LA sues car manufacturers

darkcrowdarkcrow Posts: 1,102
edited September 2006 in A Moving Train
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5365728.stm

State sues car firms on climate

About one-third of California's CO2 emissions come from traffic
The state of California is suing six carmakers for costs associated with their cars' greenhouse gas emissions.

The suit names General Motors, Toyota, Ford, Honda, Chrysler and Nissan.

California is asking for "monetary compensation" for the damage which it says their emissions are doing to health, economy and environment.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM), a pan-industry body, called it a "nuisance" suit and suggested it may be dismissed.

"Right now, global warming is harming California," runs the state's complaint.

"Human-induced global warming has, among other things, reduced California's snow pack (a vital source of fresh water), caused an earlier melting of the snow pack, raised sea levels along California's coastline, increased ozone pollution in urban areas, [and] increased the threat of wildfires."

State lawyers want any judgement for damages to be ongoing, so that manufacturers will be liable every year.

Guto Hari, the BBC's North American business correspondent, notes that California has taken an aggressive stance on global warming, passing legislation to significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 2020.

'Time to answer'

The lawsuit, lodged on behalf of the Californian people by state attorney-general Bill Lockyer, alleges that emissions from cars made by the firms in question account for 30% of all carbon dioxide emissions in California.

It is time to hold these companies responsible for their contribution to this crisis

Bill Lockyer
state attorney-general

The complaint alleges that the firms' activities have harmed the state's environmental health, with California having to spend million of dollars responding to environmental threats such as coastal erosion.

Mr Lockyer said he had not put a figure of the level of damages he was seeking but that it was likely to run into "hundreds of millions of dollars".

"Global warming is causing significant harm to California's environment, economy, agriculture and public health," he added.

"The impacts are already costing millions of dollars and the price tag is increasing. It is time to hold these companies responsible for their contribution to this crisis."

'Most significant'

This is the latest in a series of legal and quasi-legal cases in the US aimed at forcing reductions in greenhouse gas emissions




Heritage body 'no' on climate
Contempt case for Shell
Inuit to sue on climate


An Inuit group is taking the federal government to the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights

Conservation groups are trying to force the government to protect coral and polar bears from the effects of global warming

There are ongoing attempts to force the Environmental Protection Agency to define CO2 as a pollutant and regulate emissions
Roda Verheyen of Climate Justice, an international organisation which co-ordinates legal climate cases, said California's suit took action to a new level.

"It is the most significant piece of climate change litigation that has ever been brought," she said.

Car manufacturers have their own case against California pending over laws requiring them to reduce emissions.

The AAM said in a statement: "Automakers will need time to review this legal complaint [by California], however, a similar nuisance suit that was brought by attorneys-general against utilities was dismissed by a federal court in New York."
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • spongersponger Posts: 3,159
    I've always said that Calif. has too many lawyers. People always look at me like I'm crazy when I say that. For instance, I was working in a cigar bar one night when a couple of redneck Marines started complaining about Calif's indoor smoking laws. I said, "Calif. has too many lawyers with not enough to do." They just kind of looked at me like I was being weird or something.

    A friend of mine got a red light camera ticket in Arizona a while back. Apparently, in Arizona, you still get a ticket when the light turns red while you're in the intersection. In California, as long as you're already in the intersection when the light turns red, you are not breaking the law. So, I said to my friend, "You know why Arizona gets away with screwing people like that? It's because there aren't enough lawyers there like there are in California." She neither agreed nor disagreed. She just kind of looked at me for a moment, as if what I had just said was something incoherent and nonsensical.
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    that's crazy. What will that possibly accomplish? Next step is maybe we can form class action law suits against all SUV and low mileage car owners to help offset gas prices for us. I mean, they are purposely buying cars that get poor gas mileage and they are consuming more gas thus making the supply less causing those with more efficient cars to spend more on gas b/c of the others greediness and need for an SUV to drive in the city.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    It seems crazy to sue car manufacturers that built cars to California EPA specifications.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • I wonder how the judge, jury and prosecution will get to the courthouse?
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    surferdude wrote:
    It seems crazy to sue car manufacturers that built cars to California EPA specifications.

    i saw that as well...CA has even allowed those who drive hybrids to drive in the HOV lanes w/ only one person inside them...doesn't make sense to encourage people to get those cars then sue the car makers for doing what the state wants. my head is spinning now.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    chopitdown wrote:
    that's crazy. What will that possibly accomplish? Next step is maybe we can form class action law suits against all SUV and low mileage car owners to help offset gas prices for us. I mean, they are purposely buying cars that get poor gas mileage and they are consuming more gas thus making the supply less causing those with more efficient cars to spend more on gas b/c of the others greediness and need for an SUV to drive in the city.


    If you can sue for your own abuse of ciggerettes. What makes this so bad. Same thing in my eyes.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    even flow? wrote:
    If you can sue for your own abuse of ciggerettes. What makes this so bad. Same thing in my eyes.

    that's a good point. They are the same...both a little looney, but the same
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • even flow? wrote:
    If you can sue for your own abuse of ciggerettes. What makes this so bad. Same thing in my eyes.

    *sigh*

    Remember that "slippery slope" thing people talked about then?
  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    *sigh*

    Remember that "slippery slope" thing people talked about then?

    Why yes I do. And that is why I brought up that point. Abuse your body, get sick, sue, and win. *as i type i shake my head*
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • even flow? wrote:
    Why yes I do. And that is why I brought up that point. Abuse your body, get sick, sue, and win. *as i type i shake my head*

    Hey, whatever works!
  • Uncle LeoUncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    It is a damn shame that auto manufacturers put all of their efforts into advertising how "tough" and comfortable they are and that they seem to run themselves as though oil is an infinite resourse. Their products pollute our air and diminish our resources. Therefore, it is all the fault of...the public. The residents of Louisiana (and everywhere else) continue to drive on trips of less than a mile, drive vehicles that do not get optimal mileage and live a totally auto-dependant lifestye.

    Where is the outrage? Car manufacturers continue to put out vehicles that get very poor mileage. And people continue to buy them. If people would put their efforts into purchasing vehicles that got better mileage and to show the demand for something better than the same ol' same ol', the automakers would respond. I really hope it happens soon.

    Anyway, the market has created this. It is the people of Louisiana that drive SUV's, drive everywhere they have to go and pollute the air. Perhaps the State of Louisiana should sue...the people of Louisiana. Ha Ha.
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    Uncle Leo wrote:
    Perhaps the State of Louisiana should sue...the people of Louisiana. Ha Ha.
    Where I'm from they do, it's called taxes.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    Wouldn't it make more sense to sue the scientists who came up with and signed off on California's inadequate EPA specifications.

    Deriliction of duty indeed.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    surferdude wrote:
    Wouldn't it make more sense to sue the scientists who came up with and signed off on California's inadequate EPA specifications.

    Deriliction of duty indeed.

    as a law student and california taxpayer, i think it's ridiculous that my money is going to fund this litigation.

    here's an idea: fund alternative fuel research instead of giving more money to the god damn state attorney who's leading this charge!

    in regard to whoever said there are too many attorneys in california, and then cited the anti-smoking law as an example: as a former smoker, bars are better w/o smoke. this is a fact.
  • in regard to whoever said there are too many attorneys in california, and then cited the anti-smoking law as an example: as a former smoker, bars are better w/o smoke. this is a fact.

    No, that was an opinion.
  • Uncle LeoUncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    bars are better w/o smoke. this is a fact.

    I agree, but it is an opinion.
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
Sign In or Register to comment.