Month: June 2018

US District Court grants Chevron’s motion to dismiss climate change case

US District Court grants Chevron’s motion to dismiss climate change case

World Pipelines, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 12:00

The US District Court for the Northern District of California has issued a ruling dismissing the climate change lawsuits filed against Chevron Corporation by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland. The court dismissed the complaint as requiring foreign and domestic policy decisions that are outside the proper purview of the courts.

As the court described, “the scope of plaintiffs’ theory is breathtaking. It would reach the sale of fossil fuels anywhere in the world, including all past and otherwise lawful sales.”

“It is true,” the court continued, “that carbon dioxide released from fossil fuels has caused (and will continue to cause) global warming. But against that negative, we must weigh this positive: our industrial revolution and the development of our modern world has literally been fuelled by oil and coal. Without these fuels, virtually all of our monumental progress would have been impossible. All of us have benefitted. Having reaped the benefit of that historic progress, would it really be fair to now ignore our own responsibility in the use of fossil fuels and place the blame for global warming on those who supplied what we demanded? Is it really fair, in light of those benefits, to say that the sale of fossil fuels was unreasonable?”

The court concluded by dismissing the claims and deferring to the policy judgments of the legislative and executive branches of the federal government: “The dangers raised in the complaints are very real. But those dangers are worldwide. Their causes are worldwide. The benefits of fossil fuels are worldwide. 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. While it remains true that our federal courts have authority to fashion common law remedies for claims based on global warming, courts must also respect and defer to the other co-equal branches of government when the problem at hand clearly deserves a solution best addressed by those branches.”

“Reliable, affordable energy is not a public nuisance but a public necessity,” said R. Hewitt Pate, Chevron’s Vice President and General Counsel. “Tackling the difficult international policy issues of climate change requires honest and constructive discussion. Using lawsuits to vilify the men and women who provide the energy we all need is neither honest nor constructive.”

The court’s decision dismisses a lawsuit that the cities of San Francisco and Oakland filed against BP, Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell, seeking to hold a selected group of oil and gas companies responsible for the potential effects of global climate change. The suit, filed in 2017, claims that the production and sale of oil and gas are a public nuisance because they result in greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to worldwide climate change and rising sea levels. The US Supreme Court and other courts around the country have previously rejected similar claims brought by the same lawyers. Those courts – like the court today – found that America’s environmental policies must be determined by national policymakers like the Environmental Protection Agency, not courts of law.

Several other US cities and counties, including New York City and King County, Washington, recently filed nearly identical cases against the same oil and gas companies. Many were filed by the same lawyers. The energy companies have filed motions to dismiss those cases as well. As Chevron has repeatedly emphasised in its court filings, Chevron supports meaningful efforts to address climate change and accepts internationally recognised climate science, but climate change is a global issue that requires global engagement, not lawsuits. Chevron is taking prudent, practical and cost-effective actions to mitigate potential climate change risks, including managing emissions, testing new technologies, and increasing efficiency.

Chevron Corporation is one of the world’s leading integrated energy companies. Through its subsidiaries that conduct business worldwide, the company is involved in virtually every facet of the energy industry. Chevron explores for, produces and transports crude oil and natural gas; refines, markets and distributes transportation fuels and lubricants; manufactures and sells petrochemicals and additives; generates power; and develops and deploys technologies that enhance business value in every aspect of the company’s operations. Chevron is based in San Ramon, California.

via Science Matters

https://ift.tt/2N1jYs7

June 26, 2018 at 06:36AM

Climate Sexism Works Both Ways

In Twitterland, you get to see Human Nature, red in both tooth and varnished fingernail. So I thought I would post this brief, timely reminder that naked sexism, as manifest in the Naked Ape, is still alive and well – and it cuts both ways. Firstly, a familiar figure – Sarah Myhre, meteorologist Cliff Mass’s … Continue reading "Climate Sexism Works Both Ways"

via Climate Scepticism

https://ift.tt/2N1fDov

June 26, 2018 at 04:55AM

Swansea Bay tidal lagoon rejection decision criticised

Dead in the water: Swansea tidal lagoon [image credit: BBC]

In the end this project was just too expensive and too risky it seems. Even wind power offered better value, and without the 90-year subsidy commitment.

A decision by the UK government not to back the world’s first tidal power lagoon could have been made 18 months ago, according to the man who led an independent review into the plans.

Charles Hendry backed the £1.3bn Swansea Bay project in his government-commissioned review of January 2017.

Business and Energy Secretary Greg Clark said on Monday it was not value for money, but developers reject this. Tidal Lagoon Power (TLP) has requested a meeting with UK government ministers.

The rejection of the lagoon plans has been attacked by local politicians and community leaders.

First Minister Carwyn Jones claimed on Tuesday that the UK government would have supported a project like the Swansea tidal energy lagoon if it had been proposed in Northern Ireland.

Mr Hendry said he was disappointed with the UK government’s decision but he added: “They’re keen to look at other tidal technologies and that at least is positive.

“But they have therefore also taken 18 months when they could have almost said ‘no’ to it on day one.”

The scheme off Swansea Bay had £200m backing from the Welsh Government.

However the UK government said it would not pay TLP the fee it wanted for energy, although the lagoon’s backers said a revised offer made it cheaper.

Continued here.

via Tallbloke’s Talkshop

https://ift.tt/2KoI9ia

June 26, 2018 at 04:37AM

U.S. Judge Throws Out Climate Change Lawsuits Against Big Oil

By Paul Homewood

 

WOT?? Common sense two days in a row?

From GWPF:

 

ScreenHunter_2578 Jun. 26 09.57

Noting that the world has also benefited significantly from oil and other fossil fuel, Judge William Alsup said questions about how to balance the “worldwide positives of the energy” against its role in global warming “demand the expertise of our environmental agencies, our diplomats, our Executive, and at least the Senate.”

“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,” he said.

Alsup’s ruling came in lawsuits brought by San Francisco and neighboring Oakland that accused Chevron, Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips, BP and Royal Dutch Shell of long knowing that fossil fuels posed serious risks to the environment, but still promoting them as environmentally responsible.

The lawsuits said the companies created a public nuisance and should pay for sea walls and other infrastructure to protect against the effects of climate change — construction that could cost billions of dollars.

The Oakland city attorney’s offices did not immediately have comment. John Cote, a spokesman for the San Francisco city attorney’s office, said the office was reviewing the ruling and would decide its next steps “shortly,” but the lawsuit had “forced a public court proceeding on climate science.”

“We’re pleased that the court recognized that the science of global warming is no longer in dispute,” he said.

New York City, several California counties and at least one other California city filed similar suits.

The companies said federal law controlled fossil fuel production, and Congress encouraged oil and gas development. The harm the cities claimed was “speculative” and part of a complex chain of events that included billions of oil and gas users and “environmental phenomena occurring worldwide over many decades,” they said in court documents.

National Association of Manufacturers President and CEO Jay Timmons applauded the ruling in a statement. “From the moment these baseless lawsuits were filed, we have argued that the courtroom was not the proper venue to address this global challenge,” said Timmons.

https://www.thegwpf.com/u-s-judge-throws-out-climate-change-lawsuits-against-big-oil/

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/2yFCpzq

June 26, 2018 at 04:10AM