States, NYC Sue Energy Companies Over 'Global Warming'

CNSNews.com ^ | July 23, 2004 | Nathan Burchfiel

[tomball]

(CNSNews.com) - Eight states and the city of New York this week sued five major energy companies, alleging that the companies contributed to "global warming." The energy companies collectively operate 21 plants in the United States, but only one of the states suing, Wisconsin, has a plant inside its borders.

The attorneys general from California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin are joined by the New York City Office of Corporation Counsel in targeting the energy firms.

The American Electric Power Company, the Southern Company, Tennessee Valley Authority, Xcel Energy Inc. and Cinergy Corporation are the defendants in the suit filed Wednesday.

The suit is being brought on the grounds of public nuisance under federal common law and does not accuse the companies of violating existing emissions standards.

Tom Dresslar, spokesman for California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, told CNSNews.com that the suit was necessary "because global warming is a severe threat to our states and their people." He called the public nuisance argument "an ancient legal document," saying it is "well established, including in environmental cases." However, he acknowledged that "this is a first attempt to use public nuisance law to fight global warming."

Lockyer, in a statement on the matter, said the lawsuit "opens a new legal frontier in the fight against global warming."

Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency do not recognize carbon dioxide as a pollutant. And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce backs up that view by pointing out that carbon dioxide is a "naturally occurring part of the atmosphere."

Furthermore, America's energy and environmental policies "should be made by elected officials, not lawyers and judges in a courtroom," Chamber President Thomas Donahue stated in a release.

Brian Elwood of Xcel Energy agreed. "We believe that any carbon dioxide policy should be developed by the U.S. Congress and should not be done through litigation." But, he said, Xcel is already committed to reducing emissions.

"In April 2004," Elwood told CNSNews.com , "we announced a voluntary carbon management plan which will result in a 7 percent reduction in our carbon dioxide intensity."

Melissa McHenry of American Electric Power said the lawsuit is not a constructive way of dealing with the controversy. "Climate change is a global issue that cannot effectively be addressed by any individual company, small group of companies or even a single country," she said.

Dresslar denied that the states are trying to legislate through litigation. "We have a federal government which says [carbon dioxide] is not a pollutant. We don't agree with that," he said. And in light of the federal government's refusal to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act, he continued, "we've got to do something."

Dressler also said the fact that none of the states except for Wisconsin has the energy plants in question within their borders is irrelevant. "Global warming is exactly that, it's global," he said. "I don't know specifically which states we tried to contact. But we have Iowa in there. They're another Midwest state closer to [Wisconsin]."

[Alberta's Child]

You gotta figure these people are losers when they file a lawsuit like this, 1) after one of the coldest winters in the Northeast in recent memory and 2) in the middle of the second

[Zeppo]

The attorneys general from California, ...

Last time I checked, California was not a Northeastern state, however it clearly is a 'liberal greedy state'. :-)

[JerseyHighlander]

I've seen your posts here for a long time, generally agree with your positions, but on this one, from the perspective of the eastern seaboard States, there is solid theoretical, experimental, and observational science to clearly state that the Coal burning power plants in the Midwest and Ohio River Valley are causing serious air pollution and formation of acid rain over large parts of the seaboard states. The seaboard states, due to the EPA regulations, have to spend inordinate amounts of money on CO2, particulate, and etc. reducing technologies to lower local air pollution levels, with great loss to the local economies, while the sources of the pollution, are allowed to continue burning coal.

I don't believe the "Global Warming" hype, I do believe the satellite photography of pollution clouds moving over the eastern seaboard, originating directly from power plants. Equity in the halls of the Executive and Legislative branches, or renumeration through the Judicial branch.

Can't vouch for California or Wisconsin.

[JerseyHighlander]

"Global Warming" is a different animal than air pollution that causes acid rain in the Appalachian mountains.

[Falcon4.0]

You people OBVIOUSLY don't know what you're talking about! The ONLY way to stop GOBAL WARMING is with VIRGIN SACRFICE! Just like the old days.

[Let's Roll]

Apparently this needs to be spelled out in short words and simple sentences.

Solar (that means the Sun) - activity - is - the - cause - of - all - global - cooling - and - warming - just - as - it - has - been - since - the - earth (that's the globe) - was - formed.

Otherwise how to explain previous cycles of global warming and cooling - most of which was before human activity, the use of fossil fuels, the internal combustion engine and George W. Bush.

I'm starting to get a little p!ssed at the continuous repeat of this Big Lie - it's almost as pervasive as Bush stole Florida.

[nothingnew]

It's time to throw sons'a bitches like this out, and it ain't gonna happen by voting. Wake up people.

I have updated my FMCDH sign-off with the addition of (BITS).....Blood In The Streets, which I foresee coming soon, due to the enormous increase of the communist progressive movement being shoved down the throat of this failing REPUBLIC through the Judicial tyranny of fiat law, and the passing of unconstitutional laws by the Legislative and Executive branches of our government.

FMCDH(BITS)

[conservative in nyc]

This nuisance suit is about global warming, not acid rain or air pollution. It has nothing to do with violations of existing emission standards. It is an attempt to get carbon dioxide (a naturally-occurring gas caused by you and me breathing) declared a pollutant by a court instead of by the people you and I elect to go to Washington to do so. Carbon dioxide currently is not considered a pollutant. It's another attempt by liberals (including my RINO mayor) to get courts to legislate when they can't win at the ballot box. From the article:

The suit is being brought on the grounds of public nuisance under federal common law and does not accuse the companies of violating existing emissions standards.

Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency do not recognize carbon dioxide as a pollutant.

[hedgetrimmer]

It is becoming a communist nation, abetted by Bill Clinton's EO on environmental justice. This EO let groups sue property owners and energy producers in the name of justice, as defined by communism. The US legal system never allowed suits by groups or individuals who were not directly harmed by a property owner. Environmental justice lawsuits are putting property owners and energy producers out of business.

If you want to fix things, you must get your lawmakers to repeal the EO on Environmental justice and break down the governmental frameworks that have been put into place that are killing the free enterprise system in America.

Otherwise the lawsuits, which are a way of voiding laws and the will of the people, will just keep coming. Its no surprise commifornia is leading the pack, and our so called conservative Governor is allowing the suit to be filed.

[pepsi_junkie]

Dresslar denied that the states are trying to legislate through litigation. "We have a federal government which says [carbon dioxide] is not a pollutant. We don't agree with that," he said. And in light of the federal government's refusal to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act, he continued, "we've got to do something."

Is this guy kidding? "No, we arent trying to create laws via the courts! Its just that the legislature wont create the laws so we have to do it through the courts" Uh huh. I am starting to hate the judicial branch. Or is it fear?

[upchuck]

I suggest these companies buy full page ads in the newspapers of the areas they serve on Wed, 9/1; Thu, 9/2 and Fri, 9/3. These ads would say something similar to:

In conjunction with the National Labor Day Holiday (Mon 9/6/2004), and in a sincere effort to help stave off Global Warming, our company is going to sacrifice one day's worth of profit. On Monday, 9/6/2001 at 12:00:01am will be shutting down all of our electric power plants. The plants will restart at 11:59:59pm, Monday, 9/6/2004.

We hope our customers appreciate our honest effort at reducing harmful emissions and the onslaught on Global Warming. We trust everyone will join us and enjoy the Electric Power Holiday!

Dare ya!

[DonnerT]

My solution.

Terminate the AGs and all electricity flowing into those states.

[_Jim]

The ONLY way to stop GOBAL WARMING is with VIRGIN SACRFICE! Just like the old days.

Firstly, whose virgins? Secondarily, are there any to be found today?

Or do you have something else in mind ('virgins', per se, only brings to mind one thing for me ...)?

[John Lenin]

Brain Dead Leftist Psychobabble

[_Jim]

The predators:

• The attorneys general from
• California,
• Connecticut,
• Iowa,
• New Jersey,
• New York,
• Rhode Island,
• Vermont and
• Wisconsin are joined by
• New York City Office of Corporation Counsel

The prey:

• American Electric Power Company,
• the Southern Company,
• Tennessee Valley Authority,
• Xcel Energy Inc. and
• Cinergy Corporation

[JerseyHighlander]

Skimmed the article, thought this was a continuation of the the "Clear Skies" initiative battle last year. Seems rather funny that a judge could declare a building block of life a "pollutant". This suit looks frivolous, like a budget deficit stop gap gamble by the states involved.

[Falcon4.0]

and your question is...?

[hedgetrimmer]

On February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898, "Federal Action to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations." The Presidential memorandum accompanying this Order directs Federal agencies to use Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VI"), (See Footnote 1) or the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 ("NEPA") to implement the Order. (See Footnote 2.)

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, relying on President Clinton's 1994 Environmental Justice Executive Order, refused a permit for a uranium enrichment facility.

Minority plaintiffs are filing, and winning, multi-billion dollar lawsuits based on claims of environmental racism. A Louisiana jury awarded $3.4 billion to residents of a predominantly African-American neighborhood who claimed that they were exposed to toxic chemicals from a railroad tank-car fire.

An EPA Clean Air Act Advisory Committee is currently considering whether the agency's Emission Trading Program implicates environmental justice concerns.

California residents have announced they plan to file several environmental justice complaints with EPA, including claims that disparate impacts on minorities are resulting from (i) methyl tertiary butyl ether ("MTBE") releases from reformulated gasoline refineries, (ii) power plants located in low-income and minority communities, and (iii) the siting of low-level nuclear waste dumps.

The California Department of Toxic Substances Control has agreed to cooperate with EPA to address environmental justice issues and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board has indicated that it may soon adopt an environmental justice policy.

Environmental justice has, in effect, become an independent permitting requirement.

Federal and state laws provide for a broad range of claims that can cause costly delays in new and ongoing projects and result in large plaintiffs' verdicts.

[Watery Tart]

For her next trick, our attorney general [DUI, Wisconsin] will go after Dihydrogen Monoxide. After all, it is a dangerous compound:

Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities.

Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.

Excessive ingestion produces a number of unpleasant though not typically life-threatening side-effects.

DHMO is a major component of acid rain. Gaseous DHMO can cause severe burns.

Contributes to soil erosion.

Leads to corrosion and oxidation of many metals.

Contamination of electrical systems often causes short-circuits.

Exposure decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes.

Found in biopsies of pre-cancerous tumors and lesions. Often associated with killer cyclones in the U.S. Midwest and elsewhere.

Thermal variations in DHMO are a suspected contributor to the El Nino weather effect.

Visit the website. It's a real eye-opener.

[boris]

If the companies had any cojones they would pull an "Atlas Shrugged" and simply shut down all the coal-burning plants.

"That satisfy you, boys?"

--Boris