The Japan Times - Peruvian farmer struggles in climate clash with German energy giant

Saul Luciano Lliuya, 44, argues that electricity producer RWE -- one of the world's top emitters of carbon dioxide -- must pay towards the cost of protecting his hometown, Huaraz, from a swollen glacier lake that is at risk of overflowing from melting snow and ice.

According to German civil law, he first has to persuade the court that his property is at substantial risk of damage before the court could turn to the question of RWE's responsibility.

But on Wednesday, court-appointed expert Rolf Katzenbach put the probability of the lake flooding at some time in the next 30 years at about one percent, having earlier put it at three percent.

That prompted the presiding judge in the case, Rolf Meyer, to say that any danger to the plaintiff's property would need to be "tangible" and "comprehensible" for the case to succeed, adding that he saw "no present danger" for the moment.

Lukas Arenson, an expert called for Lliuya, said Katzenbach's estimates relied too much on historical trends and did not adequately factor in the effects of future climate change.

Speaking to reporters outside court on Wednesday morning, Roda Verheyen, Lliuya's lawyer, said that the flood risk was very real.

"The methods of the court-appointed expert make him practically blind in one eye," she said. "I'm sure that the court wants to pass a ruling with both eyes open and so I am still optimistic."

- Glacier flood risk -

Germanwatch, an environmental group supporting Lliuya in the case, argues the flood risk is closer to 30 percent and that even three percent should be enough for the court to rule there is real danger.

RWE, founded in 1898, today makes electricity using coal and gas as well as wind and solar.

Lliuya bases his claim on a 2014 study which found RWE to be responsible for almost 0.5 percent of all carbon emissions since the start of the industrial era.

RWE said it could not comment on an ongoing dispute.

Last week, before proceedings began, it said that holding companies responsible under German law for environmental consequences far outside the country was "legally inadmissible and the wrong way to address this issue socially and politically".

The court's ruling on whether the flood risk is concrete is expected on April 14.

Y.Hara--JT