Unfortunately damages can be extremely hard to show in environmental cases, both because of the evolving state of the science and the tendency of environmental

Unfortunately damages can be extremely hard to show in environmental cases, both because of the evolving state of the science and the tendency of environmental contamination to cause low-probability stochastic effects through a large population. It's very difficult for a lawyer to make money off of a situation that has caused a small but persistent increase in certain diseases in a certain population, and yet that kind of outcome is very common. It's not even clear who, if anyone, has standing in such cases, and courts have often dismissed environmental cases due to the inability of any one plaintiff to show damage (there is some progress towards addressing this but it is slow and uneven). This is one of the main reasons that these sorts of environmental contamination problems tend to persist for extended periods: tort law really doesn't have it covered most of the time.