{"id":260371,"date":"2021-08-02T10:30:00","date_gmt":"2021-08-02T10:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/grist.org\/?p=542332"},"modified":"2021-08-02T10:30:00","modified_gmt":"2021-08-02T10:30:00","slug":"shell-sponsored-a-museum-exhibit-on-climate-solutions-there-were-strings-attached","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/2021\/08\/02\/shell-sponsored-a-museum-exhibit-on-climate-solutions-there-were-strings-attached\/","title":{"rendered":"Shell sponsored a museum exhibit on climate solutions. There were strings attached."},"content":{"rendered":"\n
The day the Science Museum in London opened its latest exhibition on climate change in May, a group of scientists from the climate activist group Extinction Rebellion locked themselves inside<\/a> in protest. Their gripe? The exhibit, called \u201cOur Future Planet,\u201d which highlights the promise of technologies to suck up carbon dioxide from the air or from industrial smokestacks, was sponsored by the oil and gas giant Shell.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The sponsorship first sparked outcry when it was announced in April. \u201cWe condemn the Science Museum\u2019s decision to accept this sponsorship and provide Shell with an opportunity for brazen green-washing,\u201d the U.K. Student Climate Network wrote in an open letter<\/a> at the time. The Science Museum Group\u2019s director defended the exhibit<\/a> and the sponsorship, saying \u201cwe retain editorial control.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n But on Thursday, new evidence emerged showing that the money Shell offered for the exhibit was not unconditional. Culture Unstained<\/a>, an activist group whose aim is \u201cto end fossil fuel sponsorship of culture,\u201d obtained Shell\u2019s sponsorship contract<\/a> with the Science Museum under freedom of information act laws. The contract stipulates that the museum could not take any action that would be seen \u201cas discrediting or damaging the goodwill or reputation of the Sponsor.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Fossil fuel companies are regular sponsors of museum exhibits, and cultural institutions in general, but their donations have come under increased scrutiny in recent years. U.K. activists have been staging regular protests<\/a> at the British Museum for the past several years demanding it end its long-standing relationship with BP. Critics argue that allowing companies like BP to put their logos on museum walls elevates their status in society, perpetuates their social license to operate, and potentially influences curatorial decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s clear what Shell had to gain in the case of the \u201cOur Future Planet\u201d exhibit. The exhibit centers on technologies that oil and gas companies like Shell say will allow them to keep selling fossil fuels while reducing their emissions. The exhibit will be up through the fall, when thousands of political leaders from all over the world will pass through the U.K. to attend the United Nation\u2019s annual climate conference. As Grist\u2019s Kate Yoder observed in a 2019 story about the oil industry\u2019s relationship with museums<\/a>, \u201cPhilanthropy isn\u2019t just an avenue to dignify fortunes \u2014 it can also serve as an attempt to influence where society is headed.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Visitors start the \u201cOur Future Planet\u201d exhibit with a journey through the \u201cthe oldest forms of carbon capture technology: trees and plants,\u201d according to a promotional post<\/a> on the Science Museum\u2019s website. Next, they encounter a mechanical tree developed by Klaus Lackner, a professor at Arizona State University and pioneer of technology that captures carbon directly from the air. Later, they learn about attempts to capture carbon dioxide in rock dust, an approach called enhanced weathering. Finally, museumgoers are introduced to methods to capture carbon from the flue gas of fossil fuel\u2013burning power plants and industrial plants, along with products that can be produced with that captured CO2, like concrete, yoga mats, and vodka.<\/p>\n\n\n\n