Stanford denies Big Oil U. status

| 2 min read

A Stanford University official has denied linkurl:allegations;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54188/ that the university's climate and energy research is influenced by its corporate sponsors. The linkurl:report,;http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bigoilu.pdf released by Center for Science in the Public Interest accused Stanford and other major US universities of granting energy company sponsors control over research and publication. But Franklin Orr, the director of Stanford's linkurl:Global Climate and Energy Project;http://gcep.stanford.edu/index.html (GCEP), said that its findings are inaccurate because CSPI boiled down the university's nuanced responses to survey questions to simple yes or no answers. For example, said Orr, for the question "Can the sponsors delay research publication?" Stanford scored a "yes." But sponsors can only delay publication when the research contains potentially patentable ideas. In these cases, corporate funders can delay publication for up to 60 days to decide whether to pursue patents based on the work. "[CSPI] chose to portray it as the company is determining the research," Orr told __The Scientist__. "[Sponsors] don't get to review papers before they get published." GCEP is funded with a ten-year, $225 million grant from ExxonMobil, Toyota, General Electric and oilfield services technology company Schlumberger. Its research includes studies on solar and hydrogen energy generation and carbon dioxide storage. Orr encouraged those who see a conflict in GCEP's relationship with its corporate sponsors to examine the project itself. "What we would like people to do is to actually look at what we do," he said. "The argument that somehow we've been bought to do research in a certain area simply isn't right. [GCEP] researchers conduct themselves without any interference from the sponsors or anyone else." Merrill Goozner, one of the authors of the CSPI report (but not the author who interviewed Stanford), stood by the report's findings. Goozner told The Scientist that, nuanced or not, most of the university's responses indicated an inappropriate relationship to corporate funders "These grants have strings attached," he said. "I don't think you can ignore that those strings are there." Those strings shift the work "to the side of contract research and away from the tradition of pure and independent, investigator-driven research," Goozner said. "How far it's driven in that direction is open to interpretation."

Stanford denies Big Oil U. status

The Scientist ARCHIVES

Become a Member of

Meet the Author

Bob Grant

Related Research Resources

Study Confirms Safety of Genetically Modified T Cells

Research Resources

Podcasts

Webinars

Videos

Infographics

eBooks

TaqMan Probe & Assays: Unveil What's Possible Together

Meet Aunty and Tackle Protein Stability Questions in Research and Development

Detecting Residual Cell Line-Derived DNA with Droplet Digital PCR

Making Real-Time PCR More Straightforward

Products

Product News

Biotium Launches New Phalloidin Conjugates with Extended F-actin Staining Stability for Greater Imaging Flexibility

Latest AI software simplifies image analysis and speeds up insights for scientists

BioSkryb Genomics and Tecan introduce a single-cell multiomics workflow for sequencing-ready libraries in under ten hours

Agilent BioTek Cytation C10 Confocal Imaging Reader