Fossil fuel companies sue governments across the world for £13bn as climate policies threaten profit

[Terrywoodenpic]

It does not matter who ownes these things, provided the government has ultimate control and power to regulate. Companies that do not meet their commitment in any way face swinging fines. They must also pay their customers for any down time in supply.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It does not matter who ownes these things, provided the government has ultimate control and power to regulate. Companies that do not meet their commitment in any way face swinging fines. They must also pay their customers for any down time in supply.

What!? Another country having a better way to do things?

Seriously we need massive improvement here and power companies paying when they cannot deliver sounds like an excellent idea.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think the people of the world should instead sue fossil fuel companies for the damage done to the world climate.

At least some courts are already cottoning to their shenanigans:
Court orders Royal Dutch Shell to cut carbon emissions by 45% by 2030

If I were the CEO of a company being negatively affected by climate change, as I read the story in the OP, think about the Paris Climate Accord, and go "hmmm" as I thought of all the countries I could sue for damaging my business by not living up to their treaty obligations.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If I were the CEO of a company being negatively affected by climate change, as I read the story in the OP, think about the Paris Climate Accord, and go "hmmm" as I thought of all the countries I could sue for damaging my business by not living up to their treaty obligations.

Whew! Lucky for us that Trump pulled us out. Hmm, I guess his intimate knowledge of being sued came in handy.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

How many people really need to drive, and how many even need to work. What do all those people in new york for example, even do. All the fuel they use, is that really worth whatever it is they are doing? I think people would take right back to horses, or some other safer animal actually, that can carry a person. I don't think people really like to drive cars, they are atrociously dangerous, and they suck down your energy and time

 

[Kooky]

How many people really need to drive, and how many even need to work. What do all those people in new york for example, even do. All the fuel they use, is that really worth whatever it is they are doing? I think people would take right back to horses, or some other safer animal actually, that can carry a person. I don't think people really like to drive cars, they are atrociously dangerous, and they suck down your energy and time

As far as I can tell, the majority of motorized transportation happens in suburbs, which tend to be designed with exclusive car use in mind, and tend to be built such that getting around without one is made maximally impractical.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

As far as I can tell, the majority of motorized transportation happens in suburbs, which tend to be designed with exclusive car use in mind, and tend to be built such that getting around without one is made maximally impractical.

I didn't sign up not to use a horse, car roads appeared in my sight when I became alive. Some president decided on freeways thirty odd years before I was born. Of course people would opt out of it if they could, but no prenatal kiosk prompt screen was there, with a button giving them a different transportation option