Who will pay for climate change? You will, until we break the fossil-fuel addiction.
In the crisis-filled environment of the Trump presidency, it is difficult to decide which of the many outrages du jour most deserves our attention. However, we cannot afford to ignore the current battle over who will pay the rapidly rising costs of climate-intensified weather disasters.
A longstanding legal principle is that polluters should pay to prevent, reduce, or repair the damages they cause. The fossil energy industry disagrees. It is fighting in the courts, lobbying Congress, and enlisting President Trump in its fight to avoid responsibility.
But whether it wins or loses, the astronomical and rising costs of weather disasters will come out of every American's pocket. That will be inevitable if the U.S. remains addicted to fossil fuels.
To understand what's happening — and what should happen — we can go back to the tobacco wars of the last century. In the mid-1950s, individuals began suing tobacco companies for health damages from smoking. Forty years later, state public health programs had become so expensive that states sued tobacco companies to recoup the costs.
By the 1960s, tobacco companies knew that nicotine was addictive. They knew as early as the 1940s that smoking was linked with cancer, but they denied and tried to cover up these effects. In 1998, the four largest tobacco companies finally agreed to a historic settlement with states. In addition to admitting the cancer connection, the companies agreed to pay states billions of dollars annually in perpetuity to support public health programs.
The link between fossil fuel pollution and climate change emerged similarly. As early as the 1950s, major oil companies learned that the combustion of their product was causing the Earth to warm, the climate to change, and the weather to become more violent. Industry leaders decided to follow the tobacco playbook.
They conducted "a campaign of deception, disinformation, and doublespeak" with "dark money, phony front groups, false economics, and relentless exertion of political influence," according to Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who participated in a congressional investigation of the oil industry's practices last year.
........© The Hill
