Tuesday, September 16, 2014 / PROGRESSIVE JOURNALISM FOR POSITIVE ACTION
Get Email Updates | Log In | Register

UT-Austin Administration Distances Itself from “Frackademia” Study

Steve Horn
DeSmogBlog / News Report
Published: Friday 7 December 2012
UT-Austin's administration, in effect, has decided to distance itself from the report due to its numerous conflicts-of-interest, though unlike the SRSI, the Energy Institute won't be ended.
Article image

Weeks after SUNY Buffalo's upper-level administration gave the Shale Resources and Society Institute (SRSI) the boot due to its gas industry public relations effort masked as a "study," University of Texas-Austin's (UT-Austin) administrationhas somewhat followed suit for its own "frackademia" study.

The decision comes in the aftermath of an independent review of a controversial study completed under UT-Austin's auspices. 

Like SRSI's "shill gas study," UT-Austin brought itself attention when it published a "study" in February 2012 titled, "Separating Fact From Fiction in Shale Gas Development." UT-Austin's study - conducted under the wings of its Energy Institute - claimed that there's "no scientific proof" that unconventional oil and gas developement can be linked to groundwater contamination.

As it turns out, the author's lead investigator, Charles "Chip" Groat is on the payroll of the oil and gas industry via Plains Exploration & Production, a direct conflict-of-interest under the standards of academia (not to be confused with those of "frackademia"). "Groat earned more than double his University of Texas salary as a PXP board member in 2011 – $413,900 as opposed to $173,273 – and he has amassed over $1.6 million in stock during his tenure there," Public Accountability Institute (PAI) explained in a report.

The embarassment created by these revelations moved Groat to retire after the spring semester, while the head of the Energy Institute, Raymond Orbach, stepped down today as head of the Institute, though he'll still remain on the UT-Austin faculty.  

UT-Austin's administration, in effect, has decided to distance itself from the report due to its numerous conflicts-of-interest, though unlike the SRSI, the Energy Institute won't be ended.

"The school said it will undertake six recommended actions, the most significant being the withdrawal of papers from the Energy Institute’s Web site related to the report until they are submitted for fresh expert review," explained The New York Times.

Kevin Connor, Director of PAI, issued this statement in response to UT-Austin's decision:

The University of Texas has now joined the University at Buffalo in sending a strong message to the oil and gas industry: our universities are not for sale. This is another major blow to gas industry pseudoscience and a victory for academic integrity in the debate around fracking.

The University of Texas deserves credit for taking a difficult but important stand for transparency and integrity by releasing this review and pursuing these recommendations.

U of Michigan: The Next Frontier for "Frackademia"?

This announcement comes soon after University of Michigan-Ann Arbor stated it would be conducting its own forthcoming two-year study on the ecological impacts of fracking in Michigan.

"Industry representatives, nongovernmental organizations, state government officials, academic experts and other stakeholders are providing input," explained University of Michigan in a press release

Members of the study's Steering Committee include two representatives of the Michigan Oil and Gas Association and members of Republican Gov. Rick Snyder's cabinet, along with several university-affiliated faculty members. 

A Dec. 3 story by Energy and Environment News explained that Energy in Depth, the shale gas industry front group, will also be deeply involved with the study. 

"Some of those stakeholders are being pulled in as resources for the UM study, said Energy in Depth Field Director Erik Bauss, whom UM researchers have already called on to help facilitate a visit to a Michigan frack site," wrote E and E

Given the recent state of play for "frackademics," DeSmog will be keeping a close eye on the Michigan study in the weeks and months ahead. Stay tuned. 



ABOUT Steve Horn

 

Steve Horn is a Madison, WI-based Research Fellow at DeSmogBlog. He is also a freelance investigative journalist whose work has appeared in Al Jazeera America, The Guardian, The Progressive Magazine, CounterPunch Magazine, TruthOut and others. Follow him on Twitter at @SteveAHorn.

Any study coming from

Any study coming from private or public institution which draws money from dirty energy should be suspect. With trillion dollars profit (derived from price gouging and escaping windfall profit taxation), the dirty energy seems to have extended its tentacles into all areas of life to influence intellectual processes and content. Everything is for sale, including the universities/faculty for the right price. Luckily, those not getting the money will reveal the facts and will enable the rest to stop the moneybags agenda at the expense of 99%.

Fracking is worse. We soon

Fracking is worse. We soon will safely dispose of spent nuclear waste...Fracking, however, poses a much more challenging and difficult condition to re-balance.

Fracking, like nuclear power,

Fracking, like nuclear power, needs to be totally banned

Comment with your Facebook account



Comment with your Disqus account

Top Stories

comments powered by Disqus

NationofChange works to educate, inform, and fight power with people, corruption with community.

If you would like to stay up to date with the best in independent, filter-free journalism, updates on upcoming events to attend, and more, enter your email below:

7 Compelling Reasons Why You Should Support NationofChange

Our readers often tell us why they’ve decided to step up and become supporters. Here are some of the top reasons people are giving.

1. You’re keeping independent journalism alive
The corporate owned media has proven that it can’t be trusted. In a media landscape wrought with spin and corruption, NationofChange stands in very scarce company.

2. You’re sticking it to the rich, powerful, and corrupt
When you have money in this country you can get away with damn near anything, and they do. NationofChange isn’t afraid to expose these criminals no matter how powerful they are.

3. Your donation is 100% tax-deductible
NationofChange is a 501(c)3 charity. People tend to assume that many other organizations are (most nonprofits are NOT) but it’s that 501(c)3 status is a bit more rare than you think.

Read the rest...