Opinion | Michigan's climate lawsuit will backfire

As a former senior adviser to the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Economic Impact and Diversity and as an activist who continues to tackle issues related to clean air in socially and economically disadvantaged communities, I am concerned that Michigan's new climate lawsuit misses the forest for the trees and will backfire. 

Every human being should be concerned about climate change and its impact on humanity and, more importantly, those left behind in impoverished environments. However, there is ample empirical evidence that the processes driving climate change behavior can be predicted and modeled in ways that will allow the public and private sectors to respond to this crisis in a safe and responsible manner. There is no need to put a hard stop to carbon emissions. The country can address this issue reasonably, civilly and in a data-driven fashion. 

Michigan's lawsuit doesn't take this approach. Instead, it punishes the domestic businesses Michigan residents rely on to heat their homes and power their cars merely for emitting carbon — hardly a crime.

The domestic businesses that Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel is targeting are the same ones that are feverishly working to retrofit environmental control systems on their Industrial Applications to curb carbon emissions.  

The state is shooting at the wrong target. 

While both the public and private sectors in the United States have made strides in reducing carbon production — so much so that U.S. per-capita fossil carbon emissions have fallen by over 25% since 1990 — other countries continue to emit carbon at untenable levels, ignoring this issue. They are responsible for this crisis, not the American companies that continue doing everything they can to mitigate this threat. 

Michigan is leading the nation in mobilizing cleaner energy sources but still relies on fossil fuels for 97% of its energy needs. Moving away from these energy sources before the developing renewables industry has had a chance to grow and catch up will raise this state's working families' monthly budget costs and reduce the job prospects for the most vulnerable among us. 

Michigan's current unemployment rate is already the 15th highest in the nation. The Black unemployment rate in Michigan is 50% higher than the national average.

Inflation is compounding Michigan families' economic problems. Congress' Joint Economic Committee recently found that the average Michigan household has spent $25,618 more since 2021. It now costs them $1,000 more to purchase the same basket of goods they bought in 2021. 

Much like a stone thrown into a lake, suing energy companies — the same people who support Michigan's most dominant manufacturers — will add further fuel to this economic fire. It will create a cost-escalation death spiral that ripples through the economy. 

For example, it will drive up shipping prices, increasing the cost of food and everyday items we need.  

Higher oil and gas costs will also make it more expensive for Michigan's auto manufacturers to produce vehicles, rendering American cars less competitive against those from Europe, Japan and China. That is a problem in and of itself when considering that, for the first time ever, foreign automakers now build more cars in the United States than the Detroit Three. 

Michigan's booming manufacturing industry has elevated tens of thousands of working poor into the middle class, especially Black Americans, who represent nearly one-quarter of all its auto workers.

Protecting Michigan's future requires protecting Michigan's industries. Nearly 600,000 Michiganders are employed by manufacturers, accounting for over 14% of all jobs in the state. Low-cost energy makes our goods and products competitive with the rest of the world's.  

This climate lawsuit's flawed approach to addressing the climate crisis also raises serious questions about cronyism. The proposal includes outsourcing this lawsuit to trial lawyers, who will act as agents of the State of Michigan and receive compensation based on the total damages awarded. If this issue is essential, Michigan should handle the lawsuit in-house, not farm it out to historically predatory actors in the legal community. 

While Michigan has been successfully transitioning to cleaner energy sources responsibly for decades, this lawsuit will create more problems than it solves. The state should drop it and consider other ways to continue advancing this critical issue.