There are numerous ongoing legal challenges in an effort to determine who’s responsible for climate change. Exxon is under investigation by state attorneys general, cities are suing oil companies over sea level rise costs, and Our Children’s Trust is suing the federal government for failing to protect their generation from climate change. At the heart of these legal challenges lies the question – who bears culpability for climate change and liability for its costs and consequences?

Like Exxon, Shell Knew

Exxon has been a prime target of these investigations and lawsuits since Inside Climate News’ investigative journalism revealed that the company’s internal climate science research warned of the dangers posed by human-caused global warming since the late 1970s.

Recently, Dutch journalist Jelmer Mommers of De Correspondent unearthed internal documents from Shell that began warning of the dangers associated with human-caused climate change 30 years ago. The company’s 1988 report titled “The Greenhouse Effect” warned,

by the time the global warming becomes detectable it could be too late to take effective countermeasures to reduce the effects or even stabilise the situation.

And, particularly relevant to Our Children’s Trust’s lawsuits, Shell’s 1988 report warned of the climate consequences for future generations.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Quote from 1988 Shell report ‘The Greenhouse Effect’.

Similarly, in a 1991 film called Climate of Concern, Shell warned,

Global warming is not yet certain, but many think that to wait for final proof would be irresponsible. Action now is seen as the only safe insurance.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Royal Dutch Shell’s 1991 film ‘Climate of Concern’

The case against Exxon and Shell is similar to the case against the tobacco companies – that they engaged in fraud to deceive the American public about the health effects of their products. However, the oil companies modified the tobacco playbook. Rather than directly misinform the public, they funneled money to conservative think tanks who did the dirty work as Merchants of Doubt. By both outsourcing the misinformation campaign and allowing their scientists to publish research in peer-reviewed journals – where it was available to but largely unseen by the public – the oil companies tried to buffer themselves against the legal liability that took down the tobacco industry.

The case against the government

The case against the fossil fuel industry largely relies on proving that these companies deceived the American public about the threats posed by consuming their products. The case against the federal government appears more straightforward. In their defense against the cities suing over sea level rise damages, the oil industry lawyers essentially argued that the blame lies not on the producers, but rather the consumers of fossil fuels, and that any economic issues should be addressed through policy rather than in the court system.

But of course, the American government has failed to implement climate policies over the past two decades. In 1998, the Senate refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The Bush Administration censored government climate science reports and took no action to address climate change. Thanks to a Republican filibuster threat, a carbon cap and trade bill that had passed the House died in the Senate in 2009. The Obama administration finally took concrete steps to address climate change, for example by drafting the Clean Power Plan and signing the Paris climate accords, but the Trump administration has (at least temporarily) reversed all of those efforts.

In short, Our Children’s Trust is correct to allege that the American government has failed to protect the coming generations from the threats and damages of climate change.

Everyone shares the climate change blame

The oil companies do make a valid point that consumers share the blame for causing climate change. The public has been aware of the climate threat for over a decade – the subject was popularized in An Inconvenient Truth in 2006. Yet 12 years later, Americans are still buying gas guzzling trucks and SUVs, while hybrid and electric vehicles account for just 3% of new car sales.

While the electrical grid has become cleaner due to the falling costs of wind, solar, and natural gas displacing coal power plants, Americans haven’t done much to demand or spark that sort of change in other energy sectors. That would take climate policy, which most Americans (including Trump voters) support, but their support is shallow. It’s not an issue that decides votes, so policymakers aren’t pressured to take action.

The fossil fuel industry certainly bears some responsibility for having funneled tens of millions of dollars to climate-denying think tanks that have worked hard to misinform the American public. Republican Party politicians and conservative media outlets have followed their lead in helping to convey that climate misinformation. A recent study found evidence that “Americans may have formed their attitudes [on climate change] by using party elite cues” delivered via the media. The history books will not reflect well on today’s American conservatives.

However, when hybrid cars have been mass produced for over 20 years and yet 97% of new cars sold in America are still powered exclusively by inefficient, polluting, 19th Century internal combustion engine technology, Americans as a whole are also failing to do their part to curb climate change.

There’s plenty of blame to go around for the mounting climate costs, but so far, taxpayers are footing the whole bill. There may eventually be a court case in which the fossil fuel industry, like the tobacco industry before it, is held responsible for its role in deceiving the American public about the dangers of carbon pollution. And American voters will eventually punish the Republican Party for its decades of climate denial and policy obstruction. Accountability is coming.

