Today we’re bringing you a new development in last week’s investigation of the American Geophysical Union’s harsh response to a peaceful protest by two climate scientists. 

In case you missed it: AGU, the world’s largest Earth science organization, banned Rose Abramoff and Peter Kalmus from the conference, threatened them with arrest if they re-entered, and withdrew their research from the annual event. Abramoff was subsequently fired by her employer, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 

The incident sparked condemnation from many in the scientific community. And now, following HEATED and other outlets’ reporting on the incident, Senator Edward Markey is also expressing concern—and demanding answers about the organization’s actions, as well as its relationship with fossil fuel companies.

Markey: AGU’s response a “gross overreaction”

In a letter to AGU president Lisa Graumlich on Friday, Markey called AGU’s response to the protest a “gross overreaction” that could have “a chilling effect on scientifically informed activism.” 

The Democratic senator from Massachusetts also submitted a list of questions to Graumlich seeking clarification about AGU’s response to the protest. Markey’s list included many of the questions posed in HEATED’s investigation, namely:

• Did anyone at AGU threaten Abramoff and Kalmus with arrest? Why?

• Did AGU notify their employers?

• Why did AGU withdraw the scientists’ research from the conference, and is that in keeping with their own Ethics Policy?

• Does AGU believe that firing is an appropriate response to a peaceful protest?

To recap our reporting, HEATED found out the following answers to those questions last week:

• Abramoff and Kalmus confirmed they were threatened with arrest by an AGU official, who they wouldn’t name. AGU told HEATED someone else may have threatened arrest and that the question was part of their ethics investigation.

• HEATED independently identified the AGU official as vice president of Meetings Lauren Parr. When asked to confirm this, AGU repeatedly discouraged HEATED from naming Parr, claiming she had been receiving significant harassment and death threats. AGU declined to provide HEATED with evidence of the harassment. 

• Abramoff said that an AGU official told her employer about the protest. AGU told HEATED they couldn’t answer the question because it was under investigation. 

• AGU did withdraw the scientists’ research, which appears to be in direct conflict with its own ethics policy. AGU’s ethics policy says that withdrawing a scientist’s research is a sanction that follows an investigation, not an automatic response, and doesn’t list it as a repercussion for violations of their conference’s ethics code. 

• AGU would not respond to HEATED’s questions about whether their response was appropriate, citing the ongoing investigation.

AGU’s fossil fuel funding

In Friday’s letter, Markey also asked AGU whether the organization is funded by fossil fuel companies.

HEATED dug into this question as well, but didn’t have room to include it in last week’s story. Here’s what we found out:

• An AGU spokesperson told HEATED that Chevron contributed to AGU in 2022 with money earmarked for AGU’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging initiatives. We could not confirm if the 2022 conference was funded by other fossil fuel companies because AGU did not provide HEATED with a full list of their conference sponsors, either for last week’s story or this one story (as of time of publication).

• There were representatives of the fossil fuel industry at the 2022 conference. HEATED found scientists and engineers from  Exxon, Chevron, BP, Aramco, PetroChina, and Equinor among the participants presenting research.

• Chevron last publicly appeared as an AGU sponsor in 2020. Other sponsors from that year include GE and Saudi Arabia’s Prince Sultan Bin Abdulaziz’s International Prize for Water. 

• Chevron was also a sponsor in 2019. Reports from 2018 and older don’t list sponsors or donors.

It should be noted that sponsorships make up the smallest share of AGU’s revenue: In 2020, AGU earned $17.5 million from their scientific publications, compared to $95,000 from sponsors.

But AGU has a reputation for taking fossil fuel funding. Exxon donated over $620,000 from 2001 to 2015. AGU voted in April 2016 to continue Exxon’s sponsorship, despite intense backlash following initial reports revealing Exxon’s funding. Instead, Exxon decided to drop AGU in December 2016. 

AGU is the world’s largest Earth sciences conference, and the organization says it is actively trying to solve the climate crisis. Its acceptance of funding from the fossil fuel industry raises questions of a conflict of interest.

We’ll be keeping an eye on this story, and will update you if we hear back from AGU.

HEATED’s climate accountability journalism is making a difference—but we need our readers’ help to keep it going. Currently, only a very small percentage of our subscribers are paid. If you support this work, please consider joining that community of paid subscribers today. Your help really makes a difference for us.

Bonus Catch of the Day: Fish would never allow us to send you a late Friday e-mail without also including some of his furry friends.

Today’s catch is a two-for-one fluff fest via reader Byron, who shares his life with one-year-old brothers Edward and Alphonse.

These Salem, Oregon-based furry bums love greek yogurt; have an expensive taste in the things they prefer to scratch; and think Exxon executives can take a hike (but not with them!!)

Want to see your furry (or non-furry!) friend in HEATED? Send a picture and some words to catchoftheday@heated.world.

(We currently have a lot of submissions, so it may take a few months! But we’ll get to it!)