• 5 minutes Drone attacks cause fire at two Saudi Aramco facilities, blaze now under control
  • 8 minutes China Faces Economic Collapse
  • 12 minutes Oil Production Growth In U.S. Grinds To A Halt
  • 14 minutes Iran in the world market
  • 17 minutes Ethanol, the Perfect Home Remedy for A Saudi Oil Fever
  • 4 mins Experts review drone damage . Say Saudis need to do a lot of explaining.
  • 7 hours USA Wants Iran War -- Shooty Shooty More
  • 12 hours Collateral Damage: Saudi Disruption Leaves Canada's Biggest Refinery Vulnerable
  • 12 hours Yawn... Parliament Poised to Force Brexit Delay Until Jan. 31
  • 33 mins Saudis Confirm a Cruise Missile from Iranian Origin
  • 8 hours The Spy Money: U.S. Wants To Seize All Money Edward Snowden Makes From New Book
  • 54 mins Aramco Production
  • 14 hours Wonders of US Shale: US Shale Benefits: The U.S. leads global petroleum and natural gas production with record growth in 2018
  • 5 hours Trump Will Win In 2020 And Beyond..?
  • 1 day USA : Attack came from 'Iranian soil'. Pompeo to release 'evidence'.
  • 6 hours The Belt & Road Initiative: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing?
Strong Crude Inventory Draw Sends Oil Higher

Strong Crude Inventory Draw Sends Oil Higher

Oil prices rose on Wednesday…

California Cities Want Big Oil Lawsuit Back In Court

oil sands

San Francisco and Oakland have approached a federal appeals court with a request to reinstate their lawsuits against five Big Oil companies, which a U.S. District Judge dismissed last year.

NBC reports the two municipalities had also asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of San Francisco to return the lawsuits on their own turf, to the San Francisco Superior Court and the Alameda County Superior Court, where the lawsuits were filed originally.

San Francisco and Oakland are suing Chevron, Exxon, Shell, BP, and ConocoPhillips for selling oil products despite their knowledge of the effect these products had on the environment.

"Defendants have known for decades that the continued burning of fossil fuels would increase global temperatures and cause devastating impacts on coastal communities like Oakland and San Francisco. Yet they continued to wrongfully promote the increased, unrestricted use of their products," the attorneys of the two plaintiffs wrote in a brief.

The five companies’ stance was that control over the production of oil and gas and carbon emissions from the industry is the prerogative of environmental regulators and not courts. They argued the case should be dismissed, which is exactly what happened eventually.

Yet, the Big Oil defendants have also argued the environmental damage the two cities’ authorities claim they have sustained is “speculative”, involving billions of people using oil and gas as well as long environmental processes.

Another anti-Big Oil case against the same five companies was dismissed in New York City as well, a month after the SF/Oakland case dismissal. “Climate change is a fact of life, as is not contested by Defendants,” the Manhattan judge wrote in his ruling. “But the serious problems caused thereby are not for the judiciary to ameliorate. Global warming and solutions thereto must be addressed by the two other branches of government.”

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:



Join the discussion | Back to homepage

Leave a comment

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News
Download on the App Store Get it on Google Play