Encana named in California climate lawsuits

Calgary-based Encana Corp. is named in three large lawsuits that attempt to link damages from climate change to industry’s alleged attempts to hinder action to address it.

In the latest of a growing number of such lawsuits around the world, Encana is one of 20 energy majors and their subsidiaries facing claims from three California communities. They allege the companies have deliberately sown misinformation and doubt on climate change and are at least partially responsible for related damages such as shoreline erosion.

Encana has not responded to requests for comment.

The lawsuits, filed Monday in California, draw on legal precedents used against tobacco companies, which reached a U.S. settlement of US$368.5 billion in 1998.

“The plaintiffs have an uphill battle, but these are plausible claims,” said Michael Burger, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School.

Burger said that, like tobacco firms, the energy industry knew its business was creating problems. Reports quoting documents from Exxon’s archives suggest its management was told by its own scientists about greenhouse gases and climate change as early as 1977.

Instead of addressing the problem, the lawsuits allege, industry deployed think tanks, lobbyists and other means to obscure the science and resist regulation — much like the tobacco industry.

Similar lawsuits have been thrown out.

Vic Sher, the lawyer handling the litigation, said fresh reports have made industry attempts to block change much clearer. As well, research now allows scientists to make direct links between greenhouse gases, sea-level rise and individual producers.

“That causal connection we can now tie to particular companies.”

The claim alleges the defendants are collectively behind about 20 per cent of total CO2 emissions between 1965 and 2015.

“It’s an enormous volume and a substantial contribution to the problem,” Sher said.

Martin Olszynski, a University of Calgary law professor, said the cases are highly relevant to Canada.

“Everyone’s watching to see what different courts are doing, especially countries that share that common law tradition,” he said.