Environmental campaigners and climate scientists have been engaging in a merry bout of schadenfreude after the disclosure of sensitive internal documents from the , a free-market think tank based in Chicago that has been at the forefront of lobbying against cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions.
The 鈥渄eniergate鈥� documents, as they have been rapidly dubbed, appear to reveal details of the institute鈥檚 past and future planned funding arrangements, including the names of many donors. They also show major activities apparently planned by the institute this year, including efforts to influence public debate about climate change.
The institute describes its mission as 鈥渢o discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems鈥�. Heartland has been particularly active in lobbying against environmental regulation of businesses in the US, stating on its website that .
Advertisement
Donors divulged
Its website notes that Heartland 鈥渄oes not reveal to the public the identities of its donors or the amount of their gifts鈥�. However, the names of many of its secret donors have now been made public in the internal memos. One of the documents, a 29-page paper labelled indicates that the institute hopes to raise $7.7聽million this year from sources such as the , reputedly a major funder of the Tea Party movement, and companies including GlaxoSmithKline, Microsoft Corporation, Pfizer, Reynolds American (which owns a number of tobacco firms) and Time Warner Cable.
Much of the funding has been earmarked for specific initiatives, according to the document, including the , which is expected to gain support from 鈥渋nvestors in drug companies鈥� because 鈥渕any wealthy individuals have strong personal motivation to see faster access to potentially life-saving new drugs become a reality鈥�.
However, it is the funding for activities related to climate change that have attracted the most interest since the documents were posted on the websites of environmental campaign groups such as .
Planned projects
According to the papers, one 鈥渁nonymous donor鈥� gave $13.3 million to the institute between 2007 and 2011, including $8.6 million for 鈥済lobal warming projects鈥�.
The fundraising plan also suggests that the same donor will give $1.25 million this year, including $338,000 for three activities related to climate change, such as the development of teaching materials for schools. These materials would, for instance, emphasise 鈥渨hether humans are changing the climate is a major scientific controversy鈥� and 鈥渨hether CO2 is a pollutant is controversial鈥�.
The plan indicates that the schools project will be led by David Wojick, who the institute describes as 鈥渁 consultant with the Office of Science and Technical Information at the US Department of Energy in the area of information and communication science鈥�.
The institute is also seeking funding for 鈥渁n international network of scientists who write and speak out on climate change鈥� to work on the update of a volume which is described as 鈥渢he most comprehensive and authoritative rebuttal of the United Nations鈥� IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] reports鈥�.
Flow of funds
A 33-page document headed outlines proposed payments to members of the network, including , , formerly of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, of James Cook University in Townsville, Queensland, Australia, and of the in Cambridge, Massachusetts 鈥� all well-known climate-change sceptics.
However, the budget document does not include any arrangements for a major gathering of climate-change sceptics of the sort that the institute has organised in previous years. A featured speeches from members of the institute鈥檚 network, as well as sceptics from other countries, including the controversial right-wing British blogger, .
The institute strikes back
Responding through a , the Heartland Institute has alleged that the documents were stolen by 鈥渁n unknown person who fraudulently assumed the identity of a Heartland board member and persuaded a staff member here to 鈥榬e-send鈥� board materials to a new email address鈥�.
The institute鈥檚 release claimed that a two-page document posted alongside the other papers on the website of DeSmogBlog and headed 鈥淐onfidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy鈥� is 鈥渁 total fake鈥�.
The release also attacked those who had been discussing the documents in the mainstream and social media, complaining: 鈥淭hose persons who posted these documents and wrote about them before we had a chance to comment on their authenticity should be ashamed of their deeds, and their bad behaviour should be taken into account when judging their credibility now and in the future.鈥�
However, many commentators have pointed out that the institute was very quick to publicise the emails which were hacked from the University of East Anglia in Norwich and posted on websites in November 2009, creating the 鈥渃limategate鈥� controversy.
Indeed, in November the institute seized on the publication of a second batch of hacked emails from the university. , , senior fellow for environment policy at the institute, quoted extensively from a number of messages, offering the justification that 鈥淸m]ore than revealing misconduct and improper motives, the newly released emails additionally reveal frank admissions of the scientific shortcomings of global warming assertions鈥�.
It is not known who obtained and distributed the documents from the Heartland Institute. They were sent together with an email, a copy of which was received by the science writer , which began:
It remains to be seen whether the 鈥渄eniergate鈥� documents generate as much sustained controversy as the climategate emails.
