Many Global Warming Litigation Cases Started

Private climate change litigation has got started with a vengence By Peter Roderick

Thursday, Dec 23, 2004, Page 9, Taipei Times

Advertising Human influence at least doubled the risk of last year's Europe-wide heatwave. That is the conclusion of leading scientists who say they are more than 90 percent sure of the fact. The research, published in Nature magazine, is a significant milestone on the road to establishing liability for climate change damage.

It boosts the argument that greenhouse gas emissions have increased temperatures both globally and regionally, and it brings nearer the day when courts will be asked to decide where liability lies. rivate climate change litigation has got started with a vengence By Peter Roderick

Thursday, Dec 23, 2004, Page 9, Taipei Times

Advertising Human influence at least doubled the risk of last year's Europe-wide heatwave. That is the conclusion of leading scientists who say they are more than 90 percent sure of the fact. The research, published in Nature magazine, is a significant milestone on the road to establishing liability for climate change damage.

It boosts the argument that greenhouse gas emissions have increased temperatures both globally and regionally, and it brings nearer the day when courts will be asked to decide where liability lies. [ . . . ]

The rest of this article, with its list of many example cases, is at: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/12/ 23/2003216383

Peter Roderick is co-director of the Climate Justice Program. Details:

Best I know, the Kyoto protocol is not a 'law', but rather a statement of intent for voluntary cooperation. Until some body passes a 'law' setting limits on the introduction of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, there will be no 'liability'. Then there're always the questions of jurisdiction and enforcement...

RPD / Cambridge Facts can be your friends if you treat them right.

I agree, Kyoto is not a basis for liability, but rules of tort remain, whatever the mechanism. If I do someone damage, I am subject to a tort, even if I do that damage by greenhouse gas emission.

It is a treaty. Treaties are laws of the land for signatories.

josh halpern

Yes, but it forms only a 'framework for cooperation' and a set of specified 'goals'. The law (requirement for compliance) that is invoked is the UNFCCC treaty which gives a commitment but no structure. The U.S. has already ratified the actual law (UNFCCC treaty) that made reductions a requirement of U.S. laws, but as usual under Bush are making many noises while doing nothing concrete.

Right, when science fails then resort to lawsuits presented to twelve cretins who believe the moon is made of green cheese.

'If you can't convince them, SUE them!'

end

Thank you, Mr. Asshole for sharing your vison of the kind of people that cluster around you. It is to be expected that cretins tend to congregate with their like. You might try to get out more often though and realise that here is a whole nother universe out there peopled with those smarter than you are.

Actually, the Bushites seem to be trying to snow them under with op-eds and silly posts like this one. They tend to stay away from legal proceedures where the rule of law and common sense might derail their agenda.

Remember when Al thought the 'rule of law' was so important in late 2000?

josh halpern

end

'Ian St. John' < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it > wrote in message