Did 'Big Oil' cause Hurricane Katrina?

Did Big Oil cause Katrina?

In what can only be described as one of the most tenuous lawsuits ever to hit US courts, victims of Hurricane Katrina have filed a law suit against large oil companies claiming that their "operation of energy, fossil fuels, and chemical industries in the US caused the emission of greenhouse gasses that contributed to global warming".

According to The Infrastructurist, the legal action has been brought by residents from southern Mississippi, which was ravaged by the Hurricane in 2005. The lawsuit was first filed merely weeks after the storm hit.

The documents state that "the plaintiffs allege that defendants' operation of energy, fossil fuels, and chemical industries in the United States caused the emission of greenhouse gasses that contributed to global warming."

"The increase in global surface air and water temperatures in turn caused a rise in sea levels and added to the ferocity of Hurricane Katrina, which combined to destroy the plaintiffs' private property, as well as public property useful to them."

Global warming in court

You may think that the plaintiffs have a point, or you may think that they are simply desperate people looking for a pay day from lucrative companies such as Shell, ExxonMobile, BP and Chevron, but it is an interesting precedent - companies being sued for causing 'natural disasters' due to their 'contributions' to global warming.

In 2005, the court threw out the case saying that such a debate had no place in the court. But three federal appeals court judges, held in October of 2009, have stated that the case should be heard, but now the court is demanding a new hearing, this time with nine judges.

While the court thinks they may have a case, from the point of view of this writer they are going to have a hard time proving that particular oil companies are directly responsible for Hurricane Katrina.

According to Melissa Lafsky, editor of The Infrastructurist, the plaintiffs would have to show a direct link between the damage caused and the actions of the oil companies. As one would expect, this would involve proving that the oil firms were responsible for a host of variable actions such as;

1) Proving that the storm was caused/exacerbated by global warming;

2) Proving that the damage was a direct result of this increase in the storm’s severity, and not the negligence of city, state, and federal officials who failed to build and maintain adequate infrastructure;

3) Proving that, if the storm WAS caused by global warming, Big Oil’s actions were a primary cause of said warming, as opposed to the myriad other causes of carbon emissions.

Right away, you can see that this looks more like a debate of scientists and environmentalists rather than a law court, but the suit has passed several legal hurdles already.

What is clear is that when the case hits the courtroom, many people will be watching especially if the plaintiffs win. Could we see a host of natural disaster victims suing energy companies for "unreasonably endangering the environment, public health, public and private property"?

Relevant articles:

Water wars | Bill Gates: Hurricane Killer | America's most expensive natural disasters

Timon Singh

Timon Singh is a graduate of Liverpool University where he received a degree in Social and Economic History. He has previously worked for BBC Magazines on BBC Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine, the publication for the popular genealogy show.

Like this article? Get the RSS feed: