Home ND News Mobile Forum Contact Reader Blogs Register Login

Wednesday, September 20, 2006


California Suing Automakers Over Greenhouse Gases

Wow...

Sept. 20 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and four other automakers were sued by California for making vehicles that contribute to global warming, causing pollution and erosion that costs the state millions of dollars.

The lawsuit filed today in U.S. District Court in Oakland said General Motors, Ford, Toyota Motor Corp., DaimlerChrysler AG, Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co., the six largest automakers in the U.S., have created a ``public nuisance'' by making millions of vehicles that emit huge quantities of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming.

The suit, which seeks damages related to pollution, beach erosion and reduced water supplies, is the latest action by California to push businesses and the federal government to address global warming. The legislature approved a measure last month to force utilities to cut emissions, and the state has sued the U.S. for failing to address the effects of global warming.

``Vehicle emissions are the single most rapidly growing source of the carbon emissions contributing to global warming, yet the federal government and the automakers have refused to act,'' said California Attorney General Bill Lockyer in a statement.


This is absurd for so many reasons.

Probably the most absurd reason is the fact that we are still far from any "smoking gun" evidence which would suggest global warming is taking place because of human activity. One of the world's leading experts on climate science has recently penned an opinion stating that while the globe is getting warmer, humans aren't the cause. Does the state of California really believe that it can prove, in court, that the rise in global temperatures is the cause of greenhouse gases and not other phenomena? Such as natural long-term cycles in the climate, for instance?

And why is it merely the auto industry that is being blamed for greenhouse gases? Shouldn't the citizens who purchase these vehicles and drive them around bear some responsibility as well? Blaming the automakers for greenhouse gases, and not the folks who drive the cars, seems a bit like blaimg gun manufacturers for the crimes committed with their crimes rather than people who actually used the guns in the crimes. It seems to me that we have, as a society, chosen to drive vehicles powered by fossil fuels. If there were a significant demand among citizens for vehicles that didn't emit greenhouse gases we'd have had those vehicles long ago. Trying to isolate culpability for global warming to automakers only (if there is indeed any culpability to assign) seems a bit silly when pretty much every citizen of this country uses greenhouse gas emitting vehicles.

We should also keep in mind that greenhouse gases don't just come from cars. Remember that humans and animals around the globe issue greenhouse gases every time they belch or pass gas. While a part of me probably wouldn't mind the state of California suing certain people I've had to take car trips with for causing a public nuisance with their gas emittance, it probably isn't a practical way to address concerns over global warming.

To me this lawsuit is reminiscent of the tobacco lawsuits from the last century. When certain states sued the tobacco companies I think the issue was less about public health than it was about leveraging huge sums of money from "big tobacco." I don't think California is suing these automakers because they're really concerned about greenhouse gases because if they wanted to do something about that they could change emissions laws. What this is really about is California getting a big chunk of money from the auto industry.

California's state government is one of the largest bureaucracies the world has ever seen. It is a testament to big-government liberalism, and it devours huge amounts of tax dollars in order to stay afloat. So many tax dollars that it seems as though California's leaders are now turning to ill-advised lawsuits to raise revenue.

But Americans should be wary of this. As silly as the lawsuit sounds, if it gets in front of the right judge it could well result in personal transportation getting a whole lot more expensive than it already is.

Does this tick you off? Click here to email your elected representatives right here on Say Anything, or comment below.

Comments

Avatar for Zsa Zsa

No Way!

Zsa Zsa on September 20, 2006 at 11:32 am
Avatar for Paul L.

I think the Automakers should work towards not selling their products in that state of California anymore or at the very least San Francisco/Berkeley CA.

Paul L. on September 20, 2006 at 11:42 am
Rob
Rob
22120 comments
Send a private message

What they should do, Paul, is ad a $3,000 surcharge to every vehicle sold in the state of California and tell customers that they have to do it to cover legal fees (and potential settlements) resulting from this case.


The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Rob on September 20, 2006 at 11:45 am
Avatar for realitybasedbob

Or they could just develop ways to lower the emissions

realitybasedbob on September 20, 2006 at 11:50 am
Avatar for gregdn

I object to CA trying to set emission standards on their own (and I live here).
Seems to me the Interstate Commerce Clause would clearly place this in the Federal arena.

gregdn on September 20, 2006 at 11:54 am
Rob
Rob
22120 comments
Send a private message

Or they could just develop ways to lower the emissions

California could do that by manipulating their emission laws, no?  Why the need to sue?


The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Rob on September 20, 2006 at 11:56 am
Avatar for realitybasedbob

fair point

realitybasedbob on September 20, 2006 at 11:58 am
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

What they should do, Paul, is ad a $3,000 surcharge to every vehicle sold in the state of California and tell customers that they have to do it to cover legal fees (and potential settlements) resulting from this case.

wishful thanking!

aNONOMISLY on September 20, 2006 at 12:10 pm
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

ROB, any auto maker that does what you suggest is practically doing what Paul L. suggest

aNONOMISLY on September 20, 2006 at 12:31 pm

Since the Global Warming Hypothesis contains no provable and quantifiable cause and effect relationship, there is no way to quantify the damages in this case.  Therefore, this is an outright attempt by the radical enviros to rip us all off to advance their agenda.
This is a clear example of socialists attempting to accomplish their goals by limiting supply.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 20, 2006 at 12:36 pm
Avatar for Panya

If there were a significant demand among citizens for vehicles that didn’t emit greenhouse gases we’d have had those vehicles long ago. ... pretty much every citizen of this country uses greenhouse gas emitting vehicles.

Because everyone does it, everyone should always do it?  That’s a superb argument for the status quo.

Panya on September 20, 2006 at 12:46 pm
Avatar for Hoodlumman

It reminds me of the lawsuits aimed at gun manufacturers because guns are used to commit crimes.

Toss it.

Hoodlumman on September 20, 2006 at 12:54 pm
Avatar for Steve L.

Those of you who missed this thread on Kos, don’t understand how things work.  See, facts alone don’t mean anything to the left because they KNOW what the truth is.  In fact, according to some of the commenters, the lack of facts is proof of something in and of itself.  The lone voice f sanity in that discussion kept repeating, “Since we are the reality-based community, we need to have proof of the things we allege.  Just because we believe something is true doesn’t mean it is.”  OF course, he was attacked for being sane.

The movie Serial summed it up nicely, “In an insane world, a sane man will appear insane.”

Steve L. on September 20, 2006 at 01:04 pm

This is stupid in more ways than I can explain.

But I’ll Try.

Lawyers with not enough to do.

Too many Lawyers.

Shakespere, “First kill all the lawyers”.

THEN:

The evidence is piling up that there is no possible way that MAN influences Global Warming. 
All this greenhouse gas thing is just HOT AIR.  That may contribute.

Example, Try taking a leak in the ocean.  You have contributed to the salinity.  But your influence is beyond insignificant.  We are the same re the troposphere.

Since there is no money in saying hogwash to Antroprogenic global warming and since the anthroprogenic global warming advocates are so militant I admire this man who told the (Unpopular) truth

YES:  There is global warming (Climate Change) going on. 

NO: Man didn’t cause it and can’t cure it. 

It is the height of egocentrism to believe we have enough capacity to influence the weather on the whole globe.

If you want something to worry about, worry about this.  You could be wiped out tommorrow by gamma rays coming at you at the speed of light and there is no escape and there would be no warning.  Life on earth would just end in the fraction of a second.  It could happen today.

Here’s the origional article, you have to scroll down a long way to find it.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Or not.


Old Tigers are more dangerous when they believe this is their last hunt.

From , “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”
Old tigers, sensing the end,
they’re at their most fierce.       
And they go down fighting.

Gene on September 20, 2006 at 02:25 pm

Panya:

Because everyone does it, everyone should always do it? That’s a superb argument for the status quo.

You missed it.  This is a free country, which means we get to choose what we buy and don’t buy, what we manufacture and don’t manufacture.  You and your enviro extremist cronies are welcome to voice your opinions, but you don’t get to force your values on us through legislation or the courts.  Get it?  We don’t agree with you that we are doing the wrong thing.  As a matter of fact, we think we are doing the right thing.  Human-caused Global Warming is a hypothesis.  Look that up in the dictionary, and you might understand what is really going on here.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 20, 2006 at 02:35 pm
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

Those of you who missed this thread on Kos, don’t understand how things work. See, facts alone don’t mean anything to the left because they KNOW what the truth is. In fact, according to some of the commenters, the lack of facts is proof of something in and of itself. The lone voice f sanity in that discussion kept repeating, “Since we are the reality-based community, we need to have proof of the things we allege. Just because we believe something is true doesn’t mean it is.” OF course, he was attacked for being sane.

funny commment.

I actually thing the reason gas prices when up was because of a perfect storm: new arbritary government regulation kicking in a great amount of voluptivity caused by uncertainty in a key oil producing region, disruptions in some key supplying areas, and a substantial decrease refining capacity (caused by the new formula which was dictated by the arbritary govenrment regulation)

..arbritary govenrment regulation, California should take a hint.

aNONOMISLY on September 20, 2006 at 02:42 pm

aNON: Name any govt regulation that isn’t arbitrary.
The sudden imposition of the ethanol mandate(after decades of using the “demon” MTBE) added around 50 cents a gallon to the price of gas, which was not reported widely in the media, since they wanted to use the runup to “Get the President” by accusing him of conspiring to raise gas prices to enrich his “oil buddies”.  Now they are doing it on the down side, by accusing him of conspiring to lower gas prices to aid Republicans.  The MSM has no shame.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 20, 2006 at 02:47 pm
Avatar for aNONOMISLY

Now they are doing it on the down side, by accusing him of conspiring to lower gas prices to aid Republicans. The MSM has no shame.

I’VE actually seen them do the opposite: make satire out of those believing Bush did it, caused the prices to go down.

aNONOMISLY on September 20, 2006 at 02:53 pm
Avatar for Steve

Perhaps California could merely require that car owners put a plug in their exhaust pipe. That will fix the emissions problem.

Rice-A-Roni, the San Fransicko treat!

Ding Ding!

Steve on September 20, 2006 at 03:01 pm

aNON:

I’VE actually seen them do the opposite: make satire out of those believing Bush did it, caused the prices to go down.

I can’t dispute that you might have seen one newscast of that nature, but it isn’t the overall tone of the MSM on the subject, to be sure.  In any case, those that believe the President has anything to do with gas prices are in need of professional help.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 20, 2006 at 07:39 pm

dd:

Following the motions and discovery on this case should prove interesting as California being the plaintiff must show proof of its claims and since there is nebulous proof of global warming at best, well… this case may never make it to trial.

If it hadn’t been for the McDonald’s hot coffee damage award, I might be more hopeful, but I don’t trust the courts anymore, especially in the area of awarding damages for imaginary slights.
Silicone breast implants come to mind, for a number of reasons…  They ruined a company and an entire industry, then admitted it was junk science.  Oh well.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 20, 2006 at 07:45 pm

aNON: Here’s a link for you on the subject:

http://newsbusters.org/node/7785


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 20, 2006 at 08:52 pm
Avatar for Will

Why do you focus on the opinions of a discredited scientist like Gray instead of accepting the consensus view of the scientific community?

Even Steven Verdon, the author you cite above, admits:

The consensus view is just the opposite, that there was no little ice age and that the cause for the increase in global temperatures is human activities.

Roger Pielke Jr., director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said in an interview later Monday that climate scientists involved with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that most of the warming is due to human activity.

And even Fox News has reached the point where they have to report human-induced global warming as a settled issue.

Will on September 21, 2006 at 08:00 am
Rob
Rob
22120 comments
Send a private message

Will, you doofus, that’s an AP article being run on the Fox News site.

Not that it matters.  For the faithful followers of the cult of global warming facts just don’t matter.


The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Rob on September 21, 2006 at 08:09 am
Avatar for Will

Rob: You’re splitting hairs, but I’ll issue a correction, if it will get you to drop the snarky name-calling and read the articles.

Why do you focus on the opinions of a discredited scientist like Gray instead of accepting the consensus view of the scientific community?

Even Steven Verdon, the author you cite above, admits:

The consensus view is just the opposite, that there was no little ice age and that the cause for the increase in global temperatures is human activities.
Roger Pielke Jr., director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said in an interview later Monday that climate scientists involved with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that most of the warming is due to human activity.

And even Fox News has reached the point where they run a story reporting human-induced global warming as a settled issue.

Will on September 21, 2006 at 08:28 am
Avatar for likwidshoe

Will said, Why do you focus on the opinions of a discredited scientist like Gray instead of accepting the consensus view of the scientific community?

The sun revolves around the flat earth.

What…you don’t accept that? It used to be consensus.

And thus ends the lesson of the appeal to authority argument.

And even Fox News has reached the point where they run a story reporting human-induced global warming as a settled issue.

They’re running an AP article.

Wasn’t that already said?

likwidshoe on September 21, 2006 at 08:44 am
Avatar for dbruin

Yes, it was just an AP article.  It should at least be noted that within the article, it was a Republican Congressman who requested and supported the findings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Personally, I think California is taking the wrong approach towards reducing CO2 emmissions. Why make this an adversarial process? Hopefully today’s announcement by Richard Bransonwill illustrate that there can be a cooperative effort between environmentalists and the transportation industry.

dbruin on September 21, 2006 at 10:07 am
Avatar for Will

likwidshoe:

The sun revolves around the flat earth.

What…you don’t accept that? It used to be consensus.

That was more philosophic dogma than scientific consensus.  Science as we know it barely existed back then.  Galileo, one of the first true scientists in history, was put to death by the church for using science to disprove that myth.

And that’s your argument against global warming?  The fact that scientists were right more than 300 years ago about the earth revolving around the sun?

Please read this and this if you have any honest interest in learning about global warming.

Will on September 21, 2006 at 10:09 am
Avatar for HG

Will,

It used to be, during the 80’s, that another ice age was coming.  I remember the maps on the news showing the ice coming down through Canada and overtaking the US.  They were wrong and so are you. 10 years from now we’ll all be laughing at the lunacy of the global warming threat to the planet whatsoever.

HG on September 21, 2006 at 10:16 am

Will:

And that’s your argument against global warming?

It’s not necessary to have any argument against the human-caused global warming hypothesis.  You use a very common propaganda trick there.
It is up to you environmental extremists to prove it.  Nice try.

What’s the proven cause and effect relationship between CO2 and global mean temp?  Can you quantify it?  How much does global mean temp increase for every 0.1% increase in atmospheric CO2?  If you can’t answer that question, you have nothing, except the fairy tales you are trying to sell.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 21, 2006 at 10:30 am
Avatar for dbruin

robert108-

I don’t agree that strict quantification is necessary to validate the reduction of greenhouse gasses.  The environment is dynamic, and so there won’t be direct effects that would make these decisions so much easier.

I see environmental health the same way we see our own body’s health.  I think everyone can agree that diet and exercise contribute to better health.  Yet you can’t say, if you eat 5 oranges a day, you are guaranteed to add three years to your life.  Similarly, while we can’t quantify it, it’s reasonable to suggest that reducing emissions will be better for the environment.

By that same token, while I’m not willing to give up red meat and eat tofu and beans for the rest of my life, I’m not advocating that we give up all cars and start riding bicycles everywhere we go.  However, I do think that it is good public policy for environmentalists and transportation companies (see previous comment) to work cooperatively towards improving the efficiency and emmissions of vehicles.

dbruin on September 21, 2006 at 10:55 am

dbruin:

Similarly, while we can’t quantify it, it’s reasonable to suggest that reducing emissions will be better for the environment.

Your assertion assumes an equivalency between the Earth’s atmosphere and the human body which is not proven to exist.
The problem I have with the “human-caused global warming” mythology is not only that it is junk science, but that it is designed to destroy modern industrial civilization, which is the real agenda of the environmental extremists.
They are certainly welcome to their opinions, but when they start messing with my life through their socialist supply-limiting policies, I draw the line.
I also say that quantification is necessary to justify any of their “reforms”.  You create a straw man with your adding “strict”; something I never said.  Accurate quantification would be essential, IMO.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 21, 2006 at 11:02 am
Avatar for Will

It used to be, during the 80’s, that another ice age was coming.

I don’t recall that.  Can you cite something comparable to this to back up your claim?

Robert108:

The problem I have with the “human-caused global warming” mythology is not only that it is junk science, but that it is designed to destroy modern industrial civilization, which is the real agenda of the environmental extremists.

Ok, time to take that tinfoil hat off your head.  Can you cite something Can you cite something comparable to this to back up your “junk science” claim?

The National Academy of Sciences, reaching that conclusion in a broad review of scientific work requested by Congress, reported Thursday that the “recent warmth is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia.”

A panel of top climate scientists told lawmakers that the Earth is heating up and that “human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming.”

.
. .

The report was requested in November by the chairman of the House Science Committee, Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., to address naysayers who question whether global warming is a major threat.

Will on September 21, 2006 at 11:50 am

Will: Still no proven and quantifiable cause and effect relationships between human activity and global warming.  That’s why it’s still regarded as a hypothesis by real scientists.
Since we are coming out of an ice age, the Earth is still warming up, but it has nothing whatever to do with humans.  Duh.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 21, 2006 at 11:56 am
Avatar for The Whistler

R108:

It used to be, during the 80’s, that another ice age was coming.

Will:

I don’t recall that

If you don’t know that you have no base of knowledge to be discussing the Global Warming issue.

The Whistler on September 21, 2006 at 11:59 am

TW: Actually, it was the Seventies, but who’s counting?  It was the cover of either Time or Newsweek in ‘74, as I remember.  Details and facts are unimportant to the True Believers, though.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 21, 2006 at 12:03 pm
Avatar for HG

http://www.john-daly.com/schneidr.htm

You’re welcome Will.

HG on September 21, 2006 at 12:04 pm
Avatar for Will

Excellent, thank you.  Now please read this:

Every now and again, the myth that “we shouldn’t believe global warming predictions now, because in the 1970’s they were predicting an ice age and/or cooling” surfaces. Recently, George Will mentioned it in his column (see Will-full ignorance) and the egregious Crichton manages to say “in the 1970’s all the climate scientists believed an ice age was coming” (see Michael Crichton’s State of Confusion ). You can find it in various other places too [here, mildly here, etc]. But its not an argument used by respectable and knowledgeable skeptics, because it crumbles under analysis. That doesn’t stop it repeatedly cropping up in newsgroups though.

There’s your junk science.

 

Will on September 21, 2006 at 02:31 pm

Will: So, they’re both junk science.  Some of us have known this for a long time.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 21, 2006 at 02:34 pm

Will: One problem for you might be that Carl Sagan was a very firm proponent of “Global Cooling”, along with the assertion that it was exacerbated by human-caused air pollution.  I read a report wherein he asserted that CO2 influence was a non-factor in global temp.  Just thought you would like to know.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 21, 2006 at 02:39 pm
Avatar for HG

There’s your junk science.

Will,

I see you’re passionate about this issue.  I regret that in a few years you will regret your misplaced passion.  Global warming is no threat to this or any other planet.  Science is no God.
It has been wrong before, as I pointed out, and it will be wrong again and is wrong about global warming.

HG on September 21, 2006 at 02:44 pm
Avatar for The Whistler

Way to go will, here you are an expert and you didn’t even understand the history of the climate change movement.

The Whistler on September 21, 2006 at 02:53 pm
Avatar for Sely

What a double standard.  Arnold in the Hummer (choke, cough, sputter) suing the more fuel-efficient, small car manufacturers.

Sely on September 21, 2006 at 08:48 pm

Sely: CA is mostly run by Dems, and they are responsible for this silly lawsuit, not the Gov.  Get a grip.


If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

robert108 on September 21, 2006 at 09:01 pm
Avatar for Will

You all amaze me.  Why should anyone care about what Carl Sagan thought years ago?  Or what was on the cover of Newsweek decades ago?  Or whether John Daly thinks Stephen Schneider is a sensationalist?  All of that is just noise.

What matters is that CO2 is at levels not seen in at least 160,000 years, the levels are increasing an unprecedented pace, and CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

What matters is that scientists have been evaluating the global warming hypothesis for decades.  They have been collecting data and examining the evidence both for and against global warming for decades.  The end result is a broad scientific concensus is that global warming is a serious threat to the planet.

And yet you all seem to think that global warming is impossible.

Will on September 22, 2006 at 05:44 am
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

If you want to ignore a fellow commenter, download this.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.