re: Louisiana Coastal Erosion.

Someone can correctly if i'm wrong, but in a nutshell, the lawsuit against the oil companies is regarding, in large part, the canals they created that criss-cross the wetlands (can be seen clearly on a New Orleans to Houston flight) that have increased in size over several decades due to wake, resulting in salt water intrusion. Broadly, oil companies are mandated by law to environmentally fix what they destroy. I don't think anyone can argue that these wetlands canals have contributed to coastal erosion. The murky part is putting a price tag on what oil companies' environmental responsibility is, since there are a multitude of factors contributing. The lawsuit basically says, "You owe us SOMETHING. We're not sure what yet you owe. But we need to get to the table because as of now, you're getting off scott-free."

ETA: post above mine probably says what i'm trying to say a little bit better.