Climate groups push for transparency in alleged fossil fuel education influence

Climate advocacy groups are calling on officials to crack down on the fossil fuel industry’s role in K-12 education, suggesting its alleged influence has gone largely unchecked in the absence of robust climate change education.

A report released Tuesday by the groups For Our Kids and Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment suggests at least 39 oil and gas companies exercised some measure of education influence, from sponsoring public school science fairs to supplying lessons that the report alleges downplay the harms associated with their operations.

The report suggests the industry’s most common influence tactic is establishing or funding third-party education non-profits that supply material to teachers and run programs related to energy, environment and climate change.

“While it is certainly the case that many of the educators employed by industry-funded organizations make valuable contributions to environmental and climate change education, the evidence suggests that industry involvement influences the choice of topics covered, and what gets omitted,” the report says.

“By maintaining a presence in schools and funding education groups, the industry has long been able to shape the public’s understanding of climate change, using misinformation to position fossil fuels as benign, protect industry interests and delay climate action.”

The report, which was not peer-reviewed, says a “non-exhaustive” look at the non-profits’ online footprint found only one of at least six groups offered education material on the need to transition away from fossil fuels.

In other cases, the report points to education material that labelled natural gas as a clean fuel without mention of the potency of methane, its main component, as a greenhouse gas or fracking’s environmental impact. It also cites cases of alleged greenwashing in lessons that promote the industry as environmentally friendly, while omitting its contribution to biodiversity loss and climate change.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, an oil and gas industry association, did not respond to requests for comment.

Anne Keary, the report’s co-author, says schools should not accept fossil fuel-funded climate education, in the same way they would not accept tobacco-funded health education.

“Given the industry’s long history of funding denial and funding misinformation and continued lobbying against climate policy … it’s a very problematic source of funds for any organization in the business of educating kids,” said Keary, a former assistant professor who holds a PhD in history and is active in Toronto climate advocacy.

“I don’t imagine the fossil fuel industry is out there saying, ‘OK, these are the messages we need you to convey in your materials.’ But I do imagine that if you are receiving money from this industry, you’re not going to be super critical of them. That’s the crux of it.”

One of the non-profits featured prominently in the report is Alberta-based Inside Education, a group established in the 1980s and backed by industry funders. Several of its board members also represent oil and gas companies.

Among the group’s material highlighted in the report is an “oilsands field trip” program for middle school students that “proposes concerns and solutions to oilsands production, striking a balance between energy and environmental needs.” The report also highlights an “energy dialogues” unit that suggests students discuss the pros and cons of fracking.

The report cites those as examples of the oil and gas companies’ “bias balanced” approach — one of several alleged tactics detailed in the report. The approach, the report suggests, holds that lesson plans that do not include industry perspectives are unfairly biased against them.

The report quotes a former executive of a separate Canadian education non-profit as telling Oilweek magazine in 1999 that it “can’t put propaganda into the school system,” but it could promote industry perspectives by getting “bias balanced information into their hands.”

Asked to comment on the report’s findings, Inside Education’s executive director said its programs were developed by staff, most of whom had degrees in education, science or both, with the advice and input of “educators and content experts from a wide variety of backgrounds.”

“They are in no way led, approved or dictated by any of our funders or board members,” executive director Kathryn Wagner said in a written statement.

Inside Education’s intent, she said, is to help teachers challenge their students to decide where they fit on the “spectrum of ideas” on environmental and energy resource topics and issues — teaching them “how to think critically, not what to think.”

She said the organization receives funding from the governments of Alberta and Canada, as well as the City of Edmonton, among others. Wagner said “less than half” of the organization’s annual funding comes from oil and gas companies. The group reported $2.1 million in revenue in 2023.

Scrutiny of the industry’s role in education has been well-documented.

In 2013, Vancouver high school students launched a letter-writing campaign against Canadian Geographic’s partnership with oil and gas companies on education programs.

More recently, CAPE, one of the groups that backed Tuesday’s report, led pushback in 2022 to an education program developed by FortisBC, a utility and British Columbia’s largest natural gas distributor.

In a statement posted to its website, FortisBC defended the material and suggested that as a utility, it was required by law to create education programs.

Tuesday’s report argues the industry’s support for education groups has taken place in a vacuum of reliable and independent climate and environment education materials for public school teachers.

The climate education gap was noted in a discussion paper prepared last year for the federal government, which is in the process of developing a national framework on environmental learning.

“Although an important issue for Canadians, environmental education in Canadian classrooms remains limited,” it said.

Among its many recommendations, Tuesday’s report says a future national environmental education framework should ensure all parties involved in consultations declare any perceived or actual conflicts of interest.

The report also suggests government education funding should only go to groups that state their intent to support Canada’s international climate commitments, including the transition away from fossil fuels.

At the provincial level, the report says governments should require education non-profits to publicly disclose their corporate funders and the organizations represented by their board members. It suggests provinces prohibit groups from providing education resources if they have ties to the oil and gas industry.

And at the local level, the report suggests school boards promote “fossil-free” resources and establish a vetting process to identify and prohibit fossil-fuel funded educational resources.

The report was produced with funding support from The Raffi Foundation for Child Honouring, the charity founded by popular singer Raffi Cavoukian, known for children’s music.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 19, 2025.

Jordan Omstead, The Canadian Press