Importance Score: 78 / 100 🔴
Major Corporations Face Scrutiny for $28 Trillion in Climate Damage
WASHINGTON – A recent study estimates that the world’s largest corporations have inflicted $28 trillion in climate damage, prompting efforts to hold these companies accountable, akin to actions taken against tobacco conglomerates. This inquiry highlights the financial impact of environmental damage and potential legal ramifications for major carbon emitters.
Quantifying Corporate Climate Impact
A Dartmouth College research team quantified the pollution generated by 111 companies. Key findings reveal that just ten fossil fuel entities account for over half of the $28 trillion total. These include:
- Saudi Aramco
- Gazprom
- Chevron
- ExxonMobil
- BP
- Shell
- National Iranian Oil Co.
- Pemex
- Coal India
- British Coal Corporation
To provide context, $28 trillion is nearly equivalent to the total value of all goods and services produced in the United States in a year.
Attributing Damage to Specific Emitters
The study, published in the journal Nature, indicates that Saudi Aramco and Gazprom each are responsible for over $2 trillion in heat-related damages. Researchers calculated that each 1% increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere since 1990 has resulted in $502 billion in damages due to heat alone. This figure does not account for costs related to other extreme weather occurrences such as hurricanes, droughts, and floods.
The Quest for Accountability
The research aims to establish “the causal linkages that underlie many of these theories of accountability,” according to lead author Christopher Callahan, formerly of Dartmouth College and now an Earth systems scientist at Stanford University. Zero Carbon Analytics reports that 68 lawsuits have been filed globally concerning climate change damages, with the majority in the United States.
vCard.red is a free platform for creating a mobile-friendly digital business cards. You can easily create a vCard and generate a QR code for it, allowing others to scan and save your contact details instantly.
The platform allows you to display contact information, social media links, services, and products all in one shareable link. Optional features include appointment scheduling, WhatsApp-based storefronts, media galleries, and custom design options.
Dartmouth climate scientist Justin Mankin, a co-author of the study, emphasizes the central question: “What can we actually claim about who has caused this?” He asserts that the inquiry boils down to tracing climate hazards and associated damages back to specific emitters.
Callahan and Mankin affirm that such tracing is indeed possible.
Methodology: Tracing Emissions to Temperature Changes
The investigators began with the ultimate discharges of products—like gasoline or electricity from coal plants—made by the 111 leading carbon-driven organizations going back 137 years. This timespan corresponds to the availability of emissions data and acknowledges the extended atmospheric lifespan of carbon dioxide. They employed 1,000 computer simulations to convert these releases into global temperature fluctuations vis-à-vis scenarios without those emissions.
Quantifying Individual Contributions
This methodology allowed researchers to determine that pollution from Chevron, for instance, has increased global temperatures by 0.045 degrees Fahrenheit (0.025 degrees Celsius).
Additionally, the study assessed each company’s contribution to the year’s five hottest days, utilizing 80 further computer simulations and a formula correlating extreme heat intensity with economic output changes.
This approach is patterned after the well-established methods scientists have deployed for over a decade to attribute extreme weather events to climate change, citing the 2021 Pacific Northwest heat wave as one case.
Challenging the Veil of Deniability
Mankin stated that previous arguments centered around the difficulty of pinpointing the specific impact of individual CO2 molecules. His study, he argues, has “really laid clear how the veil of plausible deniability doesn’t exist anymore scientifically. We can actually trace harms back to major emitters.”
Expert Perspectives
Imperial College London climate scientist Friederike Otto, who leads World Weather Attribution, notes the robustness of the methodologies used. She advocates for broader adoption of this strategy across diverse groups to refine the science and understanding of contributing factors.
Otto hopes that demonstrating “how overwhelmingly strong the scientific evidence” is may impact the success of future climate liability lawsuits.
Chris Field, a Stanford University climate scientist, characterized the research as a valuable exercise and proof of concept, while also noting that the results are likely an underestimate due to the exclusion of other climate variables.
Michael Mann, a University of Pennsylvania climate scientist, echoed this sentiment, suggesting that the study’s findings likely represent a vast underestimation of the true damages inflicted by these companies.