Summary/Abstract
In this peer-reviewed article, the authors argue that the scientific case for climate liability is closed. The authors detail the scientific and legal implications of an ‘end-to-end’ attribution that links fossil fuel producers to specific damages from warming. Using scope 1 and 3 emissions data from major fossil fuel companies, peer-reviewed attribution methods and advances in empirical climate economics, this article illustrates trillions in economic losses attributable to the extreme heat caused by emissions from individual companies. In particular, the article focuses on emissions linked to Chevron, the highest-emitting investor-owned company in the authors’ dataset, and conclude that those emissions very likely caused between US $791 billion and $3.6 trillion in heat-related losses over the period 1991–2020, disproportionately harming the tropical regions least culpable for warming. More broadly, the authors outline a transparent, reproducible and flexible framework that formalizes how end-to-end attribution could inform litigation by assessing whose emissions are responsible and for which harms. The authors conclude that drawing quantitative linkages between individual emitters and particularized harms is now feasible, making science no longer an obstacle to the justiciability of climate liability claims.