There are serious impacts of global warming for countries in the global north, even if the the brunt of the impact is going to affect countries in the global south. One important impact has been the frequency and severity of recent heat-waves. Another will be the impact on agriculture and fisheries.

Thirty years ago when the science was already pointing at anthropogenic climate change, the impact although forseen was so distant that policy and law makers could leave the problem to another day, another year. This was a mistake, because the earlier this was dealt with, the easier it would be. Now that the impact is more or less visible, the question arises why more wasn't done earlier. Much of the blame is due to climate denialism by the big fossil fuel companies.

In fact, Reuters reported last year that the US Congress will subpoena executives of major oil companies for documents prepared by their company scientists on climate change. This was after virtual questioning by a panel of Darren Woods, CEO of ExxonMobil, Gretchen Watkins, CEO of Shell Oil, Darren Lawler, CEO of BP America and Mike Wirth, CEO of Chevron on their responsibility for a climate disinformation campaign to block strong climate change action.

Democrat Ro Khanna had said whilst these companies havd improved their position publically, "they undermined it by supporting lobbying groups that deny climate science or fight proposals to fight climate change."

It's very likely that in the future that a class-action suit against these companies and similar to the class action suit against big tobacco for denying the science showing the cancerous effect of smoking will fine them in the hundreds of billions for costs to mitigate against climate change or as punitive damages.

There are serious impacts of global warming for countries in the global north, even if the the brunt of the impact is going to affect countries in the global south. One important impact has been the frequency and severity of recent heat-waves. Another will be the impact on agriculture and fisheries.

Thirty years ago when the science was already pointing at anthropogenic climate change, the impact although forseen was so distant that policy and law makers could leave the problem to another day, another year. This was a mistake, because the earlier this was dealt with, the easier it would be. Now that the impact is more or less visible, the question arises why more wasn't done earlier. Much of the blame is due to climate denialism by the big fossil fuel companies.

In fact, Reuters reported last year that the US Congress will subpoena executives of major oil companies for documents prepared by their company scientists on climate change. This was after virtual questioning by a panel of Darren Woods, CEO of ExxonMobil, Gretchen Watkins, CEO of Shell Oil, Darren Lawler, CEO of BP America and Mike Wirth, CEO of Chevron on their responsibility for a climate disinformation campaign to block strong climate change action.

Democrat Ro Khanna had said whilst these companies havd improved their position publically, "they undermined it by supporting lobbying groups that deny climate science or fight proposals to fight climate change."

It's very likely that in the future that a class-action suit against these companies and similar to the class action suit against big tobacco for denying the science showing the cancerous effect of smoking will fine them in the hundreds of billions for costs to mitigate against climate change or as punitive damages. In fact, given that a class-action suit against the major tobacco companies around twenty years ended in a $200 billion dollar settlement over 25 years with some costs in perpetuity, and the size of the fossil fuel industry compared to the tobacco industry, its likely a final settlement will end up in the trillions of dollars.

There are serious impacts of global warming for countries in the global north, even if the the brunt of the impact is going to affect countries in the global south. One important impact has been the frequency and severity of recent heat-waves. Another will be the impact on agriculture and fisheries.

Thirty years ago when the science was already pointing at anthropogenic climate change, the impact although forseen was so distant that policy and law makers could leave the problem to another day, another year. This was a mistake, because the earlier this was dealt with, the easier it would be. Now that the impact is more or less visible, the question arises why more wasn't done earlier. Much of the blame is due to climate denialism by the big fossil fuel companies.

In fact, Reuters reported last year that the US Congress will subpoena executives of major oil companies for documents prepared by their company scientists on climate change. This was after virtual questioning by a panel of Darren Woods, CEO of ExxonMobil, Gretchen Watkins, CEO of Shell Oil, Darren Lawler, CEO of BP America and Mike Wirth, CEO of Chevron on their responsibility for a climate disinformation campaign to block strong climate change action.

Democrat Ro Khanna had said whilst these companies havd improved their position publically, "they undermined it by supporting lobbying groups that deny climate science or fight proposals to fight climate change."

It's very likely that in the future that a class-action suit against these companies and similar to the class action suit against big tobacco for denying the science showing the cancerous effect of smoking will fine them in the hundreds of billions for costs to mitigate against climate change or as punitive damages.

There are serious impacts of global warming for countries in the global north, even if the the brunt of the impact is going to affect countries in the global south. One important impact has been the frequency and severity of recent heat-waves. Another will be the impact on agriculture and fisheries.

Thirty years ago when the science was already pointing at anthropogenic climate change, the impact although forseen was so distant that policy and law makers could leave the problem to another day, another year. This was a mistake, because the earlier this was dealt with, the easier it would be. Now that the impact is more or less visible, the question arises why more wasn't done earlier. Much of the blame is due to climate denialism by the big fossil fuel companies.

In fact, Reuters reported last year that the US Congress will subpoena executives of major oil companies for documents prepared by their company scientists on climate change. This was after virtual questioning by a panel of Darren Woods, CEO of ExxonMobil, Gretchen Watkins, CEO of Shell Oil, Darren Lawler, CEO of BP America and Mike Wirth, CEO of Chevron on their responsibility for a climate disinformation campaign to block strong climate change action.

Democrat Ro Khanna had said whilst these companies havd improved their position publically, "they undermined it by supporting lobbying groups that deny climate science or fight proposals to fight climate change."

It's very likely that in the future that a class-action suit against these companies and similar to the class action suit against big tobacco for denying the science showing the cancerous effect of smoking will fine them in the hundreds of billions for costs to mitigate against climate change or as punitive damages.