CA Sues "Big Six" Automakers for Global Warming Damages

ENVIRONMENTCA Sues "Big Six" Automakers for Global Warming Damages OAKLAND, CA (Sept. 20, 2006) - California Attorney General Bill Lockyer filed a lawsuit on behalf of his state against six leading U.S. and Japanese automakers. The suit alleges that vehicle emissions from these OEMs have contributed significantly to global warming; harmed the state's resources, infrastructure and environmental health; and cost the state millions of dollars to address current and future effects. "Vehicle emissions are the single most rapidly growing source of the carbon emissions contributing to global warming, yet the federal government and automakers have refused to act. It is time to hold these companies responsible for their contribution to this crisis," says Lockyer. What's at stake? Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the complaint names Chrysler Motors Corp., General Motors Corp. (GM), Ford Motor Co., Toyota Motor North America Inc., Honda North America and Nissan North America as defendants. The lawsuit - a first of its kind - seeks to hold manufacturers liable for the damages caused by greenhouse gases that their products emit. Lockyer filed the lawsuit on behalf of the people of the state of California.  "Vehicle emissions are the single most rapidly growing source of the carbon emissions contributing to global warming, yet the federal government and automakers have refused to act."
- California Attorney General 
Bill LockyerThe complaint alleges that, under federal and state common law, the automakers have created a public nuisance by producing "millions of vehicles that collectively emit massive quantities of carbon dioxide [CO2]." Under the law, a "public nuisance" is an unreasonable interference with a public right, or an action that interferes with or causes harm to life, health or property. The complaint asks the court to hold the defendants liable for damages, including future harm, caused by their ongoing, substantial contribution to the public nuisance of global warming. The complaint states the automakers produce vehicles that emit a combined 289 million metric tons of CO2 in the United States each year, which currently account for nearly 20 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions in the United States and more than 30 percent in California. The defendants rank "among the world's largest contributors to global warming and the adverse impacts on California," according to the complaint.On another front The filing comes as Lockyer fights the auto industry's attempt to invalidate California's landmark global warming regulations curbing tailpipe emissions. In their federal court lawsuit, the automakers claim the regulations, adopted in 2005 through legislation sponsored by Assembly Member Fran Pavley, are pre-empted by federal law. Lockyer is defending the rules against the industry's legal challenge.  Lockyer noted the Bush administration's inaction on global warming has forced California and other states to take action on their own. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing a lawsuit filed by Lockyer, 11 other Attorneys General, two cities and several major environmental groups challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) refusal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Numerous parties have submitted amicus briefs supporting the states, including climate scientists, three former EPA administrators, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and environmental and religious groups.  Less than a month before initiating the global warming lawsuit, California lawmakers passed a global warming bill designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The legislation caps California's emissions at 1990 levels by 2020 (an estimated 25 percent overall reduction from current levels); establishes a mandatory emissions reduction reporting program overseen by the state's Air Resource Board; and establishes a "cap and trade" program allowing businesses to buy and sell emissions credits. In addition, Lockyer, along with nine other state Attorneys General, the District of Columbia and the City of New York, filed a lawsuit earlier this year challenging the Bush administration's new fuel economy standards for SUVs and light trucks. That complaint alleges the rules fail to address the effects on the environment and global warming.Click here to view an 
Adobe PDF file of the 
official complaint filed 
with the courts.

Click here to view an Adobe PDF file listing the 
global warming and automobile emissions experts and their bios. 

California officials say the state is particularly vulnerable to global warming impacts. According to a report submitted by the Climate Action Team to Governor Schwarzenegger and the California Legislature, the consequences of climate change in California will be "severe."

"We are seeing the harmful impacts of global warming today, and if we continue with 'business as usual,' we can expect to see more and larger impacts in the future," says Lockyer. "As a coastal state, an agricultural state, and a state that relies on its Sierra snow pack, California has an enormous stake in acting now to combat global warming." 

Industry reaction Reaction has been slow in coming, as the automotive industry mulls over how to respond to this unexpected move by California. At press time, none of the automakers named in the lawsuit had issued a statement. "This is a blatant attempt by the California attorney general to get back-door regulation through manipulation of the courts."
- NAM President John Engler

However, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) has responded. NAM has criticized Lockyer for initiating the lawsuit against automakers for damages related to greenhouse gas emissions, calling the endeavor an "appalling misuse" of the California court system to force public policy changes. 

"This is a blatant attempt by the California attorney general to get back-door regulation through manipulation of the courts. Already, manufacturers are dealing with some of the highest legal and energy costs in the world; we shouldn't be making matters worse with unwarranted lawsuits," says Engler.

Reuters reported that the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) dismissed the action as a "nuisance" lawsuit aimed at forcing automakers to accept rules adopted in 2004 requiring them to cut tailpipe emissions from cars and trucks. The automakers have so far blocked those rules with their own lawsuit, which goes to trial in January. 

The news service also said that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce yesterday suggested that Mr. Lockyer may have filed the lawsuit for his own political gain: "The election-year decision to file a lawsuit against automobile manufacturers for causing global warming by a politician seeking office is a classic case of overreaching by a state attorney-general," said Lisa Rickard, president of the chamber's Institute for Legal Reform. "At a time when the industry is looking for ways to cut emissions and promote alternative fuels, to single out the automobile companies for legal action in this way is the epitome of a frivolous lawsuit."

Social costs In most cases, the public usually pays - through taxes, fees or other means - to help ease the burden of health and environment issues. However, two ethical questions are at issue: Who is responsible for causing and/or perpetuating the environmental impact of emissions? And second, who should be responsible for paying the costs of the impact?  The lawsuit may go part of the way in answering these questions. But more importantly, the outcome of the lawsuit could increase in the real cost of owning and operating a vehicle.  (Source: Office of the Attorney General For California, NAM)