Foreign-Backed Big Green Sets Sights on Suing Ohio for Climate Chg
ANTI-DRILLING/FOSSIL FUEL | INDUSTRYWIDE ISSUES | LITIGATION | OHIO | STATEWIDE OH
Foreign-Backed Big Green Sets Sights on Suing Ohio for Climate Chg
ANTI-DRILLING/FOSSIL FUEL | INDUSTRYWIDE ISSUES | LITIGATION | OHIO | STATEWIDE OH
October 6, 2023
The so-called Center for Climate Integrity (CCI), backed with FOREIGN MONEY, is behind most of the lawsuits filed by municipalities around the country (cities, counties, states) against Big Oil & Gas companies, claiming fossil energy companies know and have known for years that using their products is toasting Mom Earth into oblivion. It is the most outrageous abuse of the justice system we know of. The lawsuits are instigated (and funded) by CCI and a litany of colluding tax-free nonprofits. In August, we told you all the signs are pointing to CCI targeting Pennsylvania (see Leftist Groups Try to Convince PA Officials to File O&G Lawsuits). The same signs are now present in Ohio.
Here’s how it works: CCI partners with propagandists to produce fake research reports showing how much “harm” has come to a region due to global warming — in this case, the green propagandists at Scioto Analysis. Then CCI and local green groups (the Ohio Environmental Council and Power A Clean Future Ohio) shop the “report” to government officials, whispering in their ears about the incredible riches that await them if they sue Big Oil & Gas. Such a report from CCI, titled “The Bill is Coming Due: Calculating the Financial Cost of Climate Change to Ohio’s Local Governments,” was released in July 2022. The Big Green groups gave it time to simmer and are now actively pushing it, hoping to prod local governments into launching lawsuits.
Kudos to Energy in Depth for uncovering this insidious cancer that is trying to gain a foothold not only in PA, but now in OH:
The wealthy national climate litigation campaign has its sights set on Pennsylvania, yet recent action shows this isn’t the only oil and gas producing state activists are targeting. New moves prove that the Buckeye State is also a target for the litigation-hungry – all while the industry helps to boost Ohio’s economy, provide good-paying jobs for thousands of families, and is deeply popular with Ohioans.
How do we know this? The main plaintiffs’ recruiter for climate lawsuits, the Center for Climate Integrity, a foreign-funded national anti-fossil fuel organization that recruits municipal and state plaintiffs to file lawsuits against American energy companies, has been laying familiar ground work. The group joined forces with the Ohio Environmental Council (OEC), Scioto Analysis, and Power a Clean Future Ohio (PCFO) to publish and amplify a report titled, “The Bill is Coming Due: Calculating the Financial Cost of Climate Change to Ohio’s Local Governments.”
CCI has previously published similar “climate costs” reports to set the stage and build momentum for filing a climate lawsuit in other states, including Colorado, Florida, and most recently in Pennsylvania – a report which Scioto Analysis also produced.
In a blog post, Scioto Analysis Policy Analyst Michael Hartnett touted their partnership with CCI:
“For the past year, Scioto Analysis has been working with the Center for Climate integrity on a series of projects that attempt to measure the financial impact climate change will have on local governments. The first report on Ohio was released in July of last year, and just last month the newest report on Pennsylvania came out.”
CCI and the climate litigation campaign have also provided financial support to the OEC. CCI gave the group $165,000 over the past two years to “provide climate accountability campaign strategy and support.” Similarly, the Rockefeller Family Fund – the primary funder behind the larger, coordinated attack on American energy – is listed as a funder of the OEC, as is the progressive dark money behemoth New Venture Fund.
Since the report’s release, CCI has been quietly circling local and statewide elected officials in Ohio. In the summer of 2022, Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) – whose daughter is listed as a member of CCI’s Ohio Leaders Network – invited OEC and PCFO to speak about the report at a U.S. Senate Banking Committee hearing. The Executive Director of PCFO cited CCI four times in his written testimony while the hearing was subsequently amplified by CCI in their blog and on social media.
CCI also spoke at OEC’s September 2022 Ohio Public Interest Environmental Law Conference in Columbus to “outline the legal approaches behind their nationwide portfolio of cases,” while the OEC’s Strategic Vision includes that its Law Center will “pursue legal strategies to compel state action on climate change and hold polluters accountable.”?
More recently, CCI participated in a September 15, 2023 panel held by the Ohio Program Evaluators Group titled “Communicating the Cost of Climate Change in Ohio” alongside OEC and Scioto Analysis, further amplifying the “climate costs” report and discussing best practices on how to discuss climate change.
Providing talking points and climate costs data is just one tool in CCI’s?Rockefeller-funded?toolbox. In fact, recently released?public records from New Jersey?revealed the full scope of the group’s efforts to instigate climate litigation at the municipal level. CCI recruits and lobbies state and local officials to support climate lawsuits by offering legal expertise, draft resolutions, talking points, press support, and even “ghost-writing” services.
Lawsuits Raise Concerns of Enriching Trial Lawyers, Increasing Costs
Following the OEC panel, Scioto Analysis put out a survey saying that Ohio economists “think lawsuits against oil and gas companies would have benefits for society.” However, the survey reflects just a handful of economists – less than 20 – and the results were a mixed bag. As reported by the Ohio Capital Journal, “a number of others said they were uncertain” about litigation against energy producers.
For example, when asked if Ohio municipalities should sue oil and gas companies, Glenn Dutcher of Ohio University said “there may be other mechanisms that would achieve some policy goal more efficiently,” while several others pointed out that these lawsuits would likely only enrich trial lawyers while harming disadvantaged communities. A sampling of their responses follows below:
“Unlikely to reduce inequality because many of the monetary benefits will go to the lawyers.”
“It completely depends upon how the revenues are used. It would increase the cost of oil and gas which would disproportionately hurt the poor…”
“Suppose the oil and gas companies win: then the answer is ‘no’ since the only winners will be the lawyers. Suppose the states/counties win: then ‘maybe’, with the answer depending on what fraction of any damages go to inequality-reducing projects, mitigated by the aforementioned enrichment of lawyers.”
EID has written previously on the massive windfall that Sher Edling, the San Francisco based firm spearheading over 20 of these cases, stands to make through contingency fee agreements all while being funded by wealthy, dark money donors.
The firm’s finances have attracted national scrutiny, as well – just last week, Senate Commerce Committee Ranking Member Ted Cruz (R-TX) and House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) sent a letter to the law firm requesting information on the wealthy foundations “footing the bill” for the firm’s “barrage of lawsuits aimed at bankrupting oil and gas companies.”
Coastal State Pitch Makes its Way to Oil and Gas Region
While lawsuits against the oil and gas industry have been filed primarily in coastal, solid-blue states like New York (where the suit was wholly defeated), and most recently in California, CCI’s venture into oil- and natural gas-producing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania marks a distinct shift away from their usual recruiting strategy.
With its not-so-subtle end-goal to usher out the sale and use of fossil fuels, the climate litigation campaign should expect an uphill battle in states where responsible oil and natural gas production is integral to economic growth.
But CCI’s pitch to coastal municipalities has also fallen flat as local leaders realize that targeting individual companies for producing energy that every community uses is a misplaced effort. For example, in Maine, one local official said filing a climate lawsuit would be “like we’re suing ourselves.”??
When CCI attempted to pitch Maryland municipalities, Baltimore Councilmember Tom Crandall said:
“I can’t fathom why we’re considering suing oil companies when we are a customer, and we need their product to run County government. Do our trash haulers use gas in their trucks? Yes, of course, they do. So, I don’t understand how we enter into a lawsuit against a provider of a product that we have to negotiate our price with.” (emphasis added)
And in New Hampshire, State Rep. Tom Mannion made the point that proposed climate litigation would hamstring American companies while benefiting countries overseas:
“Foreign countries, not just companies, have energy policies that would not be kept in check. So we’re here shooting ourselves in the face while the rest of the planet gets to continue on with economic development.” (emphasis added)?
Bottom Line: The nationally coordinated climate litigation campaign will find no home in energy-rich states like Ohio where the oil and gas industry contributes over $25 billion in wages and $55 billion in economic impact, all while contributing to lower electricity prices, a responsible decrease in greenhouse gas emissions, and a pathway to energy security across the country.*
*Energy in Depth – Climate & Environment (Oct 5, 2023) – In Shift to Oil & Gas States, National Climate Litigation Campaign Zeroing in on Ohio