Everybody talks about the weather ... and now they're suing, too.

In April, the first lawsuit concerning climate change is due to be argued in U.S. District Court. The suit, filed in 2002 by major NGOs, affected citizens, and several U.S. cities, charges the U.S. Export-Import Bank and Overseas Private Investment Corporation with failing to assess the contribution to global warming of numerous fossil fuel projects financed with taxpayer money. The plaintiffs argue that assessment is required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and allege that projects financed by the two institutions account for eight percent of annual global carbon dioxide (C[O.sub.2]) emissions.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

To date, private individuals, NGOs, cities, and a dozen U.S. states have brought at least 10 lawsuits to fight climate change, using several types of law to force governments and corporations to reduce their impact on the global climate. In October 2003, 12 U.S. state attorneys general joined in a suit against the Environmental Protection Agency for failing to regulate C[O.sub.2] under the Clean Air Act. In July 2004, eight U.S. states, New York City, and several NGOs sued the five largest U.S. power companies under "public nuisance" laws to reduce C[O.sub.2] emissions from the utilities' 170-odd power plants, which together account for 10 percent of U.S. C[O.sub.2] emissions.

In Germany, NGOs began legal action in 2004 to force the government to disclose the warming contribution of taxpayer-supported fossil fuel projects funded through the nation's export credit agency. And three petitions were filed late last year asking the World Heritage Committee to add sites in Belize, Peru, and Nepal (including Mt. Everest) to the Committee's danger list due to the threat of climate change. If the request is granted, many lawyers believe that signatories will be required to reduce their emissions to save these sites under the 1972 World Heritage Convention.

Many think that climate litigation will follow the path of tobacco lawsuits--perhaps taking time to garner a win, but meanwhile raising public awareness, driving markets to consider climate issues and risks, and encouraging federal leadership. And some cases have already made progress: in 2003, a U.S. court ruled that NEPA requires the government to assess potential impacts of C[O.sub.2] emissions, and in 2004 an Australian judge ruled that greenhouse gas emissions from coal burning must be considered in the approval process for a new coal mine.