Article content continued

Why? Because of basic economics: some corporations are making a lot of money from fossil fuels without expecting to pay much (if any) of the costs. Separating profits from costs creates an incentive for fossil-fuel companies to spend lots of money finding more oil, gas and coal, rather than directing their considerable resources, expertise and innovation towards developing energy systems that work for our communities and children.

The City of Victoria, and the other communities that have sent letters to fossil-fuel companies, are well aware that they use and benefit from fossil fuels, even as they try to reduce that dependence. Their letters to global fossil-fuel companies have generally acknowledged that they need to do more to reduce their emissions and that their taxpayers will end up paying a significant portion of the costs of climate change.

But they also know that we all — including the fossil fuel industry — need to take responsibility for dealing with the reality of climate change. Asking (through letters or through the courts) that Shell, Chevron, Saudi Aramco and other global fossil-fuel companies accept their joint responsibility for the harm caused by their products is not hypocrisy — it is common sense and good economics.

There are consequences for companies that sell products that they know cause harm. The tobacco, asbestos, lead-paint and pharmaceutical industries are just a few of the sectors that have learned this the hard way.

Clarifying the responsibility of the global companies that manufacture and sell fossil fuels is essential for the health of our planet, our communities and our children.

Andrew Gage is staff lawyer for West Coast Environmental Law. He oversees the Climate Law in our Hands Initiative, which encourages communities to ensure that their taxpayers do not pay 100 per cent of climate-related costs by demanding that the fossil fuel industry pay its fair share of those costs.