Is Your State Making Big Oil Polluters Pay For Their Toxic Waste? – CleanTechnica

Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!

---

Last year may have been record-shattering for clean energy applications in the US, but not a whole lot was accomplished for emissions reductions. Demand for electricity and transport fuels rose fast enough to erase most of the benefits of new renewables and EVs. Yet the state of New York is doing something about emissions rather than accepting a status quo. By legislating a Superfund, New York will soon force major oil and gas companies to pay up for mounting climate damages caused by the burning of their products over the last two decades.

The Climate Change Superfund Act Holds Big Oil Accountable

On December 26, 2024 Governor Kathy Hochul and key members of the New York state legislative leadership announced an agreement to approve the Climate Change Superfund Act. “Superfund” is the common name given to the US law called the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, or CERCLA. Superfund is also the trust fund set up by Congress to handle emergency and hazardous waste sites needing long-term cleanup. The national Superfund is administered by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

New York will become the second state in the nation to hold the largest Big Oil companies accountable for costs resulting from the worsening climate catastrophe. The bills are quickly gaining momentum in statehouses: Vermont passed one into law in May, and similar proposals are under consideration in California, Massachusetts, and Maryland.

The Climate Change Superfund Act is modeled on the existing State and Federal Superfund law (which requires polluters to fund toxic waste dump cleanups) by making Big Oil climate polluters financially responsible for the environmental damages that they have caused. The Act has several dimensions. It:

• establishes the climate change adaptation cost recovery program to require companies that have contributed significantly to the buildup of climate-warming greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to bear a share of the costs of needed infrastructure investments to adapt to climate change
• mandates that projects funded by the program require compliance with prevailing wage requirements
• requires that contracts for funded projects contain a provision that the structural iron and structural steel used or supplied in the performance of the contract or any subcontract thereto shall be produced or made in whole or substantial part in the United States, its territories, or possessions
• makes additional provisions
• establishes the climate change adaptation fund

The top Big Oil companies will be required to pay a combined $3 billion annually, every year, for 25 years. New York legislators reminded their constituents that the $3 billion number represents a fraction of the annual profits from the oil and gas industry, where the top three domestic producers made a combined $85.6 billion in profits in 2023 alone.

Why the Superfund is Imperative in New York — and Elsewhere

New York is facing staggering — and growing — climate costs. In 2023 alone, Governor Hochul announced $2.2 billion in taxpayer funding for climate-related infrastructure repairs and upgrades and resilience projects. The US Army Corps of Engineers estimates that it will cost $52 billion just to protect NY Harbor. On top of that, the state will need $75-$100 billion to protect Long Island, and $55 billion for climate costs across the rest of the state. The state Comptroller has predicted that more than half of local governments’ costs will be attributable to the climate crisis. Big Oil is at fault for climate change, and it can certainly afford the costs.

According to a study in One Earth, the world’s 21 top polluting companies are responsible for $5.4 trillion in climate damages over a period of 26 years. While these climate damage bills pile up for taxpayers, the industry responsible for this mess is raking in cash. From January 2021 through now, Big Oil has made $1 trillion in profits.

The Climate Change Superfund Act isn’t just necessary, it’s popular. According to a poll from Data for Progress, 89% of New Yorkers support fossil fuel companies covering at least some of the cost for climate damages. Another poll found that 70% of New York voters support the Climate Change Superfund Act, including majorities across party lines. Nationally, 89% of Democratic voters support the Climate Superfund approach, and 53% of New York voters are more likely to vote for candidates who support passing a climate Superfund bill.

Who’s Really Paying for Big Oil’s Mess? Them — or New Yorkers?

New Yorkers were in a “perfect storm” situation created by the devastating impacts of the escalating climate crisis, the huge costs faced to mount a response, and the lack of a dedicated fund to pay for those soaring costs, says NYPIRG. Without a revenue source for climate programs, by default, the costs would have been placed on the backs of state and local taxpayers. The Superfund legislation costs won’t fall back on consumers, though, according to an analysis from the think tank Institute for Policy Integrity at NYU Law.

Because Big Oil’s payments would reflect past contributions to greenhouse gas emissions, oil companies would have to treat their payments as one-time fixed costs. The analysis has concluded that the Act is unlikely to alter the price of gasoline at the pump in New York or the price of crude oil more generally.

The Act’s compensatory payments would be based on companies’ historical contributions to the existing stock of greenhouse gas emissions such that these payments would reflect past sales of petroleum and not current or future sales. Oil companies would treat these payments as one-time fixed costs. Regardless of market structures, oil companies are unable to pass on increases in fixed costs to consumers due to economic incentives and competition. Due to profit motivations, oil companies have significant incentives to leave their production levels and retail gasoline prices unchanged, even if firms may make operational changes in response to the Act.

Final Thoughts

Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz summed up the importance of New York state’s Climate Change Superfund Act.

“Given the growing damages caused by a worsening climate, the expenses needed to shore up public protections from climatic changes (such as rising sea levels, more intense storms, and hotter temperatures), the Climate Superfund offers a unique way to shift the burden of at least some of those costs from the taxpaying public to the companies most responsible. It does so in a way that should protect the public from cost shifting by the impacted companies.”