Environmentalists Want to Make Big Bucks Suing over Global Warming

National Center for Public Policy Research ^ | 2-1-04 | Amy Ridenour

[Ryan Christopher]

When They Call Themselves Greens, They're Apparently Referring to Their Love of Money

Environmentalists are making plans to sue energy companies over perceived global warming.

My thoughts:

* "Global warming," in colloquial usage, refers a theory predicting certain things about the future. The future has not occurred. Imagine the court testimony: "Your Honor, in the future, we expect to be injured... but we want the money now."

* Energy companies sell nothing without customers, so if it genuinely cares about the environment more than deep-pockets plaintiffs, Friends of the Earth should sue these customers, who often actually (gasp!) are the ones who burn the oil. (Of course, it would have to sue itself, and Greenpeace, and the Sierra Club, and Al Gore, but the environmentalist war on capitalism is serious business, and some collateral damage is inevitable.)

* Friends if the Earth thanks a European outfit called the "Minor Foundation for Major Challenges" for paying for their work on this. That's a new wrinkle on the global warming debate, which previously had been funded by major foundations chasing a minor challenge.

* As a defensive legal strategy, energy companies should stop selling to anyone planning to sue them. After a week or two, prospective plaintiffs will recall that energy has its uses, and want to use some more. (It should take less than a week in regions affected by the current uncommonly cold "global warming" weather, or, during summer, when it is over 78 Fahrenheit in France.)

* Friends of the Earth's director boasts their "global warming report should send shivers through the boardrooms." Anyone using the term "shivers" in connection with "warming" is not to be feared.

* Evidence of shivering in a boardroom may be used in court as evidence against global warming.

* Friends of the Earth says it singles out ExxonMobil because it "has repeatedly attempted to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change and actively resisted attempts to limit carbon dioxide emissions through law." In other words, it has disagreed with Friends of the Earth on scientific and legislative issues. Mediating such disagreements is not the purpose of courts.

Note to self: Plan the mother of all lawsuits -- one against environmentalists.

First up in the docket: The next-of-kin of millions of Third Worlders, very many of them children, who have died needlessly from malaria because environmentalists won't admit they are wrong about DDT.

Second up: The half million kids who go blind in the Third World due to a Vitamin A deficiency that could have been addressed with agricultural biotechnology -- technology opposed by wealthy First World environmentalists.

Third up: The next-of-kin of the 2,000 extra people killed in the U.S. every year since 1975 (National Academies of Science 2002 estimate) because environmentalist-supported fuel economy standards reduced the safety of passenger vehicles.

Fourth up: Any American who lost someone or something in forest fire because the environmentalist belief that land should be left untouched by humanity stopped forest thinning projects and other sane fire control measures. (Governor Schwarzenegger, call your office.)

I could go on. Anyone know a good lawyer? Humanitarians should apply.

[Subscribe to Our E-Mail List]

[Ryan Christopher]

Environmentalists are trying to make oil companies into the new "Big Tobacco." Next we will see states suing oil companies to recover from global warming that hasn't even happened yet. The states, naturally, will say they need the money for environmental projects, and then they will spend it on something else.

[mylife]

The headline says it ALL

[SierraWasp]

I pinged you first, farmfriend!!!

[GeronL]

as I understand it less than 5% of tobacco settlement money actually went towards medical costs/education on the suubject

I think the corporations need a refund

[henderson field]

I think what the states have used the tobacco money for is to supplement state empoyee pensions after the stock market went in the toilet. Wouldn't you rather have your money provide $4000 a month to some bureaucrat retired in Boca Raton than paving the highway you drive to work?

[Wally_Kalbacken]

I'm not keen on the way the Tobacco Settlement was engineered - or the way that the spoils were metered out by the state attorney's general as a political favor to select law firms (which then, oh by the way, returned the favor with political contributions – see Wisconsin’s attorney general and now governor Doyle.) No matter how critical on is about the Tobacco Settlement - at least you can argues there is some causality between cigarette smoking and health problems, and thus expenditures by the state. There is no settled science on global warming to the degree that any similar causality exists. These folks will lose early and often and will have to shoulder a lot of defense costs.

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[sauropod]

ExxonMobil ping.

[CyberAnt]

And .. this is why tort reform is so important.

[endthematrix]

""

Wrong. You'll see states suing YOU to recover the eco damage to the sky from using petroleum, gasoline, natural gas, synthetics and chemicals. You are the problem, and you are the cure...now hand over the $$$$$

[E.G.C.]

BTT!!!!!!

[The Raven]

The trouble with CO2 is there's no easy answer. Even if we as a nation were 100% behind the global warming theories and decided we had to fix it - what would we do?

The correct answer is not in the cards. It would set an emission goal that would eliminate the problem. It would minimize fossil fuel use with a corresponding minimal effect on the economies of the world.

Currenty the enviromentalists are 90-95% socialists and want to use this as a back door to socialism.

First we would need to substantially tax carbon and simoultaneously remove (or transfer) all other taxes.
In addition we need to pay for global warming by eliminating or reducing government programs, as we need to set sights lower with a diminished growth rate. We can't have socialism and a parallel massive hit to the economy. Finally -we'd have to tax the bazoozies out of imports from countries using fossil fuels (China, etc). This is the easiest way out...current proposals are far worse.

[mewzilla]

What are the environmentalists driving...?

[Just mythoughts]

Somebody should file a class action suit against all these dirt worshipers for causing all the trees to go up in flames over the past decade.

They claim that evil tree cutters cause clear cutting and wash away the dirt, when in fact it is the policy they demanded that caused FIRES to clear cut and the dirt got washed away and "HUMANITY" got killed last month.

[Issaquahking]

Thanks for the warning! I was just starting to believe that some Exxon-Mobil stock was going to look good in my retirement portfolio!

Note to self -

• scratch that idea!
  
  
• Help Ryan to start lawsuit against the people who want to damage America!
  
  
• Send a note to Exxon Mobil asking for donation to help stop envio-whacks!

What kind of life do these hypocritical idiots live that they would like to return to huddling over a fire outside a cave? I support Attila the Hun's rule of business when dealing with fools in life and biz - "crush them".

[BigSkyFreeper]

I know in most states, the settlement money was squandered in attempts to balance budgets. One of those states was California under the stewardship of Gray Doofus.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I know the Greenie's here in Montana typically drive SUV's, and protest with large signs made from the same tree's they're trying to protect.