# How Fossil-Funded University Research Shapes Climate Policy

An episode of [Drilled](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1439735906), 20 Sep 2024, 1 h 04 min.

Audio: https://podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/tracking.swap.fm/track/SxlTEPDY7xDg35RXkASs/pdrl.fm/3e5572/traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/e73c998e-6e60-432f-8610-ae210140c5b1/9a7ab5ee-ce11-48ff-a544-b3ec00ea9b1e/9a8a5fa3-8a99-478c-bc02-b3ec00ee30d1/audio.mp3?utm_source=Podcast&in_playlist=7f82f371-6316-4ea6-a108-b3ec00ea9b2d

Universities can play a powerful role in shaping climate research and public policy. Drilled reporter Molly Taft joins us to talk about newly released information on fossil fuel funding of university research, and shares interviews with climate disinformation researcher Geoffrey Supran, who authored one of the recent studies, and with philosopher of science Craig Callender at the University of California San Diego, which just passed a precedent-setting policy to require disclosure of funding on research. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

## Transcript

[0:05] Speaker 1: Welcome, Mollitasted, our senior reporter editor, extraordinary. Thank you. You
[0:12] Speaker 1: have been looking into fossil fuel funding in universities in
[0:16] Speaker 1: lots of different ways. But there's some news recently on
[0:19] Speaker 1: this front. What's happening.
[0:21] Speaker 2: Yeah, so there's been a lot of movement on a
[0:24] Speaker 2: conversation that I feel like has been going on, both
[0:28] Speaker 2: officially and unofficially for several years.
[0:31] Speaker 3: You know.
[0:32] Speaker 2: One of the more interesting things that happened this month
[0:35] Speaker 2: is a team of researchers released a literature review, which
[0:39] Speaker 2: sounds kind of boring, but basically what they did is
[0:42] Speaker 2: they said to themselves, Okay, you know, in order to
[0:44] Speaker 2: move forward in researching fossil fuel funding in universities, we
[0:48] Speaker 2: need to figure out what we know first, right, So
[0:51] Speaker 2: they basically did what's called in academia literature review, which
[0:55] Speaker 2: is you look at all the literature on a topic
[0:58] Speaker 2: and you kind of come to some conclusions about it.
[1:00] Speaker 2: And what's interesting about this literature review is that, you know,
[1:04] Speaker 2: even though activists and folks in universities, folks concerned about
[1:10] Speaker 2: the climate, have been talking about fossil fuel funding in
[1:14] Speaker 2: academia for a really long time, the researchers found that
[1:17] Speaker 2: there's actually not that many peer reviewed articles about it.
[1:21] Speaker 2: There's not that much peer reviewed research about what all
[1:25] Speaker 2: of this oil money is doing to academic research. Yeah,
[1:28] Speaker 2: which is kind of crazy because like the parallels here
[1:32] Speaker 2: that they drew were conflict of interest studies on bias
[1:38] Speaker 2: in research are really prevalent. When it comes to other
[1:41] Speaker 2: industries like tobacco pharmaceuticals, you can find hundreds of peer
[1:47] Speaker 2: reviewed articles on this topic like what happens when an
[1:50] Speaker 2: industry funds research. Those discussions have been going on for decades,
[1:54] Speaker 2: but there's there's just not a lot with fossil fuel funding,
[1:58] Speaker 2: and a lot of it is really recent. They found
[2:00] Speaker 2: seven peer reviewed articles in their search, and only a
[2:03] Speaker 2: few of them were before twenty twelve, so you know,
[2:07] Speaker 2: there's a real dearth of peer reviewed research on this topic.
[2:12] Speaker 2: So to complete their literature review, what they did was
[2:15] Speaker 2: they use what they call gray literature, which is reports
[2:18] Speaker 2: from NGOs, reports from journalists, you know, articles about what
[2:25] Speaker 2: fossil fuel funding is doing and moving through universities, and
[2:28] Speaker 2: reports from students too, which are a really valuable part
[2:31] Speaker 2: of this conversation, and they use that to kind of
[2:34] Speaker 2: bulk out the literature review and found that there's a
[2:37] Speaker 2: lot of really valuable work going on to understand how
[2:41] Speaker 2: this industry is shaping policy at the top levels of university.
[2:45] Speaker 2: But there's also like still a lot more that especially
[2:48] Speaker 2: folks involved in academia can do. Academia needs to kind
[2:51] Speaker 2: of turn the mirror towards itself in a sense and
[2:55] Speaker 2: really take a much closer look at how this industry
[2:58] Speaker 2: is shaping what's going on inside of it.
[3:01] Speaker 1: Yes, exactly. I think it just sort of helps to
[3:04] Speaker 1: have this report as like a official accounting of where
[3:09] Speaker 1: this stuff is at now totally as we're looking towards
[3:13] Speaker 1: getting more information and figuring out more speaking of which
[3:16] Speaker 1: I know there are also student reports coming out. Yeah,
[3:20] Speaker 1: so yeah, there's a batch of new research that's coming
[3:23] Speaker 1: on this stuff.
[3:24] Speaker 2: Yeah so what actually and that sort of ties into
[3:27] Speaker 2: the literature review. So I was talking to one of
[3:29] Speaker 2: the researchers, Jeffrey Supran, and you know, he really emphasized
[3:32] Speaker 2: that again, a lot of their literature review came from
[3:35] Speaker 2: students on campus noticing stuff about how their university takes
[3:39] Speaker 2: fossil fuel money, and you know, there's no replaceable way
[3:44] Speaker 2: of doing research on a campus that's quite like being
[3:47] Speaker 2: on the campus and being in the campus culture and
[3:49] Speaker 2: understanding the way a school works, whether you work there
[3:53] Speaker 2: or you're a student there, or you're an a lum
[3:56] Speaker 2: Those are really the front lines of understanding this kind
[3:59] Speaker 2: of stuff. And so there's been a push from a
[4:03] Speaker 2: group called the Campus Climate Network. They have gathered students
[4:07] Speaker 2: on a couple of different universities across the US and
[4:11] Speaker 2: some international groups as well, and the first batch of
[4:14] Speaker 2: their reports on how fossil fuel money is working throughout
[4:19] Speaker 2: their specific universities were also released in September, and these
[4:23] Speaker 2: students put a lot of really interesting numbers on a
[4:27] Speaker 2: problem that doesn't have a lot of numbers right now.
[4:30] Speaker 2: I think the last real accounting was Data for Progress
[4:34] Speaker 2: estimated back in twenty twenty three that five fossil fuel
[4:37] Speaker 2: companies had donated I think seven hundred million to a
[4:41] Speaker 2: group of US universities over the past decade, and they
[4:45] Speaker 2: said that was almost certainly an undercount, and really turns
[4:48] Speaker 2: out it was. So One number that really shocked me
[4:52] Speaker 2: was students at Columbia really buckled down and combed their
[4:55] Speaker 2: universities public facing documents like stuff they could obtain publicly.
[4:58] Speaker 2: This isn't any sort of pea into the inner workings
[5:01] Speaker 2: of Columbia. They just sat down and they did the work.
[5:03] Speaker 2: They expanded the reach a little bit to not just
[5:06] Speaker 2: five major fossil fuel companies, but a variety of different
[5:09] Speaker 2: fossil fuel influences, and by their calculations, Columbia has taken
[5:13] Speaker 2: I think more than thirty seven million since two thousand
[5:16] Speaker 2: and five in fossil fuel funding, which includes an environmental
[5:20] Speaker 2: health professorship endowed by a descendant of Hesse, the guy
[5:26] Speaker 2: who started HESS. So there is an environmental health field
[5:31] Speaker 2: of study that is being funded by like the Hess Foundation,
[5:34] Speaker 2: which I found particularly ironic, but yeah, it really goes
[5:39] Speaker 2: to show. And I think in the Data for Progress
[5:41] Speaker 2: report the number they put on Columbia was five million,
[5:44] Speaker 2: and you know, it really goes to show like when
[5:46] Speaker 2: you are familiar with how your school works and where
[5:50] Speaker 2: to look for these things, it can be insanely beneficial
[5:54] Speaker 2: in figuring out where the money is coming from and
[5:57] Speaker 2: what it's going.
[5:57] Speaker 1: Towards totally, which is a perfect segway into the other
[6:01] Speaker 1: thing that we're going to talk about in this episode,
[6:04] Speaker 1: which is like, I know, beautiful smooth transition, but like
[6:08] Speaker 1: the students are amazing because they know where to look
[6:11] Speaker 1: for things, and they also like catch with some things
[6:13] Speaker 1: on campus that they're kind of like, wait a minute,
[6:15] Speaker 1: that seems weird. And the other great place to look
[6:19] Speaker 1: for information on this stuff because again, a lot of
[6:22] Speaker 1: these schools do not disclose all of their funding, and
[6:27] Speaker 1: with the private schools in particular, you can't get at
[6:31] Speaker 1: it through public records requests. You have to talk to
[6:33] Speaker 1: people and figure it out. And one of the best
[6:36] Speaker 1: sources on that stuff is actually other professors at those
[6:40] Speaker 1: schools too, because in a lot of cases, people who
[6:44] Speaker 1: are working at these campuses and are working on climate stuff,
[6:48] Speaker 1: for example, are not super happy about the fact that
[6:52] Speaker 1: other people are taking fossil fuel money. Like actually, I
[6:55] Speaker 1: had an interesting conversation with Mark Jacobson at Stanford about
[7:00] Speaker 1: this and how much some of his colleagues there have
[7:03] Speaker 1: been ponying up to the fossil fuel money trough.
[7:10] Speaker 4: There's a lot of fossil fuel funding and institutes like
[7:12] Speaker 4: at our university we have these institutes that are funded
[7:15] Speaker 4: largely by fossil fuels. We have even in our new
[7:18] Speaker 4: school sustainability, what's the number one flagship research project? That
[7:23] Speaker 4: they're promoting. It's carbon capture besides Stanford Princeton and MIT
[7:27] Speaker 4: or culprits and pushing carbon capture, direct air capture, blue
[7:33] Speaker 4: hydrogen electro fuels. So these four technologies are really pushed
[7:36] Speaker 4: by the fossil fuel industry, and the fossil fuel industry
[7:39] Speaker 4: is funding universities.
[7:41] Speaker 1: And you had an interesting conversation with Craig Calendar, who's
[7:45] Speaker 1: a professor at UC San Diego, both about what he's
[7:49] Speaker 1: seen there but also they passed some interesting new policies recently.
[7:54] Speaker 2: Yeah, Craig's doing some really interesting work and under his
[7:57] Speaker 2: and other folks on his committee's leadership kind of pioneering
[8:02] Speaker 2: the next step forward in talking.
[8:04] Speaker 1: About this kind of stuff.
[8:06] Speaker 2: He teaches the philosophy of science, so this is like
[8:08] Speaker 2: kind of right up his alley, and you know, he
[8:10] Speaker 2: got on the Academic Senate Committee and they started wrestling
[8:12] Speaker 2: with this question of like, Okay, what do we do
[8:14] Speaker 2: about fossil fuel money in our university, in the UC
[8:18] Speaker 2: system in general, what are the best policies to kind
[8:20] Speaker 2: of start tackling this. And so back in the early
[8:24] Speaker 2: two thousands, lots of schools joined on this bandwagon to
[8:28] Speaker 2: ban tobacco money for specifically medical or health research, and
[8:32] Speaker 2: a lot of these schools still have those policies in place. Surprisingly,
[8:35] Speaker 2: that policy actually failed, that you see, but they did
[8:38] Speaker 2: put on this other policy where you would need a
[8:42] Speaker 2: special review of tobacco money by the chancellor, and so
[8:46] Speaker 2: they said, okay, what if we do that for fossil
[8:49] Speaker 2: fuel money? And that was basically he said. They told
[8:52] Speaker 2: me that was kind of dead on arrival. There's all
[8:54] Speaker 2: sorts of concerns about academic freedom. I think late in
[8:58] Speaker 2: this conversation some times is when you bring this up,
[9:01] Speaker 2: it's you know, I think people who are working at
[9:05] Speaker 2: research centers and at universities think that you're accusing them
[9:09] Speaker 2: of like knowingly conspiring with oil and gas companies, which
[9:13] Speaker 2: is absolutely like, that's far and away not the case.
[9:17] Speaker 2: But there is research showing that when you take money
[9:20] Speaker 2: from an industrial funder or corporate funder, that does like
[9:24] Speaker 2: set the tone of your research, whether you sort of
[9:26] Speaker 2: realize it or not. You know, it doesn't mean that
[9:28] Speaker 2: you're emailing BP every day to update them on your
[9:30] Speaker 2: progress and destroying the climate, but it does mean that
[9:34] Speaker 2: if he is paying for something, then they want that
[9:37] Speaker 2: research done for a specific reason.
[9:40] Speaker 1: Right, shout out to Doug Allmond and his team at
[9:43] Speaker 1: YES and their nature piece.
[9:45] Speaker 2: Yes, that piece is so good and really highlights you know,
[9:49] Speaker 2: and he being at Colombia is also really interesting, especially
[9:52] Speaker 2: given this new student report telling some of the money involved.
[9:55] Speaker 2: But anyway, so Craig and the committee sort of regrouped
[9:58] Speaker 2: and they were like, all right, so going to get
[10:00] Speaker 2: a special review from the chancellor. Why don't we just
[10:04] Speaker 2: like beef up transparency disclosures around this. And I think
[10:09] Speaker 2: a lot of people I've talked to, and Amy, I'm
[10:11] Speaker 2: sure you had this experience too, Like people you talk
[10:13] Speaker 2: to about this are like shocked that that's not required,
[10:17] Speaker 2: but like they're really there's so few.
[10:19] Speaker 1: Disclosure requirements for this stuff.
[10:21] Speaker 2: It is mind blowing. There's no federal policy, state policies,
[10:26] Speaker 2: nothing in the state. You know, most universities have some
[10:30] Speaker 2: sorts of ethics stuff, but like a lot of them
[10:33] Speaker 2: don't require you to talk about where you take money from.
[10:37] Speaker 1: And there's this really interesting thing. So like the last
[10:40] Speaker 1: time I wrote about this stuff was around the Data
[10:43] Speaker 1: for Progress report and the Holy School that gave me
[10:46] Speaker 1: like a full accounting of their funding from fossil fuel
[10:50] Speaker 1: companies was Berkeley, and when I asked them about what
[10:54] Speaker 1: they thought of this push to try to ban fossil
[10:56] Speaker 1: fuel funding of research, they were like, well, I don't
[10:59] Speaker 1: think we could do that without getting sued. And I said,
[11:02] Speaker 1: but what about you know, which is the thing people
[11:06] Speaker 1: always say is like, well we did it with the
[11:08] Speaker 1: tobacco industry and they were like yeah, but that was
[11:10] Speaker 1: pre Citizens United. So that's super interesting how that stuff
[11:14] Speaker 1: details with this idea that like it's part of academic
[11:18] Speaker 1: freedom to allow people to take money from wherever. And
[11:21] Speaker 1: something Craig said to me and I'm sure repeated to
[11:24] Speaker 1: you as well, is that like even when they talk
[11:27] Speaker 1: about transparency and disclosure, people will argue that it could
[11:33] Speaker 1: impact or have like a chilling effect on academic freedom. Yes,
[11:37] Speaker 1: people have to disclose where their funding is coming from.
[11:40] Speaker 1: And I'm kind of like I kind of feel okay
[11:43] Speaker 1: with that show, Like if you know what I mean,
[11:45] Speaker 1: it's like if somebody ooh, like this money is going
[11:50] Speaker 1: to make me look bad, or it's like, you know,
[11:52] Speaker 1: they're worried that they will be criticized for taking money
[11:55] Speaker 1: from somewhere I don't know. To me, I'm kind of
[11:58] Speaker 1: like I don't know, it just seems like where there's smoke,
[12:01] Speaker 1: there's fire on that one.
[12:03] Speaker 2: But totally. But it's also you know, and and yeah,
[12:07] Speaker 2: we talked about you know, he was like a lot
[12:11] Speaker 2: of the standards you think of this stuff come from
[12:13] Speaker 2: conversations around pharmaceutical products and like ethics around disclosure in
[12:18] Speaker 2: the pharmaceutical industry, and those conversations were like really heated
[12:22] Speaker 2: a couple of decades ago, and people were defending writing
[12:26] Speaker 2: an op ed in favor of a drug while being
[12:29] Speaker 2: paid for the company that manufactures that drug and saying
[12:32] Speaker 2: that's academic freedom.
[12:33] Speaker 1: So our conversations.
[12:34] Speaker 2: Around yeah, yeah, yeah, Like so that was a hot
[12:38] Speaker 2: button issue back in I think he said the eighties.
[12:41] Speaker 2: So I think that one thing I took away from
[12:44] Speaker 2: him is that our definition of academic freedom, both culturally
[12:46] Speaker 2: and in universities is subject to debate. I think most
[12:50] Speaker 2: people now would say that it's it's important to disclose
[12:54] Speaker 2: if you're getting paid by a drug company to promote
[12:57] Speaker 2: a drug. But there's also this issue it's not just
[13:00] Speaker 2: citizens united, but like increasingly universities and research have been
[13:06] Speaker 2: just so privatized over the past couple of decades.
[13:09] Speaker 1: That's a really important point. Like I know, I looked
[13:11] Speaker 1: at this a while ago, and I think it's probably
[13:14] Speaker 1: only gotten worse. But the proportion of research funding that
[13:19] Speaker 1: comes from the private sector has just been growing exponentially
[13:23] Speaker 1: over the past couple decades. So you have corporate donors,
[13:28] Speaker 1: then you have high net worth individuals donating and they
[13:31] Speaker 1: have specific agendas oftentimes too, and then you know, donor
[13:36] Speaker 1: advised funds have become a major donor to universities as well,
[13:41] Speaker 1: which is where you get a lot of like the
[13:43] Speaker 1: coke money, but also lots of other hidden industry interests
[13:47] Speaker 1: as well. So definitely, Yeahkes, there's a lot going on.
[13:53] Speaker 2: So Craig and his fellow faculty members on the Sundate
[13:55] Speaker 2: Committee formed is this policy that says, look, you can
[13:59] Speaker 2: take money from fossip, fel industries. That's fine, you just
[14:02] Speaker 2: have to disclose it, like you have to be really
[14:03] Speaker 2: clear about where it's from and what it's going towards.
[14:06] Speaker 1: Which is so reasonable and a really high margin right.
[14:10] Speaker 2: Right nine percent in may percent of the vote, So clearly,
[14:14] Speaker 2: you know, I think these conversations are are, perhaps for
[14:19] Speaker 2: folks on campuses, difficult to have with your peers who
[14:22] Speaker 2: might be taking money from a corporation and doing what
[14:26] Speaker 2: probably is like valuable research, but you know, having the
[14:30] Speaker 2: conversations around just how low of a barred disclosure is
[14:34] Speaker 2: and how much good actually just being forthcoming about where
[14:37] Speaker 2: the money is coming from can help address some of
[14:41] Speaker 2: the issues and honestly also just open up a dialogue
[14:44] Speaker 2: about like what's the purpose of taking this money? So
[14:48] Speaker 2: that measure is with the chancellor right now, so like
[14:50] Speaker 2: we still don't know if it's going to pass. In
[14:52] Speaker 2: the meantime, UCSD is actually all of their students are
[14:55] Speaker 2: being required to take climate change courses. It's a new
[14:58] Speaker 2: as of the semester and new curriculum requirement for everyone there,
[15:02] Speaker 2: which is like really cool. But like I think just
[15:05] Speaker 2: having people on campuses who are starting these conversations is
[15:09] Speaker 2: going to be some of the most important steps forward
[15:11] Speaker 2: in even just like learning more about this stuff and
[15:15] Speaker 2: figuring out where we're at with regards to to trust
[15:18] Speaker 2: feel money in universities.
[15:20] Speaker 1: Yeah, and like where feels comfortable to draw the lines
[15:24] Speaker 1: because I feel like you and I were talking about
[15:26] Speaker 1: this before that like there's a certain amount of this
[15:28] Speaker 1: stuff that does seem kind of innocuous, you know, it's
[15:30] Speaker 1: sort of like, oh, they like funded a scholarship here,
[15:33] Speaker 1: or they funded uh, you know whatever. But then I
[15:37] Speaker 1: also am like, well, maybe I've just had that stuff
[15:41] Speaker 1: normalized so much that it seems fine. But there's influence
[15:45] Speaker 1: there too, And I agree like just really like talking
[15:47] Speaker 1: like just figuring out as a society, okay, how because honestly,
[15:51] Speaker 1: I mean, oil companies were like amongst the first to
[15:54] Speaker 1: actually be major private donors to universities, and they did
[15:57] Speaker 1: cotton on really quickly. Like there was I found and
[16:00] Speaker 1: a speech that a Standard Oil New Jersey guy gave
[16:03] Speaker 1: in the fifties, which is like there was this huge
[16:06] Speaker 1: influx of private money into universities because they changed the
[16:09] Speaker 1: tax code in the US, right and they made it
[16:11] Speaker 1: a write off, right, which it wasn't before. So like
[16:15] Speaker 1: the companies were starting to do more donations because it
[16:18] Speaker 1: was like, oh great, it's a tax write off. But
[16:21] Speaker 1: this guy who was at Standard Oil was like, no,
[16:25] Speaker 1: you guys are missing the much bigger value, which is
[16:28] Speaker 1: that like this is going to help us shape how
[16:31] Speaker 1: people view the economy and public policy, and it's going
[16:34] Speaker 1: to be the thing that's going to help us push
[16:36] Speaker 1: back against statism.
[16:38] Speaker 5: This is like, you know, so like they were really
[16:42] Speaker 5: really early, and I feel like I don't know that
[16:44] Speaker 5: there's been enough of a larger cultural conversation about how
[16:49] Speaker 5: much it's grown and how we feel about it.
[16:52] Speaker 1: I don't like when I was at school, I remember
[16:54] Speaker 1: there was a huge push around public private partnerships and
[16:57] Speaker 1: like commercializing the research that was coming out of universities,
[17:01] Speaker 1: and like it was kind of all upside right. It's like, oh, well,
[17:04] Speaker 1: like researchers, you know, don't just want their stuff sitting
[17:08] Speaker 1: in a lab somewhere. Companies are looking for new ideas.
[17:11] Speaker 1: It's a win win, you know, and they're just hasn't
[17:15] Speaker 1: necessarily been enough about like okay, but what are the downsides?
[17:18] Speaker 2: You know?
[17:19] Speaker 5: Yeah?
[17:19] Speaker 2: Yeah, And I think it's going to get even murkier,
[17:21] Speaker 2: you know, as oil companies shift from like you know,
[17:24] Speaker 2: they're not doing explicit deny. No one's doing explicit denial anymore,
[17:28] Speaker 2: Like no one is denying that this problem is here,
[17:31] Speaker 2: but they are adopting different tactics to make sure that
[17:36] Speaker 2: they stay in business, which is a different conversation, right,
[17:39] Speaker 2: And so what where is the I find this topic
[17:43] Speaker 2: really endlessly fascinating because I think that a lot of uh,
[17:48] Speaker 2: disinformation reporting has a hard ethical line, right which it's
[17:51] Speaker 2: like this company is spreading disinformation, but like now it's like, okay,
[17:55] Speaker 2: so BP wants to stay in business and one of
[17:57] Speaker 2: the things they're doing is like funding research at universities
[18:02] Speaker 2: that will help them stay in business, and.
[18:04] Speaker 1: Like what do we do about that?
[18:05] Speaker 2: It's an interesting ethical question or you know, I think
[18:09] Speaker 2: Doug Almond in that paper, that twenty twenty two paper,
[18:11] Speaker 2: there's a bunch of recommendations that he has, which include like,
[18:15] Speaker 2: when someone from a research center that is funded by
[18:19] Speaker 2: oil and gas money testifies in front of lawmakers, they
[18:22] Speaker 2: should disclose the funding to their research center, which seems
[18:28] Speaker 2: really simple, but I can imagine a lot of people
[18:30] Speaker 2: would be extremely upset to have to do that. And
[18:33] Speaker 2: so you know, like where where are these ethical aligns?
[18:37] Speaker 2: Like what are we going to start accepting when it
[18:40] Speaker 2: comes to money in research and what is going to
[18:45] Speaker 2: be onerous to the total general Totally.
[18:47] Speaker 1: I've had so many conversations with people who either run
[18:50] Speaker 1: or work at centers that are heavily fossil fuel funded
[18:54] Speaker 1: or even exclusively fossil feel funded at universities, and they're
[19:00] Speaker 1: line of thinking, and I think this is pretty common
[19:02] Speaker 1: across a lot of these campuses. Is this idea that
[19:06] Speaker 1: but we're taking it to research solutions, So it's fine.
[19:10] Speaker 1: We're not taking it to fund a petroleum engineering department,
[19:15] Speaker 1: like that would be bad. But what we're doing is
[19:19] Speaker 1: actually taking their money to look into solutions. But you know,
[19:21] Speaker 1: I had a conversation with a guy at one place
[19:25] Speaker 1: who you know, was kind of like, what's like, what's
[19:26] Speaker 1: the problem with that if it's for not fossil fuel
[19:30] Speaker 1: development or whatever? And I was like, well, I mean,
[19:34] Speaker 1: what are you researching at your center? And he's like, oh,
[19:36] Speaker 1: like mostly mostly hydrogen, but like good hydrogen, green hydrogen,
[19:41] Speaker 1: and carbon capture. And I was like, okay, well, like
[19:44] Speaker 1: would would those be the research focuses of your center
[19:49] Speaker 1: absent the fossil fuel funding, right? And he was like
[19:53] Speaker 1: I don't know. And I'm like, that's that is where
[19:56] Speaker 1: the big question lies.
[19:58] Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think that's a great that's a
[20:02] Speaker 2: great question, and like, yeah, I think I think that's
[20:07] Speaker 2: something that you know, I'm glad that, like people on
[20:09] Speaker 2: campuses are starting to talk about this, And honestly, it's
[20:14] Speaker 2: funny because.
[20:15] Speaker 1: Talk about it, because yeah, I'm like, I don't know,
[20:17] Speaker 1: maybe they would be maybe we do need more money
[20:19] Speaker 1: in those things. And like, you know, the other thing
[20:22] Speaker 1: too is that like people will be like, well, where
[20:24] Speaker 1: else is the money gonna come from?
[20:25] Speaker 6: Right?
[20:25] Speaker 1: It's not like there's some big pot of you know,
[20:27] Speaker 1: no strings attached money just waiting to fund research. And
[20:33] Speaker 1: when I've asked students about that, they're kind of like, well, a,
[20:36] Speaker 1: I'm okay with less research if it means less bias
[20:39] Speaker 1: in the research. And I'm like, okay, good, you know,
[20:41] Speaker 1: interesting to think about, yes. But also, and I mean
[20:45] Speaker 1: I think about this with with respect to the fossil
[20:48] Speaker 1: fuel industry all the time in general, like why do
[20:52] Speaker 1: they have to be in charge of how that money
[20:54] Speaker 1: gets spent? That's the piece where I'm like, Okay, well
[20:57] Speaker 1: what if they can donate, but they can't have any
[21:01] Speaker 1: influence right for the most part, is not a thing
[21:04] Speaker 1: that they are interested in doing. No, almost every thing
[21:08] Speaker 1: I've ever seen or talk to someone about or whatever,
[21:11] Speaker 1: there are strings attached. It's like, well, we only want
[21:14] Speaker 1: to fund research on X, Y Z, or we want
[21:18] Speaker 1: to have a say in the research projects that are chosen,
[21:22] Speaker 1: or yeah, we want to have a person who works
[21:24] Speaker 1: at that center, or you know, it's like there's there
[21:27] Speaker 1: are a lot of ways that they end up having
[21:30] Speaker 1: influence if they spend the money, and like you know,
[21:34] Speaker 1: they don't really make big donations without that. Yeah about
[21:39] Speaker 1: the strings attached.
[21:40] Speaker 2: Yeah, Craig compared compared this to like, you know, everyone's
[21:45] Speaker 2: doing it, but no one wants to show their hand
[21:47] Speaker 2: in poker, Like no one wants to be the guy
[21:49] Speaker 2: who goes first. And right. I do think, like, you know,
[21:54] Speaker 2: if if that is a condition for accepting money, then
[21:57] Speaker 2: like defend it, you know, like make sure like make
[21:59] Speaker 2: sure or you have the guardrails in place so that
[22:02] Speaker 2: it's like we are taking money for this specific project
[22:05] Speaker 2: and we think this is actually a good thing and
[22:08] Speaker 2: we're gonna like put your say it with your whole chest.
[22:10] Speaker 2: Is kind of where I'm at with this, you know. Yeah,
[22:13] Speaker 2: Like if you think it's if you think having an
[22:16] Speaker 2: oil executive sit on the board of a center that
[22:19] Speaker 2: is doing this kind of research is a good thing,
[22:21] Speaker 2: then why don't you publicize the guardrails you're you're putting
[22:26] Speaker 2: in place to make sure that the research is you know,
[22:29] Speaker 2: not biased. Why don't you, like I hate to be
[22:33] Speaker 2: like a investigative reporter, a stereotype, but like sunlight is
[22:36] Speaker 2: the best disinfective, just put it out there, make sure
[22:39] Speaker 2: everything is really public, which is the opposite of what's
[22:42] Speaker 2: happening right now.
[22:43] Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, totally awesome. All right, coming up,
[22:47] Speaker 1: Molly talks to Jeffrey Suprin and Craig Calendar and we
[22:51] Speaker 1: get into a lot more details on this stuff that's
[22:54] Speaker 1: all coming up after this quick break. I'm Amy Westervelt,
[22:57] Speaker 1: and this is drilled. Let's start at the beginning.
[23:08] Speaker 2: So the first piece of research you guys have is
[23:13] Speaker 2: two thousand and three, right, It's the New Economics Foundation Report,
[23:17] Speaker 2: And like I got to tell you, like I looked
[23:18] Speaker 2: it up and I was pretty not surprised, but it
[23:24] Speaker 2: sounded like something that could have been written yesterday, right,
[23:27] Speaker 2: And like a lot of the tenets of what people
[23:31] Speaker 2: who study this stuff they were right there. And you
[23:34] Speaker 2: do the math, and there are like kids in college
[23:37] Speaker 2: now who were born after that report came out, Right,
[23:40] Speaker 2: So you know, this stuff has been out there for
[23:43] Speaker 2: a while. How has the research around it grown and changed?
[23:47] Speaker 2: And was it the nature of academia to sort of
[23:49] Speaker 2: sit on topics for a while? Until someone kind of
[23:53] Speaker 2: lights a fire under someone's ass or is it the
[23:56] Speaker 2: circular nature of this kind of discussion, or like, what
[23:59] Speaker 2: kind of prevented this from catching on quicker in the literature,
[24:02] Speaker 2: do you think?
[24:04] Speaker 7: I mean so, I think this our findings are a
[24:08] Speaker 7: bit of an interesting needle to thread in terms of
[24:10] Speaker 7: communicating them, because on the one hand, what we found
[24:13] Speaker 7: is that civil society, right like non academic researchers have
[24:20] Speaker 7: been warning about this for quite some time, right since,
[24:24] Speaker 7: as you said, the early two thousands. So part of
[24:26] Speaker 7: the story is that there has been quite a significant delay,
[24:29] Speaker 7: like on the order of a decade or more in
[24:32] Speaker 7: terms of an uptake on this topic by academics who
[24:35] Speaker 7: are doing more scholarly, peer reviewed research. So on the
[24:39] Speaker 7: one hand, this is a story about sort of an
[24:42] Speaker 7: intransigence and the delayed serious attention being paid on it.
[24:47] Speaker 7: But on the other hand, I think what we find
[24:49] Speaker 7: is that there has already been enough research, both the
[24:52] Speaker 7: gray literature and the peer of viewed literature to substantiate
[24:55] Speaker 7: that there already is an emerging consensus around the idea
[24:59] Speaker 7: that this is a big, threatening problem that should be
[25:04] Speaker 7: taken more seriously. But yeah, I guess, like specifically on
[25:08] Speaker 7: this question of how it's evolved and why it hasn't
[25:10] Speaker 7: evolved quicker academically, I think you could ask almost the
[25:14] Speaker 7: same question about why supply side climate research very broadly
[25:23] Speaker 7: has only taken off in the last few years, and
[25:26] Speaker 7: for anyone listening who isn't very familiar, supply side academic
[25:30] Speaker 7: literature basically refers to putting fossil fuel production and supply
[25:35] Speaker 7: front and center rather than just consumer demand and the
[25:39] Speaker 7: associated greenhouse gas mission. So it's about looking at the
[25:44] Speaker 7: top end of the pipeline rather than the bottom end,
[25:47] Speaker 7: to use like an oil industry.
[25:48] Speaker 2: Metaphorprint versus the people who are actually like selling the
[25:53] Speaker 2: shoes kind of yeah.
[25:54] Speaker 7: Yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, and and and and it's really
[25:58] Speaker 7: by some kind of fortune, I suppose, over almost exactly
[26:02] Speaker 7: the span of my academic career on this topic, that
[26:06] Speaker 7: that transition has happened. And I've actually, i think written
[26:10] Speaker 7: a few articles about and definitely some Twitter threads like
[26:14] Speaker 7: about why this has happened. And I think it's a
[26:17] Speaker 7: confluence of multiple factors, perhaps foremostly activism that has really
[26:23] Speaker 7: you know, especially I'm thinking of the fossil fuel divestment movement,
[26:28] Speaker 7: the Blockadia campaigns, things that really put front and center
[26:32] Speaker 7: fossil fuels and fossil fuel producers and their political complicity
[26:37] Speaker 7: as much as anything through lobbying and disinformation and so on.
[26:41] Speaker 7: And I think going along with that has been things
[26:43] Speaker 7: like the economics the warnings of carbon bubbles and stranded
[26:46] Speaker 7: fossil fuel assets, increasing public health research about the direct
[26:50] Speaker 7: public health harms and fossil fuels, and frankly the economics
[26:54] Speaker 7: of renewables that has increasingly made fossil fuels economically more expensive.
[27:00] Speaker 7: And so I think it's a number of those factors
[27:02] Speaker 7: that will come together. I would say also it's about courage.
[27:06] Speaker 7: Like I wrote a piece back in like I don't
[27:09] Speaker 7: know twenty sixteen, seventeen or so in Huffington Post saying
[27:14] Speaker 7: like higher education needs to be braver when it comes
[27:17] Speaker 7: to addressing the climate crisis. And part of that was
[27:20] Speaker 7: about a campaign we were running to try to get
[27:23] Speaker 7: the American Geophysical Union, which is the world's largest earth
[27:26] Speaker 7: science organization, to reject funding from Exomobile. And at the
[27:30] Speaker 7: same time we were campaign for fossil fuel Divestment MIT
[27:34] Speaker 7: and students were doing us around the world, and we
[27:36] Speaker 7: were very conscious that the very universities we were asking
[27:39] Speaker 7: to take climate action were also taking hundreds of millions
[27:42] Speaker 7: of dollars from David Cooch and other fossil fuel interests.
[27:46] Speaker 7: And so I think that there's just been this generational
[27:49] Speaker 7: shift too, in terms of like no longer feeling like
[27:52] Speaker 7: we have time to waste, in terms of, you know,
[27:55] Speaker 7: I'm going to get tenure and be really safe before
[27:57] Speaker 7: I start to address this topic. Although constentity, that is
[28:00] Speaker 7: what has happened to me. But that is purely kind
[28:05] Speaker 7: of coincidence, because you know, like I've been, I've been
[28:08] Speaker 7: writing publicly but in a non academic way about this
[28:11] Speaker 7: since like twenty sixteen, seventeen, but it's just taking a
[28:14] Speaker 7: long while to get our ducks in a row because
[28:16] Speaker 7: academics are like, you know, psychhiding cats. But yeah, I mean,
[28:21] Speaker 7: I think it's just taken a moment for the sort
[28:24] Speaker 7: of the realization that this is a big deal, like
[28:27] Speaker 7: when I testified in the Senate, like very recently, and
[28:32] Speaker 7: I think perhaps the most interesting documents that came out
[28:35] Speaker 7: of that joint how Senate investigation were the revelations these
[28:39] Speaker 7: internal oil industry memos showing how strategic and intentional. Their
[28:44] Speaker 7: infiltration of academia and their weaponization of those relationships has
[28:48] Speaker 7: been and a lot of people were coming up to
[28:50] Speaker 7: me afterwards and being like, Oh, this whole like academia
[28:53] Speaker 7: thing actually seems kind of important, And I was like, yeah,
[28:56] Speaker 7: like this is what we've been saying for a while.
[28:59] Speaker 7: So I don't know, it's just a I guess it's
[29:01] Speaker 7: just the way things happen that sometimes things take a
[29:03] Speaker 7: moment for people to cotton onto them.
[29:06] Speaker 5: Yeah.
[29:06] Speaker 2: I mean, actually, now that you're saying it, it's like
[29:08] Speaker 2: a lot of people I know who are doing activism
[29:10] Speaker 2: in two thousand and nine, twenty ten, like you know,
[29:12] Speaker 2: they grew up and like furthered in their careers, and
[29:15] Speaker 2: it does seem like academia is more rife with people
[29:18] Speaker 2: who came from a different perspective on this and who
[29:21] Speaker 2: might have actually had experience on the front lines of
[29:25] Speaker 2: activism versus just coming at this from like an academic perspective.
[29:28] Speaker 6: You know.
[29:30] Speaker 7: Yeah, exactly, I think. And that's kind of the general
[29:33] Speaker 7: trend that we observed that essentially activists and advocates and
[29:36] Speaker 7: civil society in general has been on the leading edge
[29:40] Speaker 7: of addressing this and recognizing this problem, and it still is. Frankly,
[29:45] Speaker 7: it's still frankly the student at activists at places like
[29:48] Speaker 7: Campus Climate Network leading the charge back in twenty twelve
[29:52] Speaker 7: twenty thirteen. Like when we were organizing around fossil fueled
[29:55] Speaker 7: divestment at MIT, we were explicitly conscious of the fact
[30:01] Speaker 7: that there was also this funding problem. But I guess
[30:04] Speaker 7: alan naive approach was, well, let's solve one problem at
[30:07] Speaker 7: a time, and we thought, you know, once a MITS divested,
[30:10] Speaker 7: then we'll get onto addressing the funding issue. Unfortunately they
[30:14] Speaker 7: never divested. But actually I just the students miit just
[30:18] Speaker 7: reached out to me the other day and in a
[30:20] Speaker 7: couple of weeks their graduate student union has a referendum
[30:23] Speaker 7: vote on whether the university should take fossil fuel funding.
[30:28] Speaker 7: So there is a new generation, you know, working on this.
[30:31] Speaker 2: That ties into my next question, which is folks in
[30:33] Speaker 2: the climate world love the tobacco industry.
[30:36] Speaker 1: Analogy with good reason.
[30:37] Speaker 2: Right, and now everyone I've interviewed on the university funding
[30:41] Speaker 2: aspect brings up the tobacco conversation. And in the early
[30:44] Speaker 2: two thousands, it seems like a lot of the conversation
[30:46] Speaker 2: around tobacco funding policies was coming from academics and public
[30:49] Speaker 2: health groups and not the kind of grassroots students and
[30:53] Speaker 2: frontline folks that we're talking about here. And it does
[30:56] Speaker 2: seem like as a result, a lot of you university
[31:00] Speaker 2: is very explicitly decided to stop taking tobacco funding or
[31:05] Speaker 2: really put guardrails on other types of funding. No one
[31:09] Speaker 2: has really been able to do that with fossil fuel
[31:11] Speaker 2: funding yet, Like, why do you think the response from
[31:14] Speaker 2: universities to this movement has been so limited?
[31:17] Speaker 1: Have we just not given them enough time?
[31:18] Speaker 2: Or is it the nature of the request is thornier
[31:22] Speaker 2: than when it comes to you know, pharmaceuticals or tobacco.
[31:25] Speaker 2: What are some of the sticking points that you've noticed
[31:28] Speaker 2: in this work and the rest of your work.
[31:30] Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean, in a way the questions above my
[31:32] Speaker 7: pay grade. Ultimately, it's university leaders themselves who have to
[31:35] Speaker 7: explain the decision making. I would, you know, to give
[31:38] Speaker 7: them the benefit of the doubt. It has in some
[31:43] Speaker 7: cases been a relatively recent push, you know, like on
[31:46] Speaker 7: the order of a few years by students and faculty
[31:49] Speaker 7: trying to get universities to cut these ties. But in
[31:52] Speaker 7: other cases, I mentioned the American Geo Physical Union. We
[31:55] Speaker 7: ran a year long campaign and we wrote a whole
[31:58] Speaker 7: report proving that the EXON sponsorship of the AGU conference
[32:03] Speaker 7: violated the organization's own by laws. And this is an
[32:06] Speaker 7: organization of for and by Earth scientists, you know. And
[32:13] Speaker 7: the only way the funding relationship ended was because in
[32:16] Speaker 7: the end, after like more than a decade or two,
[32:19] Speaker 7: Exon actually cut their tires. And my only presumption is
[32:22] Speaker 7: that it ended up being on net worse pr than
[32:25] Speaker 7: good pr for them that we were running this campaign,
[32:28] Speaker 7: So there is a measurable sort of recalcitrants from universities
[32:34] Speaker 7: to act on this. And you know, our reports specifically
[32:37] Speaker 7: shines a spotlight on the failure to disclose like a
[32:41] Speaker 7: failure of transparency to even just provide data on who
[32:46] Speaker 7: is funding and how much are they funding, let alone
[32:48] Speaker 7: you know, what are the terms of these these contractual agreements.
[32:52] Speaker 7: And all the evidence that we have uncovered points to
[32:55] Speaker 7: the fact that these relationships are and these contracts are
[32:58] Speaker 7: sometimes really problem in terms of the control that they
[33:02] Speaker 7: hand to the fossil fuel funders. As far as universities
[33:05] Speaker 7: are concerned, this is a significant source of revenue and
[33:12] Speaker 7: they obviously I remember once a board member at MIT
[33:15] Speaker 7: telling us it's not so much an issue of should
[33:19] Speaker 7: they take money from A or should they take money
[33:21] Speaker 7: from be. They just want to take money from everywhere,
[33:24] Speaker 7: you know, like anywhere they can find it. And I
[33:28] Speaker 7: think we're sympathetic as scholars to the fact that funding
[33:31] Speaker 7: is tight and federal funding has been falling in part
[33:35] Speaker 7: as a result of the politics that the oil industry
[33:37] Speaker 7: has been lobbying in favor of for decades. So there
[33:40] Speaker 7: is a circularity to all this. So we're not saying
[33:43] Speaker 7: it's easy and necessarily the immediate response has to be
[33:48] Speaker 7: just like cutt ale ties overnight. You know, if people
[33:51] Speaker 7: make that response, that's like saying, oh, you're saying we
[33:54] Speaker 7: should end fossil fuel use tomorrow. It's like it's a
[33:57] Speaker 7: very reductive oversimplification of raising of concerns and the proposal
[34:02] Speaker 7: that we, as you said, do more. There are dozens
[34:06] Speaker 7: and dozens of safeguards that you can impose between doing
[34:10] Speaker 7: nothing and cutting the ties. And I have another paper
[34:13] Speaker 7: coming out where we really elaborate all those in detail,
[34:17] Speaker 7: based on the history of tobacco but also pharmaceuticals and
[34:20] Speaker 7: junk food. I myself have really taken most insight from
[34:25] Speaker 7: those other disciplines where there has been an awful lot
[34:28] Speaker 7: of scholarship proving that these conflicts of interest often lead
[34:31] Speaker 7: to bias.
[34:32] Speaker 2: That's something I sort of noticed in the spring when
[34:36] Speaker 2: both the documents came out, and then concurrently there were
[34:39] Speaker 2: all of those campus protests where they were really calling
[34:41] Speaker 2: out the campus ties to like Lockheed and Razeon and
[34:45] Speaker 2: defense contractors. And I saw a lot of not in
[34:49] Speaker 2: response to the FOSSi Field documents, but a lot of
[34:51] Speaker 2: university kind of folks who sided with the universities saying, well,
[34:55] Speaker 2: there's no way to just cut off all funding altogether, right,
[34:57] Speaker 2: Like where else are we going to get the money?
[35:00] Speaker 2: And I'm glad you mentioned the safeguards because one thing
[35:03] Speaker 2: that I think is difficult is like there's just no
[35:06] Speaker 2: way to tell a lot of the time what the
[35:08] Speaker 2: money is going to be used for, Like if Exxon
[35:11] Speaker 2: is building a dance hall versus if it's funding studies
[35:14] Speaker 2: on renewable energy. Right, and either a group of students
[35:18] Speaker 2: or some faculty who want to either do research in
[35:22] Speaker 2: academic discipline on this or start some sort of group
[35:26] Speaker 2: on campus, what can they do to kind of root
[35:29] Speaker 2: a little bit more down into how funding is used
[35:32] Speaker 2: at their university, what tools are available to their disposal.
[35:34] Speaker 7: Well, it's actually interesting you asked that question. If I
[35:37] Speaker 7: was a little more prepared, i'd have like a perfect response.
[35:40] Speaker 7: But we are actually in the process of trying to launch,
[35:46] Speaker 7: essentially a global survey to pool all of these insights
[35:50] Speaker 7: from different campuses, and a lot of this information, probably
[35:54] Speaker 7: most of it is not on the internet, right, Like
[35:57] Speaker 7: I can tell you that grad students who go to
[36:00] Speaker 7: the careers for MIT, at least in my day, Exon
[36:03] Speaker 7: was a recruiter and they would hand out little stress
[36:06] Speaker 7: reliever squeezy toys in the shape of an oil barrel
[36:08] Speaker 7: with the company logo on.
[36:09] Speaker 6: That's crazy.
[36:10] Speaker 1: They were the shape of an oil barrel. That's insane.
[36:13] Speaker 7: Yeah, I have a photo of it. There was another
[36:15] Speaker 7: any the Italian oil company sent us like a ten
[36:18] Speaker 7: thousand dollars custom made horse size toy in the shape
[36:23] Speaker 7: of the company logo, and it sat in my office
[36:26] Speaker 7: and we would would ride it like a horse like
[36:28] Speaker 7: it was like it was it's like so eccentric. So
[36:33] Speaker 7: like anything you can imagine exists, you know, like students
[36:36] Speaker 7: that either Camebridge rugs. So I can't remember engineering students
[36:40] Speaker 7: being required to wear hard hats with the BP logo
[36:43] Speaker 7: on things like that, you know, like and so I
[36:46] Speaker 7: think one simple answer is that they should get in
[36:49] Speaker 7: touch like people who want to be involved, because actually
[36:52] Speaker 7: we are looking for information, and you, as a student
[36:57] Speaker 7: or a professor at your specific universe, have a unique
[37:01] Speaker 7: insight into not just the financial ties, but the non
[37:04] Speaker 7: financial ties, like these weird things that you see and hear.
[37:09] Speaker 7: Sometimes you will know about the dollar values of contracts
[37:12] Speaker 7: because they're spoken about on campus, but they're not on
[37:15] Speaker 7: any official database that the university releases. And we're developing
[37:19] Speaker 7: the infrastructure to pool all of these insights and give
[37:23] Speaker 7: us some better statistics on these phenomena. Campus Climate Network,
[37:27] Speaker 7: which was formerly known as Fossil Free Research, is the
[37:30] Speaker 7: foremost use led organization campaigning to cut these fossil fuel
[37:34] Speaker 7: ties at universities. For transparency sake, I should note that
[37:37] Speaker 7: I'm on the advisory board of Campus Climate Network, and they,
[37:40] Speaker 7: I'm sure would love for people to reach out, you know,
[37:43] Speaker 7: anything from providing information all the way up to helping
[37:45] Speaker 7: launch a new campaign. As another university they're looking to
[37:48] Speaker 7: help coordinate and facilitate that work. So I think those
[37:53] Speaker 7: are a couple of the ways at the individual level
[37:55] Speaker 7: scholars can inform themselves better about the science of comfort
[38:00] Speaker 7: of interest, and that runs all the way through to
[38:02] Speaker 7: the responsibility of universities as we discussed, but also journals
[38:07] Speaker 7: implementing better protective measures. Frankly, there are things that politicians
[38:11] Speaker 7: can do, even at the national level, And as I said,
[38:14] Speaker 7: we're almost ready to publish a sort of kind of
[38:16] Speaker 7: comprehensive guidebook if you like, on all those different measures.
[38:20] Speaker 2: You're totally right where it's like just being in a
[38:22] Speaker 2: place and being in the culture of a place is
[38:25] Speaker 2: like way more important than what anyone can do kind
[38:28] Speaker 2: of from the outside. On the journals thing, I was
[38:30] Speaker 2: talking to Craig Calendar, he's one of the uses, and
[38:34] Speaker 2: he told me that pharmaceutical journals have much more regulations
[38:39] Speaker 2: on disclosing conflicts of interest than energy journal He said
[38:44] Speaker 2: that like most climate and energy journals don't really require
[38:48] Speaker 2: the types of disclosures that pharmaceutical journals do. Is that
[38:51] Speaker 2: something you've seen.
[38:53] Speaker 7: Yeah, that's broadly correct. The measures in place for public
[38:58] Speaker 7: health researchers all levels from you know, disclosures they have
[39:02] Speaker 7: to make internally within their universities. Yeah, through to disclosures
[39:06] Speaker 7: they have to make with the journals are much tighter
[39:10] Speaker 7: when it comes to research that in any way touches
[39:14] Speaker 7: on areas that tobacco or pharmaceuticals or others might get
[39:17] Speaker 7: involved in. And in comparison, climate and energy research right
[39:20] Speaker 7: now is the world West. I think it's certainly something
[39:24] Speaker 7: that there is already a blueprint in place with safeguards
[39:28] Speaker 7: against tobacco and pharmaceutical funding to mitigate most of this,
[39:31] Speaker 7: and so we don't have to reinvent a lot of wheels.
[39:34] Speaker 7: In many cases, we can just implement these things. So
[39:37] Speaker 7: it's all about simply compelling those impositions of power and
[39:41] Speaker 7: decision making to do so. And that's kind of the
[39:44] Speaker 7: point of this paper is to basically ask the question
[39:47] Speaker 7: of what do we know already? Because often the first
[39:51] Speaker 7: step to solving a problem is recognizing there is one,
[39:54] Speaker 7: and so bringing all of our current knowledge together allowed
[39:58] Speaker 7: us to realize that although yes, there are many many
[40:01] Speaker 7: details that need to be further scrutinized, broadly speaking, a
[40:06] Speaker 7: lot of this thinking has been done when it comes
[40:08] Speaker 7: to other industries, and so I think that you know,
[40:12] Speaker 7: we see this as essentially putting university leaders on notice
[40:15] Speaker 7: that the existing research is clear that this has been
[40:18] Speaker 7: a massive elephant in the climate and energy policy research realm,
[40:24] Speaker 7: and they need to start taking it seriously, starting with
[40:27] Speaker 7: just acknowledging the science of conflicts of interest, because right
[40:31] Speaker 7: now they basically do the opposite, and they actively solicit
[40:34] Speaker 7: and encourage this kind of oil industry funding.
[40:37] Speaker 6: The actual opposite.
[40:38] Speaker 7: Yeah, the actual opposite.
[40:46] Speaker 2: So let's get started with the basics. How did you
[40:49] Speaker 2: get involved in this specific issue given that your academic
[40:54] Speaker 2: background isn't exactly climate change.
[40:58] Speaker 6: So I got into this because, yeah, I thought, I
[41:02] Speaker 6: I've taught environmental ethics for about twenty or thirty years,
[41:05] Speaker 6: but also I'm a philosopher of science and of philosters
[41:09] Speaker 6: of science. One sort of thing we look at is methodology,
[41:12] Speaker 6: and then of course bias, and so you know, those
[41:17] Speaker 6: two interests sort of collided. At one point a long
[41:20] Speaker 6: time ago, I co taught a course with Naomi Erski's
[41:24] Speaker 6: who's the author of Merchants of Doubt and the movie
[41:28] Speaker 6: Merchants of Doubt, and so this had been on my
[41:33] Speaker 6: radar for a long time. Then you know, I got
[41:37] Speaker 6: recruited to the Campus Climate Change Committee, which is the
[41:41] Speaker 6: only standing academic senate committee in the UC system devoted
[41:47] Speaker 6: to campus climate change in the whole system. Yeah, in
[41:51] Speaker 6: the whole system.
[41:52] Speaker 2: Wow.
[41:53] Speaker 6: And actually, when we think about solutions, that's one of
[41:56] Speaker 6: the biggest ones I think is actually having an academic
[41:59] Speaker 6: senate committee lends a lot of legitimacy to the climate
[42:03] Speaker 6: change question. And so then this team, we were approaching
[42:08] Speaker 6: all sorts of different issues like offsets and climate teaching
[42:12] Speaker 6: and all sorts of things. And one of the topics
[42:16] Speaker 6: was then also, of course all the fossil fuel money
[42:18] Speaker 6: coming in, and so we decided to have an initiative
[42:22] Speaker 6: on research. And so then I was put in as
[42:26] Speaker 6: one of the one of the main people thinking about that. So,
[42:29] Speaker 6: you know, the first thing I did was then look
[42:31] Speaker 6: at what u SE did with tobacco back in the
[42:34] Speaker 6: early two thousands, and they tried to ban which would
[42:38] Speaker 6: be like what the group Fossil Free Research is calling for,
[42:41] Speaker 6: you know, ban on taking money from fossil fuel industry
[42:45] Speaker 6: for climate research. Many schools did ban, or many units
[42:49] Speaker 6: in particularly banned taking tobacco money for medical or health research.
[42:55] Speaker 6: So surprisingly that failed. That you see, so the University
[42:59] Speaker 6: of California voted down a tobacco ban by a large
[43:04] Speaker 6: margin due to worries about academic freedom, but they did
[43:09] Speaker 6: put in this other policy that we still have that
[43:12] Speaker 6: mandates a special review of any tobacco money that's accepted,
[43:16] Speaker 6: and so the chancellor has to form an ad hoc
[43:18] Speaker 6: committee reviewing it, and I write a public letter if
[43:21] Speaker 6: it's accepted on why it's justified. And so I thought, well,
[43:25] Speaker 6: that's not as good as a ban, but you know
[43:27] Speaker 6: that's if that worked with tobacco, and the fossil fuel
[43:30] Speaker 6: issue and climate change are even worse, so why not
[43:34] Speaker 6: just run with this. So it basically just took that
[43:37] Speaker 6: policy and crossed off the word tobacco and replaced it
[43:41] Speaker 6: with fossil fuel and then tried to run with that.
[43:46] Speaker 6: But we were more or less told that that was
[43:47] Speaker 6: dead on arrival, and.
[43:49] Speaker 2: Just her timeline like when when did you first get
[43:52] Speaker 2: involved with the committee itself?
[43:54] Speaker 6: And like when four years four years ago? Four years ago? Okay? Yeah,
[43:59] Speaker 6: So then we've switched to a transparency measure because we thought, well,
[44:04] Speaker 6: transparency seemed to us and it seems to many people,
[44:09] Speaker 6: you know, all over the place. If I just take
[44:11] Speaker 6: my dog for a walk and talk to somebody. You know,
[44:14] Speaker 6: they're all about transparency. So we switched then from this
[44:19] Speaker 6: kind of special review, not anything bandlike or any kind
[44:23] Speaker 6: of friction on this. They can still take as much
[44:26] Speaker 6: money as you want from anyone you want, but it
[44:28] Speaker 6: would definitely disclose it. And so we pushed this policy
[44:32] Speaker 6: for about three years and then in May it was
[44:36] Speaker 6: finally voted on in the Academic Senate UCSD and it
[44:40] Speaker 6: passed with ninety one percent of the vote, which was great.
[44:45] Speaker 2: It does it does feel like I think a lot
[44:48] Speaker 2: of people are just really surprised to hear that that's
[44:51] Speaker 2: not like a set policy, especially at a public school.
[44:55] Speaker 6: Yeah, so if this policy, which got voted on but
[44:58] Speaker 6: has not been implemented yet, if it gets implemented, it
[45:02] Speaker 6: will be by far the most progressive transparency policy in
[45:06] Speaker 6: the country. I think none of the schools disclose anything
[45:11] Speaker 6: apart from what they have to more or less so
[45:14] Speaker 6: that if you take federal money, then the federal government
[45:17] Speaker 6: insists you disclose. They might encourage you to disclose, but
[45:21] Speaker 6: you don't have to, and they jealously guard the information.
[45:26] Speaker 6: So it's not common practice at all. It does surprise
[45:32] Speaker 6: most people when you talk to them. That, especially a
[45:34] Speaker 6: big public research university doesn't disclose a lot of this stuff.
[45:39] Speaker 6: U see does disclose more than most I think, but
[45:42] Speaker 6: you cannot find if they're like gifts to centers and
[45:48] Speaker 6: things like that. You cannot find that information anywhere apart
[45:51] Speaker 6: from a foyer request. So, for instance, the institute I
[45:54] Speaker 6: co direct, the Institute for Practical Ethics, that would challenge
[45:58] Speaker 6: you to find out where we get funding. There's no
[46:01] Speaker 6: way you could find out.
[46:03] Speaker 2: So I could be talking to you right now, and
[46:05] Speaker 2: you could be like cashing or your institute could be
[46:08] Speaker 2: cashing a check from like Chevron, and I just wouldn't
[46:12] Speaker 2: have any idea unless you chose to disclose. Is that's right?
[46:17] Speaker 6: Yeah, So the university might disclose some aspects of some grants,
[46:23] Speaker 6: but not gifts. And if you think about this, I mean,
[46:27] Speaker 6: if we're going to be now fair and think about
[46:30] Speaker 6: it from the anti transparency side, you know, from their
[46:34] Speaker 6: point of view, what's happened is public funding is basically
[46:38] Speaker 6: plummeted in the universities. They have to make up the gap.
[46:43] Speaker 6: So a lot of that gap is going to be
[46:44] Speaker 6: filled by money from industry and then but you have
[46:48] Speaker 6: other schools. Were not the only school who is funding
[46:51] Speaker 6: deprived from public funds, they all are, and so then
[46:55] Speaker 6: it's like a battle against them. And so these donors,
[46:59] Speaker 6: you know, so they're then it's like a high stakes
[47:01] Speaker 6: game of poker. And so the idea of disclosing your
[47:07] Speaker 6: gift funding is like, you know, showing your hand and
[47:10] Speaker 6: the game of poker from their point of view, of course,
[47:13] Speaker 6: if everybody showed their hand, you know, then it would
[47:19] Speaker 6: be we.
[47:20] Speaker 1: Wouldn't be playing poker, basically playing poker.
[47:23] Speaker 2: Yeah, which, Yeah, one of the takeaways that Jeffrey Suprann
[47:27] Speaker 2: and I were talking about was that there's this robust
[47:30] Speaker 2: body of research around conflict of interest with regards to
[47:35] Speaker 2: money from other industries. Like there's a lot around tobacco.
[47:38] Speaker 2: There's been conversations about fast food funding, but until very
[47:42] Speaker 2: very recently, the conversation around oil and gas was like
[47:46] Speaker 2: people noticed it was happening, but it didn't really start
[47:50] Speaker 2: becoming an issue until like very recently. Does that track
[47:53] Speaker 2: with your experience in thinking about this and working on this,
[47:57] Speaker 2: and why do you think it's taken so long for
[47:59] Speaker 2: folks to kind of start this conversation.
[48:02] Speaker 6: Yeah, that does track with my understanding. So much of
[48:08] Speaker 6: the movement and energy was all based around health and
[48:12] Speaker 6: big pharma, and so you had all of these conflict
[48:15] Speaker 6: of interest policies and things which were challenged and fought
[48:20] Speaker 6: step you tooth and nail. From the early seventies, National
[48:25] Speaker 6: Academy of Science have reports about conflicts of interests with
[48:29] Speaker 6: big Pharma and so these things. It took decades really
[48:33] Speaker 6: for a lot of this to all get to the
[48:35] Speaker 6: where it is now. Even things that you think of
[48:38] Speaker 6: as like completely consensus, you know, so for instance, that
[48:41] Speaker 6: there would be internal review board that would review the
[48:45] Speaker 6: ethics of whether the subjects of an experiment have consent,
[48:49] Speaker 6: Even that stuff was fought. People are stunned when they hear.
[48:52] Speaker 1: This, but that's crazy.
[48:54] Speaker 6: If you just look back a little while, you would
[48:57] Speaker 6: see that people fought based on that. There like freedom,
[49:01] Speaker 6: because it's like a restraint on academic freedom. You can't
[49:04] Speaker 6: do the experiment the way you want it, or you
[49:05] Speaker 6: have to change the design, maybe you can't even do
[49:08] Speaker 6: it because it's unethical. And so people thought this. People
[49:12] Speaker 6: thought all the conflict of interest rules and all the journals,
[49:15] Speaker 6: they thought everything. I was reading a paper with one
[49:19] Speaker 6: of the one of the main medical journals, had instituted
[49:22] Speaker 6: a thing where you couldn't write op ed or editorial
[49:27] Speaker 6: if you were about a particular drug if you were
[49:29] Speaker 6: being paid for by the company that made that drug.
[49:32] Speaker 6: And then the reaction was that this was called the
[49:35] Speaker 6: new McCarthyism. People are really heated against that sort of thing.
[49:42] Speaker 6: It's greaz it's so much of the energy. It was
[49:44] Speaker 6: all there in a big pharma. Yeah, even on like
[49:47] Speaker 6: core things like just you know, ethical consent forms and
[49:51] Speaker 6: things like that. This seventies, eighties, nineties, you know, going
[49:57] Speaker 6: all the way up to eventually you have Obamas the
[49:59] Speaker 6: Sunshine Act, which most people don't know about. Maybe you
[50:03] Speaker 6: can go online and then go to a registry and
[50:05] Speaker 6: then see if your physician is taking money from particular companies,
[50:10] Speaker 6: and then when the physician recommends a particular drug, you
[50:13] Speaker 6: can see where they're getting many money from that person
[50:16] Speaker 6: that that company. So that was actually what the UCSD
[50:20] Speaker 6: thing was modeled after, is to have a kind of
[50:22] Speaker 6: public registry like in this Obama Sunshine Act. But that
[50:26] Speaker 6: was maybe what two thousand, somewhere between two maybe two,
[50:32] Speaker 6: I guess twenty eleven, But it is around then.
[50:35] Speaker 2: I feel like that's right.
[50:36] Speaker 6: Yeah, I think why it happened there was because you know,
[50:39] Speaker 6: everyone cares about medicine and health, and there was just
[50:43] Speaker 6: so much interference. But then as those transparency policies started
[50:48] Speaker 6: to appear, then you start to see more conflicts of interest,
[50:52] Speaker 6: and then there's more works now, you know, fast forward
[50:55] Speaker 6: to the fossil fuel case. You know, have those transparency
[50:59] Speaker 6: policy and a lot of those journals. It's more theoretical
[51:03] Speaker 6: and not something the American public cared about as much,
[51:07] Speaker 6: and so you didn't get as much transparency. The transparency alone,
[51:12] Speaker 6: of course, doesn't solve the problem at all. Right, it's
[51:14] Speaker 6: still say you can take the money and be influenced,
[51:18] Speaker 6: but you know, it's like a necessary condition for finding
[51:21] Speaker 6: the breadcrumbs that would lead you to serious conflicts of interest,
[51:25] Speaker 6: and so you need those transparency policies. And we've known,
[51:29] Speaker 6: really for a long time, but now we know without
[51:31] Speaker 6: beyond the shadow of the doubt, that there is this
[51:34] Speaker 6: kind of influence. And that's not just like advertising and
[51:39] Speaker 6: oh maybe they had to believe the wrong thing or something.
[51:42] Speaker 6: It's about a deliberate strategy, and that strategy is contrary
[51:46] Speaker 6: to the mission of the university, which is to produce
[51:48] Speaker 6: an unbiased knowledge for you know, a democratic republic. So
[51:54] Speaker 6: you have a lot of people say that money doesn't
[51:56] Speaker 6: influence our outcomes and things like that, But the scientists
[51:59] Speaker 6: should be scientific about this. Now we've got a couple
[52:03] Speaker 6: of decades of evidence, right, it's happening. And so if
[52:07] Speaker 6: they apply their saying scientific you know, acumen to this problem,
[52:13] Speaker 6: then you can just see it's a problem. And then
[52:16] Speaker 6: once you know, now you've got the responsibility of this knowledge.
[52:21] Speaker 6: And then if you're being used as a weapon, and
[52:24] Speaker 6: now you know you're being used as what your infrastructures
[52:27] Speaker 6: allow it you to be weaponized, well, now you have
[52:30] Speaker 6: a duty to not be a weapon.
[52:34] Speaker 2: I think everyone kind of thinks they're going to be
[52:36] Speaker 2: the exception, like, oh, if you know, I wouldn't be
[52:40] Speaker 2: swayed in my work. And I don't know what you
[52:44] Speaker 2: think about, but like it's hard to sort of articulate
[52:47] Speaker 2: where it's like, well, it's kind of not even about you.
[52:49] Speaker 2: It's just about the fact that this money was delivered
[52:52] Speaker 2: to the institution you're working at, not out of the
[52:56] Speaker 2: goodness of this company's heart. You know, it's like a
[53:00] Speaker 2: tool doesn't know. It's a tool necessarily, it's not a
[53:02] Speaker 2: comment on the quality of the work even all the time.
[53:05] Speaker 6: Well, yeah, so have two thoughts about this. What is
[53:09] Speaker 6: a lot of the work in this area has shown
[53:12] Speaker 6: that even if you are just the most pure researcher
[53:16] Speaker 6: in the world, you know, the most innocent, pure research
[53:18] Speaker 6: in the world, still this money can make it such
[53:21] Speaker 6: that you're part of a network such that it distorts
[53:24] Speaker 6: the evidential base. So if you think of when Robert
[53:28] Speaker 6: Profter showed how he called a distraction science where tobacco
[53:34] Speaker 6: would fund work on asbesos causing lung cancer, genetics causing
[53:38] Speaker 6: lung cancer, all that work maybe is perfectly good, and
[53:42] Speaker 6: all those people are you know, as far as I know,
[53:45] Speaker 6: there was tobacco funded, but probably weren't doing anything bad science.
[53:50] Speaker 6: On the other hand, it skews the evidential landscape, you know,
[53:54] Speaker 6: in a big way. Same thing. I it is probably
[53:58] Speaker 6: happening now when think of how much money is going
[54:01] Speaker 6: into carbon capture and storage versus other things. And so
[54:06] Speaker 6: you as the individual research could rightly say, yeah, it
[54:09] Speaker 6: hasn't affected my outcomes, But you're part of this social network.
[54:15] Speaker 6: And when you think about that, so mostly we know
[54:18] Speaker 6: also that that's not true that it does buy us outcomes.
[54:22] Speaker 6: I'm saying, even if it didn't buy us outcomes, it
[54:25] Speaker 6: would still be the case that you could be part
[54:27] Speaker 6: of this kind of weaponization of the academic structure. And
[54:32] Speaker 6: then the other thing is, you know, it always reminds
[54:34] Speaker 6: me of when people say guns don't kill people. People do.
[54:38] Speaker 6: And you might go to a store later and buy
[54:42] Speaker 6: a weapon to protect your dogs and cats and have
[54:47] Speaker 6: only love and peace in your heart. But we still
[54:50] Speaker 6: know what having like automatic weapons does in the society.
[54:52] Speaker 6: It changes your incentives, it changes your choices, it changes
[54:57] Speaker 6: all around you that network, and so it will end
[55:01] Speaker 6: up leading to more deaths. And so again it's sort
[55:05] Speaker 6: of failing to appreciate the way the individual and the
[55:08] Speaker 6: social connect to each other.
[55:11] Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, in our society, I think people think
[55:15] Speaker 2: of professors and researchers as sort of the third leg
[55:20] Speaker 2: of knowledge, like an informed source. In journalism, we're always
[55:25] Speaker 2: taught to reach out to academics and confirm studies or
[55:28] Speaker 2: to talk to you about scientific issues. But the university
[55:33] Speaker 2: system in the country is so privatized and getting even
[55:37] Speaker 2: more and more privatized each day, and I'm wondering which
[55:41] Speaker 2: people should know about the funding system for some of
[55:45] Speaker 2: these research that they might not know already.
[55:47] Speaker 6: Yeah. I think people are shocked really when they see
[55:52] Speaker 6: dependent most researches on getting grants in general, you know,
[55:57] Speaker 6: most of the grants are from the federal government, but
[55:59] Speaker 6: still she plays a huge role in many, many different disciplines.
[56:04] Speaker 6: I think people are shocked. They don't really appreciate that fact.
[56:09] Speaker 6: It's a big question I think about whether once people
[56:12] Speaker 6: hear this, whether they'll continue to trust science. Now.
[56:15] Speaker 3: Yeah, That's why I think the disclosure is so important,
[56:18] Speaker 3: because who do you believe, you know, somebody who says, well, OK,
[56:22] Speaker 3: I have this interest, or somebody who says, no, I'm
[56:26] Speaker 3: hiding something.
[56:27] Speaker 2: So the resolution passed in May with ninety one percent support.
[56:32] Speaker 2: What are the next steps on campus right now?
[56:35] Speaker 6: Yeah? Good? So I think you know, when we're thinking
[56:38] Speaker 6: about solutions. The first thing is I think having an
[56:40] Speaker 6: academic Senate committee to devote to campus climate change was huge
[56:44] Speaker 6: and so the activist on campus who pushed for that
[56:48] Speaker 6: were really geniuses. So there was an academic Senate task
[56:52] Speaker 6: force devoted to climate change in the late twenty teens,
[56:56] Speaker 6: maybe twenty seventeen or nineteen somewhere around there, and then
[57:02] Speaker 6: they came up with all these recommendations, and one was
[57:05] Speaker 6: the formation of this committee, and then it was formed.
[57:09] Speaker 6: And then having it be a committee meant that it
[57:12] Speaker 6: gives a legitimacy to the voices on campus who care
[57:17] Speaker 6: about climate change because now you have a seat at
[57:20] Speaker 6: the table and can comment on various things that are
[57:23] Speaker 6: going on. But you could also put forward resolutions and
[57:27] Speaker 6: then see what the faculty whether they vote on this
[57:31] Speaker 6: or not. So that was really just a stroke of
[57:35] Speaker 6: genius and really very unique and right away, you know.
[57:39] Speaker 6: So we had this memorial go through the whole system.
[57:42] Speaker 6: It took about a year, but it was basically to
[57:46] Speaker 6: replace this kind of carbon neutral by whatever date with
[57:50] Speaker 6: actual emission reduction targets, and implicitly it was it was
[57:55] Speaker 6: against carbon offsets. You could see we were getting closer
[57:59] Speaker 6: and closer to carbon neutral, but our missions were going up,
[58:03] Speaker 6: up and up and up. So how can be getting
[58:05] Speaker 6: closer to carbon neutral was by buying all these offsets.
[58:09] Speaker 6: And so we went, we had this memorial go through
[58:13] Speaker 6: the whole to ten campuses and one resoundingly, I think
[58:17] Speaker 6: it got about eighty five percent approval. And then we
[58:21] Speaker 6: have the Climate education requirement that's starting in two weeks
[58:26] Speaker 6: or three weeks. So already a whole list of courses
[58:28] Speaker 6: have been approved, so every student will have to take
[58:31] Speaker 6: this ongoing and then if it spreads to other campuses,
[58:35] Speaker 6: this could be something that eventually affects hundreds of thousands
[58:38] Speaker 6: of students. Now I'm off the committee as of just
[58:41] Speaker 6: a couple of weeks ago, served four years on it.
[58:44] Speaker 6: I will be very curious to see hopefully the disclosure
[58:48] Speaker 6: thing will be adopted. You see, like at many schools,
[58:51] Speaker 6: you have what's called shared governance, and so it's shared
[58:55] Speaker 6: between the admin and faculty. The admin where I think
[58:59] Speaker 6: it's to say, we're not fans of the disclosure of policy,
[59:03] Speaker 6: and so it's been sent to them asking them to
[59:06] Speaker 6: make a team and to make it happen. So you see,
[59:10] Speaker 6: has like the president of the whole system, and then
[59:12] Speaker 6: each each campus has a chancellor, and so the chancellor
[59:16] Speaker 6: would have to form a team to make this happen.
[59:21] Speaker 6: So far as I know, I haven't heard of anything
[59:23] Speaker 6: happening yet.
[59:24] Speaker 1: So it could sort of sit in limbo.
[59:28] Speaker 6: Just ask I think, I mean, there would be a
[59:32] Speaker 6: grave offense to share governance because if ninety one percent
[59:37] Speaker 6: of the faculty voted in favor of it, it doesn't happen.
[59:40] Speaker 6: It's about the faculty's own work and money.
[59:44] Speaker 2: Okay, so it's it requires like a little bit more implementation,
[59:48] Speaker 2: but it's it's kind of with the chancellor's.
[59:50] Speaker 6: Off us now, yeah, and then we'll see what happens.
[59:54] Speaker 6: Hopefully it happens. But like I said, they weren't fans,
[1:00:00] Speaker 6: so I'm not counting my chickens when I talk about
[1:00:07] Speaker 6: this with people. The transparency thing opens the doors because
[1:00:13] Speaker 6: if you want to give an industrial center money to
[1:00:17] Speaker 6: find oil and gas, I'm curious if you agree or not.
[1:00:20] Speaker 6: That doesn't seem to have the same ethical layers as
[1:00:23] Speaker 6: BP funding a public policy school or Chevron funding.
[1:00:28] Speaker 2: You know, I was just looking at numbers for this center.
[1:00:30] Speaker 2: I'm sure you've seen the Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy,
[1:00:34] Speaker 2: where their experts are constantly in front of Congress. They
[1:00:37] Speaker 2: are doing policy work, and I think that people get
[1:00:41] Speaker 2: really defensive, like you said when you mentioned funding, because
[1:00:44] Speaker 2: they're like, well, we can't, you know, not take money.
[1:00:46] Speaker 2: But it's like, why don't we just start having a
[1:00:49] Speaker 2: conversation about where this money is going as a starting point,
[1:00:53] Speaker 2: which we're not doing right now.
[1:00:55] Speaker 6: You know, I couldn't agree more with what you just said.
[1:00:58] Speaker 6: That the money that goes into shaping climate policy and
[1:01:03] Speaker 6: that's not disclosed, that's what really bothers me the most.
[1:01:07] Speaker 6: So of course, some petroleum engineer gets money from a
[1:01:11] Speaker 6: fossil fuel industry, I mean, that's the whole business model,
[1:01:15] Speaker 6: and they typically they disclose it all, you know, and that,
[1:01:20] Speaker 6: But when you're trying to influence policy, then if even
[1:01:23] Speaker 6: our politicians are supposed to reveal their donors, and everyone's
[1:01:28] Speaker 6: wanting now the Supreme Court to have to disclose who's
[1:01:31] Speaker 6: giving them money and gifts, and we want our doctors
[1:01:34] Speaker 6: to disclose money and gifts, whereas everybody have to disclose
[1:01:38] Speaker 6: who are trying to influence industry policy except for these
[1:01:43] Speaker 6: scientists at these climate centers. That's study by Doug Almon
[1:01:48] Speaker 6: at Columbia where he looks at the favorability ratings coming
[1:01:53] Speaker 6: out of climate centers comparing natural gas and methane versus renewables.
[1:01:59] Speaker 6: I mean, and it's shocking. Really people are under the
[1:02:02] Speaker 6: illusion that it doesn't really do anything, but holy moly,
[1:02:05] Speaker 6: this money does a lot those centers produce all these
[1:02:08] Speaker 6: white papers. Those white papers get used at local level
[1:02:12] Speaker 6: to open up an area for fracking, or national level
[1:02:16] Speaker 6: congressional evidence dockets just all over the place, and so
[1:02:22] Speaker 6: it really does shape national policy and local policy. And
[1:02:27] Speaker 6: so it's not the factor I think of why we're
[1:02:30] Speaker 6: in the state we're in, but it's definitely a causal factor.
[1:02:41] Speaker 1: That's it for this time. We'll be back soon with
[1:02:44] Speaker 1: another episode in this series. Don't forget to check out
[1:02:47] Speaker 1: the print stories that are going along with this series
[1:02:50] Speaker 1: as well on our website at Drilled dot Media, and
[1:02:53] Speaker 1: of various co publishing partners, including Rolling Stone and Vox.
[1:02:58] Speaker 1: This episode was mixed and mastered by Peter duff. Our
[1:03:02] Speaker 1: theme music is Bird in the Hand by Forenoon. Our
[1:03:05] Speaker 1: artwork is by Matthew Fleming. You can also check us
[1:03:09] Speaker 1: out on Twitter we are Drilled, and everywhere else on
[1:03:13] Speaker 1: social media at Drilled Media. You can sign up for
[1:03:17] Speaker 1: our newsletter on our website as well that comes out
[1:03:20] Speaker 1: once a week and gives in overview of an important
[1:03:23] Speaker 1: story that's happening in the climate universe, plus suggestions for
[1:03:28] Speaker 1: the week's five must read climate stories. It's never more
[1:03:32] Speaker 1: than a ten minute read, and people tell us it
[1:03:34] Speaker 1: helps them keep up to date on all things climate

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.