An influential group of distinguished academics has said that universities should stop accepting funding from fossil fuel companies if the research is focused on developing green and low-carbon technology.
More than 500 academics from the US and the UK have written an open letter to all university leaders in the two countries, calling on them to reject all funding.
Accepting money from fossil fuel companies was an inherent conflict of interest and could compromise academic freedom. It was a chance for the companies to get away with skewing the findings of research in a way that would benefit them.
The letter states that many public health and research institutions reject tobacco funding because of its harmful effects on the environment, and that fossil fuel cash should be treated the same.
Universities and the research they produce are vital to delivering a rapid, just transition away from fossil fuels. Fossil fuel industry funding undermines such efforts. Academics shouldn't have to choose between researching climate solutions and aiding corporate greenwashing.
Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, told the Guardian that funding has been used to compromise leading academic institutions. It's a two-for-one situation for pollution: they purchase the authority and objectivity of these institutions, while funding research that often leads to advocacy for false solutions and prescriptions like massive. That is not the right path.
Funding research allows oil and gas companies to ground their promotional statements in enough truth to give substance to the green shadows. Fossil-energy interests must be removed from our institutions so that our children can have a chance at a liveable future.
Universities have been under pressure from their students and some academics for several years to remove their investments from fossil fuels, and many have done so. This is the first time that senior academics have called for them to cut their research ties with fossil fuel companies.
Most universities don't publish their sources for money they accept from fossil fuel companies. An investigation for the Observer last year found UK universities had taken at least 89 million dollars from oil companies in the previous four years.
Some scientists don't agree with the letter. The wrong focus is causing young people to waste their energy on unproductive activities, while they actually have, according to James Hansen, one of the first scientists to warn governments of the impending climate crisis.
Bob Ward, policy director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, said it was reasonable for universities to accept funding from fossil fuel companies if they showed genuine commitment to transforming themselves. Universities should be careful about accepting funding from oil, gas and coal companies that are not committed to the clean energy transition and are trying to greenwash their reputations.
Imperial College London accepted 54 million dollars from oil companies since the beginning of the year. The energy sector needs a radical shift in industrial systems, technologies and business models. We are using our influence and expertise to push energy companies to meet the targets of the Paris Agreement. We will only work with companies who are committed to achieving these targets.
If western universities reject fossil fuel funding, it will be accepted in other countries around the world, as argued by some academics.
It is a myth that fossil-energy companies are spending large sums to aid the green transition. According to the IEA, only 1% of fossil-energy companies spend their capital on research, development or deployment of technologies that do not produce greenhouse gas emissions.
The third part of the comprehensive review of climate science will be published at the end of the month. Novel ideas such as sucking carbon dioxide out of the air will be included.
The report will shine a light on the technological solutions to the climate crisis, which will require tens or hundreds of billions of dollars in funding to be brought to market and deployed around the world.
The US and the UK are among the richest countries on Earth, and their governments enjoy total monetary sovereignty. At the touch of a button, they can finance the necessary research many times over. Most of the major innovations and public projects that have changed history over the past century have relied on public funding for research.
The letter didn't say if companies with interests in fossil fuels should be included in the ban. The letter was directed at the top 200 fossil fuel companies, according to Ilana Cohen, a Harvard student.
Cohen said that the call was limited to US and UK universities because many fossil fuel companies are concentrating their funding there.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
