German Groups Sue Major Carmakers for Fueling the Climate Emergency

“While people suffer from floods and droughts triggered by the climate crisis, the car industry, despite its enormous contribution to global warming, seems unaffected.”

Climate Lawsuit against German Corperations
Climate Lawsuit against German Corporations

Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) and Greenpeace today announced lawsuits against German corporations for failing to protect the climate. They are legally demanding that Volkswagen, BMW and Mercedes significantly accelerate the climate-friendly conversion of their companies: By 2030, the three German automakers are to stop building climate-damaging internal combustion vehicles worldwide, and the oil and natural gas company Wintershall Dea must stop developing new oil and gas fields from 2026. For the first time since the landmark climate ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court, environmental associations are taking legal action against climate-damaging corporations, Greenpeace against VW, DUH against BMW, Mercedes and Wintershall Dea. The plaintiffs include the executives of the associations and the Fridays for Future activist Clara Mayer.

In this picture: Plantiff Clara Mayer, Attorney Dr. Roda Verheyen, Executive Director Greenpeace Martin Kaiser.

© Mike Schmidt / Greenpeace, 3 Sep, 2021

By Jessica Corbett, Common Dreams (CC BY-ND 3.0).

A pair of climate advocacy groups on Friday announced lawsuits against BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Volkswagen for fueling the climate emergency, hoping to force the German carmakers to stop selling internal combustion vehicles and cut their carbon footprints 65% by 2030.

“With our lawsuits, we want to achieve the exit from the internal combustion engine.”

—Barbara Metz, DUH

Greenpeace Germany and Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) are accusing the companies of failing to decarbonize in line with the 1.5°C temperature goal of the 2015 Paris climate agreement.

The groups addressed the legal actions during a Friday press conference, with Greenpeace targeting Volkswagen and DUH initiating proceedings against the other two carmakers as well as the fossil fuel company Wintershall Dea, aiming to prevent it from developing new oil and gas fields by 2026.

“While people suffer from floods and droughts triggered by the climate crisis, the car industry, despite its enormous contribution to global warming, seems unaffected,” said Martin Kaiser, executive director of Greenpeace Germany, in a statement.

An April 2021 ruling on climate action from Germany’s highest court “represents a mandate to quickly and effectively enforce the legal protection of our common livelihoods,” Kaiser added. “We need all hands on deck to protect our common future.”

As German broadcaster Deutsche Welle detailed:

Two lawyers—Remo Klinger and Roda Verheyen—who helped environmental activists force the German government to commit to more detailed plans of how it will reduce carbon emissions to near zero by 2050 will also represent the plaintiffs in this case, DUH said.

Following the success of the case against the government, the NGOs are hoping to pursue the precedent set by Germany’s Federal Constitution Court (BverfG) and uphold the rights of future generations.

“The BVerfG concluded in its groundbreaking climate decision that future generations have a basic right to climate protection. Large corporations are also bound by this!” the DUH said in a tweet.

Verheyen said Friday that “whoever delays climate protection harms others and thus behaves unlawfully. This is clear on the basis of the constitutional court decision, and this also and especially applies to the German car industry with its gigantic global CO2 footprint.”

“Clearly, this is not a game,” the attorney added. “Civil law can and must help us to prevent the worst effects of climate change by ordering corporations to stop emitting—otherwise they endanger our lives and deprive our children and grandchildren of the right to a safe future.”

Among the plaintiffs in the Volkswagen case is Clara Mayer of the youth climate movement Fridays for Future. Mayer declared that “climate protection is a constitutional right.”

“It is not acceptable that a company should so significantly prevent us from reaching our climate targets,” she continued. “At the moment, Volkswagen is making huge profits by producing climate-damaging cars, which we will have to pay dearly for in the form of climate consequences. The basic rights of future generations are in danger, as we are already seeing the effects of the climate crisis. The begging and pleading has come to an end, it is time to hold Volkswagen legally responsible.”

Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW “have previously announced plans to transition to producing more eco-friendly electric cars,” DW noted, “but environmentalists have said these plans are vague and nonbinding.”

The outlet also reported on carmakers’ responses to the new cases against them:

Daimler, the maker of the Mercedes-Benz brand, said it saw “no basis” for the legal action against them and that it would defend itself “through all legal means.”

BMW said in response to the announcement that it was already committed to the Paris climate agreement. Volkswagen, which owns several car brands including Audi, Porsche, and Skoda, did not comment.

Meanwhile, those behind the lawsuits warned that their actions are intended to help ensure a habitable future planet.

“It’s about the future of our children when we complain today about an end to the production of combustion cars from 2030 onwards,” said Barbara Metz, deputy federal manager of DUH.

“Like hardly any other company, BMW has blocked the exit from the internal combustion engine and a credible switch to economical, battery-electric cars,” Metz said. “While we are feeling the consequences of the climate crisis more and more clearly, BMW is constantly developing new combustion SUVs and sedans. With our lawsuits, we want to achieve the exit from the internal combustion engine that is necessary at BMW.”

Greenpeace and DUH’s moves come just before the Automobil-Ausstellung (IAA), one of the world’s largest car shows, is set to open on September 7 in Munich. German climate campaigners are planning a large march and bike ride to protest the event.

Greenpeace Compares Grocery Chains On Plastics, Q&A With EarthTalk

How are American supermarket chains doing in regard to cutting back on single-use plastics?
–B. Weston, Jacksonville, FL

Not very well, if you ask Greenpeace. The activist group compares 20 U.S. grocery chains by their commitments and actions to reduce single-use plastics in its recently released “Shopping for Plastic 2019” report. Each and every chain—even those you would think are leading the charge on reducing plastic—gets a failing score.

Illinois-based ALDI, with 1,900 stores in 36 states, ranks highest on Greenpeace’s list, thanks to its efforts to set a specific plastic reduction target and establish a more comprehensive plastic reduction plan than any of its competitors. That said, ALDI sells mostly its own in-house versions of products so the company has more control over its entire supply chain than conventional grocery retailers that draw from thousands of different producers. But beyond the product line and its packaging, ALDI has also been more transparent on its plastic practices and Greenpeace gives bonus points for the company’s commitment to implement reuse and refill systems across the entire chain.

Does that corn really have to be wrapped in so much plastic? Credit: Anna Gregory, FlickrCC.
Does that corn really have to be wrapped in so much plastic? Credit: Anna Gregory, FlickrCC.

That’s about as nice as Greenpeace gets in the report. While second-place finisher Kroger Co. gets kudos for being the only U.S. retailer of its size to phase out single-use plastic checkout bags (by 2025) and for setting plastics recycling goals for its own branded products, Greenpeace chastises the grocery behemoth with more than 2,400 stores in 31 states for not already taking much bolder steps to scale way back on single-use plastic: “These goals might have been totally rad in the 1990s, but given its size and the scale of the plastic pollution crisis in 2019, Kroger must do far more to reduce its plastic footprint.”

Greenpeace didn’t have much nice to say about third-place finisher Albertsons, either, and is incensed that the company participates in Hefty’s EnergyBag Program whereby non-recyclable plastics are incinerated or turned back into fossil fuels. “Plastic incineration in any form threatens human health and the climate,” says Greenpeace. “Albertsons must immediately stop participating in this program.”

Whole Foods’ 11th place finish on the list begs the question of how the chain known for its green and healthy food selection could be so bad on plastics. Greenpeace says the chain has largely focused on recycling initiatives and using more lightweight plastics but needs to “up its game to reduce and ultimately end its reliance on single-use plastics.” Whole Foods’ past groundbreaking efforts in plastics reduction—it was the first large nationwide U.S. retailer to ban single-use checkout bags as well as plastic straws and then microbeads—aren’t lost on Greenpeace. But given the scale of the plastic pollution crisis, Greenpeace says Whole Foods “needs to do much more.”

While Greenpeace is working hard to pressure these corporations to go above and beyond minimal efforts to reduce single-use plastics, it’s up to individual consumers to really drive the point home by bringing their own reusable shopping bags to the grocery store, staying away from products swaddled in unnecessary amounts of throwaway plastic, and complaining to store managers about all the plastic wrap everywhere.

CONTACTS: Greenpeace’s “Shopping For Plastic 2019”; “Say NO To Dow’s Dirty EnergyBag.

EarthTalk® is produced by Roddy Scheer & Doug Moss for the 501(c)3 nonprofit EarthTalk. Send questions to: question@earthtalk.org.