohibits these new and unsubstantiated allegations targeting a single industry and group of companies engaged in lawful activity that provides enormous benefits to society.”
People sleep in a cooling shelter constructed during an unprecedented heat wave in Portland, Oregon, US, June 27, 2021.
Marani Stab | Reuters
Shell has said it is working towards a low-carbon future and does not see the lawsuit as fruitful.
“Shell Group’s position on climate change has been a matter of public record for decades. We agree action is needed now on climate change, and we fully support society’s need to transition to a low-carbon future. The energy the world needs today, we continue to reduce our emissions and help customers reduce their emissions,” a Shell spokesperson told CNBC.
“Tackling climate change requires a collaborative approach at the community level. We do not believe that the courtroom is the appropriate place to address climate change, but smart policy from government and action from all sectors is the appropriate way to access solutions and drive progress,” Shell said.
ConocoPhillips and the Western States Petroleum Association told CNBC they do not comment on active litigation.
BP, Motiva, Occidental Petroleum, Space Age Fuel, Valero Energy, Total Specialties USA, Marathon Petroleum, Peabody Energy, Koch Industries and McKinsey did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
[ad_2]
