Fishermen Sue Big Oil For Its Role In Climate Change

[Techno-Druid]

(Source)

While oil companies built seawalls and elevated their oil rigs to protect critical production infrastructure from the rising sea level, they concealed from the public the knowledge that burning fossil fuels could have catastrophic impacts on the biosphere.

That's what citizens and local governments across the United States are asserting in lawsuits against oil, gas, and coal companies. Plaintiffs in the cases have alleged that fossil fuel producers knowingly subjected the entire planet and future generations to the dire consequences of their actions.

On Nov. 14, fishermen in California and Oregon joined the legal fray by filing suit against 30 companies, mainly oil producers. The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, the plaintiff, contends that the fossil fuel industry is at direct fault and must be held accountable for recent warming-related damages to the West Coast's prized Dungeness crab fishery, which catches millions of the tender-fleshed crustacean most years, and coastal chefs turn the critters into classics like Crab Louie and Crab Cioppino.

The fishermen's lawsuit appears to be the first time food producers have sued the fossil fuel industry for allegedly harming the environment.

A recent history of heatwaves

Since 2014, the northeast Pacific Ocean has experienced several dramatic marine heatwaves. The higher temperatures have caused blooms of toxic algae that, by producing the neurotoxin domoic acid, can make Dungeness crab and other shellfish unsafe to eat. In the fall of 2015, state officials in California and Oregon delayed the opening of crab season by several months, until testing finally showed domoic acid levels had dipped back to safe levels. Several similar closures have occurred since, including this year.

Noah Oppenheim, the executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, says the 2015-2016 crab fishing closure resulted in direct financial losses that caused some boats in the fleet of about 1,000 to leave the fishery. Subsequent closures, also caused by domoic acid concerns, have further strained the industry, which in California and Oregon is worth about $445 million, Oppenheim says.

[bmThe lawsuit, filed in California's Superior Court, San Francisco county, chronicles the fossil fuel industry's alleged role in obfuscating the likely global effects of climate change and demands compensation from companies including Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP and Shell Oil.[/b]

…

The crabbers' lawsuit comes amidst a string of court actions by cities against the oil industry. In July, the mayor and city council of Baltimore filed suit against 26 companies, alleging they knew but hid from the public the dangers of fossil fuels. The lawsuit claims the "Defendants' Actions Prevented the Development of Alternatives That Would Have Eased the Transition to a Less Fossil Fuel Dependent Economy." Similar suits have come from the state of Rhode Island and several communities in California, including the City of Santa Cruz and Marin County.

[b]Federal judges have dismissed some of these lawsuits.[/bm One filed jointly by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland, and another from New York City, were tossed out on the grounds that such matters should be handled in venues other than the courts, such as by Congress or the executive branch.

But some climate activists are convinced that the tide will turn. Richard Wiles, executive director of the Center for Climate Integrity, is not involved in the crabbers' lawsuit but believes a flood of lawsuits like theirs could soon inundate the fossil fuel industry. He says "establishing a firm, highly defensible, essentially incontrovertible link between global warming and the damages that the plaintiff, or industry in question, has suffered" is the key to winning a lawsuit of this nature, and he says he believes the crabbers' case — and the science supporting it — "appears very strong."

"This case could signal the beginning of a wave of suits from industries and businesses that have been harmed by climate change," he says.

What do you guys think? Are climate suits justifiable, and do you think they will begin happening more often?

[PC2]

What do you guys think? Are climate suits justifiable, and do you think they will begin happening more often?

Depends on whether the lawsuit claims are general or specific. It also depends on the accounting formula they use to claim damages. The more symbolic and vague they are the faster the lawsuits will be thrown out, the more specific they are, the higher the chance of winning financial compensation.

[Endus]

(Source)

What do you guys think? Are climate suits justifiable, and do you think they will begin happening more often?

The key isn't whether or not the oil companies caused damage. It's whether they knew they were causing environmental damage and tried to conceal it or pushed bullshit counter-arguments with trumped-up fake research.

Which, I'll note, we objectively know to be true;

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...48-9326/aa815f
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-40-years-ago/
https://theconversation.com/i-was-an...cientist-49855

It's pretty much like if tobacco companies were sued for causing cancer in their customers. And oh wait; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacc...ment_Agreement

Among others.

[Krastyn]

What do you guys think? Are climate suits justifiable, and do you think they will begin happening more often?

Why stop at oil companies? Sue cattle farmers for the release of methane. Sue the forestry industry for cutting down trees. Sue anyone who drives a car. Sue, sue, sue.

no single industry is the cause of climate change, and almost every industry is contributing to it. Does the blame lie with the producers? The consumers?

This is a government regulatory matter, not a court matter.

[Heladys]

Why stop at oil companies? Sue cattle farmers for the release of methane. Sue the forestry industry for cutting down trees. Sue anyone who drives a car. Sue, sue, sue.

no single industry is the cause of climate change, and almost every industry is contributing to it. Does the blame lie with the producers? The consumers?

This is a government regulatory matter, not a court matter.

Uh huh. And do you also believe Brown vs Board of Education was a regulatory matter that should'be been left to government instead of taken to court?

[Seranthor]

What do you guys think? Are climate suits justifiable, and do you think they will begin happening more often?

I wish them luck in their legal quest... I do wonder what fuel source these folks use for their seaborne vessels...

[McFuu]

(Source)

What do you guys think? Are climate suits justifiable, and do you think they will begin happening more often?

I didn't realize that they paddle their boats out when they go fishing and there aren't any plastics or other products where oil is used at some point in their production. All the fisherman must live at the dock.

[arandomuser]

scientist knew about climate change since the begining of the industrial revolution, i believe arrhenius was the first to create a model of it

[Unholyground]

Sue the forestry industry for cutting down trees.

I agree, especially when we know hemp is far superior in every way to trees and grows 1000 times faster and produces some of the strongest naturally occurring mold resistant fibers in the world and it lasts for a long ass time. The paper and wood industry created a self inflated market because they know how long trees take to grow so the value of wood and pulp increased because it is really your only option.

That is just one thing, there are tons of other industries that have done similar things to corner the market to create a monopoly.

[Barnabas]

(Source)

What do you guys think? Are climate suits justifiable, and do you think they will begin happening more often?

Well they have to prove big tobacco knew about the health risks. I'm putting it this way because this is what this type of lawsuit reminds me of.

[Alvito]

They could also blame themselves for over fishing waters, but why take responsibility when you can shift it to somebody else and try to get paid at the same time.

[Unholyground]

I didn't realize that they paddle their boats out when they go fishing and there aren't any plastics or other products where oil is used at some point in their production. All the fisherman must live at the dock.

When you are painted into a corner and are poor you have to use what is cheap, even if it is hypocritical of someone to use the very things they are against when you are given no cheap alternatives because the creators of the very things you are forced to used stomped all possible competition out of the affordable range. You cannot magically expect people to switch over to more expensive materials and still be able to do what they are doing.

[Doctor Amadeus]

I totally support this, I want to donate to his legal fund, and I hope other do also, great lawsuit.

[Varitok]

They could also blame themselves for over fishing waters, but why take responsibility when you can shift it to somebody else and try to get paid at the same time.

Yeah, Overfishing totally caused Exxon Valdez and The gulf oil spills that killed massive amounts of fish and destroyed their habitats. Stop pushing major blame from Oil companies considering Fishermen have far more restrictions on them than Oil companies.

[Doctor Amadeus]

(Source)

What do you guys think? Are climate suits justifiable, and do you think they will begin happening more often?

I hope so, really protect our environment I have no problem with the most extreme on this one. This is the most mild and civil.

[The Stormbringer]

The key isn't whether or not the oil companies caused damage. It's whether they knew they were causing environmental damage and tried to conceal it or pushed bullshit counter-arguments with trumped-up fake research.

This right here. The fact that they were aware of the adverse effects and were working to protect themselves from them without telling anyone else (hell, while pushing flat-out lies to make themselves supposedly appear innocent) is enough for me to say that these suits are definitely justifiable. The sad thing is, unless other people follow suite, and even if they do, it won't make up for the damage caused. Maybe some of those funds can be pushed in the right places to combat climate change, but I'm sure it's going to be a fraction.

[helebelemon]

That's a pretty good claim given the effects of global warming on aquatic reproduction.

[Krastyn]

Uh huh. And do you also believe Brown vs Board of Education was a regulatory matter that should'be been left to government instead of taken to court?

Who runs the Board of Education again? Oh that's right. The government.

If the crab association decided to sue the state or federal government for failing to enact proper legislation for environmental protection then I'd be fine with that. Going after one industry? Cherry picking.

[Alvito]

Yeah, Overfishing totally caused Exxon Valdez and The gulf oil spills that killed massive amounts of fish and destroyed their habitats. Stop pushing major blame from Oil companies considering Fishermen have far more restrictions on them than Oil companies.

I didn't push any blame, I actually commented on how it is stupid to do so. An oil spill also has nothing to do with climate change so 2 completely different issues. A single person, group or walk of life aren't to blame for any issue. Fix and address what you can and stop focusing on how others do things worse and ignore your own shit.

[Citizen T]

Unless these fishermen were using sailboats I'm guessing they were aiding and abetting the oil industry's "destruction of the oceans"