Emerging legislation would shield polluters from liability for climate change

This is the latest front in the battle over climate lawsuits.

See full article...

 

[sighburr]

Not going to lie, this is impressive. I didn't see this coming. They really are super villains at this point.

 

[hillspuck]

I wouldn’t mind the MAGA death cult as much if they kept to themselves and killed each other, like the Branch Davidians or any other old fashioned doomsday cult.

I would mind. All these cults wind up killing lots of kids (directly or indirectly). Or partners (let's face it, women) who they keep under their thumb. And there's plenty of us that grew up religious that broke away from that in adulthood, or people who finally managed to break away from that relationship.

 

[Kavinsky]

Just wondering if China (world's #1 polluter) is kneecapping themselves while building a new coal-powered power plant every 2 weeks?

That's not to say we shouldn't be pursuing clean energy. Just not at any cost... Take UK energy costs as a prime example...

You mean the same country that deployed as much new solar and wind power in a month as Poland (an entire, modern country) generates?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...with-massive-build-up-of-wind-and-solar-power

Let's also ignore that fact that the stop-gap coal plants China is putting in are the ultra-clean, ultra-efficient kind.

There's lots wrong with China, but their approach to industrialisation isn't one of them, unlike, say, the US or India.

 

[42Kodiak42]

Unpopular opinion however, a lawsuit specifically blaming one entity at a time for humanity's industrial sins going back to the 1800s is another way to ignore the problem. Supporting clean energy and new technologies is a better use of time and energy, imagine if California subsidized power lines, geothermal plants, and funded a race to the first green container ship and trucks? Those things are hard so lets just distract everyone with lawsuits.

Counterpoint: They know their actions are resulting in mass deaths, increased rates of illness, higher energy prices, and catastrophic damage to our environment.

This is not some tragedy of the commons, nor did we collectively decide to pollute our environment for industry and energy. There are specific people who are making the decision to dump pollutants into our shared atmosphere in exactly the same way that there are specific people who decide to murder and rape other humans. We don't look at old maritime piracy, bank robberies, and general theft as some form of "shared sin." Specific, individual humans are responsible for these harms, and they ought to be held accountable for the damage they cause.

 

[graylshaped]

Next year's alt-right Super Bowl halftime show will feature a MAGA stan belting out their newest hit "Ain't No Gutter Low Enough"...

... to fill with running toxic waste.

 

[Scary Devil Monastery]

Because of course they are. It's a day ending 'y' so, naturally, Republicans are up to something monstrous and evil.

I've said it by now a thousand times, I think. Republicans have done their damndest best to actively sabotage the world everyone lives in and their nation in particular for a long time.

There are many reasons, none of them good. The perpetrators knowing the consequences will not come until they're long dead, the perpetrators knowing they will never be the demographic facing a death toll, the perpetrators knowing only that 'Hey, the money's good'.

The Fallout series has the evil corporation Vault-Tec actively ensuring doomsday because, in their minds, there's a lot of money in the apocalypse and it will all end with their frozen selves being thawed out to take over all of humanity.
Farcically evil of course, but...by this point, looking at the ideologies of Thiel and Yarvin being the moral heart of modern republicanism, there's no bottom-of-the-barrel trope of evil I hold too farcical compared to what we already know, either from project 2025 or from what these clowns say in public.

For Trump, especially, I wouldn't bet against that if/when he realizes that his legacy will be that of the worst president in american history and that no one is buying his bullshit, he'll do his best to wreck everything he can. To that narcissist a world not crawling at Trump's feet shouldn't exist.

Where climate change is concerned the equation's simple. The wealthy and privileged assholes trying to stifle every attempt to combat climate change know damn well they'll be dust before it gets so bad their kind is meaningfully impacted - and they couldn't care less what happens to a few billion asians, africans...or for that matter, americans living in the half or more of the country set to turn into a hellscape.

 

[Fearless Fermion]

My understanding of some of the logic behind these initiatives, if there is any, is that admitting or having any opportunity for leaving the door open for financial liability for climate change consequences is a financially catastrophic risk/concern (as if climate change isnt bad enough?) that is similar to some of the discussions of the massive financial implications of "slavery reparations". While we might think that all of these attempts of accountability are important - and they clearly are - we are now also had a financially/corporate tipping point (to use a climate change term). Much of the discussions around how/where/why COVID started (like in the Wuhan lab) center around liability and I think there is almost some multi-trillion US$ lawsuit against China for this. Imagine similar legal battles for if and when Florida is under water. I have had a few conversations with conservative Republican-types, their denial of climate change is not based upon a fundamental disagreement with the realities that climate is changing because of what we are doing to the planet, but rather if we acknowledge it then we will have to be financially accountable for it....

I guess, either way - we are screwed - climate change is happening either way and we are probably past the point in which we can do anything about the trajectory over the next couple of hundred years. Now the only question is do we want to add endless litigation on top of it (and the financial consequences of that).... and now, back to the Epstein files.

A future in which we've made those companies truly pay for the damage is practically impossible. If it arrives, then we could entertain the idea and details of liability shields, but certainty not now, when they're doubling down on protecting their interests rather than making even a token effort to fix things.

 

[EnPeaSea]

Captain Planet nemeses needed magic to aspire to such villainy! If made today, they would have Judge Dishonorable paving the legal path for Plunder, Blight, Greedly, et.al.

 

[Scary Devil Monastery]

Just wondering if China (world's #1 polluter) is kneecapping themselves while building a new coal-powered power plant every 2 weeks?

That's not to say we shouldn't be pursuing clean energy. Just not at any cost... Take UK energy costs as a prime example...

I never cease to marvel at the sheer stupidity of the arguments shills keep bringing up...

China is, in addition to being the country which proportionally outpaces everyone else in retooling it's energy park for sustainables is also the one stuck with the energy need being incredibly high because they're building all our shit.

There's a lot of things to say about China but you just had to show everyone the level of brain you operate at by blaming them for the exact part of emissions that western consumption is responsible for.
Fucking amazing, really. Yes, they are stuck expanding every energy source they can most effectively construct the fastest...to meet the demand of their industry which manufactures more than half of the global supply of just about everything.

This isn't the MAGA rally where the uneducated bleat in unison, shill. Pulling lines that dumb and fallacious here only means you telling everyone you're Trolling for Trump.

 

[Snark218]

I first read this as "effluent white men".
It still worked!

We call that one the shit tier!

 

[Scary Devil Monastery]

A future in which we've made those companies truly pay for the damage is practically impossible. If it arrives, then we could entertain the idea and details of liability shields, but certainty not now, when they're doubling down on protecting their interests rather than making even a token effort to fix things.

Bullshit.

In the US? Yep, the american government is very shy of beating industries until they bleed.
That is not the case in a lot of places elsewhere.

And even in the US there are many cases where too uppity industries have been made to pay. Ma Bell comes to mind. Big Tobacco. Big Oil when it came to leaded gasoline.

The united states kneeling before the corporations in utter helplessness is very much a fairly recent phenomenon only normalized because for the last generation, their everything has been too broken - by design - to even handle paying the government bills regularly.

 

[Sajuuk]

Seeings as this the fourth time we have elected an "actor" and we certainly haven't learned any lessons it looks like we are going for the quadruple-down and break.

Oh, of course. The earth will literally pry the gas guzzling F147 Protest Dozers from our cold, dead, exceptionally American hands.

 

[FSTargetDrone]

Because of course they are. It's a day ending 'y' so, naturally, Republicans are up to something monstrous and evil.

These ReThugLieCons in government are utterly corrupt to the core.

 

[metlman13]

The cherry on top is when these same states begin suing wind farms over bird deaths or some bullshit.

Because it isn't just about covering the oil industry's ass. It's also about using every legal tool imaginable to destroy the competition, the one favored by the 'woke' crowd.

Just another day in the Age of Regression!

Edit: also going to add this for anyone reading this, consider stuff like this a lesson that 'progress' is never to be taken for granted and can easily go in the other direction at any point. Doesn't matter where you live. You have to fight for the future you want to see, always, even if you live in a place where the people are 'sane'. And the fight doesnt stop even if you decide to move somewhere else.

 

[JudgeMental]

Unpopular opinion however, a lawsuit specifically blaming one entity at a time for humanity's industrial sins going back to the 1800s is another way to ignore the problem. Supporting clean energy and new technologies is a better use of time and energy, imagine if California subsidized power lines, geothermal plants, and funded a race to the first green container ship and trucks? Those things are hard so lets just distract everyone with lawsuits.

A major reason we have a litigious society (in the US, specifically) is specifically because we don't have effective regulation to keep various industries from hurting us and the world we live in. Therefore because the government effectively ignores the issue, the only civil route left is lawsuits. Unfortunately I don't think other civil actions (boycott, lifestyle change, other forms of 'voting with your wallet') will ever be effective because ultimately those actions would have to happen on a scale that's simply not accessible.

R's are attempting to close that loophole so petrochem can just do what they want. And they're doing it by presenting it as a solution to a problem that they themselves created. It's actively insulting, and I wish more people knew how badly they were being pandered to.

 

[=j]

Republicans really are just super villains now...

No. They are the super villains' henchmen.

 

[42Kodiak42]

My understanding of some of the logic behind these initiatives, if there is any, is that admitting or having any opportunity for leaving the door open for financial liability for climate change consequences is a financially catastrophic risk/concern (as if climate change isnt bad enough?) that is similar to some of the discussions of the massive financial implications of "slavery reparations". While we might think that all of these attempts of accountability are important - and they clearly are - we are now also had a financially/corporate tipping point (to use a climate change term). Much of the discussions around how/where/why COVID started (like in the Wuhan lab) center around liability and I think there is almost some multi-trillion US$ lawsuit against China for this. Imagine similar legal battles for if and when Florida is under water. I have had a few conversations with conservative Republican-types, their denial of climate change is not based upon a fundamental disagreement with the realities that climate is changing because of what we are doing to the planet, but rather if we acknowledge it then we will have to be financially accountable for it....

I guess, either way - we are screwed - climate change is happening either way and we are probably past the point in which we can do anything about the trajectory over the next couple of hundred years. Now the only question is do we want to add endless litigation on top of it (and the financial consequences of that).... and now, back to the Epstein files.

There's a couple of stark differences that come to mind regarding slavery reparations and the start of COVID and climate change reparations, but they're different differences.

These were perhaps similar to slavery reparations at the time, but nowadays, over generations as wealth has changed hands and the lasting evils have mutated, most of the parties that 'should've known better' who you could plainly attach punitive responsibility for have passed on, and while there may be some members of hate groups that you can punish, 'making things right' is now almost purely focused on collectively fixing the lasting damage and shutting down hate-groups. Unless, of course, you want to try to hold people like me accountable for the actions of ancestors I disown as traitors to my country and murderers of my countrymen. I am fully willing to do my part to fixing their damage, and while I will admit that I share their blood and have benefitted from their crimes, I had no say in their actions and no power to stop or hinder them.

COVID-19 was a chaotic eventuality, something that was not consciously decided as a trade-off, not cost of ill-gotten gains. It is much harder to point at someone and say "This person/organization should've known better and are solely responsible for this tragedy!" because in practice, they're not. Humanity has always been vulnerable to novel plagues that could emerge from countless normal actions, both activities we would regard as careless and appropriate. You might be able to find a lab responsible for failing certain safety protocols and assign some punishment for that, but unless they happen to have been developing it as a bioweapon, we all just got unlucky.

Comparatively, corporations and people who are polluting our environment, poisoning our lungs, and destroying our country are very much alive, active, and did so knowingly. This is a decision that they continuously make, pollutants they consciously are dumping or know are going to be dumped into our atmosphere, damage they are deliberately externalizing to the rest of humanity. They are still here, the hammer can and should be brought down on them. They seek to wash their hands by pretending that the purchase of their goods and services makes us responsible for their externalities; they know what gasoline is used for, they know coal is burned, they could put their money towards fixing the damage they cause and raise the price of their goods to cover it, but they don't as a deliberate, immoral choice.

 

[forkspoon]

OK, Dems. Take note: make it illegal to sue over DEI, objections to renewable energy (e.g. wind turbines), and who uses what bathrooms.

 

[Fearless Fermion]

Bullshit.

In the US? Yep, the american government is very shy of beating industries until they bleed.
That is not the case in a lot of places elsewhere.

And even in the US there are many cases where too uppity industries have been made to pay. Ma Bell comes to mind. Big Tobacco. Big Oil when it came to leaded gasoline.

The united states kneeling before the corporations in utter helplessness is very much a fairly recent phenomenon only normalized because for the last generation, their everything has been too broken - by design - to even handle paying the government bills regularly.

What I'm trying to argue is that we shouldn't preemptively give them immunity when there's not even a framework for making them repair the damage. Piecemeal lawsuits are not a solution to the problem, but why preempt them when we don't have anything else? If anything, it would make it more difficult to make them accountable.

 

[LDA 6502]

If the US does not hold its companies accountable for climate damage while other countries do, it creates a clear and justifiable case for other countries to levy a climate damage tax on imports from the US, just to level the competitive field.

That was part of the justification for the EU CBAM tariff.

 

[cfenton]

You mean the same country that deployed as much new solar and wind power in a month as Poland (an entire, modern country) generates?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...with-massive-build-up-of-wind-and-solar-power

Let's also ignore that fact that the stop-gap coal plants China is putting in are the ultra-clean, ultra-efficient kind.

There's lots wrong with China, but their approach to industrialisation isn't one of them, unlike, say, the US or India.

There's no such thing as ultra-clean and ultra-efficient coal. It might be cleaner and more efficient than other ways to burn coal, but it's still coal.

 

[SGJ]

So coporate bodies are to have the benefit of being legal personalities such as the right to free speech (and to fund politicians) and the right to privacy but none of the obligations that non-corporate personalities (a.k.a. people) have: like the obligation to follow the law.

 

[Frank C.]

Another reason to ban all things republican for the good of all mankind.

This would solve most if not all of the problems currently facing this country.

 

[Statistical]

There's no such thing as ultra-clean and ultra-efficient coal. It might be cleaner and more efficient than other ways to burn coal, but it's still coal.

Yeah clean coal is just bullshit. I am surprised this myth continues to live on in 2026. I would add that while China coal plants are more efficient this just because coal on average has horrific efficiency. China newest coal plants are around 50% efficient. Natural gas combined cycle turbines are about 60%. China also has substantial number of older coal plants with lower efficiency.

China newest plants are the least bad coal but that is like saying the least bad kick to the nuts. It is all bad. The rest of the arguments in terms of deployment of renewables are better.

 

[QMaverick]

Nothing says "we're not doing anything wrong" more than passing laws that shield you from being responsible for doing wrong things.

 

[raschumacher]

The snake thrashes most violently just before the head comes off.

What's left to say other than: Vote Democrat for every office in every election. Nothing else will make any difference.

 

[=j]

There's no such thing as ultra-clean and ultra-efficient coal. It might be cleaner and more efficient than other ways to burn coal, but it's still coal.

Well, China's coal is relatively non-polluting because they are hardly ever run. Average coal plant in China runs about half the time. I suppose running a coal plant as a "peaker" is hardly efficient.

 

[just another rmohns]

Excellent initiative but sadly it doesn't go far enough. Now let's see a bill that bans liability for corporations poisoning groundwater with toxic waste, and gives blanket immunity to the most upstanding private citizens accused of silly mishaps like multi-billion-dollar fraud and sexual assault of minors. Justice, American style.

That's some satire that hits close to home…

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...-easier-for-coal-plants-to-pollute-waterways/

https://www.wilderness.org/articles/article/congress-voted-its-okay-dump-mine-waste-waterways

Not to mention considerably older laws, like an absolutely wild loophole in the 2002 updates to the Clean Water Act which allows mine owners to designate lakes, rivers, and wetlands as "waste treatment systems" and make them exempt from the act.

 

[cosmotose]

Pessimism and boot-shaking be Damned!.. THEIR DAY OF RECKONING WILL COME!! : ))

 

[Hmnhntr]

Unpopular opinion however, a lawsuit specifically blaming one entity at a time for humanity's industrial sins going back to the 1800s is another way to ignore the problem. Supporting clean energy and new technologies is a better use of time and energy, imagine if California subsidized power lines, geothermal plants, and funded a race to the first green container ship and trucks? Those things are hard so lets just distract everyone with lawsuits.

And what exactly is your plan to incentivize these powerful corporations to cooperate unless they suffer consequences for their current actions?

The fossil fuel industry was willing to spend decades and billions of dollars fighting against green energy rather than invest in the new sector. Why would they cooperate now?

 

[Hmnhntr]

Seeings as this the fourth time we have elected an "actor" and we certainly haven't learned any lessons it looks like we are going for the quadruple-down and break.

BuT hE's SoMeOnE i CoUlD sIt DoWn AnD hAvE a BeEr WiTh

When will people finally stop picking leaders based on how well they blow smoke up our asses and instead look at actual qualifications?


Never? Oh.

 

[Heavy Messing]

So coporate bodies are to have the benefit of being legal personalities such as the right to free speech (and to fund politicians) and the right to privacy but none of the obligations that non-corporate personalities (a.k.a. people) have: like the obligation to follow the law.

This, in a nutshell. Thank you.

 

[Hmnhntr]

The only good news is this bill would not be possible under reconciliation. That means they need 60 votes in the Senate. Not only would every Republican would need to vote for it even those looking at tough re-election fights in six months but seven Democrats would need to break ranks.

I don't see it happen. Sure they could go with nuclear option and throw out the filibuster but they didn't even do that for the govt shutdown or to fund DHS which is currently not funded.

You can't see seven Democrats breaking ranks to vote for a bill that supports the interests of Big Business? You can't see the party allowing a few people to 'betray' them, and pretend that absolves them of any responsibility?

Have....have you ever followed any political news at literally any time in history?

 

[Hmnhntr]

Just wondering if China (world's #1 polluter) is kneecapping themselves while building a new coal-powered power plant every 2 weeks?

That's not to say we shouldn't be pursuing clean energy. Just not at any cost... Take UK energy costs as a prime example...

So your argument is "other country bad, therefore we should also be bad"? On the basis of what? Giving up trade dominance?

Let me say it loudly enough for those in the back: THE AVERAGE PERSON DOESN'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT AMERICA HAVING A PARTICULAR POSITION IN THE GLOBAL STAGE. WE WANT TO HAVE GOOD LIVES AND GOOD FUTURES FOR YOUNGER GENERATIONS. WE DON'T CARE IF CHINA OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY GAINS MORE GEOPOLITICAL INFLUENCE.

 

[Hmnhntr]

My understanding of some of the logic behind these initiatives, if there is any, is that admitting or having any opportunity for leaving the door open for financial liability for climate change consequences is a financially catastrophic risk/concern (as if climate change isnt bad enough?) that is similar to some of the discussions of the massive financial implications of "slavery reparations". While we might think that all of these attempts of accountability are important - and they clearly are - we are now also had a financially/corporate tipping point (to use a climate change term). Much of the discussions around how/where/why COVID started (like in the Wuhan lab) center around liability and I think there is almost some multi-trillion US$ lawsuit against China for this. Imagine similar legal battles for if and when Florida is under water. I have had a few conversations with conservative Republican-types, their denial of climate change is not based upon a fundamental disagreement with the realities that climate is changing because of what we are doing to the planet, but rather if we acknowledge it then we will have to be financially accountable for it....

I guess, either way - we are screwed - climate change is happening either way and we are probably past the point in which we can do anything about the trajectory over the next couple of hundred years. Now the only question is do we want to add endless litigation on top of it (and the financial consequences of that).... and now, back to the Epstein files.

BuT tHe FiNaNcIaL cOsT

"Oh, right, humanity may die a slow death, but have you considered that the alternative is economic turmoil?"

YOU. ARE. A. PART, OF. THE. PROBLEM.

 

[Hmnhntr]

You mean the same country that deployed as much new solar and wind power in a month as Poland (an entire, modern country) generates?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...with-massive-build-up-of-wind-and-solar-power

Let's also ignore that fact that the stop-gap coal plants China is putting in are the ultra-clean, ultra-efficient kind.

There's lots wrong with China, but their approach to industrialisation isn't one of them, unlike, say, the US or India.

But...but....but....chyiiiiiiina!!!!11!!1!!

Guys, China bad!!!!1!!11!!!

 

[Statistical]

You can't see seven Democrats breaking ranks to vote for a bill that supports the interests of Big Business? You can't see the party allowing a few people to 'betray' them, and pretend that absolves them of any responsibility?

No I do not see seven Democrats breaking ranks. It is the same reason the Save Act is likely to fail, the reason Republicans weren't able to fund DHS, etc. All three would be very unpopular with Democratic voters and the Congressional critter would risk losing their seat just prior to Democrats possibly retaking Congress in the midterms.

Have....have you ever followed any political news at literally any time in history?

Have you? How many by party or nearly by party votes have there been in the last decade excluding non controversial ones? It isn't even clear every Republican will vote for this much less every Republican voting and seven Democratic senators breaking ranks.

 

[Hmnhntr]

Next year's alt-right Super Bowl halftime show will feature a MAGA stan belting out their newest hit "Ain't No Gutter Low Enough"...

... to fill with running toxic waste.

Ain't no gutter low enough,
Ain't no river dry enough,
Ain't no child sick enough,
To keep me from making more money!

Catchy!

 

[Hmnhntr]

No I do not see seven Democrats breaking ranks. It is the same reason the Save Act is likely to fail, the reason Republicans weren't able to fund DHS, etc. All three would be very unpopular with Democratic voters and the Congressional critter would risk losing their seat just prior to Democrats possibly retaking Congress in the midterms.




Have you? How many by party or nearly by party votes have there been in the last decade excluding non controversial ones? It isn't even clear every Republican will vote for this much less every Republican voting and seven Democratic senators breaking ranks.

So a few victories mean there's no history of Democrats breaking ranks in just enough numbers to stop deadlocks in the favor of Republicans? Okay buddy, the crayons are right over there.