Democrats’ Climate Lawfare Campaign Jeopardizes America’s Energy Future

In political and advocacy battles, litigation has been a proven strategy to reach policy goals. However, in recent years, climate activists have used the courts as a weapon to attack large energy companies — essentially leveraging the legal system as a proxy to win a war of public opinion. This type of behavior is not permitted anywhere. “lawfare” It is evident that this was more so than in the flood of climate litigation facing producers.

Actually, the coalition of cities and states looking to put financial blame on climate change on companies might be approaching a turning point. Elizabeth Prelogar is President Joe Biden’s solicitor general. will file a brief To the Supreme Court, that position could be offered on where climate lawsuits should fall under: federal or state courts. This opinion may be crucial in determining whether plaintiffs are allowed to use friendly locale venues to punish or obtain payouts from the producers of America’s energy needs.

Climate lawsuits don’t just concern money. These suits are steadily flooding into America. courts since 2017Many factors impact on the future energy resources that power our economy. These lawsuits filed by counties, states, and cities against fossil fuel producers are intended to not only hold them accountable for the alleged damages but to also leverage America’s district and state courts in order to lower their status in public opinion. Politicians can leverage the judicial system to undermine the rule of laws and jeopardize the availability of oil and other resources when America and its allies require them.

Public pressure campaigns already have led to investors dumping energy producers and pipelines projects. Now activism in the media aims to increase this. Reputational damage goes beyond just tarnishing one’s name. It also limits the ability of energy producers to do their jobs and invest in quality infrastructure and equipment maintenance. The harm caused by smearing an oil company doesn’t just affect its boardroom; it also impacts the nation’s reliability and costs.

Numerous Benefits

All Americans can reap the tangible benefits of energy production. Hydrocarbons play a central role in powering the economy and producing essential products. The U.S. Department of Energy actually has more hydrocarbons than any other department. notes Americans use There are at least 6000 everyday products that contain petrochemicals. This includes cellphones, coffee machines, hair products, credit cards and shampoo. much more. Even the president admitted in his State of the Union address that oil and natural gas use is not ending anytime soon — albeit trying to hedge with “for at least another decade.”

Furthermore, America can rely less on foreign companies and countries that are not trustworthy and have unsecure supply chains and products. Second, domestic fossil fuels provide energy security. Energy producers, which is important, are often those who innovating the next generation of technology to create low- or zero-carbon solutions for energy. All of these objectives are undermined by climate lawsuits.

Follow the Innovators

In 2011, New Jersey’s Attorney General filed a lawsuit Accusing energy companies of deceiving the public about climate change, and using that deception in order to slow down the transition from oil-and gas production to low-carbon sources. New Jersey must continue funding its three energy companies if it wants to keep them funded. offshore wind projects It will be required to continue traditional energy production during a transition period in order to create greener energy alternatives. A wind farm is nothing without its turbine blades. These are products that use oil for manufacturing. 

Similarly, a recent lawsuit filed Puerto Rican municipalities have filed in November allegations that energy companies were not only deceitful but also helped to cause hurricane damage. But the Puerto Rico lawsuits claim that companies involved in deception helped reduce carbon emissions. 32 percent Since 2005, the transition from coal to natural gasoline for power generation has been completed. They are the leaders in funding new technologies such as carbon capture, storage, and financing them. investing Puerto Rico green technology says This is necessary to reach its renewable energy goal of 100 percent by 2050. You don’t need to sue these companies to achieve your objective.

Casting Energy Producers into Villains

These ironies show that the purpose of lawsuits is to bring litigation to alter behavior, and not to enforce the rule. The truth is that plaintiffs don’t need to prevail in court. The plaintiffs portray energy producers in a negative light, claiming that they are trying to block a low-carbon economy by making them villains. One journalist put it this way: explainedClimate lawsuits can be useful for specific interests due to the fact that they are based on climate change “effect the suits could have even before they’re decided in court.” These suits don’t have to be based on actual illegal acts or violations of law. “lawfare” Their actions degrade the image of energy producers.

Market participants are more likely to follow their lead when policymakers try to undermine rules or laws. This can further cause distortions. Lawfare is not an exception. The effects could extend well beyond energy companies getting a bad reputation — we could see less domestic energy production, higher energy prices, more reliance on nations such as Russia and Saudi Arabia, and less green innovation. China, India, Russia and other countries will continue to contribute to the world’s atmosphere.

Americans still need oil and gasoline. An orchestrated campaign to undermine America’s energy future should not be tolerated. The pending brief of Solicitor General Prelogar must be a victory for common sense, and not continue this costly and destructive form of litigation that is spreading throughout state courts and other local courts.

Benjamin is an economist, writer, and speaker. The articles of Benjamin are meant to show issues in new ways to readers. They do not reflect his personal opinions. These articles do not reflect the opinions of any past employers.