Activists have criticised Oxford Climate Forum, after it emerged that the main sponsor invests millions researching oil extraction.
The main strategic partner of the event is IBM, which promotes research in tar sands, a controversial and expensive form of sourcing fossil fuels. The Oxford Hub, which helps organise the event, has also received criticism for its partnership with Barclays, which is an investor in tar sands.
The conference, which is due to be held from 7th-8th February at the Saïd Business School, will have a particular emphasis on careers in sustainable industries.
IBM’s sustainability initiative, ‘Smarter Planet’ recently opened a Natural Resources Solution Centre in Calgary, Canada to promote “smarter” processes for the petroleum and mining industries. According to a document recently released by IBM, “The Canadian NRSC has the distinction of being the first Centre of Excellence to focus specifically on creating solutions for Canada’s resource industries, such as oil sands petroleum production and Canadian hard rock mining”.
The news comes a week after the OUSU Council passed a motion at its 1st week meeting, requesting that the University “puts safeguards in place to ensure the University does not indirectly invest in fossil fuel companies”.
A spokesperson for the Forum said, “IBM will be present at our event and hold a stall at our careers fair because they have been very generous in their sponsorship with us and the Hub as a whole, but the message of our event is very clear.
“The large companies that will be present at our careers fair will be offering positions in their sustainability departments rather than advertising the usual consulting positions.”
Several local activist groups have criticised the partnership. Louise Hazan, Climate Campaigns Manager for People and Planet, an Oxford-based, nationwide student activism network, said, “If it’s wrong to wreck the climate by extracting fossil fuels, People & Planet believes it’s wrong to accept sponsorship from companies who profit from and actively support the continued extraction of fossil fuels.
“Those of us working to create solutions to the climate crisis must model the responsible behaviour that we expect of others, which is why it’s frustrating to see worthwhile events like the Oxford Climate Forum lending their valuable social license to the very companies responsible for causing climate change.”
Danny Chivers, environmental researcher and author of the No-Nonsense Guide to Climate Change, questioned the message that the partnership was sending out. “If wewant to maintain a liveable climate, we simply cannot afford to extract tar sands oil. By providing services and resources to the tar sands industry, IBM is actively pushing us all towards climate meltdown.
“I spoke at the Oxford Climate Forum a few years ago and it seemed like a useful event. However, by accepting sponsorship from IBM, they are undermining any good the event is doing by helping to greenwash this polluting company.”
He concluded, “I hope that this sponsorship deal was simply an error, and that the OCF will realise their mistake and drop this inappropriate sponsor.”
Ruthi Brandt of the Oxford-based UK Tar Sands Network also criticised the decision. “We are very glad to see students questioning sponsorship deals and using them as an opportunity to discuss the human rights abuses perpretrated by the fossil fuel industry.”
The Oxford Hub has defended its partnership with Barclays. A spokesperson said, “We’re working with IBM because the climate forum shares their ambitions of building a smarter planet, as it were. We can’t control the investments that they make, but what we can control is the quality of the conference, which will be very, very high.”
They continued, “[Tar sands] in particular may not be the most environmentally sustainable process, but broadly speaking, IBM and other organisations working at the conference, for example Unilever, are really committed to a more sustainable future, and that’s the point that we’re trying to get across here.”
OUSU has so far been advertising the Oxford Climate Forum. An email shown to Cherwell from the organising committee to a member of OUSU Environment and Ethics’s Divestment Campaign justifying the decision read, “We are by no means indulging in green wash nor trying to justify IBM’s involvement with fossil fuel extraction. I hope you understand our position and that you are still willing to help us advertise our conference so that we can have as big an impact as we can with both attending companies and students.”
Many students at Oxford have responded negatively to the news. Abi Enlander, Environment and Ethics Trustee at Magdalen College, told Cherwell, “It’s a tricky one with the Hub because they do a lot of good work here and it must be hard getting enough funding without resorting to big companies that often, unfortunately, have these sort of ties. Obviously it’s ideal for any charity to ensure they’re only funded by ethical sources, but in today’s financial environment this often isn’t a reality that can be achieved.”
She added, “There also seems to be a big difference in receiving money from companies that invest in tar mining than, as investors, actually giving this project the money it uses to sustain itself; perhaps the Climate Forum should reconsider its sponsorship from IBM as it does seem somewhat ironic given what the event is trying to achieve.”
Tar sands are loose sands containing bitumen (tar) – a dense and highly viscous form of petroleum. According to the 2009 study by IHS CERA, the production of bitumen and synthetic crude oil emits more greenhouse gases than conventional crude oil. The environmental issues associated with tar sands range from water pollution to soil erosion to possible carcinogenic effects. Tar sands have only recently become viable for oil companies due to the high extraction costs involved.
IBM and Barclays were unavailable for comment when approached by Cherwell.
