The Exxon corporate logo is pictured at a gas station in Arlington, Virginia January 31, 2012.
Credit: Reuters/Jason ReedBy Jason McLureLITTLETON, New Hampshire | Tue Apr 9, 2013 5:32pm EDT
LITTLETON, New Hampshire (Reuters) - A New Hampshire jury on Tuesday found Exxon Mobil Corp liable for $236.4 million in a civil lawsuit that charged the oil company had polluted groundwater in the state with a gasoline additive used to reduce smog in the 1970s and 1980s.
Following a three-month trial, jurors deliberated less than two hours before finding that the world's largest publicly traded oil company acted negligently in contaminating the groundwater with the additive MTBE, said Jessica Grant, a lawyer who represented the state.
"We're very pleased that the jury held Exxon accountable for the harm its defective product caused to the state's groundwater resources and that they also held Exxon responsible for its negligence," she said.
Originally filed in New Hampshire court in 2003, the state charged that Exxon and other major oil companies knew that MTBE was likely to contaminate groundwater and was more difficult to clean up than other pollutants. Some damages from the suit will help pay for the costs of testing and cleaning affected water supplies.
Exxon vowed to appeal.
"MTBE worked as intended to improve our air quality and the benefits of its use substantially outweighed the known risks," said spokeswoman Rachael Moore. "MTBE contamination in New Hampshire is rapidly decreasing and the state's current system for cleaning up gasoline spills ensures safe drinking water."
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today considers MTBE a potential human carcinogen, though much of the research on the chemical has focused on the health effects of inhaling it rather than drinking it. New Hampshire banned MTBE in the state in 2007.
Exxon was the only one of the 22 original defendants in the original suit to go to trial. Other defendants either had the suits against them dismissed or agreed to settlements.
Those included Canada-based Irving Oil Co, which agreed to pay $57 million last year, and Venezuela's state-owned Citgo Petroleum Corp, which struck a $16 million agreement as the trial began.
The three-month trial on the suit, filed in state court, was moved to the state's federal courthouse in Concord to accommodate the large number of witnesses, lawyers and exhibits. The jury found that MTBE contamination had caused $816 million in damages in the state. Exxon's market share of 29 percent was used to compute damages, Grant said.
(Reporting by Jason McLure; Editing by Scott Malone and Tim Dobbyn)
Tough guy. Invasive green crabs will freak out herbivorous marsh crabs, allowing cordgrass to regrow. Credit: Catherine Matassa/Northeastern University
CREDITS: (LEFT) BRYCE RICHTER/UNIVERSITY COMMUNICATIONS, UW-MADISON; (RIGHT) SEAN PARSONS/AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY The thousands of presentations at next week's meeting of The American Chemical Society (ACS) in New Orleans exemplify one of the many ways scientists converse among themselves about the most recent advances in science. Science and technology continue to reshape the world we live in, and appreciating how these changes, both intended and unintended, come about is a necessity for all citizens in a democratic society. Scientists have a responsibility to help their fellow citizens understand what science and technology can and cannot do for them. Communicating the science of climate change provides one example where the scientific community must do more. Climate change affects everyone, so everyone should understand why the climate is changing and what it means for them, their children, and generations to follow. Scientists are already members of groups that can facilitate this communication: neighborhoods, school boards, religious groups, service clubs, political organizations, and so on. These groups present opportunities to engage in respectful conversations on climate change and on the policies and actions that individuals, communities, and nations might take to mitigate and adapt to what is happening to our planet. 
CREDIT: DAVID JONES/ISTOCKPHOTO We know that the concentrations of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere are higher and increasing faster than at any time in the past 1 million years.* The average temperature of Earth is increasing, ice is melting, oceans are acidifying, and extreme weather events are more frequent. Human activities, principally the combustion of fossil fuels, are a major source of greenhouse gases and a major driver of climate change. To share this knowledge with the public and be credible as a “scientist-citizen,” a scientist must acquire a good grasp of the science of climate change. In recent years, U.S. scientific institutions and societies, including the National Academies, Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and American Institute of Physics have prepared Web-based materials on the science of climate change suitable for communicating with the public.† Last year, the ACS released a Climate Science Toolkit on greenhouse gases, atmospheric and planetary warming, and Earth's energy balance, among other topics.‡ The Toolkit provides a succinct intellectual foundation at an introductory level that can be a guide to more extensive resources. Some of the materials are in forms (such as slide shows) that scientists may use to present this subject to the public, and there is a series of brief narratives designed to help scientists initiate informal conversations with others. Implicit in this resource is the message that the world must make adaptations to changes that have already occurred and that reducing emissions is required to avoid a warmer planet. Scientist-citizens can stress how lifestyle decisions that reduce energy consumption are actually meaningful steps. Supporting elected officials who promote policies and practices aimed to decrease the effects of global warming is another step that individuals and citizens' groups should take. F. Sherwood Rowland was a central figure in the late–20th-century controversy about the effect of chlorofluorocarbons on stratospheric ozone. For years, he engaged audiences ranging from students to members of the U.S. Congress. As an exemplary scientist-citizen, his focus eventually led to the worldwide ban on these compounds. Rowland spoke to all scientist-citizens when he asked: “Isn't it the responsibility of scientists, if you believe that you have found something that can affect the environment, isn't it your responsibility to do something about it, enough so that action actually takes place?…If not us, who? If not now, when?”§We pose these same questions and ask you to join the conversations now.