Obstruction and obfuscation by fossil fuel companies?

In December 2019, Commissioner Roberto Cadiz told COP25 that the three-year Philippines Human Rights Commission National Inquiry on Climate Change will soon release its report. He said the Commissioners have made their decision: the 47 biggest Carbon Majors have violated the human rights of  Philippine citizens through their contributions to climate change, and can be held legally liable for those violations under existing Philippines civil law. Cadiz said it may also be possible to hold the companies criminally accountable “where they have been clearly proved to have engaged in acts of obstruction and willful obfuscation.” 

How strong is the evidence that big fossil fuel companies knowingly concealed the hazards that they knew would result from the normal use of their fossil fuel products through misrepresentation about those products and deliberately discrediting scientific information related to climate change? Read the impressive amicus brief in the San Mateo litigation. It lays out evidence that the fossil fuel companies had actual knowledge of the risks of their products and had taken “proactive steps to conceal their knowledge and discredit climate science” while at the same time taking steps to protect their own assets from the impacts of climate change. 

The brief starts this way:

"At least fifty years ago, Defendants-Appellants (hereinafter, “Defendants”) had information from their own internal research, as well as from the international scientific community, that the unabated extraction, production, promotion, and sale of their fossil fuel products would result in material dangers to the public. Defendants failed to disclose this information or take steps to protect the public. They also acted affirmatively to conceal their knowledge and discredit climate science, running misleading nationwide marketing campaigns and funding junk science to manufacture uncertainty, in direct contradiction to their own research and the actions they themselves took to protect their assets from climate change impacts such as sea level rise."

More Posts

Climate Change and Sustainable Finance

#climatechange and #sustainablefinance at @masseycollege: join our expert panel Tom Rand, Robin Edger, Alex Chapman and me to explore what Canada's financial community is doing now to build a #greeneconomy, especially #Cleancapitalism and Canadian venture capitalists; Property assessed clean energy programs #PACE, and the Canadian...

Read More

Indigenous voices in climate action

Dear friends, Ambassador Rosemary McCarney and I are continuing our climate action series at Massey College. If you haven't heard it yet, don't miss the discussion of human and planetary health that took place September 23rd. The next scintillating conversation...

Read More

Electric vehicle charging takes off in the Bruce Peninsula

Want to read an inspiring Ontario case study of how a small NGO swiftly transformed electric vehicle charging in a thinly populated rural and tourist area? Warmest congratulations to the Bruce Peninsula Biosphere Association for making electric vehicle charging widely...

Read More

More evidence that Alberta’s oil industry is not “ethical”

Alberta claims to have an ethical oil industry. An ethical industry would pay its way and clean up its own mess. This is called the Polluter Pay principle and it’s fundamental to Canadian environmental law. Unfortunately, that’s not what’s happening...

Read More

Climate litigation: Exciting victories

"Gradually, then suddenly". After many years of hard work, climate litigation is racking up unprecedented victories around the world. Both companies (Shell) and governments (Belgium, France, Germany, etc.) have been found to be negligent and in breach of human rights...

Read More
View All Posts