Arson

Arson

The world is too big to fail... the fossil fuels industry is not.

By J.M. Hamilton (8-19-2018)

The world is ablaze.  

To drive the point home, we have the following from the New York Times piece: 2018 Is Shaping Up to Be the Fourth-Hottest Year. Yet We’re Still Not Prepared for Global Warming.

This summer of fire and swelter looks a lot like the future that scientists have been warning about in the era of climate change, and it’s revealing in real time how unprepared much of the world remains for life on a hotter planet.

The disruptions to everyday life have been far-reaching and devastating. In California, firefighters are racing to control what has become the largest fire in state history. Harvests of staple grains like wheat and corn are expected to dip this year, in some cases sharply, in countries as different as Sweden and El Salvador. In Europe, nuclear power plants have had to shut down because the river water that cools the reactors was too warm. Heat waves on four continents have brought electricity grids crashing.

And dozens of heat-related deaths in Japan this summer offered a foretaste of what researchers warn could be big increases in mortality from extreme heat. A study last month in the journal PLOS Medicine projected a fivefold rise for the United States by 2080. The outlook for less wealthy countries is worse; for the Philippines, researchers forecast 12 times more deaths.

Globally, this is shaping up to be the fourth-hottest year on record. The only years hotter were the three previous ones. That string of records is part of an accelerating climb in temperatures since the start of the industrial age that scientists say is clear evidence of climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

And even if there are variations in weather patterns in the coming years, with some cooler years mixed in, the trend line is clear: 17 of the 18 warmest years since modern record-keeping began have occurred since 2001.

And if climate change wasn't bad enough, the death toll caused by pollutants is astounding, w/ one in six deaths attributed to pollution related illnesses.  That's quite a body count, and largely preventable.  Given the level of renewable energy science, and the ever decreasing costs of deploying same, it’s entirely unacceptable.  That is for the benefit of the Coal and Oil & Gas industries, we continue to poison the planet, and kill millions of humans annually.  The number of animal species, due to man’s interaction w/ the planet, is on a steady decline.  Our seas and oceans?  Rapidly, turning into lifeless, contaminated, carbon & plastic vats.

Climate change' toll upon humanity is catastrophic.  However, there's also considerable property damage associated with climate change, the incalculable harm it does the global economy (by foisting the social costs of climate change on unrelated businesses and already cash strapped federal, state, & local governments), not to mention the hidden tax carried by the world's citizens.

The costs, however, are not as hidden as they seem:  It's been reported that the US pays $20 billion in direct subsidies, annually, to the fossil fuels industries (including recipients, like the libertarian - antigovernment - Koch Bros.).  Factor in the aforementioned health costs, a US military that fights endless wars in occupation of Middle East oil fields, and these indirect/social costs add up - per the IMF, for a subsidy we all pay - to the tune of $5.3 trillion per annum.  You read that right, trillions, not billions. 

Talk about your intergenerational wealth larceny:  the fossil fuels industry represents an absurd transfer of wealth from this - and future - generations to the Big Carbon robber barons, and their shareholders.  Perhaps rivaling the Wall Street banks and a captured monetary policy.

So what is to be done?  

It was widely reported that twenty state attorney generals banded together, in early 2016, in the process of suing Exxon and others for fraud and suppression of key climate science data.  Exxon countersued and w/ the resources, and government subsidies/welfare, Exxon enjoys, we can see that civil litigation has the potential to drag out for a very long time, in a never-ending war of attrition.  Note too, the fossil fuels industry may prolong civil litigation and wait for regime change (or political party turnover) at the state level.

Rhode Island recently announced that they would sue oil companies, for undisclosed damages, as a result of climate change.

The State of NY is also suing Exxon for securities fraud and misleading investors.

But, as mentioned, civil litigation tends to drag, at a time that the earth and its inhabitants are gasping for breath.  

Is there a better way?

Carr Fire: Redding, California on July 26.  Image: Noah Berger/AP/REX/Shutterstock

Clearly, Exxon, et al., rather than take the high road, and very much like Big Tobacco before them, plans to drag out their biz model - no matter the irreparable harm - as long as they can.  After all, billions in government subsidies, picked up by the US taxpayer - not to mention billions in profits, in a largely oligopolistic industry - are at stake.

One possible alternative might be the criminal charge of arson, and the convening of a grand jury, in applicable states.... say in California for starters (where there is likely to be found throughout the state, highly sympathetic juror panels).

The beauty of criminal prosecution is two fold: one, the sixth amendment guarantees a speedy & public trial; and two, if the criminal prosecution is successful, it should make the subsequent civil trials much easier to pursue and WIN.

Now the crime of arson often varies, to some degree, by state and jurisdiction.  But generally, per Black's Law dictionary, it is thought to be:  

Arson, by the common law, is the willful and malicious burning of the house of another. The word “house,” as here understood, includes not merely the dwelling- house, but all outhouses which are parcel thereof.  Aggravated assault, a harsher offense, is outlined in the dictionary as, “arson accompanied by some aggravating factor, as when the offender foresees or anticipates that one or more persons will be in or near the property being burned."

Post - grand jury or criminal charge, haul in Exxon, its Board of Directors, and Exxon’s C-Suite on the charges of arson & aggravated assault, and the prosecution would have to prove, basically the following:

"The accused must intend to burn a building or other structure.  Absent a statutory description of the conduct required for arson, the conduct must be malicious, and not accidental.  Malice, however, does not mean ill will.  Intentional or outrageously reckless conduct is sufficient to constitute malice.  Unless a statute extends the crime to other property, only a house used as a residence, or buildings immediately surrounding it, can be the subject of arson."

"And, generally, the actual presence of a person within a dwelling at the moment it is burned is not necessary.  It may, however, be required for a particular degree of the crime.  The fact, and not the knowledge, of human occupancy is what is essential.  If a dwelling is burned under the impression that it is uninhabited when people actually live in it, the crime is committed."

That Exxon, et al., knew for decades that climate change was real, and sought to cover it up over the same time frame, is already known.  That behavior - in the quest for profits (in essence, placing monopolistic profits before the lives of individuals and their property) - arguably, defines "malicious behavior."  Moreover, Exxon had to know that turning the planet into an enormous convection oven (or a tinder box soaked in jet fuel) would create the powder keg/inferno the earth has become.

The burning of homes & commercial enterprise, and the taking of lives: check and check.  

Again, in the right jurisdiction, the pursuit of a swift criminal conviction seems like a layup shot.  In this manner, a two pronged legal attack - criminal & civil – maybe the best strategy attorney generals and state prosecutors, serious about fighting climate change, might pursue.

The world is too big to fail... the fossil fuels industry is not.  Is it time for prosecutors to roll out arson charges?

PS:

Interestingly, one very useful ally that is finally coming around against the oil majors is Big Business, itself.  And JMH suspects more corporations and multinationals - aligned w/ state and local government - will only further add to the chorus in the near future.  Bloomberg ran a piece recently where California utility, PG&E and others, had spoken out against the billions in legal claims that it now faces, due to the California fires.  Moreover, the CEO for PG&E is placing blame squarely where it, comparatively, belongs: that is on climate change and the fossil fuels industry.  Could insurance carriers, and reinsurers, be far behind?

Publicly traded insurance carriers, in particular, may have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to litigate, & subrogate, in the recovery of billions in property damages against the oil majors.  Moreover, carriers are well known for pursuing criminal complaints against parties that are responsible for insurance claims & fraud.

As Big Agriculture finds once fertile farmlands turned into desert & scorched earth, it too, is likely to join a rising chorus of corporations & multinationals calling for a swift conclusion to an industry that is a direct threat to life, liberty, & happiness (not just for Americans, but the world’s citizens).

Perhaps felony convictions – meted out to Exxon  - will change a few reactionary minds.

Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2018