Climate Lawsuits: The Bigger Picture on Funding, Motives, and Outcomes
The surge in climate-related lawsuits against Big Oil, like the one discussed in The Guardian and the legal battle initiated by Chicago, is presented as a fight for environmental justice.
However, a more thorough examination reveals that these lawsuits are less about climate change and more about redistributing wealth, weakening the fossil fuel industry, and enriching advocacy groups that fund these lawsuits.
Companies like ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Shell have been accused of deceiving the public about fossil fuels’ role in climate change. But in reality, these lawsuits are part of a broader lawfare strategy designed to drain the resources of oil companies and redirect money to well-funded advocacy groups backed by wealthy donors.
Common Themes in the Lawsuits
Both lawsuits accuse major oil companies of fueling climate disasters by withholding information about the environmental risks posed by fossil fuel consumption.
The New York case, as detailed in The Guardian, claims that these companies are responsible for damages related to heatwaves, flooding, and extreme weather events. Similarly, Chicago’s lawsuit filed earlier in 2024.
Points to climate-related events like flooding, extreme heat, and shoreline erosion, claiming that these disasters were exacerbated by the fossil fuel industry’s failure to act and alleged deception.
Both cases draw from the same climate change narrative, that oil companies are responsible for extreme weather events due to their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
These lawsuits aim to hold oil companies financially accountable for the rising costs of climate-related damage, framing their legal claims as a way to shift the burden of costs from local governments to corporations. However, as in Chicago’s case, the outcomes of these lawsuits remain unclear, as they have faced procedural delays and have yet to produce tangible settlements or verdicts.
Parallel Strategies and Lawfare
Both the New York and Chicago cases are part of a broader lawfare strategy, a legal campaign designed to cripple the fossil fuel industry through an onslaught of lawsuits while funneling money to advocacy groups and renewable energy sectors.
These lawsuits are not isolated incidents but are part of a coordinated effort by well-funded legal groups, including Public Citizen, Fair and Just Prosecution, and other advocacy networks funded by donors like the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.
In both lawsuits, the strategy is to shift financial liability for climate change from the public to the private sector by targeting oil companies, using the courts as a battleground for climate activism.
The lawsuits also aim to compel fossil fuel companies to pay for climate adaptation measures, everything from flood defenses to cooling infrastructure in cities. But as we’ve seen in Chicago’s case, these lawsuits often get bogged down in legal complexities.
The Bigger Picture: Funding, Motives, and Outcomes
The financial motives behind these lawsuits are clear when examining the groups backing them. In both the New York and Chicago cases, legal advocacy organizations funded by progressive donors have a vested interest in undermining the fossil fuel industry.
Groups like Public Citizen are backed by foundations with financial stakes in renewable energy industries, creating conflicts of interest that undermine their claims of fighting for environmental justice…
See more here Substack
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATI ONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. [paypal-donation
Trackback from your site.