FOR DECADES after Americans discovered that cigarettes were killing them, tobacco companies won nearly every lawsuit that smokers brought. No one forced them to light up(点烟；开始吸烟), the manufacturers said. Only after states uncovered evidence that firms knew of the risks posed by cigarettes—and hid them—did Big Tobacco capitulate, agreeing in 1998 to pay states more than $200bn over 25 years for the costs of treating smoking-related illness.(直到各州发现证据，证明烟草公司早已知晓香烟的风险却加以隐瞒，大烟草才终于屈服，于1998年同意在25年内向各州支付超过2000亿美元，用于治疗吸烟相关疾病的费用。)
在美国人发现香烟正在夺走他们的生命之后，烟草公司在此后数十年间几乎赢下了烟民提起的每一桩诉讼。制造商的理由是：没有人强迫他们点烟。直到各州掌握了证据，证明烟草公司早已知晓香烟带来的风险却刻意隐瞒，大烟草才终于低头，于1998年同意在25年内向各州支付超过2000亿美元，用于补偿治疗吸烟相关疾病的费用。
A generation on, the Supreme Court is poised to(准备就绪；即将) decide if a similar reckoning(清算；算总账) is coming for oil companies. Like tobacco firms, oil companies sell products with dangerous consequences—and they too understood the risks before the general public did. But unlike tobacco, oil is broadly useful, and legal obstacles stand in the way of winning damages from oil firms, as arguments before the Supreme Court on October 5th demonstrated.(但与烟草不同，石油用途广泛，而且正如10月5日最高法院的辩论所表明的，要从石油公司赢得损害赔偿还面临法律障碍。)
一代人之后，美国最高法院即将裁定，石油公司是否会面临类似的清算。与烟草公司一样，石油公司销售的产品会带来危险后果，而且它们同样比公众更早认识到这些风险。但与烟草不同的是，石油用途广泛，而且正如10月5日最高法院的辩论所展示的那样，要从石油公司手中赢得损害赔偿，还面临重重法律障碍。
In 2018 Boulder, Colorado, sue(起诉；控告)d Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy on the basis that(基于……的理由) emissions from their products contributed to floods, extreme heat and wildfires. A report commission(委托；委托撰写)ed by the city put the cost of coping with just some of the impacts of climate change at up to $157m by 2050.
2018年，科罗拉多州博尔德市起诉埃克森美孚和森科能源，理由是这两家公司产品的排放加剧了洪水、极端高温和野火。该市委托撰写的一份报告估计，仅应对气候变化的部分影响，到2050年成本就高达1.57亿美元。