Green Eco Services » Pollution

Eco-Graphic: What Drugs Are You Drinking?

Cathy — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:00:43 +0000

National Geographic put this up and an eye-opener it is. People are throwing their pill and medicines down toilets and drains, and guess where it ends up? In our groundwater, in our food and in of course fish. You can find the full size here at National Geographic.

Photo: ngm.nationalgeographic.com

Before you go out and start buying bottled water again, remember that most bottled water is also tap water.

You can read more about Drugs in our Drinking Water

Similar Posts:

Chevron Named “Most Toxic” Energy Company of 2011

Cathy — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 13:00:36 +0000

“Amazon Chernobyl” Disaster in Ecuador, Brazil Spill Lead to Embarrassing Award for CEO John Watson

Amazon Defense Coalition, For Immediate Release – 25 November 2011, Contact: Karen Hinton, 703-798-3109, Karen@hintoncommunications.com

New York – The American oil giant Chevron has been named the “most toxic” energy company of 2011 by AlterNet, a prestigious U.S.-based online magazine that closely tracks environmental issues. See here and here.

Chevron won the sad award the same week it was caught lying to Brazilian authorities who threatened company officials with prison terms about a burgeoning offshore spill. The toxic designation also came in the same year Chevron lost the largest environmental lawsuit in history over its intentional contamination of what was once pristine rainforest in the Amazon of Ecuador.

The Ecuador contamination decimated indigenous groups and created an outbreak of cancer that has killed or threatens to kill thousands of people, according to evidence presented to an Ecuador court that recently ordered the company to pay $18 billion in damages. Chevron operated in Ecuador from 1964 to 1992 under the Texaco brand.

AlterNet reported that Chevron beat out ExxonMobile and BP, which ranked second and third respectively. Koch Industries and Massey Energy ranked fourth and fifth.

In its eye-opening report — “The 5 Most Toxic Energy Companies and How They Control Our Politics” — AlterNet cited Chevron’s misconduct in Ecuador as the primary reason it won the award.

AlterNet wrote: “Chevron’s worst legacy may be in Ecuador, where Texaco (now part of Chevron) spent 30 years decimating the ecologically rich Amazon rainforest and the many indigenous communities there.”

Victims in Ecuador refer to Chevron’s catastrophe as the “Amazon Chernobyl” and experts believe the damage dwarfs that caused by BP’s recent spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Unlike the BP spill, which was an accident, Chevron designed its system of oil extraction in Ecuador to pollute as a way to lower production costs.

AlterNet also concluded that Chevron has paid $85 million on Washington lobbyists since 1998 to help cover up its wrongdoing. It wrote: “(Chevron) has … moved quite a large amount of cash through Washington and its business practices have resulted in an incredible loss of life. Much of it just happened out of the country, so many in the U.S. may have missed Chevron’s gross abuses.”

Chevron’s “most toxic” award follows a November 7th spill caused by the company in Brazil that has leaked an estimated 110,000 gallons of pure crude into the Atlantic Ocean. Brazilian officials and environmentalists were outraged after Chevron’s local spokesman lied about the origin of the spill, low-balled the number of barrels released into the ocean and told regulators the damage was contained when it wasn’t. See here.

Chevron was drilling deeper than it was licensed to by the Brazilian government and had to borrow sonar equipment to try to determine the source of the spill, according to the U.S.-based environmental group Amazon Watch. Carlos Minc, an official in Brazil’s Rio province, called the spill an “environmental crime” and said it took Chevron almost ten days to start containing it.

In Ecuador, Chevron has declared open warfare on the country’s government by suing it in various courts in a desperate attempt to shift the $18 billion liability to Petroecuador, the state-owned oil company.

The Ecuador judgment, issued after an eight-year trial, also found that Chevron left behind more than 900 unlined waste pits gouged out of the jungle floor that to this day contaminate groundwater and discharge oil sludge into nearby rivers and streams. Because of the pollution, thousands of people in the region no longer have access to clean drinking water.

AlterNet’s report took into account a variety of factors in reaching its conclusions. Among them were loss of life, the extent of environmental destruction, and the use of false advertising to cover up misconduct.

Chevron has been widely mocked for its “We Agree” ad campaign and spends far more money each year buying publicity than it has ever spent cleaning up its toxic legacy in Ecuador, said Karen Hinton, the U.S. spokesperson for the Ecuadorians.

“It is becoming increasingly clear that Chevron under its current CEO John Watson has become the most rogue of energy companies and has fostered an internal culture of impunity when it comes to abuses,” Hinton said.

“There is little doubt Chevron’s ‘Most Toxic’ award is richly deserved,” she added.

Hinton said a significant portion of Chevron’s lobbying funds were used to try to convince the U.S. government to cut trade preferences for Ecuador in retaliation for letting its citizens press their legal claims against the company. Cutting trade preferences would have cost Ecuador an estimated 300,000 jobs.

In the meantime, Amazon Watch appealed via email to its global network of supporters to send a message to the Brazilian government backing a strong response to the recent spill.

“Anyone familiar with the ongoing battle to bring Chevron to justice in Ecuador knows that the company will do everything it can to protect its profits even at the expense of the planet and human health,” wrote Amazon Watch in the email.

Rainforest Action Network, another prominent American environmental group, also blasted Chevron for the Brazil spill and issued a warning to other countries who are thinking about doing business with the American company.

“Countries like Brazil should be cautious about doing business with Chevron considering how long the oil giant has evaded responsibility for its environmental crimes in Ecuador,” said Ginger Cassidy, an official with the organization.

Similar Posts:

Chevron In Open Conflict With Brazil and Ecuador Over Worsening Oil Spills

Cathy — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 23:58:36 +0000

American Company Faces Loss of Credibility With Oil Producing Nations in Latin America

Amazon Defense Coalition, For Immediate Release – 18 November 2011, Contact: Karen Hinton, 703-798-3109, Karen@hintoncommunications.com

Quito, Ecuador — Chevron, which already faces allegations of fraud over an $18 billion liability in Ecuador for environmental damage, is being accused in Brazil of trying to cover up the extent of an oil spill caused by one of the company’s offshore drilling rigs, leading to the company’s second major conflict with a key Latin American oil-producing nation.

Misleading statements from Chevron about the size of the November 8th spill and its containment have led several Brazilian officials and environmental groups to criticize Chevron and demand more transparency from the oil giant, said Karen Hinton, spokesperson for the Ecuadorians who successfully sued Chevron for massive oil contamination in the rainforest.

According to the environmental group Greenpeace, whose activists today spilled black ink at the door of Chevron’s Rio office, satellite pictures obtained by NASA show a spill “10 times bigger” than Chevron’s estimate of 330 barrels a day. Rio state’s Environmental Secretary Carlos Mink said, “The accident must be bigger than what is being announced. We are going to demand compensation…. The company must be punished in an exemplary manner.”

Chevron already is in open conflict with Ecuador’s government as part of its strategy to discredit the $18 billion judgment against it obtained in Ecuador’s courts by rainforest residents. For almost three decades, Chevron’s predecessor company Texaco dumped billions of gallons of toxic oil waste into the Amazon, leading to an environmental and public health catastrophe that dwarfs the extent of the BP calamity, according to evidence before the Ecuador court.

“Chevron’s oil disaster in Brazil, and apparent cover-up, once again shows that the company has a systemic problem in failing to meet its environmental obligations to the communities where it does business,” said Pablo Fajardo, the lead Ecuadorian lawyer who defeated Chevron in the 18-year legal battle.

“This type of dishonest behavior clearly puts Chevron at a competitive disadvantage relative to its peers, particularly in Latin America,” he added.

Humberto Piaguaje, an indigenous leader in the area of Ecuador where Chevron operated, said Brazil should not trust Chevron to take responsibility for its actions.

“In Ecuador, we have lived with Chevron’s contamination for five decades, and the company has refused to pay for the damage and destruction it caused. All governments in Latin America should beware of these basic facts before they do business with this company,” said Piaguaje.

Chevron’s management of its oil spills is not much better even in the United States. The oil giant recently agreed to a $4.5 million settlement with environmental officials in the state of Utah for two oil spills that polluted a creek and city pond. In that incident, Chevron also underestimated the amount of oil spilled, which contaminated a lake and impacted fish and wildlife.

In Ecuador, Chevron has tried to pressure President Rafael Correa to violate his country’s Constitution – which guarantees Separation of Powers and an independent judiciary – and reach into the courthouse in Lago Agrio to quash the lawsuit, said Fajardo.

After an eight-year trial, the Ecuador court found Chevron responsible for the systematic dumping of billions of gallons of toxic waste into the Amazon from 1964 to 1992, when Texaco operated a large oil concession with 378 wells and production stations. The dumping decimated indigenous groups and created a spike in cancer rates and other oil-related illnesses, according to evidence before the court.

The indigenous and farmer communities in the area of Ecuador where Chevron operated have accused the oil giant of fraud in trying to cover up several waste pits with dirt and engaging in a sham remediation to hide its environmental crimes, said Fajardo.

Similar Posts:

Your E-Waste I-Q Test

Cathy — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:51:54 +0000

Planet Green has a great e-Waste IQ test on their site, of which I failed. Cannot believe it, after all the blogging, I fail at this!

Question:

How many tons of e-waste are put in landfills every year

2007-1.9 Million according to EPA (actually this is wrong, but it is hard to get 2010 figures)

How many televisions will Americans purchase this year

34.5 Million new TVs (Consumer Electronics Association) up from 26.8 million. Americans need their updated digital.

e-Waste recyclers are regulated and can no longer ship to electronics to developing countries. (I was wrong here)

False, e-Stewards and serious recyclers are responsible. Dell instituted a policy of not exporting to developing companies. But as we all know there are unscrupulous bastards, that box up and ship, or illegal dump them someplace or take to landfills, as it is cheaper and easier.

How much of the lead found in landfills is from consumer electronics (Got this one right)

61%. The problem with the lead and we all know how toxic that is, it leaks into the soil, water and air. Guess what the plants you buy absorb it, the animals eat it and drink it and you breathe.

What percentage of computer products and TV’s were recycled in 2007 (Got this correct)

18%- which should go up with legislation.

One Ton of scrap from discarded computers contains more gold than.. (Got this wrong)

17 Tons of Gold ore. In 1998 recycling electronic scraps yielded as much gold a 2 million metric tons of gold ore. Think about it- mining is a hugely toxic and enviromental problem! Think of how much we could save (especially water) if we salvaged all the gold from electronic waste.

How often does the average cell phone user replace their phone. (Got this one right)

14-18 months (this was in 2007) it is probably higher now. I know people that change every year. Cell Phones are easily recyclable and there is no reason at all that over 700 million cell phones go into landfills.

I just took the eco- myths test and passed with flying colors. They offer alot of tests to check out your eco-iq. Planet Green Similar Posts:

Similar Posts:

Chevron’s $8.6 Billion Judgement Summary

Cathy — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 01:01:34 +0000

A summary of the recent $8.6 billion judgment against Chevron in the oil contamination lawsuit in Ecuador. The entire judgment, in English and Spanish, can be found here:

http://chevrontoxico.com/0303-chevron-found-guilty-of-massive-contamination-in-ecuador.html

The Court’s analysis of the issues in the case was thorough and comprehensive; skeptical of the claims made by both parties and their experts; and grounded in overwhelming quantities of scientific, documentary, and testimonial evidence. Moreover, the Court put aside the ancillary mud-slinging and focused more heavily on the merits of the parties’ claims and legal defenses. Chevron, of course, took the position that the Lago Agrio Court’s judgment is “illegitimate and unenforceable” long before it knew how the court would actually rule. Predictably, Chevron has denounced the judgment and vowed never to pay a penny.

Highlights of the summary:

The Court based its decision on the technical data submitted by both sides, not the experts’ reports, concluding that that Texaco had the means, but not the will, to employ safer methods of oil exploration.

The Court was particularly troubled by the fact that even samples taken by Chevron’s experts revealed “alarming” levels of carcinogenic or otherwise highly toxic substances like benzene, toluene, mercury, lead, cadmium, barium. The Court also noted that Chevron—presumably to minimize the impact of contamination—did not test for certain harmful chemicals such as Chromium VI, and did not really even test for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons, opting instead to test only for certain compounds within the TPH spectrum (“DRO” and GRO”).

Based on the record evidence and the economic criteria largely proposed by expert Gerardo Barros, a court-appointed expert sponsored by Chevron, the Court concluded that an award of approximately $5.4 billion and $600 million would be appropriate for the remediation of soil and groundwater contamination, respectively.

Ultimately, the Court found that there was a “reasonable medical probability” that the health problem experienced by persons in the Concession area had been caused by oil-related contamination.

The Court noted Chevron’s bad-faith efforts to delay resolution of the case by “reopening” issues that had been resolved, its obstruction of the evidence-gathering process and the company’s attacks on the judiciary.

The Court rejected the argument that the remediation agreement between the government of Ecuador and Texaco released the company from third-party claims. It found that the peoples’ right to bring a claim is fundamental and inviolate, citing the Ecuadorian Constitution as well as multiple human rights conventions.

As to Chevron’s related argument that Texaco was part of a consortium and thus cannot fairly be made to bear the full extent of liability caused by drilling and extraction operations, the Court observed that the contract of 1964 states that “[i]t will be left to Texaco only the ways, the means to carry out procedures…in a way that it will be able to explore (for) oil….”

Karen Hinton

Hinton Communications

1215 19th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

karen@hintoncommunications.com

703-798-3109, cellular

480-275-3554, fax by emailSimilar Posts:

Similar Posts:

Target Pays $22.5 Million For Illegal Dumping

Cathy — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 20:03:36 +0000

One more reason not to shop at Target 1.) It’s expensive 2.) No Customer Service 3.) They illegally dump toxic ingredients into our waste streams. And no, I don’t think this solves the problem, they will continue to dump.. and litter products.

A judge in Oakland has ordered Minnesota based Target Corporation to pay $22.5 million as part of a lawsuit settlement. The lawsuit filed against the corporation claims more than 290 target stores and distribution centers in California handled and disposed hazardous wastes and materials improperly.

Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey explained, “A number of hazardous wastes, paint solvents, chlorine, if those broke or if customers would return those back, they would just be dumped into the dumpsters. These were extremely toxic hazardous materials that were taken to local landfills that couldn’t handle it.”

The Target store in Chico was one of those involved in the investigation. The multi million dollar settlement will cover civil penalties and costs, and will fund several supplemental environmental projects.

“Here we’re looking at about $72,000 for Butte County District Attorney’s Office and $25,000 for Butte County Public Health, which did the initial investigation of the local Chico Target store.”

Full Story: Similar Posts:

Similar Posts:

Ex Employee-Chevron Told Them To Illegally Dump Toxic Waste

Cathy — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 14:28:03 +0000

A former oil operations assistant for Texaco (now Chevron) in Ecuador explains how oil workers were told to dump toxic waste directly into the rainforest environment. Chevron’s dumping of 18 billion gallons of toxic wastewater created an ongoing environmental catastrophe for tens of thousands of local residents, who continue to suffer an epidemic of cancer and other oil-related illnesses to this day.

http://chevrontoxico.com/news-and-multimedia/2010/1027-former-chevron-texaco-worker-in-ecuador-we-dumped-pollution-into-the-rainforest.html

The English translation of the historic $8.6 billion decision against Chevron in a few days. Meanwhile, you can review the plaintiffs’ final arguments on the evidencehere or download the attached summary.Similar Posts:

Similar Posts:

Justice in The Amazon: Chevron v.s Ecuador

Cathy — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 19:11:39 +0000

For your information — This editorial appeared today in the Diario El Comercio, one of the major newspapers in Ecuador. Below is an imperfect but understandable Google translation.

Justice takes time but it arrives!

In a small office building located in the main street of Lago Agrio, Nicolas Zambrano judge ruled against the powerful multinational oil company Chevron-Texaco: “Pay USD 8 000 million and public apology by the environmental and human damage caused duringoperations in the Amazon. “ This is the decision of the judge who reviewed the historical claim of 30 000 inhabitants of Sucumbíos affected by the irresponsibility and excessive ambition of Texaco, which shed about 30 billion gallons of formation waters in estuaries and rivers, waters which came loaded with metals heavy and benzene, both highly carcinogenic products. These downloads represent three times the pollution that caused the Exxon Valdez spill and 150 times the discharge of the British Petroleum in the Gulf of Mexico! But greed for easy money and the lack of a basic sense of responsibility and ethics, makes the highest officials of Chevron declared that the verdict is a fraud and that they will not recognize the resolution because the Ecuadorian judicial system is corrupt. The funny thing is that when the affected lawyers filed the complaint before a judge in New York in 1993, Texaco requested that the trial is conducted in Ecuador, because the events had occurred in this country under its laws and because they trusted fully in the fairness and effectiveness of the Ecuadorian courts.

“Finally, the judgment? How good is justice when you can manipulate a poor judge when the judge does not accept pressure and bribes?

Chevron-Texaco will appeal the decision and also affected. Justice takes a little longer but someday and that day will show several things: 1 .- now you can not treat the small countries as did the cowboys in the Wild West or the Americans in the ‘banana Countries ’. 2 .- That the citizens have rights that are universal and appear poor or homeless at some point succeed in raising their voice and fight to defend these rights, and 3 .- The nature can not be treated with contempt, quemeimportismo and absolute irresponsibility and that the cause of such damage must be held accountable for their misdeeds.Chevron-Texaco now gives kick drowned, says it remediated the damage that Ecuador has signed a deed of settlement, that Petroecuador is responsible.

Evidence is seen in the 339 wells drilled and contaminants that still lie in pits stinking as Aguarico 4, Sacha Sur or San Carlos, all silent witnesses to the vandalism of the multinational oil against human beings and the environment.

Karen Hinton

Hinton Communications

1215 19th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

karen@hintoncommunications.com

703-798-3109, cellular

480-275-3554, fax by emailSimilar Posts:

Similar Posts:

Chevron Finds That Billions of Gallons Of Toxic Waste Doesn’t Hurt

Cathy — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 14:04:53 +0000

Lago Agrio, Ecuador — Chevron has found that dumping of billions of gallons of toxic waste into Ecuador’s Amazon didn’t harm a single person or the environment, according to the company’s final argument submitted to the Ecuador court hearing the historic environmental case.

Chevron denies in the 292-page document that there are damages despite admitting during the trial that it dumped billions of gallons of chemical-laden “water of formation” into the streams and rivers of the Amazon that indigenous groups relied on for their sustenance. The indigenous groups are now decimated because of the toxic waste, according to evidence submitted to the court.

“The plaintiffs have not established that there was any negligence” on the part of Chevron in its operations in Ecuador, the company claims in the document “The plaintiffs have not proven the existence of the supposed damages … that they allege in their lawsuit,” it added.

Curiously, Chevron’s final argument — called the “alegato” in Ecuador – can not be found on the company’s website or in its press materials. The company for weeks has refused to publicize its final argument in a case the company claims that it should win based on the evidence.

“Chevron is embarrassed to promote a document that is so clearly misleading,” said Karen Hinton, a spokesperson for the 30,000 plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit. “Chevron’s final argument makes a mockery out of the evidence at trial and is so deceptive that not even Chevron wants people to read it.”

Chevron from 1964 to 1990 operated a large oil concession in an area of Ecuador the size of Rhode Island, reaping billions of dollars in profits before pulling out of Ecuador in 1992.

Chevron has admitted during the trial that it created in Ecuador a system of oil extraction that led to the deliberate discharge of more than 16 billion gallons of chemical-laden “water of formation” into the streams and rivers of Ecuador’s Amazon, home to six indigenous groups.

The dumping of the toxic “formation water” was confirmed by the company’s own environmental audits by environmental sampling, and by Rodrigo Perez Pallares, Chevron’s legal agent in Ecuador who admitted to the practice.

The lawsuit also accuses Chevron of abandoning more than 900 unlined waste pits gouged out of the jungle floor that leech toxins into soils and streams; contaminating the air by burning the waste pits; dumping oil along roads; and spilling millions of gallons of pure crude from ruptured pipelines. Internal company documents demonstrate that Chevron officials ordered field workers to destroy records of oil spills, that the company refused to develop an environmental response plan or pipeline maintenance program, and that Chevron never conducted a single health evaluation or environmental impact study despite the obvious harm it was causing.

Chevron’s “alegato” claims that not even one person in Ecuador was harmed by the company’s operations, even though several independent studies in academic journals suggest dramatically higher rates of cancer and other health problems in the region where the oil giant operated. Studies show thousands of people have either died or are at increased risk of contracting cancer due to the contamination.

“Chevron’s final argument is scientifically and morally bankrupt,” said Hinton, the spokesperson for the plaintiffs. “It is just astonishing that a public company continues to bury its responsibility for causing a flagrant and ongoing human rights violation that is putting thousands of lives at risk.”

Chevron’s “alegato” in Ecuador continues the longstanding practice of the company of ignoring scientific evidence and denying all responsibility for causing environmental harm.

Chevron’s lead scientific expert in the Ecuador trial, the American John Conner, has admitted under oath in U.S. court that his company never found that any of Chevron’s activities worldwide have harmed a single individual. Conner has been working for Chevron on a variety of lawsuits for most of two decades and has been paid at least $5 million for his work in the Ecuador trial.

The Connor testimony in a trial last year in Mississippi, was rejected by a jury and resulted in a $19 million judgment against Chevron.

The plaintiffs submitted the first part of their “alegato” on January 18, finding “irrefutable evidence of contamination” at each of Chevron’s 45 well and production sites inspected by the parties during the trial. The chemicals found — all of which are toxic and some of which are known carcinogens — include barium, benzene, cadmium, chromium, copper, etheylbenzene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, vanadium, xylene, and zinc. The plaintiff’s alegato concluded that the sampling results and other evidence provided by Chevron prove the claims of the plaintiffs.

Karen Hinton
Hinton Communications
1215 19th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Karen@hintoncommunications.com
703-798-3109, cellular
480-275-3554, fax by emailSimilar Posts:

Similar Posts:

Chevron Resorts To Intimidation In Amazon Lawsuit

Cathy — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 15:06:07 +0000

Chevron Threatened Ecuador Judge With Prison Time If He Failed to Grant Motions, Court Papers Say On Eve of Judgment, Chevron Resorting to Intimidation Tactics

Amazon Defense Coalition 3 February 2011 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Karen Hinton at 703-798-3109 or Karen@hintoncommunications.com

Lago Agrio, Ecuador (February 3, 2011) – Chevron’s lawyers in Ecuador have threatened the trial judge overseeing the historic environmental trial where the company faces a potential judgment in the billions of dollars, according to court papers made available by the plaintiffs.

In a series of recent legal papers, Chevron lawyers Enrique Carbajal and Alberto Racines threatened trial Judge Nicolas Zambrano with criminal sanctions and prison if he failed to grant their motions asking for a dismissal of the case, which has been on trial since 2003 in the Amazon town of Lago Agrio. The threats were clearly outlined in motions signed by the two lawyers and submitted to the court, said Pablo Fajardo, the Ecuadorian lawyer for the plaintiffs.

“Chevron’s threat to the judge is another example of its abuse of the rule of law and its desperation to avoid a judgment,” said Fajardo, who represents an estimated 30,000 Ecuadorians who brought the lawsuit.

Judge Zambrano recently sanctioned and fined Racines approximately $1,600 for repeatedly filing the same motions in an effort to delay the Ecuador trial. A third Chevron lawyer in Ecuador – Patricio Campuzano – was sanctioned for the same reason 2009. Also that year Racines exploded in anger at a trial testing site when oil was found at one of Chevron’s so-called “remediated” sites.

The first motion, filed by Carbajal on Chevron’s behalf, falsely claimed that the signatures of twenty of the 48 signatories to the lawsuit — almost all indigenous persons and impoverished farmers — were forged by attorneys for the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs rejected the claim and most of the 20 farmers appeared at a recent public event to verify that they actually signed the original lawsuit.

In the motion seeking the annulment of the trial based on the supposedly “forged” signatures, Carbajal wrote to the judge: “If you deny this motion, your conduct will fall within Article 292″ of the criminal code of Ecuador, which requires a criminal sentence of up to six months for any public official who does not report a crime.

One day later, Racines filed a motion asking Judge Zambrano to nullify an expert report submitted by the plaintiffs by Dr. Lawrence Barnthouse, a renewed American natural resources ecologist. Racines, also citing Provision 292 of Ecuador’s criminal code, said to the judge that “if you don’t do it, you will have committed a criminal infraction punished by prison.”

“Threatening judges with criminal sanctions is typical of the Chevron way when it comes to litigating in Ecuador,” said Fajardo. “They would never attempt such intimidation tactics in U.S. courts.”

In addition to the threats, Chevron has repeatedly been charged with trying to use intimidation tactics to dissuade law firms and financial partners from working with the plaintiffs, who live in dire conditions in approximately 80 different indigenous and farmer communities spread throughout the rainforest.

In recent days, Chevron has sued each of the 47 named plaintiffs in New York federal court; sought an unprecedented injunction from a U.S. federal judge to bar any American lawyer working on the case from enforcing a judgment from Ecuador’s court anywhere in the world; and has actively tried to depose several of the plaintiff’s lawyers. All told, the company has tried to depose 33 people in the U.S. who have worked with the plaintiffs.

Chevron also filed a civil RICO suit in New York, claiming the indigenous groups were trying to extort money from Chevron via the lawsuit.

“Chevron is acting out of pure desperation because we are nearing judgment,” said Karen Hinton, the spokeswoman for the plaintiffs. “The company’s new legal actions are designed to intimidate lawyers and funders and to provide a fake cover story for shareholders when the company is hit with an adverse judgment.”

The environmental lawsuit charges Chevron with deliberately discharging more than 16 billion gallons of chemical-laced “formation water” into the streams and rivers of the Amazon over a 26-year period when it operated a large oil concession, decimating indigenous groups and poisoning an area the size of Rhode Island. The case was moved from U.S. federal court at Chevron’s request after Chevron filed 14 sworn affidavits praising Ecuador’s court system.

The top end of the damages claim recently submitted by the plaintiffs in their final argument is $113 billion. The plaintiffs have submitted tens of thousands of chemical sampling results that prove extensive soil contamination at 100% of Chevron’s 378 former well and production sites in the Amazon.

“In the end, the voluminous scientific evidence will triumph over Chevron’s intimidation tactics,” said Fajardo.

###

Karen Hinton

Hinton Communications

1215 19th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

Karen@hintoncommunications.com

703-798-3109, cellular

480-275-3554, fax by emailSimilar Posts:

Similar Posts: