• 4 minutes USGS Announces Largest Continuous Oil Assessment in Texas and New Mexico
  • 10 minutes IT IS FINISHED. OPEC Victorious
  • 16 minutes GOODBYE FOREIGN OIL DEPENDENCE!!
  • 13 mins Paris Is Burning Over Climate Change Taxes -- Is America Next?
  • 32 mins End of EV Subsidies?
  • 22 hours The Great Climate Change Swindle
  • 24 mins Price Decline in Chinese Solar Panels
  • 21 mins Maersk's COO statment.
  • 1 hour Trump accuses Google Of Hiding 'Fair Media' Coverage of him
  • 2 days S. Australia showing the way
  • 24 hours China Builds LNG Icebreaker
  • 4 hours EPA To Roll Back Carbon Rule On New Coal Plants
  • 1 day More OPEC Members May Leave
  • 1 day Exxon buys green power.
  • 2 days Not only GM: Morgan Stanley Predicts Ford to Cut 25,000 Jobs in Overhaul
  • 2 days Feudalism: The Most Resilient System?
Are Russia’s Natural Gas Goals Too Ambitious?

Are Russia’s Natural Gas Goals Too Ambitious?

Years ago, Russian President Vladimir…

OPEC+ Gives Oil Bulls Hope

OPEC+ Gives Oil Bulls Hope

OPEC+ has given oil bulls…

Judge Deals Exxon Blow In Climate Cover-Up Case

Oil barrels

A federal judge has put an end to Exxon’s attempt to sue the district attorneys of New York and Massachusetts for investigating the company with relation to its alleged cover-up of its knowledge of climate change and the effects its business had on the environment.

Manhattan judge Valerie Caproni dismissed as “implausible” Exxon’s argument that New York’s DA Eric Schneiderman and Massachusetts’ Maura Healey were on a political quest against the company, seeking to violate its constitutional rights.

The dismissal of the case was made with prejudice, meaning Exxon cannot bring it again, Reuters reports.

Exxon is being sued by employees and shareholders on allegations of knowing about the effects of the oil industry on climate change for decades but deliberately withholding the information from the public and from shareholders.

It is also being sued by several municipalities in California that argue its activities in the state have had a harmful impact on the environment. They are seeking billions in compensation from Exxon and a number of other oil supermajors.

Exxon struck back at those, too. In January, the company asked a California district court for permission to question a number of government officials and an attorney from Hagens Berman, arguing that these individuals have told the court one thing in their lawsuits against Exxon and a completely different thing to prospective bondholders about the effect of the energy industry on the local environment.

Related: Will Lithium-Air Batteries Ever Become Viable?

For example, Exxon says in its court filing against energy companies, San Mateo County has stated that it is very vulnerable to rising sea levels with a 93-percent risk of suffering a devastating flood before 2050. At the same time, however, two bond offerings, one from 2014 and one from 2016, say something very different, namely that San Mateo County “is unable to predict whether sea-level rise or other impacts of climate change or flooding from a major storm will occur.”

As regards its next steps in the New York and Massachusetts case, Exxon’s spokesman Scott Silvestri told Reuters the company was evaluating its options.

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
-->