Deadly heatwaves in May smashed records in the UK, France, Spain, and parts of North Africa. India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh saw April temperatures soar to 113-122 degrees Fahrenheit. A late spring heat dome in the US marked the hottest March on record, and in a 1,000-year July storm, parts of Texas were left reeling after flash flooding killed multiple people. That same month, wildfires in Canada turned skies orange and exposed over 106 million North Americans to hazardous air quality. In the US alone, the catastrophic events of 2026 have killed approximately 17,377 people and cost over $3.2 trillion.

In terms of the sheer scope of heat and extreme weather, 2026 has been a year of climate disasters.

Meanwhile, the fossil fuel industry—by far the greatest contributor to global climate change, accounting for approximately 68 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and almost 90 percent of carbon dioxide emissions—is holding firm. In response to a growing tide of litigation seeking to hold it at least partly responsible for the climate crisis, oil and gas groups and their networks have accelerated their defenses, fighting with their all-too-familiar playbook of discrediting the science linking emissions to extreme weather events such as heatwaves, wildfires, flooding, heavy storms and hurricanes. With the help of the Trump administration and industry partners, oil and gas groups have lodged disinformation campaigns targeting specific studies and even individual climate scientists.

“How can you show approximate causation in injury?” asked Michael Buschbacher, a partner at Boyden Gray PLLC during an October 2025 Federalist Society panel on climate litigation. He has supported industry opposition to renewable energy mandates, state-level climate liability lawsuits, and SEC climate risk disclosure mandates. “Bad weather is of course not new. So how do you show that emissions from company X cause injury Y from a hurricane or whatever?” He then wondered about the consequences of the suits should they be successful. “Will they reduce global carbon emissions, or will it just be a payday for contingency fee lawyers and opportunity for virtue signaling from progressive politicians?”

“There is no level of emissions that does not contribute to changing climate impacts. Every ton matters.”

A new peer-reviewed study published earlier this month in Earth’s Future suggests that it is possible to demonstrate that “emissions from company X cause injury Y.” It also could potentially provide evidence so industry could be forced to answer........

© Mother Jones