City says global warming will hit home
SAN FRANCISCO — Attorneys with the U.S. Department of Justice argued before a U.S. District Court judge today that a lawsuit involving Santa Monica City Hall should be thrown out on grounds that it has no merit.
The suit, which was filed by Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, and the cities of Santa Monica, Oakland and Boulder, Colo., charges two federal development agencies with funding projects oversees that have contributed to global warming.
This marks the second attempt by the Department of Justice to have the suit thrown out.
Attorneys for City Hall argue that the Export-Import Bank, or Ex-Im, and the Overseas Private Investment Corp., or OPIC, provided over $32 billion in financing and insurance for oil fields, pipelines and coal-fired power plants over the last 10 years without studying the impacts these projects would have on global warming back in the United States, a requirement under the National Environmental Police Act, or NEPA.
In a complaint filed with the U.S. District Court, attorneys for City Hall argued projects funded by Ex-Im and OPIC are responsible for 8 percent of the annual, worldwide greenhouse-gas causing emissions — the equivalent of 31.7 percent of annual emissions in the U.S.
This affects Santa Monica tremendously, the complaint contends. From 1903 to 2000, annual mean temperatures have increased in Los Angeles County by about 2.85 degrees, a “significant increase” over the Santa Monica mean temperature of about 61.5 degrees.
Rising temperatures have caused ice caps to melt, increasing the sea level of the Santa Monica Bay by three inches. Rising tides threaten the city’s beaches and bluffs, and could destroy the pier and overwhelm the city’s state-of-the-art drainage system, according to the complaint.
Local officials said the stakes are high in Santa Monica, with rising tides threatening the health of a $788 million tourism industry that employs more than 11,000 workers and pumps nearly $24 million a year into city coffers.
An increase in storm activity will not only lead to beach erosion and the possible destruction of the pier, a main tourist attraction, it could also erode the Palisades bluffs, endangering motorists and pedestrians.
Attorneys for Ex-Im and OPIC told Judge Jeffrey S. White on Friday that the agencies are exempt for NEPA and there is no evidence to support impacts from climate change are foreseeable results of decisions by Ex-Im and OPIC to provide financing to projects overseas.
Attorneys argued those projects would have been built without assistance from the two entities, according to a motion seeking to have the case dismissed.
A spokesman for OPIC would not comment because the case is ongoing. Calls to the Department of Justice were not returned.
Ex-Im and OPIC are self-supporting agencies that provide financing and loans to U.S. corporations for overseas projects that commercial banks deem too risky, including new oil field developments in South America, Mexico, the Caspian region and Southeast Asia. Companies that have benefited from Ex-Im and OPIC funding include Exxon, Halliburton and Enron.
Ron Shems, the attorney who argued on behalf of City Hall and the other plaintiffs, said he felt “very confident” about the day’s proceedings.
“The court has ruled in our favor before when (attorneys with the Department of Justice) tried to have the case thrown out on grounds that we didn’t have a leg to stand on,” Shems said. “This judge seemed very knowledgeable of the issues, and I feel good with where we stand today.”
Shems did not know when a ruling might be issued.
“It could be next week or next month,” Shems said.
The case — the first in which private citizens were allowed to sue organizations for air pollution — was originally filed in 2002, with City Hall signing on in January 2004.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 15, 2006. Read the original PDF.