8 government oversight, and broadly lobby to eliminate potential barriers to a durable and profitable carbon economy. More pervasive and effective, however, is the gradual build-up of global acceptance of carbon products as the fuels of choice, that elimination of noncarbon alternatives is fair game, and manipulation of the market and of public opinion in defense of profits is no vice. As a result, the global infrastructure of rules, regulations, and incentives (or outright subsidies) have been deeply imbedded to perpetuate the dominance and profitability of the carbon economy from extraction to end use. Had the fossil fuel companies acted forcefully on their own scientific knowledge gained in the 1970s and 1980s, the world would have avoided the worst of the climate havoc we now face. And, I might add, the companies before this national inquiry (as well as the state-owned companies that are not) would have been on the right side of history, helped usher in decarbonization years if not decades earlier, and not be facing the citizens of the Philippines and their grievous loss of life and livelihood. This is a marker, of course, for the deprivation of human rights that climate change and related extreme events that will follow in the footsteps of corporate, national, and international inaction, for centuries. It is my opinion that carbon producers (both investor-owned and stateowned) have a moral (and perhaps legal) obligation to act to reduce the threat of climate change and climate damages. These corporations have the technical skills, resources, financial wherewithal to assure that their investment and production strategies align with science-based targets for reducing global emissions as well as to compensate communities for the costs of adapting to the expected climate changes that will afflict humanity for decades to come. The costs of climate change should not be borne by taxpayers alone. Companies held accountable should pay their fair share. I do not mean to lay the full force of accountability on the oil, gas, and coal companies, or on trade associations, or on the nations whose dysfunctional policies have helped perpetuate carbon dominance. Individuals, consumers, non-energy corporations, cities, and states are also partially responsible for historical emissions, and also bear a share of the burden of addressing the climate problem. By and large, individuals, municipalities, companies, and many progressive nations are taking the lead in reducing carbon fuel use and emissions. Fossil fuel companies are not solely responsible for the climate problem, or for the use of their products — fossil fuels have, after all, propelled economic growth, prosperity, health, comfort, and longevity for billions of us — but these companies do have, in my mind, substantial responsibility for climate change, and must now address the problem and help pay for adaptation and damages. Q17: Could you please describe how your research has been used by third parties, including plaintiffs in climate cases? A17: My original paper in Climatic Change (Heede 2014) has been cited and used by authors of 98 other peer-reviewed papers. Significantly, my published and posted research results has been cited and used in more than a dozen lawsuits filed by cities, counties, and states in the United States (such as City of New York vs BP et al. {Case 18 cv 182}, and County of Marin vs Chevron et al. {Case cv 1702586}) and Germany (Saúl Luciano Lliuya vs