A new report contends fossil fuel funding has biased Columbia University's climate research.

The report, by two Columbia students, shows the university has taken in close to $48 million in donations from the fossil fuel industry since 2005. Around $16 million went to fund Columbia's Center on Global Energy Policy.

Leel Dias, an environmental science major and report co-author, is convinced this funding has slanted the center's research. He cited a 2014 paper about the impacts of the U.S. ending its then-ban on exporting crude oil.

"A CEO of a natural gas company is listed as a contributor on this report. His name is Charif Souki; no disclaimers, no disclosures. All these reports by CGEP, I think the vast majority of them are not peer-reviewed, so there's no check. They're just published on the CGEP website," Dias said.

He added this study was a key factor when Congress ended the country's crude oil export ban in 2015. But Columbia isn't alone in this. Fossil fuel companies sponsor climate research at other schools, from Princeton and Stanford to George Washington University.

Other findings show some advisory board members for Columbia research centers are also on the boards of fossil fuel companies. Columbia University officials couldn't be reached for comment.

The research includes memos from fossil fuel companies suggesting Columbia University has been complicit in 'greenwashing' them.

Anika Kathuria, a computer science major and report co-author, said another conclusion is that Jason Bordoff, the Center for Global Energy Policy's founding director, might be swaying the center's research agenda.

"He has basically been talked about by numerous companies as this kind of 'corporate counselor' figure, where they will go to him to decide - to make decisions, decide what research paths they're going to go on. And it doesn't really make sense why the head of a center of research would be counseling corporate interests," Kathuria said.

The authors added that one goal of the report is to aid the newly formed student and faculty committee in examining fossil fuel research funding. The committee is slated to release a final report next fall, with guidelines for the university about this type of research funding.


get more stories like this via email

Christmas, it turns out, is for the birds, at least for those that will be counted this year in the National Audubon Society's Christmas Bird Count.

The nearly monthlong bird count takes place around the country. Birders will go through a circled area with a 15-mile radius, counting the number of birds they see or hear.

Steve Sheffield, professor of biology at Bowie State University and vice president of the Maryland Ornithological Society, said the data gathered across the country will help map the trends and movements in bird populations.

"You can look at the population trends of each of the species and see where they're headed, whether their trajectory is up or down or whether they're stable," Sheffield outlined. "You can also look at where you are seeing the numbers. You're getting an idea of how the birds are moving due to climate change."

For counters who can identify bird calls, Sheffield noted they only need to hear a bird in order to count it, which helps with species flying silently, such as owls.

Sheffield emphasized collecting a century's worth of data is invaluable to bird conservation efforts. Birds, he added, are often a strong indicator of the overall health of ecosystems and are easily found and measured the world over.

One of the trends the bird count tracks is what Sheffield called "irruptive species," those forced to move south because food supplies in their local ecosystems run low.

"We get these birds showing up, like snowy owls, evening grosbeaks, purple finches, red-breasted nuthatches," Sheffield observed. "You could go several years and you won't find any of them. All of a sudden, one year, you have many of those species. That tells you some information about their habitat conditions."

The bird count begins Dec. 14 and goes through Jan. 5. The count is conducted by thousands of volunteers in more than 20 countries in the Western Hemisphere.


get more stories like this via email

A New Mexico agency has stepped up vigilance of the state's limited water resources.

On Tuesday, the New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission approved a designation to protect more than 250 miles in five watersheds, including the Rio Grande. A coalition of state groups including anglers, local governments, acequia members and conservation groups were seeking the "Outstanding National Resource Waters" designation.

Ralph Vigil, northern organizer for the nonprofit New Mexico Wild, said the classification will protect traditional community water uses and safeguard waterways from the degradation new uses often inflict.

"I think that we, as people living in this time, need to take the necessary steps," Vigil asserted. "Because I believe we're living in a tipping point where either we do it or we're going to get to a point that it's so far gone that there's no such thing as clean water anymore."

The designation protects traditional community water uses and safeguard waterways from degradation from mining, development and transportation, waste disposal, recreational overuse and the effects of climate change. It will also help sustain outdoor activities such as fishing, hunting, hiking and camping.

Nick Streit, executive director of Friends of Rio Grande del Norte National Monument and co-owner of the Taos Fly Shop, explained the value of protecting the resource.

"My father started the business back in 1980 and I've been running it with my wife for the last 20 years and it's our sole income," Streit explained. "Protecting the water is also protecting kind-of our livelihood."

Vigil, an organic farmer, said clean rivers and streams are vital to New Mexico's agricultural economy, which depends on clean water to grow healthy crops.

"As we move forward with uncertainty as far as what might happen to our protections for clean water throughout the state this whole ONRW designation will help ensure that more of our streams within our state are protected," Vigil emphasized.

Some conservationists worry the incoming Trump administration will repeal clean water legislation approved by President Joe Biden, including an order for utilities to start ridding the nation's drinking water of forever chemicals known as PFAS, which are linked to cancer and other health risks.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Protesters are gathering at the Columbus Public Safety Building today to voice opposition to plans that could expand fracking activities near the state's parks.

Participants are raising concerns over environmental and health risks, emphasizing the potential dangers to Ohio's natural spaces.

Jenny Morgan, a longtime activist and environmental advocate, highlighted the potential health hazards associated with fracking.

"This accident-prone industry that uses dangerous chemicals, creates radioactive waste," said Morgan. "Ohio park lovers are not being properly informed of the risk to the lands that they own, where they take their children. It's wrong."

Morgan cited a 2022 Harvard study linking fracking to increased radioactive particles in areas downwind of drilling sites.

The Ohio Oil and Gas Association defends the industry, asserting that advances in technology and oversight minimize risks, while emphasizing the economic benefits and jobs it brings to the state.

Melinda Zemper - a steering committee member of Save Ohio Parks - stressed the importance of preserving Ohio's public lands for future generations, and said the public deserves more transparency about the long-term effects of fracking.

"These are public lands that belong to the people of Ohio, not to one or two political administrations," said Zemper. "We want our children - and our grandchildren - to be able to enjoy these natural resources in perpetuity, because that's how they were established."

Roxanne Groff, a former Athens County commissioner and environmental activist, noted how industry promises have shaped local perceptions.

"Sadly," said Groff, "what keeps most people from Appalachia from participating in the protesting is they believe the industry lies that they are going to get jobs, and they're going make money, and their communities are going to prosper. People fight to get their leases bought."

The protest, set to take place at 12:15 p.m, is part of a growing movement across Ohio to raise awareness about the environmental costs of fracking.




get more stories like this via email