The question is one of attribution: Can we detect the cause of climate change in individual weather events? A few decades ago, this was simply not possible. But researchers since then tools have been developed allows us to determine the probability of various events occurring with or without the effect of our greenhouse gas emissions. And so it turned out that some the most extreme events just wouldn’t happen without the warming we drive.
This clarity has allowed other researchers to link the financial losses of catastrophic weather events to the impact of fossil fuels. produced by separate companies. If these studies are accepted as valid scientific work, judges will be forced to accept them as evidence in any lawsuit against the companies in question.
There have been a number of lawsuits against fossil fuel companies, but most they did not succeed because judges have ruled that they affect policies that should be set at the federal level. But things like economic damages have long been considered the domain of the courts, and a direct link between business practices and storm damage can be a more difficult charge to avoid.
These cases are where the National Academies are stepping in again, as a committee formed during the Biden administration is in the process of assessing the scientific state of attribution research. Oil companies are concerned enough that they have hired third parties to access the emails of committee members who work at public universities, the Politico article details.
All of this suggests that the fight over this report will intensify, and that both the credibility and funding of the National Academies may come under sustained attack, causing permanent damage to science-based policy in the United States. And it will demonstrate once again that when even basic facts can become politicized, trying to avoid being targeted by saying “we’re just focusing on the science” is not going to be a successful strategy.
