For those choosing to ignore reduction methods, the result could be costly. Rather than treaties and regulations, litigation is becoming the weapon of choice for those concerned about human-induced global warming. Transferring the cost of global warming to those who are disproportionately the perpetrators, is the aim of those taking this route of action and there are a number of cases already underway. After all, if your neighbour was polluting the river, forcing you to buy more expensive water, who should pay for this?
Most cases already filed have resulted from anger at the Bush administration for failing to honour their Kyoto promises:
Case One:
The government of tiny Pacific island state Tuvalu revealed that it planned to launch lawsuits against the United States and Australia , who have both rejected the Kyoto climate pact.
The country, which is only four metres (13 ft) above sea level at its highest point, faces oblivion within 50 years if the scientists' gloomy scenarios
are correct. Global warming causes the sea to rise and Tuvalu is blaming the polluters.
Case Two:
In 2002 the city of Boulder , Colorado and two environmental groups launched a suit against two U.S. government finance agencies for providing funding for fossil fuel projects overseas.
The suit has been filed against the Export Import Bank (Ex-Im) and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). Ex-Im and OPIC are taxpayer funded agencies that provide corporate welfare to U.S. corporations for overseas projects
The plaintiffs claimed that the extra emissions of heat-trapping greenhouses gases would exacerbate global warming and the resulting climate changes would damage American farms and property.
Case Three:
The New York attorney general's office is studying the possibility of suing greenhouse gas polluters, along the lines of the successful litigation that was brought against the tobacco industry in the 1990s.
These 'class suits' are likely to lead to a raft of national and international litigation in the not-too-distant future.