Italy’s first climate change lawsuit, brought by Greenpeace Italy and climate change advocacy group Recommon against Italian oil giant Eni, began with its first trial on February 16, accusing the company of contributing to global warming. Ta.
The hearing comes alongside a new report by Greenpeace Italy, which reveals how Eni’s technical consultants involved in the case have deep ties to the fossil fuel industry and climate change deniers. is explained.
As DeSmog previously reported, the lawsuit “builds on a similar lawsuit targeting Dutch Anglo-Dutch oil giant Royal Dutch Shell, which requires Eni to reduce its carbon emissions by 45 percent by 2030. The aim is to force them to cut back.”
At issue in the lawsuit is whether Eni intentionally contributed to climate change and whether it is liable for past and future damages. The case also assesses whether the oil giant violated human rights protected by Italy’s constitution and international treaties.
Documentary evidence in the case includes two “technical reports” prepared in Eni’s defense by consultants identified as climate change deniers in a new Greenpeace Italy report.
Last week, two environmental groups asked a judge to examine witnesses, including 12 Italian citizens affected by climate change, their lawyer Alessandro Gariglio told Desmog.
“It is up to the judge to assess whether he considers the documentary evidence presented to be sufficient or whether he thinks it appropriate to hear from witnesses and, above all, seek the opinion of a court-appointed expert. ” Gariglio pointed out. He added that he and his parties were in favor of such a move. [Eni included] it’s not. ”
In a statement to DeSmog, an Eni spokesperson said the company “will prove in legal proceedings that Greenpeace and Recommon’s claims are baseless, both legally and factually.” Documents related to the current case can be viewed on Eni’s website.
Eni technical report
This technical report is an addendum to one of Eni’s defense statements and was written by Carlo Stagnaro, head of research at the think tank Istituto Bruno Leoni (IBL), and Stefano Consonni, professor of energy and environmental systems at the Department of Energy. It was done. He holds a PhD from Politecnico di Milano.
According to Greenpeace Italy, the two consultants are “not independent” and have “expressed a climate change denial position” on multiple occasions.
Mr. Consonni’s resume states that since 1993 he has been a “principal investigator” on research funded by multiple oil and gas companies, including Eni, ExxonMobil, BP Alternative Energy, and the U.S. Department of Energy. It is stated that.
Greenpeace said Stagnaro’s technical report included references to Eni’s key climate delay strategies, including “whataboutism.” This is to obscure the true contribution of Italy’s oil giants to global warming. For example, it mentions China’s lack of responsibility in regulating emissions and its tactics of shifting accountability to consumers, a reference repeated 19 times in the text.
Connections with the US Climate Change Denial Organization
The Greenpeace report says the think tank IBL has denied anthropogenic climate change in the past, and that in the early 2000s Mr. Stagnaro was the organization’s “most active figure in importing U.S. climate denialism to Italy.” He was one of them.
For example, in 2006, Stagnaro said, “Climate. We want to be Americans,” which includes procrastinating expressions such as “climate change alarmists.” At the press conference, he stated, “Unfortunately, the Kyoto Protocol is based on the premise of ‘field selection’ in science. In other words, it is based on the premise that humans are the root cause.” This is a premise that is not justified by the above.” Not because of actual scientific knowledge or the complexity of atmospheric dynamics. ”
To support this, the briefing cited former astrophysicist Sally Valiounas, who is associated with many climate change denial groups, including the George C. Marshall Institute. In 2002, at a U.S. Senate hearing, Bariunas argued that “most of the surface warming in recent decades is due to the anthropogenic greenhouse effect, as no warming trend was observed in the lower troposphere. It’s nothing,” he declared.
Stagnaro’s press conference also quoted climate change denier Björn Lomborg, who is the current editor-in-chief of Italy’s far-right newspaper Libero, former director of Eni-owned news agency AGI, and co-author of Eni’s news agency AGI. Mr. Mario Ceci, former public relations officer. Italy’s current right-wing Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.
At a summit in Rome at the end of January, Meloni announced the Mattei Plan, named after Eni founder Enrico Mattei. The program aims to turn Italy into an “energy hub” for the distribution of fossil fuels extracted from Africa and to build “a bridge between Europe and Africa.” Activists in Italy and across Africa have criticized the plan, saying it promotes fossil fuel development and “false solutions”. Before the initiative was announced, more than 50 African organizations signed a letter to the Italian government calling for an “end to the neo-colonial approach” and “a more consultative approach”. “This ‘dash for petrol’ in Africa is dangerous and short-sighted,” the letter said.
Eni has also recently come under fire from some Italian media outlets for sponsoring the weeklong music and entertainment TV show Sanremo. The show was watched by 70% of Italian viewers during its broadcast this year. Greenpeace says the sponsorship is “another act of greenwashing.”
The Greenpeace report highlights the fact that IBL, under Mr. Stagnaro’s direction, is part of the Atlas network. The Atlas Network is a group of more than 500 “free market” organizations in about 100 countries that support climate science denialism and campaign against laws limiting greenhouse gas emissions. .
Previous DeSmog reporting said the Atlas network is also involved in “branding climate change activists as extremists” and “passing anti-protest legislation.”
The Greenpeace report also reveals that in 2004 IBL also joined the Coalition of Cooler Heads (CHC), a US-based pressure group that has worked to promote climate change denialism. CHC has been calling climate science a hoax for two decades and played a key role in President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement in 2017.
From 1997 to 2015, CHC members received “more than $98 million in donations from Exxon Mobil, conservative foundations, and underground finance organizations,” according to the Center for Climate Research.
In 2010, Exxon donated $30,000 to IBL and Eni donated 12,000 euros to the group, according to another report in Italian news outlet Il Fatt Quotidiano.
In 2008, IBL also co-hosted a “Global Warming Is Not a Crisis” event with the Heartland Institute, which has been on the “front lines” of denying the scientific evidence of climate change.
The Greenpeace report said IBL’s position appears to have softened over the years, with Stagnaro tweeting in November 2019: 3. Not all policies aimed at reducing emissions work or are effective. ”
However, in 2018, IBL “directly influences oil policy as a member of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission,” according to the research group Documented, in Alex Epstein’s book Defending Fossil Fuels. The publication of the book was promoted. is a “powerful quasi-regulatory body acting in the interests of oil and gas.”
“Would the reporting of someone who has personally frequently embraced and promoted the positions of climate change deniers be considered reliable from the perspective of climate change litigation?” The lawsuit campaign was named “Just Cause.” asks Greenpeace Italia and Recommon. Will there be no room for judgment if the same expert has received funding from the same company in the past? Plaintiffs ask.
In response, Eni’s website says: “There is very little that can be said “accurately” about this behavior. “Plaintiffs are, in effect, asking the court to declare Eni ‘responsible’ for damages sustained and future damages caused by climate change, which its actions in past decades allegedly contributed to. ”
This “false narrative” is based on an “obvious instrumental approach” aimed at “demonizing” the business, Eni continued.
Greenpeace Italia and Recommon said they expected the judge to “overrule a number of plausible objections by Eni” to allow “a fundamental change in the company’s industrial strategy”.