A period of consequences: Global warming as public nuisance

Stanford Journal of International Law

Volumn 43 A, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 77-97

  Alex, Ken ^a  

^a California Department of Justice   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 35448979992     PISSN: 07315082     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (125)

1. See, e.g., California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, CAL. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE div. 25.5, §§ 38500-99 (Westlaw 2007);
2. AL. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 43018.5 (Westlaw 2007) (developing regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles);
3. Cal. Exec. Order No. S-3-05 (June 1, 2005) (establishing greenhouse gas emission reduction targets), available at http://www.climatechange.ca. gov/ (scroll down and follow link for "Governor's Executive Order: Executive Order # S-3-05, June 1, 2005").
4. People ex rel. Lockyer v. Gen. Motors Corp., No. C06-05755 (N.D. Cal.). The defendants are General Motors Corp., Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Ford Motor Co., Honda North America, Inc., Chrysler Motors Corp., and Nissan North America, Inc.
5. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), to which the United States is signatory, defines climate change as "a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirecdy to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods." UNFCC art. 1, May 9, 1992, S. TREATY DOC. No. 102-38, 1771 U.N.T.S. 107, available at http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/ background/items/2853.php.
6. Connecticut v. Am. Elec. Power Co., 406 F. Supp. 2d 265 (S.D.N.Y. 2005).
7. The states are Connecticut, California, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin. Id. at 266.
8. The defendants are American Electric Power Co., American Electric Power Services Corp., Cinergy Corp., Xcel Energy, Tennessee Valley Authority, and Southern Co. Id. at 266-67.
9. ENVTL. PROT. AGENCY, USEPA Report No. 430-R-06-002, INVENTORY OF U.S. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND SINKS: 1990-2004, at ES-7 (2006), available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html.
10. California is already spending tens of millions of dollars to study and address global warming impacts. See, e.g., CAL. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 43018.5 (Wesdaw 2007) (regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles);
11. ANALYSIS OF THE 2006-07 BUDGET BILL, Governor's Climate Change Initiative, Cal. Legislative Analyst's Office (Feb. 2006), available at http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_2006/resources/ res_04_anl06.html. Already, experts can measure significant harm from such phenomena as coastal erosion and the diminished ability of the state's flood control system to handle increased run-off from earlier snow melt.
12. See, e.g., Expert Reports of Edwin P. Maurer, Iris T. Stewart-Frey, and Michael Hanemann, filed in Central Valley Chrysler-Jeep Inc.. v. Witherspoon, No. 1:04-CV006663-AWI-LJO (E.D. Cal. 2006) (automakers' suit challenging California's greenhouse gas emission regulations). California must spend millions of dollars on monitoring impacts.
13. Since the litigation is pending, we leave for the commentators a more rigorous discussion of the nuances of the legal doctrine and the likelihood of success. Here, we seek to present the outlines of the claim and some of the anticipated defenses.
14. IPCC FOURTH ASSESSMENT REPORT, CLIMATE CHANGE 2007: THE PHYSICAL SCIENCE BASIS - SUMMARY FOR POLICYMAKERS, at 4 (February 2, 2007), available at http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
15. [hereinafter IPCC SUMMARY];
16. see also IPCC THIRD ASSESSMENT REPORT - CLIMATE CHANGE 2001: SYNTHESIS REPORT, available at http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/online.htm [hereinafter IPCC 2001 SYNTHESIS].
17. Academia Brasiliera de Ciências et ai., Joint science academies' statement: Global response to climate change (June 2005), at 1 (citations omitted), available at http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/displaypagedoc.asp?id= 20742.
18. NAT'L RESEARCH COUNCIL, CLIMATE CHANGE SCIENCE: AN ANALYSIS OF SOME KEY QUESTIONS 3 (2001), available at http://www.gcrio.org/OnLnDoc/pdf/ClimateChangeScience.pdf.
19. Id.
20. Naomi Oreskes, Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change, 306 SCI. 1686 (2004) ("Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect"), available at http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/ content/full/306/5702/1686.
21. Id.;
22. see also Am. Meteorological Society Council, Climate Change Research: Issues for the Atmospheric and Related Sciences, 84 BULL. AM. METEOROLOGICAL. SOC. 508, 508-09 (2003) ("Human activities have become a major source of environmental change. Of great urgency are the climate consequences of the increasing atmospheric abundance of greenhouse gases and other trace constituents resulting primarily from energy use, agriculture, and land clearing.");
23. Randy Showstack, Climate Change Statement Highlights Human Influence, 84 EOS 574 (2003) (describing American Geophysical Union position statement that "human activities are increasingly altering the Earth's climate"). Overwhelming and compelling evidence of global warming impacts appears in scientific journals on a daily basis. Past, present, and future impacts include: temperature increases, heat waves, loss of Arctic ice and habitat, loss of Antarctic ice, sea level rise and coastal flooding, melting of glaciers and related glacial lake outburst flows into already rising oceans, ocean acidification, loss of fisheries, shutdown of ocean currents that moderate temperatures, loss of snowpack in California and elsewhere, changes in precipitation patterns, increased hurricane intensity, public health harms such as increased heat-related illness and smog, harm to habitats, and the potential for substantial social upheaval resulting from significant environmental changes.
24. See, e.g., WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORG., WMO STATEMENT ON THE STATUS OF THE GLOBAL CLIMATE IN 2004 12 (2005);
25. IPCC 2001 SYNTHESIS, supra note 10, at 12-13;
26. ARCTIC CLIMATE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (ACIA), IMPACTS OF A WARMING ARCTIC: ARCTIC CLIMATE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 22 (2004).
27. IPCC 2007 SUMMARY, supra note 10, at 4.
28. James Hansen et al., Earth's Energy Imbalance: Confirmation and Implications, 308 SCI. 1431, 1434 (2004), available at http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2005/2005_Hansen_etal_1.pdf.
29. Id.
30. Id.
31. Id.
32. Catherine Owens & Bill Herrick, Rewriting the Science (CBS television, broadcast Mar. 19, 2006), http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/ 60minutes/main1415985.shtml.
33. See, e.g., California Climate Action Team Reports and related materials, available at http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/index.html. The Climate Action Team includes representatives from the relevant state agencies and consultants, overseen by Cal/EPA, collaborating to implement global warming emission reduction programs and to report on the progress made toward meeting the statewide greenhouse gas targets established by Governor Schwarzennegger's executive order. See id.
34. See, e.g., Academia Brasiliera de Ciências et al., Joint Science Academies' Statement: Global Response to Climate Change (June 2005) ("Long-term global efforts to create a more healthy, prosperous and sustainable world may be severely hindered by changes in the climate."), available at http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/displaypagedoc.asp?id=20742.
35. At least one commentator describes failure to take action in the face of strong evidence of increased flooding, frequent heat waves, disrupted water supplies, increased intensity of weather events, and massive harm to temperature sensitive ecosystems as "planetary malpractice." William C Clark, Planetary Malpractice, ENV'T, Nov. 2005, at 3, available at http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1076/is_9_47/ai_n15877169.
36. In the amicus brief of Robert H. Bork, et al., filed in Massachusetts v. EPA, No. 05-1120 (U.S. Apr. 2, 2007), a group of law professors generously describe the federal response as "a determined, if cautious, approach to global climate change for nearly thirty years." Bork amicus brief at 5 n.2.
37. Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S._, No. 05-1120, slip op. at 25-32 (Apr. 2, 2007).
38. USEPA Website, http://www.epa.gov/epahome/aboutepa.htm (last visited Apr. 11, 2007).
39. 2 and other GHGs cannot be considered 'air pollutants' subject to the CAA's regulatory provisions for any contribution anthropogenic GHG emissions may make to global climate change.");
40. Brief of Respondents at 20-34, Massachusetts v. EPA, No. 05-1120 (U.S. Apr. 2, 2007), 2006 WL 3043970; see also Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401 et seq.
41. Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S._, No. 05-1120, slip op. at 21 (Apr. 2, 2007).
42. Department of Energy Guidelines for Voluntary Greenhouse Gas Reporting, 71 Fed. Reg. 20784 (Apr. 21, 2006).
43. See, e,g., WHITE HOUSE GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY BOOK, EXEC. SUMMARY (Feb. 2002), available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ news/releases/2002/02/climatechange.html. The Bush Administration has expressed support for state efforts, including emission control programs. For example the Chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality testified before Congress, apparendy supportively, that "[m]any of our states and cities are experimenting with . . . portfolios of voluntary measures, incentives, and locally relevant mandatory measures." Testimony of James L. Connaughton Before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform (July 20, 2006) at 4, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/ JLC2006_07_20_House_Govt_Reform_Final_WAc_2.pdf. Connaughton also stated that the Bush Administration welcomes "effective state action to complement" federal efforts.
44. Juliet Eilperin, California Tightens Rules on Emissions, WASH. POST., Sept. 1, 2006, at Al (quoting James L. Connaughton, "Bush's top environmental adviser"), available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083100146. html. And in his statement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Head of the U.S. Delegation, Dr. Harlan Watson, stated: I would like to highlight the efforts being made by State and local governments in the United States to address climate change. Geographically, the United States encompasses vast and diverse climatic zones representative of all major regions of the world-polar, temperate, semi-tropical, and tropical-with different heating, cooling, and transportation needs and different energy endowments. Such diversity allows our State and local governments to act as laboratories where new and creative ideas and methods can be applied and shared with others and inform federal policy-a truly bottom-up approach to addressing climate change. Statement of Dr. Harlan Watson, Senior Climate Negotiator and Special Representative and Head of U.S. Delegation, Ninth Session of the Conference of the Parties, U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (Dec. 4, 2003).
45. Georgia v. Tenn. Copper Co., 206 U.S. 230, 231 (1907).
46. Id. at 237.
47. Id. at 239.
48. Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins. 304 U.S. 64, at 78.
49. Wheeldin v. Wheeler, 373 U.S. 647, 651 (1963).
50. Illinois v. City of Milwaukee (Milwaukee I), 406 U.S. 91, 104 (1972) (citing Georgia v. Tenn. Copper Co., 206 U.S. 230, 241 (1907)).
51. The Supreme Court in Massachusetts v. EPA reaffirmed the vitality of Tennessee Copper in holding that states are entided to "special solicitude" in analyzing standing in environmental cases. 549 U.S. _, No. 05-1120, slip op. at 17 (Apr. 2, 2007).
52. See The Climate System: An Overview, in IPCC THIRD ASSESSMENT REPORT CLIMATE CHANGE 2001: THE SCIENTIFIC BASIS ch. 1, at 86-97 (2001), available at http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/online.htm.
53. Cox v. City of Dallas, 256 F.3d 281, 291 (5th Cir. 2001) (citations omitted) (quoting WILLIAM H. ROGERS, JR., HANDBOOK ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAW § 2.1, at 100 (1977)).
54. A public nuisance is "an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public." RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 821B(1) (1979).
55. City of Milwaukee v. Illinois (Milwaukee II), 451 U.S. 304, 313-14 (1981).
56. Id. at 316 (quotation omitted).
57. Id. at 315 n.8.
58. United States v. Texas, 507 U.S. 529, 534 (1993) (alteration in original) (quotations omitted).
59. County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation, 470 U.S. 226, 236-37 (1985) (summarizing City of Milwaukee v. Illinois, 451 U.S. 304, at 313-15).
60. Illinois v. City of Milwaukee (Milwaukee I), 406 U.S. 91, 103 (1972).
61. Id. at 93.
62. Id. at 103.
63. Id. at 107 n.9 (quotation omitted).
64. Id. at 102-103, 106-107.
65. City of Milwaukee v. Illinois, 451 U.S. 304 (1981).
66. Milwaukee II, 451 U.S. at 317.
67. Id. at 318.
68. Id. at 317, 320.
69. Milwaukee I, 406 U.S. at 101.
70. 470 U.S. 226, 253. (1985).
71. Id. at 245.
72. 507 U.S. at 535.
73. Milwaukee II, 451 U.S. at 318 (quotation omitted, emphasis in original).
74. Id. at 320-321.
75. Id. at 323.
76. Milwaukee II, 451 U.S. 325;
77. see also Int'l Paper Co. v. Ouellette, 479 U.S. 481, 490-91, 498 n.18 (1987) (noting that state can apply to federal agency to disapprove Clean Water Act permit based on undue impact and can bring a citizen suit action to enforce permit after issuance).
78. 470 U.S. at 237;
79. see also United States v. Texas, 507 U.S. at 534-35 (holding that Debt Collection Act did "not speak directly" to the federal government's right to collect prejudgment interest on debts owed to it by a state; federal common law claim not displaced).
80. Although EPA argued that the Clean Air Act does not apply to greenhouse gas emissions at all, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected that argument. Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S._, No. 05-1120, slip op. at 25-32 (Apr. 2, 2007). The Court remanded the matter to EPA to determine whether to take regulatory action. Id. at 30. Currently, no regulations exist, and the remand does not guarantee or define any particular action by EPA.
81. Nat'l Audubon Society v. Dep't of Water, 869 F.2d 1196, 1212-13 (9th Cir. 1988) (Reinhardt, J., dissenting) (reaching displacement issue and reasoning that Clean Air Act does not displace federal common law nuisance claims based on air pollution);
82. accord New England Legal Found, v. Costle, 666 F.2d 30, 32 n.2 (2d Cir. 1981).
83. Pub. L. No. 101-549, Title VI, § 401, 104 Stat. 2399, 2584 (1990) (codified at 42 U.S.C §§ 7651-76510 (Westlaw 2007)) ("Acid Deposition Control");
84. Pub. L. No. 101-549, Title VI, § 602(a), 104 Stat. 2649, 2648 (1990) (codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 7671-7671q (Westlaw 2007)) ("Stratospheric Ozone Protection").
85. Water Pollution Control Act, Pub. L. No. 845, preamble, 1948 U.S.C.C.A.N. (62 Stat. 1155) 843.
86. Milwaukee II, 451 U.S. at 318.
87. See Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S._, No. 05-1120, slip op. at 30-32 (Apr. 2, 2007) (noting in conclusion that the Court did not reach "the question whether on remand EPA must make an endangerment finding, or whether policy concerns can inform EPA's actions in the event that it makes such a finding") (emphasis added).
88. Milwaukee I, 406 U.S. at 107.
89. Tenn. Copper, 230 U.S. at 238.
90. 406 F. Supp. 2d 265 (S.D.N.Y. 2005).
91. 369 U.S. 186 (1962).
92. 406 F. Supp. 2d at 274.
93. Alperin v. Vatican Bank, 410 F.3d 532, 537 (9th Cir. 2005)
94. (quoting Baker, 369 U.S. at 211) (citations omitted),
95. cert. denied sub nom. See also Order of Friars Minor v. Alperin, 126 S. Ct. 1141 (2006).
96. See Baker, 369 U.S. at 217.
97. Alperin, 410 F.3d at 544
98. (quoting Baker, 369 U.S. at 217) (citations omitted).
99. Id. at 544
100. (citing Baker, 369 U.S. at 217).
101. Gross v. German Found. Indus. Initiative, 456 F.3d 363, 388 (3d Cir. 2006)
102. (quoting EEOC v. Peabody W. Coal Co., 400 F.3d 774, 784 (9th Cir. 2005)).
103. Alperin, 410 F.3d at 544-45
104. (citing Baker, 369 U.S. at 211).
105. Id. at 537
106. (quoting Baker, 369 U.S. at 211);
107. see also Klinghoffer v. S.N.C Achille Lauro, 937 F.2d 44, 49 (2d Cir. 1991) (holding tort suit against the Palestine Liberation Organization justiciable despite serious and complex international implications).
108. Alperin, 410 F.3d at 550.
109. Id. at 551.
110. Oneida Indian Nation v. New York, 691 F.2d 1070, 1083 (2d Cir. 1982) (holding that although legislative solution to the native American land claims may be preferable, the "claims are justiciable notwithstanding the complexity of the issues involved and the magnitude of the relief requested").
111. Alperin, 410 F.3d at 548.
112. In Connecticut v. AEP, the parties await the Second Circuit's ruling on preemption of federal common law, political question/non- justiciablity, and standing. In People v. GM, the complaint identifies specific harms from global warming happening now in California, including direct expenditures in the state budget. Thus, the allegations in the complaint set forth a strong basis for standing. See Massachusetts v. EPA, 127 S. Ct. 1438.
113. See, e.g., In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation, 175 F. Supp. 593, 629 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (denying motion to dismiss even though defendants as MTBE product manufacturers had no control over the gasoline with MTBE at the time it was spilled or leaked); In re Starlink Corn Products Liability Litigation, 212 F. Supp. 2d 828 (N.D. Ill, 2002) (allowing public nuisance claim to proceed against manufacturer of genetically-engineered seeds, which contaminated neighboring farms with altered cotton);
114. see also Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp., 503 U.S. 258, 268-69 (1992) ("At bottom, the notion of proximate cause reflects 'ideas of what justice demands or of what is administratively possible and convenient,'"
115. quoting W. KEETON, D. DOBBS, R. KEETON & D. OWEN, PROSSER AND KEETON ON LAW OF Torts § 41, at 264 (5th ed. 1984)).
116. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 875 cmt. (1979).
117. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 875 (1979).
118. RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF TORTS: APPORTIONMENT OF LIABILITY § 10 (2000).
119. See, e.g., RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 840E (1979) ("[T]he fact that other persons contribute to a nuisance is not a bar to the defendant's liability for his own contribution.");
120. see also WILLIAM L. PROSSER, W. PAGE KEETON, ET AL., THE LAW OF TORTS § 52 (5th ed. 1984);
121. State of New Jersey v. City of New York, 283 U.S. 473, 477, 483 (1931) (issuing injunction against City of New York's dumping of garbage in ocean even though New York alleged that others also dumped garbage and contributed to nuisance).
122. Massachusetts v. EPA, 127 S. Ct. 1438, at 48.
123. See, e.g., Colorado v. New Mexico, 459 U.S. 176, 183 (1982) (applying a principle of "equitable apportionment" in fashioning a remedy for interstate water allocation disputes);
124. H.L.A. HART & TONY HONORE, CAUSATION IN THE LAW 205-53 (1985) (discussing concurrent causes and multiplicity of approaches to apportioning responsibility and damages).
125. Georgia v. Tenn. Copper Co., 206 U.S. 230, 237 (1907).