California Initiates Legal Proceedings Against Major Oil Corporations, Accusing Them of Misleading the Public on Climate Issues and Demanding Reparation for Disaster Damages

California has instituted a legal case against some of the most prominent corporations in the oil and gas sector, alleging that they have misled the populace about the hazards associated with fossil fuels, which are now being implicated in climate-induced storms and wildfires leading to billions of dollars in damages, according to official statements released on Saturday.

The civil litigation, submitted in the state Superior Court of San Francisco, also calls for the establishment of a monetary fund, to be underwritten by the accused companies, intended to cover the costs of recovery operations in the wake of catastrophic storms and fires. Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, stated that the corporations identified in the lawsuit—Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and BP—must be held responsible for their actions.

“Big Oil has perpetuated a falsehood for over half a century, obscuring their long-established awareness of the peril that their fossil fuel products pose to the environment,” said Newsom. “Californian taxpayers should not bear the financial burden for the extensive damages, such as communities being obliterated by wildfires, air quality deteriorating due to hazardous smoke, fatal heatwaves, and unprecedented droughts draining our water resources.”

Ryan Meyers, Senior Vice President of the American Petroleum Institute—an industry association also named in the suit—countered that the subject of climate policy should be a matter for Congressional debate rather than a courtroom topic.

“This sustained, orchestrated effort to launch baseless, politicized legal actions against an essential American sector and its employees diverts attention from meaningful national dialogue and consumes considerable taxpayer resources in California,” Meyers stated.

Shell echoed this sentiment, asserting that legal forums are not the appropriate setting for resolving issues pertaining to global climate change. “Addressing climate change mandates a cooperative approach that encompasses all segments of society,” the energy conglomerate stated. “Immediate action is indeed requisite for combating climate change, and we are in full agreement that society must transition toward a reduced-carbon future.”

This legal move by California aligns with an increasing number of similar actions undertaken by other states and local governments. “California’s litigation enhances the accelerating effort to hold Big Oil accountable for years of deceit, and to guarantee justice for those afflicted by climate-related disasters, including the gradual phenomena like rising sea levels,” stated Kathy Mulvey of the Union of Concerned Scientists via email.

The exhaustive 135-page complaint posits that these companies have been aware since at least the 1960s that fossil fuel combustion would result in global warming and climate alterations. Despite this, they minimized the impending danger in their public communication strategies and promotional campaigns. The complaint further alleges that the companies initiated a disinformation operation as early as the 1970s to undermine the mounting scientific consensus on climate change and disputed its associated risks.

State Attorney General Rob Bonta emphasized in a statement that these companies “have systematically disseminated falsehoods to augment their historic profit margins at the environment’s expense. This cannot continue.”

Richard Wiles, President of the Center for Climate Integrity, affirmed that “California’s resolution to litigate against major oil producers signifies a pivotal moment in the burgeoning legal struggle to make principal polluters accountable for decades of misinformation regarding climate change. Californians have been enduring a climate crisis induced by the fossil fuel industry, and the state is now acting decisively to compel those responsible to make amends.”

Despite being a forerunner in environmental policy and aims to reduce carbon emissions by 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, California has not always been in complete accord with environmental advocates. The state has had a fraught relationship with such activists over matters like aging water infrastructure, new permits for oil and gas wells, and water management strategies which could jeopardize endangered fish species.

Governor Newsom had previously been a vocal advocate for closing the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, the state’s last operational plant of its kind, but reversed his stance last year. This led to censure from key environmental organizations that had been campaigning for its closure.

Report contributed by Adam Beam in Sacramento for Big Big News.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about California oil company lawsuit

More about California oil company lawsuit

• California Official Press Release on Lawsuit
• Exxon Mobil’s Corporate Response to Lawsuit
• Shell’s Statement on California Lawsuit
• American Petroleum Institute’s Views on Climate Policy Litigation
• Union of Concerned Scientists on Holding Big Oil Accountable
• Center for Climate Integrity on Climate Lawsuits
• California’s Carbon Emission Reduction Goals
• Overview of Legal Actions Against Oil Companies by States and Municipalities