Balance of Probability: CC Well Past the Legal Test

authordefault
on

โ€œUniversity of Adelaide research has found governments and companies face a likely increase in law suits for their role in global warming and consequent damage to health and communities, and that these claims have a good chance of succeeding.โ€

The thrust of this piece ist that the likelihood that humans have cause climate change is greater than 50% plus one – which is the legal test in civil court.

In fact, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said in its 2001 Summary for Policymakers (attached) that, โ€œIn the light of new evidence and taking into account the remaining uncertainties, most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations.โ€

As to a definition of โ€œlikely,โ€ the IPCC is specific: โ€œIn this Summary for Policymakers and in the Technical Summary, the following words have been used where appropriate to indicate judgmental estimates of
confidence: virtually certain (greater than 99% chance that a result is true); very likely (90-99% chance); likely (66-90% chance); medium likelihood (33-66% chance); unlikely (10-33% chance); very unlikely (1-10% chance); exceptionally unlikely (less than 1% chance). โ€œ

All this could (but probably will not) have a bearing on the suit that Friends of the Earth, et al, are threatening against the recalcitrant federal government for failing to make any effort to meet Canada’s Kyoto commitments.

Related Posts

on

Israeli private eye Amit Forlit denied appeal in decision that could lead to his facing a maximum of 45 years in prison if found guilty.

Israeli private eye Amit Forlit denied appeal in decision that could lead to his facing a maximum of 45 years in prison if found guilty.
Analysis
on

Canadian politicians and pundits are leveraging Trumpโ€™s war with Iran to expand fossil fuel infrastructure.

Canadian politicians and pundits are leveraging Trumpโ€™s war with Iran to expand fossil fuel infrastructure.
on

Clean Creatives analysis reveals a โ€œcoordinated narrative shiftโ€ by Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, and Chevron.

Clean Creatives analysis reveals a โ€œcoordinated narrative shiftโ€ by Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, and Chevron.
on

Now, parish lawsuits, including one in front of the Supreme Court, could make oil giants pay to restore the stateโ€™s vanishing marshes.

Now, parish lawsuits, including one in front of the Supreme Court, could make oil giants pay to restore the stateโ€™s vanishing marshes.