An order by a federal judge on Monday delayed the start of “pile driving” construction for a massive wind project off the Atlantic Coast by Dominion Energy.
Such simplifications in judicial decisions risk setting dangerous precedents where policies are shaped not by empirical evidence but by judicial interpretations of contested scientific theories.
Or is this an indicator that folks promulgating the ‘industry disinformation’ accusation have figured out they are in a hole they cannot dig their way out of from using those old Greenpeace/Ozone Action scans?
“I can think of no other area of research where the relaxing of rigour and standards has been encouraged by researchers in order to generate claims more friendly to headlines, political advocacy and even lawsuits”.
Hot on the heels of the ECHR judgement, we now face the possibility of a rush of silly legal climate cases:
it is a near-total copy of their Feb 20 “Chicago v BP” lawsuit – see my dissection of that one here. It shares text straight out of others. No joke, witness how this March 27 Pennsylvania Record article quoting the...
“Humans don’t use fossil fuels because of a ‘public relations campaign.’ They use fossil fuels because they are necessary to the technologies that underlay global human prosperity—from synthetic fertilizer, to cement,...
To believe the Administrator’s own words, or not to believe—that is the question.
Weak Swiss Government climate policies were found to violate the rights of older Swiss women by increasing their risk of dying in heatwaves.
This central claim by Dominion is simply absurd: “The overwhelming consensus of federal agencies and scientific organizations is that offshore wind does not adversely impact marine life.” No adverse impact? Seriously?
At a time when incidents of dead whales washing ashore on the Atlantic coast are spiking, the lawsuit would force Dominion to cease construction of massive wind turbines for its Virginia Offshore Wind (VOW) project in the...
“It’s illegitimate, mocks their statutory purpose, and hopefully will be fully annulled by the courts in coming days.”
The appellate court is likely to look at this thing that jumps out at me here is the punitive damage award.
If the case can be made that each – in domino fashion – should be dismissed due to a total lack of evidence for the claims about ‘industry-paid shill climate scientists,’ and that the core people behind these lawsuits...
I'll have to spend another five million to prove that I don't have to pay the lousy one mil.
- Popular Related Tags: climate lawsuits, epa, exxon knew, opinion, endangerment finding, gao, intermittent wind and solar, mark steyn, climate ugliness, biden administration
- Search for "climate lawsuits" on our Eco Web Search