VICTORY PARTY: UB Closed Unscholarly Shale Institute

When: Friday, December 7, 5pm - 8:30pmTo be Rescheduled for a later date.

Where: Sportsmen's Tavern, 326 Amherst St., Buffalo [MAP]

What: Party with music by Five to One ($5 cover and Sandy relief donation at the door). Dancing, beer, fun, fellowship and awards.

All are Welcome - Invite your Friends

CWA Healthcare Coordinating Council Presents a Victory Salute to UB CLEAR and Friends (below) for helping UB shut down the unscholarly Shale Institute. Award Certificates will be presented at 6:30pm to:

• Jim Holstun - Chair, UB CLEAR (Coalition for Leading Ethically in Academic Research)

• David Kowalski – Re-ENERGIZE Buffalo Blog; UB CLEAR

• Buck Quigley – Associate Editor, ArtVoice

• Kevin Connor – Director, Public Accountability Initiative

We’ll also be passing the hat for  
Occupy Sandy’s relief efforts


Printable Flier: Click Here

Adam Zyglis - The Buffalo News

Goodbye to industry-promoted studies masquerading as objective, scholarly research at UB!

Join us to celebrate the safeguarding of research integrity at our public university.

Facebook page is here. Invite friends!

Shale Institute Study Compromised Research Integrity

Letter to the Editor of the UB Reporter ~ 
By David Kowalski ~

In addressing the controversial UB shale institute study, Provost Zukoski stated, “It’s important to note that no concerns regarding the report have been raised by the relevant scientific community.” President Tripathi stated in a report to SUNY Chancellor Zimpher and the SUNY Trustees that “No concerns were raised by the relevant scientific community about the data used in developing the report’s conclusion.”

I am a scientist (professor emeritus, Roswell Park Cancer Institute), a UB research professor and an experienced peer reviewer. I have reviewed the study by the UB shale institute (Shale Resources and Society Institute) entitled “Environmental Impacts during Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling: Causes, Impacts, and Remedies.” My comments are below.

The authors listed academic affiliations in the study, but no industry ties. John P. Martin, institute director, owns a consulting company that produces public relations reports for oil and gas interests, and two co-authors have received past support from gas-industry groups. The authors’ gas-industry ties raise concern about conflicts of interest.

The objectivity of the study was compromised in favor of the gas industry and existing state regulations. The authors’ conclusion that major environmental events per gas well were declining in Pennsylvania was not drawn from their data. Based on the data, the rate of major environmental events actually increased by 36 percent in the period studied. This information was not displayed in the graphs shown. The increased rate of major environmental events and the fact that the study made no attempt to demonstrate a cause-and-effect relationship between state regulations and environmental events invalidates the study’s conclusions that the “odds of major environmental events are being reduced even further by enhanced regulation” (p.iii), and that “the percentage of wells resulting in a major environmental event declined significantly, an indicator that the attention of regulators was focused on the areas of greatest concern (p.30).

The authors’ conclusions on cause and effect directly contradict a statement in the results section of the study: “While difficult to conclusively illustrate causation between regulatory actions and decreases in environmental violations, the history of regulations in Pennsylvania suggests such a relationship may exist.” (p.15)

The following statement is pure speculation and not a valid conclusion: “Findings indicate that each of the underlying causes associated with these specific events could have been either entirely avoided or mitigated under New York State’s proposed regulatory framework” (p.iii and a related statement on p.30).

Scott Anderson, senior policy advisor for the Environmental Defense Fund’s Energy Program, was one of the reviewers selected by the authors. After the study’s release, he wrote: “While I was a reviewer, this does not mean that all of my suggestions were taken or that I agree with all of the report’s opinions and conclusions.” He added: “Caution should be exercised with regards to some of the conclusions.”

Later, the shale institute authors released a revised version of the study with minor changes. However, they did not correct the invalid conclusions described above. 

Originally, the authors claimed incorrectly that the study was “peer-reviewed,” giving it an aura of scientific authenticity that it did not deserve. That claim helped attract media attention to the study’s invalid conclusions, resulting in misleading newspaper headlines and reports. The “peer-reviewed” claim was retracted by UB after the press release, but the damage in the newspapers had already been done. 

At this critical time in determining policies on fracking in New York State and the nation, it is outrageous that invalid conclusions in the study were made public and promptly cited as an authoritative source in Congress to influence policymakers. 

The shale institute aims to attract funding from various sources, including the oil-and-gas industry. Would the industry fund studies that did not prove its case? Will UB be vigilant enough to prevent promises of industry funding from dictating the institute’s conclusions?

Reports from the provost and the president cited above upheld the shale institute’s use of an “open peer-review method” for the “self-published” study.

However, open review of the institute study was ineffective. Reviewers who identified invalid conclusions have no power to enforce revision or rejection of the self-published study.

The shale institute study should have been peer-reviewed through an academic journal. In this case, if reviewers identify invalid conclusions, the journal editor has the power to enforce revision or rejection of the study for publication.

Scientists rely on the rigorous and critical peer-review process to ensure research integrity. The objectivity of the UB shale institute study was compromised. The authors should have been held to the same high standards of peer review as the UB faculty.

Published in the UB Reporter: Oct. 25, 2012

Post Comments to the letter at the UB Reporter website. The link is here.

UB Must Investigate Its Shale Institute

Letter to the Editor of The Buffalo News - August 30, 2012 ~
By David Kowalski ~

University administrators, the press and the public are being duped by industry-backed studies masquerading as objective academic research. Specific examples involve studies released by the University at Buffalo Shale Resources and Society Institute, University of Texas and Penn State University. At all three public universities, authors of studies on the impacts of shale-gas extraction by fracking did not disclose gas industry ties, which were discovered only after their industry-biased conclusions were reported. The lead UB author also failed to disclose industry ties in a Penn State study that was later retracted by the university. The University of Texas is investigating its study's principle author. The absence of an investigation of the UB study damages the university's credibility and erodes public trust.

Publication of academic research in science requires disclosure of industry affiliations and funding sources to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. Also required is anonymous peer review mediated by a journal editor, which generally results in revision and resubmission, and ultimately, in acceptance or rejection for publication. University studies resulting from industry-affiliated research should likewise undergo rigorous peer review and be published in a journal prior to their release to the press.

The UB press release contained authors' conclusions that were not peer-reviewed, not supported by the data and were biased in favor of the gas industry. At this critical time in determining policies on shale-gas fracking, it is outrageous that invalid conclusions in the UB press release were made public and promptly cited as an authoritative source in Congress in order to influence policy makers.

The lack of transparency and academic rigor is appalling and intolerable. The UB administration should uphold academic standards and initiate an industry-independent investigation of the Shale Resources and Society Institute and its research findings. 

~ ~ ~

UB Shale Institute -- Links to selected news reports and recent updates: 

• UB report on 'fracking' draws fire of watchdog
• Institute’s Gas Drilling Report Leads to Claims of Bias and Concern for a University’s Image
• Fracking Research and the Money That Flows To It
• Frackers Fund University Research That Proves Their Case
• UB staff, students urge probe of institute
• The hidden sponsors of fracking studies
• Transparency urged for shale institute
• Faculty Question SUNY-Buffalo About Fracking Institute
• Controversy still simmers over SUNY Buffalo Shale Institute
• “Nonsense” and UB’s Shale Resources and Society Institute

~ ~ ~

 

Editorial Cartoon by Adam Zyglis in The Buffalo News - August 14, 2012

UB Shale Institute -- Getting to the Bottom of It

By David Kowalski ~

Shale gas and fracking have become sensitive topics at UB. SUNY signed a three-year, $22M contract to buy natural gas extracted by hydraulic fracturing beginning April 1, 2012. On April 5, a UB Shale Institute was announced to the public. Shale-gas industry ties and UB's new Shale Institute led to controversy, which only deepened after the Institute released its first study on May 15.

The Institute's study revealed a gas-industry bias and was found by the Public Accountabilty Initiative to be riddled with procedural flaws and errors of fact. All of the Institute's authors have ties to the gas industry, but they did not disclose the funding sources for their study. Lack of disclosure naturally raised concern about conflicts of interest. Also, the authors' initial claim that the study was peer reviewed was later retracted.

Subsequently, news reports in the New York Times and The Buffalo News only exacerbated concern about the effect of the industry-friendly institute on UB’s reputation for credible scholarship. The Institute’s director, John P. Martin, who does consulting and public relations work for the oil and gas industry, is a co-author on the study. Martin declined, through a UB spokesperson, reporters' requests for an interview. 

The UB Shale Institute is not a physical entity -- it's a virtual institute. The study's lead author, Timothy Considine, lives in Wyoming, works at the University of Wyoming, and has a reputation as the academic "go-to-guy" for industry-friendly studies. Two other co-authors live in Wyoming and Pennsylvania. Director John P. Martin lives in Saratoga Springs, NY.

How did an industry-friendly Shale Institute come to exist at a publicly-funded university known for academic research and scholarly activities?

According to a May 25, 2012 statement by UB Dean E. Bruce Pitman, the College of Arts and Sciences formed the Institute in April 2012, with the goal of providing scientific research and analysis on all sides of the issues surrounding shale gas. Pitman acknowledged in a radio interview on June 7, that he gave the support to create the Institute, and that he appointed the Director and the Co-Director, and got the Institute started. He also said, "The origin of the Institute. It started with a series of seminars organized by the Geology Department in spring of --get my years right-- 2011."

So how did the seminar series start and who were the speakers?

On March 28, 2011, the UB Geology Dept announced a Public Lecture Series on the Marcellus Shale.  Department chair Marcus Bursk Ph.D. said that "The series will inform attendees about how geologists explore for resources, how companies get rights to the resources, how gas resources are drilled, fracked, and distributed and what legal, environmental and regulatory issues are involved."

HEARTLESS - courtesy of IOGA.

On March 29, 2011, it was announced that oil and gas industry experts will take part in "Marcellus Shale Lecture Series: Energy Resources and the Environment in Western New York," beginning March 31 at UB. Independent Oil and Gas Association (IOGA) of New York members were to lead five of the eight presentations, and the March 31 speaker would be Rayola Dougher, senior economic advisor for the American Petroleum Institute.

Six of the eight announced presentations were connected to the gas industry. 

A speaker not listed among the industry experts was Langhorne Smith, also known as Taury Smith, the state geologist with the New York State Museum. Smith was under a state gag order from talking to reporters. A month before his UB talk, he told the Albany Times Union that the Marcellus natural gas was "a huge gift" and that the potential environmental hazards of hydraulic fracturing were often exaggerated, as reported in The Buffalo News. At his UB presentation, Smith downplayed claims that the ability to light tap water on fire was caused by gas drilling contamination.

The final presentation on May 19, 2011 was entitled "Energy and the Environment: Gas and the Green Earth," by John P. Martin, listed as former senior project manager for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. At the seminar, the audience learned that the title of his talk had changed to "Can we get to sustainable energy resource development in the 21st century?" Well, so much for the Environment and the Green Earth. 

Martin talked rapidly, describing how all energy sources have risks. It seemed that he was providing cover for the known risks of drilling and fracking. He downplayed wind turbines, and showed a fallen tubine tower made of some flimsy material to illustrate one risk. 

John P. Martin showed the same flaming faucet photo that Langhorne Smith displayed, and said the water contamination wasn't caused by gas drilling. About a month before his seminar, scientists at Duke University published peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA). Martin, an economist, dismissed the scientific study and put down the journal of the esteemed National Academy.

At his UB seminar, Martin was introduced by Robert Jacobi, a UB Geologist who had a position as director of special projects in Norse Energy Corporation. Jacobi would later become the Co-director of the UB Shale Institute.

Dean Pitman consulted with Geology faculty and others at the university

In the June 7, 2012 interview cited earlier, Pitman said "That seminar series was very successful. There was interest in following up on this issue." He added, "In consultation with the Geology faculty and with others at the university, as dean I gave my support to create an Institute as an initiative of the College of Arts and Sciences. And that’s how it started."

Consultation must have occurred before February 6, 2012 when John P. Martin gave a talk in Jakarta, Indonesia and listed himself as Director of the Shale Resources and Society Institute, University at Buffalo, SUNY (also known as the UB Shale Institute). In his slide presentation (courtesy of Artvoice) he cited as "in review" the study of Considine et al. (2012), which would later become the UB Shale Institute's first study (released May 15).
 
Who is Dennis Holbrook and who consulted with him?

UB CLEAR: Coalition for Leading Ethically in Academic Research -- Please Endorse the Petition

Coalition seeks transparency on a new industry-affiliated Shale Institute at UB in order to preserve research integrity and protect the university's reputation.

Please read the information below and Endorse the Petition.

Background: On April 5, 2012, the University at Buffalo administration announced the UB Shale Resources and Society Institute. On May 15, an official UB press release accompanied its first publication: “Environmental Impacts During Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling: Causes, Impacts and Remedies.”

The Institute’s first report is fatally compromised. It was announced as peer-reviewed when it wasn’t. Its authors failed to reveal in the report their financial connections to the gas industry. And the report itself is riddled with procedural flaws and errors of fact, as detailed in a report by the non-profit Public Accountabilty Initiative.

The ensuing controversy includes a widely-distributed Associated Press story, an article in the June 11th New York Times, and another in The Buffalo News on June 29. It has damaged UB’s hard-won reputation and credibility.

The Institute’s formation violates UB procedures for creating centers and institutes. Its funding sources and plans are obscure.

In response, a group of SUNY faculty, alums, students, and other citizens have established the UB Coalition for Leading Ethically in Academic Research (UB CLEAR).

UB CLEAR calls on the UB Administration to take the following initiatives to prevent further damage and regain public trust in the university: 

• Time Out - Suspend all funding, publications, and other operations of the Institute.

• Be Clear - Reveal all documents bearing on the formation of the Institute, its staffing, its governance and oversight, and its funding. Explain how and why the Institute’s first report came to be described publicly as “peer reviewed” and associated with the University itself and not just its authors. Adopt a goal of genuine, active transparency, not just the minimum required by law.

• Investigate - Establish a genuinely independent body, outside UB and the oil and gas industry, to investigate the Institute’s formation and its relations to industry and other donors.

• Discuss - Hold a forum in which all interested UB and other community members can raise their concerns about the Institute, receive candid answers, and offer advice.

Please Endorse a Petition to support the UB CLEAR initiatives

UB CLEAR seeks endorsement of the above initiatives, not only by the local university community, but also by all people who expect integrity in academic research and are concerned about the university's reputation. Academic research, which may influence public policy, should be held to the highest standards of ethics and must not be beholden to outside special interests. New Yorkers deserve transparency from their State University at Buffalo.
Please pass the Petition on to others. Thank you!

For more information, please contact Professor Jim Holstun at 884-0895 or jamesholstun@hotmail.com.

UPDATE: Next MEETING of UB CLEAR is TUESDAY, September 25, 6:30pm-8:30pm, at Burning Books, 420 Connecticut St, Buffalo [Map]
Come join the campaign. All are welcome to attend!