UU can still start new projects with polluting fossil fuel companies

"Substandard" and “very disappointing”. That's how UU student Lies (DUB's editors know her surname), from End Fossil Occupy, describes the new assessment framework for partnerships with the fossil fuel industry. "UU went back on all its promises. The assessment framework reads like a summary of what UU is already doing. Nothing is changing. They only say they will be more critical when examining new collaborations. This framework shows a lack of moral leadership." End Fossil is considering new protests and disruptive actions.

Members of Scientists for Future (S4F) are also critical of the assessment framework. In a letter to the University Council, they say UU is breaking "its previous promise" to only enter into partnerships with fossil fuel companies that adhere to the Paris Agreement.

Promise
In 2023, the Executive Board announced that it would no longer enter into new partnerships with fossil fuel companies that did not sufficiently commit to the Paris Agreement. The board made this announcement after climate activists from End Fossil Occupy occupied the Minnaert building.

Fossil fuel companies would need to demonstrate their efforts to limit global warming to 2 degrees, preferably 1.5 degrees to continue to work with UU. Fossil fuel companies currently finance scientific research in which UU researchers are involved, as well as consortia in which UU participates. They also provide guest speakers for lectures and sponsor events organised by study associations.

For a year and a half, an expert group assembled by the Executive Board worked on an assessment framework for new collaborations with the fossil fuel industry. In the meantime, UU gave the green light for three research projects with oil companies BP and TotalEnergies, arguing that these will contribute to the fight against global warming.

Partner test
The new assessment framework (only accessible to users with a Solis ID, Ed.) has now been finalised and is currently being discussed with the University Council. UU will now have a test to check which fossil fuel companies are demonstrably committed to the Paris objectives. The Climate Action 100+ benchmark is being used for this purpose.

Companies that play an important role in the energy transition are assessed on several criteria, including their ambition to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2025 or earlier; and their short, medium and long-term greenhouse gas reduction targets.

Depending on the criterion, fossil fuel companies must score green or orange on UU's scale to be considered as a suitable partner. Maarten Flinkenflögel, policy officer at the Student & Academic Affairs Office (SO&O), said in the University Council meeting held on February 17 that, right now, "no fossil fuel company passes the partner test".

Exceptions
Although UU does not want to enter into new partnerships with the fossil fuel industry, the assessment framework makes an exception for companies that do not pass the partner test. A scientist can submit a partnership proposal to the university advisory committee if the research contributes to the energy and materials transition.

Exceptions are still possible for a transitional period of five years. Inquiries with Maarten Flinkenflögel indicate that after that period, partnerships with polluting fossil fuel companies will no longer be possible, but he cannot guarantee this. "The world is changing, so I don't dare make any statements about that right now."

In addition, the assessment framework does not apply to new projects within existing consortia, even though most collaborations with the fossil fuel industry are part of these. The list of partnerships with the fossil fuel industry shows that thirteen out of nineteen ongoing partnerships are part of consortia.

Projects
Ina Vollmer, Assistant Professor of Chemistry and a member of Scientists for Future, has experience working with fossil fuel companies, but she has decided to stop doing that. She is disappointed that UU is not honouring previous agreements and fears that little will change with the new framework. "UU wasn't doing research into fracking anyway."

According to Vollmer, a project manager can still convince the advisory committee of the benefits of research with the fossil fuel industry. "The research may have a positive side, but the university's discourse was that it no longer wanted to enter into new partnerships with fossil companies. If Shell is not a suitable partner because the company has not committed to the Paris Agreement, it is pointless to consider whether a project with them can go ahead."

"The problem is that there is no subsequent review to determine whether such projects have contributed to the energy transition or if they are only being used for greenwashing. The university needs to keep an eye on that."

Lies believes fossil fuel companies will mainly use partnerships with UU to improve their image. "Fossil fuel companies that are not doing enough to meet the Paris Agreement tend to use these 'sustainable' projects with universities to guarantee their survival. Universities are very important to fossil fuel companies because they give them legitimacy."

Consortia
Lies and Ina Vollmer also find it strange that new projects within existing research consortia are excluded from the assessment framework. "It is the biggest exception in the framework," says Lies. "This means that existing consortia can continue to collaborate with companies like Shell for years to come.

UU writes that it would find it "particularly disappointing" if the existing consortia had to be terminated. The university warns of the major consequences this would have for the university and the individual researchers and research groups involved. The consortia bring in 33 million euros in funding, 2 million of which come from the fossil fuel industry.

"Experienced researchers have spent years building up networks in which they are fruitfully on important sustainability projects." UU believes that the problem "does not lie with the university, but with the fossil fuel companies that do not act based on scientific knowledge, court rulings and social signals."

Education 
When it comes to education, guest speakers, student challenges, traineeships and thesis projects are permitted as long as they emphasise the energy transition. The fossil fuel industry is not allowed to do things like arranging transport for excursions. Vollmer: "After all, this ensures that the fossil fuel industry retains access to a source of talent. They can maintain the positive image they want to have."

What remains of the promise to no longer enter into new partnerships with polluting fossil fuel companies? The Executive Board responds:
The Executive Board says in a written response: "It is true that the assessment framework currently being discussed with the University Council is not fully in line with what was decided in 2023. However, our approach is definitely changing as we are now going to thoroughly analyse prospective partners and projects. We did not know exactly how the framework would be designed back in 2023 and what the consequences would be. 

Through a carefully considered process, we have been able to better consider the substantive arguments and the diverse opinions within our community. The criticism levelled by S4F represents one of the many spectrums of existing opinions and was therefore taken into consideration. Many of the complex considerations made during the process are described in the framework. The background to some of the exceptions described is that we, as a university, want to be a reliable partner. We want to honour agreements made in the past and not make processes within existing projects unworkable. We are also convinced that the energy and materials transition will benefit if we carry out certain research projects. We will, however, take a much more critical look at both the intended partner(s) and the content of research projects."