In a growing number of climate-related legal actions, concerned citizens are targeting the Carbon Majors, the world’s largest fossil fuel corporations responsible for two thirds of the human-made carbon emissions in the atmosphere today.
These corporations have made massive profits while outsourcing the true cost of their product upon the poor who are paying with their lives, their homes, and their ability to grow food, as they begin to deal with the impacts that 1˚C of warming is already inflicting on them.
In a new report, the Climate Justice Programme examines cases across the world and finds that climate litigation will dwarf all other litigation, including tobacco and asbestos, in terms of both the number of plaintiffs and the timeframe over which it can stretch.
Along with corporations, climate law champions are also targeting the governments that have colluded with the Carbon Majors to enable the continuation of a fossil fuel based economy. Governments that fail to take on the coal, oil, and gas giants are likely to be targeted in future cases brought by concerned citizens, particularly youth.
Governments that have continued to support—and collude with—the Carbon Majors have done so through promoting, subsidizing and locking in a fossil-fuel based energy system, with the full knowledge of the catastrophic impacts of climate destabilization and ocean acidification that would result from continuing to burn fossil fuels.
In the Paris Agreement, the world’s governments agreed to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5˚C—but the climate pledges on the table at Paris will result in roughly 3-4˚C of warming, with insufficient finance to implement them. The deal was widely acknowledged to signal the end of the fossil fuel era, yet the phrase “fossil fuels” never appears throughout the entire document, nor does the agreement contain any binding requirements that governments commit to concrete climate action.
Citizens and some governments are now beginning to seek redress in court, with groundbreaking cases emerging around the world, some of which are comparable to (and based on some of the legal precedents set by) litigation against the tobacco industry.