Oregon Senator Revives Climate Superfund Bill Targeting Big Oil

Feb 7, 2026, 2:50 AM

Hover over text to view sources

Oregon State Senator Jeff Golden has brought back the Climate Superfund Bill, a proposal that could hold some of the largest oil and gas companies accountable for climate change-related disasters. This initiative comes less than a year after a previous version of the bill failed to pass in the Oregon Legislature.

Senate Bill 1541 is modeled after similar legislation in New York and Vermont and aims to establish a disaster fund within the Oregon Treasury. This fund would be financed by damages paid by companies responsible for significant greenhouse gas emissions, including major players like Exxon Mobil and Chevron. These companies account for approximately 80% of global emissions over the past decade.

Golden reintroduced the bill during a public hearing in the Senate Natural Resources and Wildfire Committee. During the previous legislative session, the bill did not advance due to time constraints, according to committee chair Senator Janeen Sollman.

The recent hearing saw a turnout of around 60 attendees, with over 70 individuals signing up to provide testimony, reflecting strong community interest and support for the bill. Advocates included local government officials, religious leaders, and first responders, all of whom shared personal accounts of how extreme weather events have impacted their communities. Talent Mayor Darby Ayers-Flood recounted the devastation her town faced during the Almeda Fire in 2020, which destroyed a third of Talent and left lasting trauma in the community.

The bill's supporters emphasize the need for accountability. Pastor Brennan Guillory highlighted the disparity between those profiting from climate change and the communities suffering its effects, stating, "It is time for those who have benefitted the most to start paying to fix this disaster.".

However, the proposal has faced opposition from representatives of the natural resource and business industries. Sharla Moffett, a lobbyist for Oregon Business and Industry, expressed concern that the bill could harm Oregon's economic competitiveness, potentially leading to increased fuel prices.

The Climate Superfund Bill would operate similarly to the 1980 federal law that established "superfund sites," which are designated for cleanup due to hazardous contamination. Under this legislation, Oregon's Department of Land Conservation and Development would evaluate state expenditures on climate-related disasters from 1995 to 2024. The Department of Environmental Quality would identify the companies responsible for emissions and issue recovery notices for damages.

The proposed fund would allocate 30% of its resources to the Oregon State Fire Marshal's Office for wildfire prevention and response, while 40% would go towards resilience projects for disadvantaged communities disproportionately affected by climate change.

If the bill passes, it is anticipated that it will face legal challenges similar to those encountered in New York and Vermont, where similar laws have been contested. Critics, including the Trump administration and the American Petroleum Institute, argue that such laws infringe on due process rights by imposing retroactive penalties.

Despite potential legal hurdles, experts like Vermont attorney Geoff Hand assert the legality of the superfund approach, noting that states possess the authority to safeguard public health and welfare.

As Oregon navigates the complexities of climate change and its impacts, the revival of the Climate Superfund Bill represents a significant effort to hold major corporations accountable and to invest in community resilience and recovery initiatives.

Vermont Defends Fossil Fuel Accountability Law Amid Trump Administration Challenge

Vermont is standing firm against the Trump administration's legal challenge to its Climate Superfund Act, which mandates fossil fuel companies to contribute to climate adaptation costs. The state's attorneys argue that the law is constitutional and within their rights to protect citizens from climate impacts.

Vermont Stands Firm Against Trump Administration's Climate Law Challenge

Vermont is defending its Climate Superfund Act against legal challenges from the Trump administration, which claims the law is unconstitutional. The state argues that it is exercising its rights to regulate fossil fuel companies for their climate impacts.

Maryland Supreme Court Rules Against Local Governments in Climate Lawsuits

The Maryland Supreme Court has ruled that local governments cannot sue major oil companies for damages related to climate change. The decision is a significant setback for Baltimore, Annapolis, and Anne Arundel County, which sought to hold these corporations accountable for their role in global warming.

Maryland Supreme Court Dismisses Baltimore's Climate Lawsuit

The Maryland Supreme Court has ruled against Baltimore's climate lawsuit, stating that the city could not hold fossil fuel companies liable for climate-related damages. This decision reflects ongoing debates over the accountability of corporations in environmental degradation and the legal frameworks surrounding climate change litigation.

Maryland Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Oil Companies Over Climate Lawsuits

The Maryland Supreme Court upheld lower court rulings dismissing climate change lawsuits against major oil companies by Baltimore and other local governments. The decisions prevent communities from holding these companies accountable for climate-related damages, emphasizing a contentious battle over liability and fraud in the context of global warming.