Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html
Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by
a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil
companies to undermine a major climate change report due to
be published today.
Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI),
an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush
administration, offered the payments for articles that
emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Travel expenses and additional payments were also offered.
The UN report was written by international experts and is
widely regarded as the most comprehensive review yet of
climate change science. It will underpin international
negotiations on new emissions targets to succeed the Kyoto
agreement, the first phase of which expires in 2012. World
governments were given a draft last year and invited to comment.
The AEI has received more than $1.6m from ExxonMobil
and more than 20 of its staff have worked as consultants to
the Bush administration. Lee Raymond, a former head of
ExxonMobil, is the vice-chairman of AEI's board of trustees.
The letters, sent to scientists in Britain, the US and elsewhere,
attack the UN's panel as "resistant to reasonable criticism and
dissent and prone to summary conclusions that are poorly
supported by the analytical work" and ask for essays that
"thoughtfully explore the limitations of climate model outputs".
Climate scientists described the move yesterday as an attempt
to cast doubt over the "overwhelming scientific evidence" on
global warming. "It's a desperate attempt by an organisation
who wants to distort science for their own political aims," said
David Viner of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of
East Anglia.
"The IPCC process is probably the most thorough and open
review undertaken in any discipline. This undermines the
confidence of the public in the scientific community and the
ability of governments to take on sound scientific advice," he said.
The letters were sent by Kenneth Green, a visiting scholar at
AEI, who confirmed that the organisation had approached
scientists, economists and policy analysts to write articles for
an independent review that would highlight the strengths and
weaknesses of the IPCC report.
"Right now, the whole debate is polarised," he said. "One
group says that anyone with any doubts whatsoever are
deniers and the other group is saying that anyone who wants
to take action is alarmist. We don't think that approach has a
lot of utility for intelligent policy."
One American scientist turned down the offer, citing fears that
the report could easily be misused for political gain.
"You wouldn't know if some of the other authors might say
nothing's going to happen, that we should ignore it, or that it's
not our fault," said Steve Schroeder, a professor at Texas
A&M university.
The contents of the IPCC report have been an open secret
since the Bush administration posted its draft copy on the
internet in April. It says there is a 90% chance that human
activity is warming the planet, and that global average
temperatures will rise by another 1.5 to 5.8C this century,
depending on emissions.
Lord Rees of Ludlow, the president of the Royal Society,
Britain's most prestigious scientific institute, said: "The IPCC
is the world's leading authority on climate change and its latest
report will provide a comprehensive picture of the latest
scientific understanding on the issue. It is expected to stress,
more convincingly than ever before, that our planet is already
warming due to human actions, and that 'business as usual'
would lead to unacceptable risks, underscoring the urgent
need for concerted international action to reduce the worst
impacts of climate change. However, yet again, there will be a
vocal minority with their own agendas who will try to suggest
otherwise."
Ben Stewart of Greenpeace said: "The AEI is more than just
a thinktank, it functions as the Bush administration's
intellectual Cosa Nostra. They are White House surrogates in
the last throes of their campaign of climate change denial.
They lost on the science; they lost on the moral case for
action. All they've got left is a suitcase full of cash."
On Monday, another Exxon-funded organisation based in
Canada will launch a review in London which casts doubt on
the IPCC report. Among its authors are Tad Murty, a former
scientist who believes human activity makes no contribution to
global warming. Confirmed VIPs attending include Nigel
Lawson and David Bellamy, who believes there is no link
between burning fossil fuels and global warming.
.
|
