Landmark Science Report Confirms Big Oil’s Fingerprints on Extreme Weather, as Industry Races for Legal Shield

The National Academies of Sciences released a report today that puts the full weight of the country's most respected scientific institution behind extreme weather attribution science, affirming that the field can reliably connect specific disasters to fossil fuel pollution. The three-year review comes as nearly two dozen states and municipalities sue fossil fuel companies for climate damages, while roughly a dozen states advance climate superfund legislation that would force the industry to help pay for climate-related damage. Legal experts say the report could significantly strengthen both efforts.

Fossil fuel companies aren't waiting to find out. Congress is weighing legislation, and several states have already passed laws that would shield oil and gas companies from climate liability altogether — including model legislation drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council for other states to adopt. In response to the report, the Make Polluters Pay campaign released the following statement.

Statement from Cassidy DiPaola, Communications Director for the Make Polluters Pay campaign:

"The National Academies just gave courts, cities, and communities something they've long needed: the full weight of the country's most authoritative scientific body behind attribution science. It affirms what researchers and international bodies like the IPCC have long recognized — that we can say, with real confidence, which extreme weather events were made worse by fossil fuel pollution, and how much damage that pollution caused.

The fossil fuel industry understands exactly what this means. That's why they've spent years trying to discredit attribution science as a field, and why they and their allies in Congress and state legislatures are racing right now to pass liability shield laws. They can't out-argue hundreds of peer-reviewed studies backed by the country's most respected scientific institution, so instead they're trying to make the law immune to the science. They know this research doesn't just describe a hotter world, but draws a line from their products to specific floods, heat waves, and deaths, and from there to who should pay for the damage.

Attribution science now underpins how cities plan for disaster, how insurers price risk, how public health officials prepare for heat deaths, and how courts weigh accountability. The only people with an interest in pretending otherwise are the ones being asked to pay for the damage they caused."