Have you heard of climate change refugees?

In essence, it’s the idea that people are displaced by environmental disasters that are in part caused by climate change and global warming. It’s a concept that is gaining steam around the world, especially to look at the millions who are moving in Africa due to increased drought or torrential rain, those in the Pacific moving because of flooding and tsunamis, and those who live on low-lying atolls and islands who are forced to move as their islands become uninhabitable due to rising sea levels.

Photo Credit: Houstonian/ Dan Blazen

But was Hurricane Katrina created or exacerbated by climate change? Can those who were forced to move claim to be climate change refugees? The U.S. doesn’t typically like to admit having refugees anywhere- those who were forced to Houston by Hurricane Katrina looked pretty similar to what happens in other countries and shows up in our newspapers as photos of a refugee camp. But few would have called Katrina a climate change disaster- for years the focus has been on the slow government response and the racism involved in relief (or lack of) efforts. So why is this back in the news?

A group of Mississippi landowners are suing 30 major oil, coal and electric companies in a lawsuit claiming that they created pollutants that have contributed to rising sea levels that contributed to the destruction of Hurricane Katrina.

I’m sure this is viewed by some as ridiculous and unfounded, but in some ways it could be a landmark legal decision. The basic assertion, that oil and energy companies are responsible for the emissions that their production and products create, points a definitive finger at the fossil fuel energy industry. If this were successful as a lawsuit, it would mean that the companies are tagged with the guilt. I imagine they will go to significant lengths to make sure that doesn’t happen.

The U.S. Supreme Court already ruled in 2007 that the EPA violated the law by not forcing energy companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions- look now for this case to make it to the Supreme Court- it could be some of the most landmark rulings of our time. If it is ruled to be breaking the law to not reduce greenhouse gas emissions, that would effectively change the way that Congress HAS to create the next round of legislation and the way our country is fundamentally governed.

Can the court mandate that we reduce greenhouse gasses? I think the EPA decision was based on their charge to protect the environment- and since greenhouse gasses harm the environment they are in trouble for not getting people to reduce them. Tough times for the EPA- I’m sure they would have found no support from the Bush Administration for any kind of climate change focused action.

"Thus the court recognized . . . that injuries may be fairly traceable to actions that contribute to, rather than solely or materially cause, greenhouse gas emissions and global warming," wrote Judge James Dennis of New Orleans in the 5th Circuit Court Opinion.

I like the idea of holding the energy companies accountable for greenhouse gas emissions and their true cost to the environment- but what about each of us, who continue to purchase the products even though we know they harm the environment? Will we be suing each other?