Like the tobacco industry, Big Oil has denied for years that its products are harmful. Now as extreme storms and fires have become common, its members claim to be the clean energy leaders. The top five oil companies spend $125 million a year on green advertising to convince us of this.

The facts present a different picture. In 2024, world oil production reached a new high, sending 40 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases into the Earth’s atmosphere. Profits for the top five oil companies also reached a new high: $102 billion. 2024 was the hottest year on record.

Yes, Big Oil invested in clean energy. But the top five oil companies invested just 4% of their total investments in renewables. A whopping 96% of their investment dollars went to oil and gas exploration, and building new infrastructure such as refineries, pipelines and ports.

Maine environmental voters are having none of this. That’s why Rep. Grayson Lookner of Portland and Sen. Stacey Brenner of Scarborough have introduced legislation to establish a “Maine Climate Superfund.” The money would be used to clean up from storms and build new infrastructure to accommodate climate change.

You may be wondering how a pollution fee could be assessed. Based on decades of research and using advanced computing, it’s now possible to accurately determine the cost of climate damage attributed to each polluter.

Establishing a state “climate superfund” is a bold move but there’s legal precedent for it. Vermont and New York have passed similar legislation. The new laws are based on the national superfund act (the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act or CERCLA) passed in 1980. Since then, over 500 sites have been cleaned up.

There is no similar law requiring payment for damage from greenhouse gas pollution, and Congress is unlikely to take up this issue any time soon. So states are stepping up. Maine joins five other states pursuing bills to make fossil fuel companies accountable.

The strategy behind Maine’s legislation is to assess fees retroactively — on past emissions since the year 2000. This avoids the argument that states are regulating future emissions, or regulating the operations of out-of-state companies, both of which would be illegal. Noting the precedent set by CERCLA, lawyers and supporters believe they have a strong case.

The fossil fuel companies have never been complacent, however. True to character, the American Petroleum Institute has sued Vermont, claiming that fossil fuel companies operated within the law at the time of past emissions, and that the bill “regulates” interstate emissions.

A coalition of 24 attorneys general from oil-producing states is suing New York. Similar to the Vermont lawsuit, they claim that New York is “regulating” emissions in violation of interstate commerce laws. Earlier this month, the Department of Justice sued four states, claiming that state climate laws conflict with federal authority. If Maine passes the new law, we are likely to see similar pushback.

State climate superfund laws are a welcome paradigm shift and well worth the fight to put them in place, however. For too long our country has allowed companies to externalize the costs of pollution. As a result, you and me as taxpayers end up paying the bill, while oil companies harvest record profits.

Once again, Maine is taking the lead. If we don’t call upon fossil fuel companies to clean up their act, our coastline, forests and farms will suffer catastrophic damage.

Damage to public and private infrastructure from last year’s winter storms cost over $100 million. Repair to our state electric grid from storm damage cost an additional $228 million. Maine communities and taxpayers should not be stuck with these bills. Please contact your legislators and urge them to support LD 1808 and LD 1870, the climate superfund bills.