The UKโs Science Museum and oil giant BP are increasingly concerned about criticism of their ongoing partnership, email correspondence seen by DeSmogย suggests.
The news comes as the Royal Shakespeare Company and National Theatre announce they will be ending their partnerships with BP and Shell,ย respectively.
Emails released through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request show Sir Ian Blatchford, Director of the Science Museum, and a BP representative arranging a meeting to discuss fossil fuel sponsorship of the arts the day before a public debate on theย issue.
Forwarding on an email sent to the museumโs staff in which he defends the Science Museumโs relationship with the oil company, Blatchford says this is why the BP representative has been โon hisย mindโ.
In the all-staff email circulated at the end of July, Blatchford dismisses the idea that oil sponsorship of the arts amounts to greenwashing, calling it a โtriteโ argument, and says the collaboration enables them to โachieve moral and publicย goodโ.
Tateย snub
In the email to staff, covered by the FT at the time, Blatchford dismisses the Tateโs declaration of a โclimate emergencyโ earlier in theย month.
Addressing what he calls recent โmedia chatterโ around oil sponsorship, Blatchfordย writes:
โThe Tate announcement got such limited coverage, perhaps because press releases that are more statement than substance do not always play well with a jadedย media.โ
Blatchford says he instead favours maintaining ties with oil companies as a means of engaging with them on issues like climate change, an approach taken by the Natural Historyย Museum.
โI discuss these issues regularly with vital sister organisations like the Natural History Museum and their team take the same view,โ heย writes.
Blatchford goes on to praise the efforts of institutions like the Church of England and the Wellcome Trust to pressure fossil fuel companies from the inside, deeming this โmore strategic andย honestโ.
โThe Board and senior team [of the Wellcome Trust] take the same view as us: engage, debate, challenge energy companies, because walking away is the easy and fruitlessย option.โ
DeSmog asked the museum for details on what efforts it is making to engage with BP on climate change but did not receive aย response.
Can you help support DeSmog’s work? Become a patronย today!
Bridget Mckenzie, from the Climate Museum initiative, told DeSmog that Blatchfordโs dismissal of the Tateโs โclimate emergencyโ announcement missed the point. She said the declaration was about โmaking a public pledge to take actionโ, not because they โwantedย publicityโ.
Engagement with oil and gas companies in the manner Blatchford advocates had not achieved the โdesired resultsโ, sheย added.
โDemonising fossil fuel industry isย unproductiveโ
Blatchford argues oil sponsorship of the arts should continue because โmajor energy companies have the capital, geography, people and logistics to be major players in finding the solutions.โ He said that โdemonising them is seriouslyย unproductive.โ
He also insists the museum would not be prepared to work with โany energy companyโ, explaining that the museum would โneed to be convinced that their actions and values align with our mission andย objectivesโ.
The Science Museum did not clarify whether it had previously refused to work with any particular energyย companies.
Reacting to the emails, Chris Garrard, Co-director of Culture Unstained, which campaigns for arts institutions to refuse fossil fuel sponsorship and submitted the FOI request, said the partnership should make the Science Museum uneasy. Heย said:
โSir Ian Blatchford continues to both defend and endorse the companies that are causing the climate crisis, even after respected climate scientists have highlighted how his oil sponsors helped to spread disinformation on climate science, lobby against climate action and have business plans that directly undermine the Paris Climateย Accord.โ
Big Oilย links
The museum previously worked with fellow oil giant Shell, something Blatchford also addresses in his email toย staff.
In 2015, an FOI by the Art Not Oil coalition, of which Culture Unstained is a member, revealed how Shell had tried to influence a climate change project it was sponsoring at theย museum.
While admitting that the museum had invited Shell to offer input into plans for the project, Blatchford insists in the email that it did not adopt any of the companyโsย suggestions.
An August 2014 email from a Shell employee, however, claimed the museum was producing a video on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology โbased on Shellโs CCSย videoโ.
BP has also sought to influence the museumโs exhibitions over theย years.
In the midst of the companyโsย efforts to rebrand itself as โBeyond Petroleumโ, BP played a major role in shaping the design of the museumโs Energy Hall, according to a staff magazine from theย time.
A magazine feature article from 2004 explained how an advisory board of 10 BP employees was drafted in to โhelp with content for theย exhibitsโ.
The museumโs then Sponsor Liaison Manager told the magazine: โThe Science Museumโs goal is to maximise its relationship with BP.โ
โWe would like to help them meet their objectives on different levels, including corporate responsibility, education strategy and globalย strategy.โ
Photo credit: Paul Hudson/Flickr/CC BYย 2.0
Subscribe to our newsletter
Stay up to date with DeSmog news and alerts