Prestigious US universities are raking in millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests, raising concerns about conflicts of interest. And one university even appears to have owned a petroleum company from which it has earned millions of dollars, according to a spate of new reports produced by student organizers.
The six analyses, released Wednesday, focus on American University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Princeton University, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill and University of California, San Diego. They were written by campus organizers at each respective institution and released by Campus Climate Network, an international student-led coalition that is pushing colleges to cut ties with big oil.
“Fossil fuel companies are hijacking our universities to perpetuate their own toxic industry, and we students are not having it anymore,” Will Kattrup, a research lead at Campus Climate Network, said on Wednesday.
The researchers scraped tax forms for publicly disclosed donations to universities from oil companies’ charitable arms, scoured schools’ boards for names linked to fossil fuel interests and tracked conflict of interest statements in published academic articles to document fossil fuel funding. Students from public universities also filed public information requests to obtain additional financial information.
Since 2003, the researchers found, the six schools have together accepted over $100m in fossil fuel industry-tied funding, defined as money from fossil fuel companies or their charitable arms. Millions more in funding are coming from firms that “enable” the fossil fuel industry, the students said, such as banks that fund oil expansion or groups that have spread climate disinformation. These numbers are sure to be understatements, the students said, as most university research centers do not disclose their donors publicly, and as some students only tracked contributions over the past decade.
The six schools also published a collective 1,507 academic articles funded by oil and gas interests, raising the students’ concerns about bias. And the universities have placed numerous fossil fuel-tied individuals on various boards, including in some cases on governing boards which are often responsible for setting institutions’ policies.
Princeton University appears to own, or have owned, a fossil fuel company named Petrotiger – apparently named for the school’s mascot. The university appears to have earned nearly $140m over the last 10 years in investment income and direct financial contributions from the Houston-based oil and gas company, Alex Norbrook, a sophomore at the university who co-authored the report, found in a stunning revelation. More specifically, tax forms show that it for years owned the vast majority of shares in three entities, Petrotiger I, Petrotiger III and Petrotiger IV.
Princeton’s current ownership stake in Petrotiger is unclear, the students write; it appears to now only own shares of Petrotiger I from which it “earns more income than ever”. But the school continues to list each company as a “related organization” to the university, and from 2013 through 2023, it made nearly $70m from its investments in Petrotiger, including $22.5m in 2023, according to the report.
Asked for comment, a Princeton spokesperson noted the school’s commitments to cut ties with many fossil fuel companies. She did not respond to questions about Petrotiger. School officials also declined to comment on the university’s relationship with Petrotiger when asked by students, the report said.
Additionally, Princeton received $43m from fossil fuel companies and their charities from 2013 to 2023. It additionally reported over $350m in revenue from the oil and gas sector from its investments over the same time period. These financial relationships have persisted, the report said, despite the university’s September 2022 decision to dissociate from top fossil fuel companies.
“Princeton’s claim that it is a climate leader is false,” Norbrook said. “The university cannot make this claim while continuing to promote the fossil fuel industry behind the scenes.”
The university has previously come under fire for its ties to the oil sector, and particularly for its Carbon Mitigation Initiative, which has been funded by BP since it originated in 2000 and has placed little emphasis on fossil fuel phaseout. But the school also “supports oil and gas extraction in more direct ways”, said Norbrook, who also organizes with the campus group Divest Princeton.
American University, students found, has taken $1,004,784 in fossil fuel industry contributions in the past decade. From 2003 to 2023, it also accepted nearly $1.41m from the Koch Foundation, a charitable fund for petroleum conglomerate Koch Inc which has long been criticized for a history of sowing doubt in climate science.
“[T]he fossil fuel industry can brand itself onto the reputation of every university it donates to, no matter how upstanding or progressive,” the report said. The Koch Foundation did not respond to a request for comment.
The school has also placed industry-tied members on various boards. Gaurdie Banister, who heads an executive search firm, is a member of American’s board of trustees and also sits on the board of directors for oil and gas company Enbridge, which has come under fire by a United Nations body for its treatment of native groups’ human rights in the Great Lakes. Meanwhile, one of the university’s school of public affairs board members is the CEO of Aon, a private risk management company that advises fossil fuel clients on how to overcome regulatory challenges.
American University did not respond to a request for comment.
Columbia University, student researchers found, has taken $43,712,333 in funds from fossil fuel interests since 2005, and also produced 784 papers with funding from the industry.
Columbia’s Center on Global Energy Policy alone, the students found, has received over $15m in funding from the fossil fuel industry since it was founded in 2013. 2022 research found evidence that fossil fuel-funded research centers, including the Center on Global Energy Policy, are disproportionately likely to produce research that is favorable toward the continued use of gas. And Jason Bordoff, the founder of Center on Global Energy Policy, has worked with leading fossil fuel companies in various capacities, including by briefing Chevron top brass on the energy transition and its implications for Chevron, a congressional investigation this year found.
Columbia University did not respond to a request for comment.
The report comes amid increasing public scrutiny of the oil sector’s relationship with universities, including in an April report from Democrats on Capitol Hill. Efforts to push academic institutions to “dissociate” from fossil fuel companies are also ramping up on campuses across the country.
This month, researchers also published the most extensive peer-reviewed study to date of the industry’s influence on academia, finding that fossil fuel companies’ funding of universities’ climate-focused efforts is delaying fossil fuel phase-out.
Fossil fuel companies’ relationships with academic institutions can create the opportunities for bias in research and foster real or perceived conflicts of interest, the students wrote. The reports provide further evidence that universities should completely cut ties with the sector, they said.
“It’s time for our universities to become real climate leaders and cut ties with the fossil fuel industry once and for all,” said Maddie Young, research manager at Campus Climate Network and student organizer at Sunrise Movement American University.
