4 ms·
> total damages claimed could reach $10 billion or more, especially if the big energy and oil companies—whose presence in one section of West Houston gave it th
by zzzeek 9y ago
> total damages claimed could reach $10 billion or more, especially if the big energy and oil companies—whose presence in one section of West Houston gave it the nickname the Energy Corridor—sue over their flooded headquarters.
the irony that the home neighborhood of many of the worlds largest oil companies would want to sue because the global warming they're at the core of causing contributed towards the damage of their own buildings.
- Edmond 9y agomy thought exactly.
- cma 9y agoI'm sure the suit will just ask for FEMA trailers for everyone.
- _jal 9y agoA two-person company with the right friends can make this right in a jiff. If they can fix PR, they can fix Houston, right?
- briandear 9y agoCrazy. All those oil companies forcing you to buy stuff that gets transported by trucks that use oil. You’re blaming the drug dealers for people choosing to shoot heroin. Feel free to stop consuming oil. Even your Tesla has plastics made from oil and uses power generated using oil. If you buy a single thing made in China, you are buying products generally made using coal-fired electricity. Unless you live in a grass hut, you are part of the “problem.”
- vardump 9y agoThe rest of the argument seemed kinda valid, but one nitpick: > Even your Tesla has plastics made from oil I think nearly all plastics are made out of natural gas, not oil.
- codycraven 9y ago> I think nearly all plastics are made out of natural gas, not oil. Fracking monster
- libertyEQ 9y agoTo elaborate further: "Chemical plants produce olefins by steam cracking of natural gas liquids like ethane and propane. Olefins are the basis for polymers and oligomers used in plastics, resins, fibers, elastomers, lubricants, and gels."
- zzzeek 9y ago> You’re blaming the drug dealers for people choosing to shoot heroin. Grade-school libertarianism doesn't apply here. I'm blaming them for using their billions of dollars to pack my government with people like James Inhofe who willingly spread lies and misinformation about a regulatory subject they know nothing about: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/234026-sen-inhofe-throws-snowball-to-disprove-climate-change http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/234026-sen-inho... > Take a look at Inhofe's campaign funding. The major source, contributing half a million dollars over the past five years, has been the oil and gas industry... If Inhofe were to change his position on man-made global warming, is it credible that he would retain all this funding? No. He receives money from fossil fuel companies because he articulates the views to which these funders subscribe, and because he advances their interests in the Senate. Given that keeping your seat means spending a fortune on television advertising and other forms of campaigning, changing your views on a matter of great interest to your sponsors is likely to be political suicide. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2012/aug/02/climate-change-political-funding-us https://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2012/a...
- mikeash 9y agoIt's more like: you're blaming the drug dealers for telling people drugs are healthy and suppressing research that says they do any harm.