A wealthy national anti-fossil fuel organization that recruits municipal and state plaintiffs to file lawsuits against energy companies for the effects of climate change now appears to have its sights on Pennsylvania, America’s second largest natural gas producing state. The effort to encourage local officials to sue American energy companies will surely be a tough sell in the energy-rich Commonwealth, where the fracking boom has not only provided thousands of good-paying jobs but also lowered carbon emissions.
How do we know of this new effort in the Keystone state? Because the main recruiter of these climate lawsuits — the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI) — joined the Philadelphia-based eNGO Clean Air Council and Resilient Analytics to publish a report late last month on the estimated costs of climate change mitigation and adaptation in Pennsylvania. CCI has previously published these “climate costs” reports to set the stage and build momentum for filing a climate lawsuit.
Recall it was Resilient Analytics that provided the climate impact costs cited by the City of Boulder, Boulder County, and San Miguel County in their 2018 climate lawsuit. CCI and Resilient Analytics later partnered on a report estimating Florida’s climate costs during CCI’s ultimately unsuccessful media and lobbying campaign to encourage South Florida municipalities to file climate lawsuits.
Of course, the Pennsylvania report doesn’t account for the cost of limiting energy development through frivolous litigation, even though the state has generated over $2.5 billion in revenue since 2012 from natural gas impact fees alone. As former NOAA Chief and meteorologist Ryan Maue pointed out, the real purpose of CCI’s “climate costs” reports is not to provide hard data to state and municipal leaders, but to fuel a public relations push for support for climate litigation.
Packaging up courtroom-ready “climate costs” data is just one tool in CCI’s Rockefeller-funded toolbox. In fact, recently released public records from New Jersey revealed the full scope of the group’s efforts to instigate climate litigation at the municipal level. CCI recruits and lobbies state and local officials to support climate lawsuits by offering legal expertise, draft resolutions, talking points, press support, and even “ghost-writing” services.
Pennsylvania Leaders Skeptical of Litigation Pitch
While its proponents often portray the climate litigation campaign as an organic, grassroots effort, it’s anything but. In fact, it’s out of touch billionaires who couldn’t care less about energy prices funding the effort. The Rockefellers, Hollywood Actor Leonardo DiCaprio, British hedge fund executive Chris Hohn, and controversial Swiss businessman Hansjörg Wyss have all either granted money to CCI, Sher Edling LLP, or to the other entities backing these frivolous lawsuits.
Although Joe Minott, executive director of the Clean Air Council, said that he “doesn’t know of any municipalities in Pennsylvania entertaining legal action against companies for climate damages,” it’s likely that CCI is already making its pitch around the state.
At least two Pennsylvania municipal officials appear to be promoting CCI’s talking points. Sharpsburg Mayor Brittany Reno and Delaware County Council Chair Monica Taylor, who is also a member of CCI’s “Leaders Network,” both attended and spoke at CCI’s promotional webinar announcing the release of the Climate Costs report.
To convince the rest of the Commonwealth however, may prove to be tricky. Already, state and local leaders are realizing how climate litigation harms consumers and stalls progress on climate solutions. Mike O’Barto, Chairman of a Pennsylvania township featured in CCI’s report, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette he “doesn’t see the logic in filing lawsuits against oil and gas companies”:
“‘Tell me what happens if we file a lawsuit?’ he said. If the municipality wins, ‘who’s going to be the loser? It’ll be the people who are buying gasoline, oil, etc. I don’t see a winner out of this at all.’”
CCI’s PR blitz faces an uphill battle in large part due to wide-ranging, bipartisan support for Pennsylvania’s energy industry. In the 2022 Senate election, both the Democratic and Republican candidates supported fracking, citing its numerous benefits such as energy security and safety. Pennsylvania is also home to powerful trade unions that see continued energy development as a major contributor to the Commonwealth’s job market and community fabric.
Bottom line: Support lines up behind Pennsylvania energy development as the industry contributes over $40 billion in wages and $75 billion in economic impact annually to the state. Nation-wide, natural gas production in Marcellus shale region has unleashed lower electricity prices and catalyzed a dramatic decrease in carbon emissions across the nation. While CCI’s typical message that American energy companies need to “pay their fair share” may work on some in Oregon and Hawaii, CCI’s usual talking points fall flat in Pennsylvania.
