A front-page story in the May 3 Valley News described a meeting at which Bill Helman, chairman of the Dartmouth Board of Trustees, responded to concerns that the work of the newly-formed Arthur L. Irving Institute for Energy and Society will be tainted by an $80 million donation connected to Irving Oil. Given a foundational commitment to academic freedom, which I understand to be in place, the establishment of the Irving Institute seems to me deserving of honor rather than doubt and criticism.
As someone who has spent my professional career on research and entrepreneurship related to renewable fuels, I understand the rationale for moving away from reliance on fossil resources. I also understand the substantial challenges and tradeoffs this entails, and keenly appreciate the need for research and prepared university graduates to address them. My impression is that being a “sustainability crusader” is a career path that a significant fraction of entering college students are interested in, but many fewer find ways to pursue upon graduation. If the Irving Institute can help address this gap between aspiration and realization, it will have done something important.
At his 2013 address as a Thayer School of Engineering investiture speaker, former National Science Foundation Director Subra Suresh observed that a great many challenges of the 21st century are issues that arise out of the engineering achievements of the 20th century. Thus, for example, the spread of instant global connectivity made possible by the internet now presents cybersecurity challenges, and the success of the petroleum economy built over the last century has given us the problem of how to control carbon emissions and slow climate change.
Having become wealthy as a result of the oil industry, it seems to me altogether fitting that Irving Oil Ltd., the Arthur L. Irving Family Foundation and members of the Irving family would support forming an institute positioned to contribute to solving the climate problem. If the institute does not place appropriate emphasis on addressing the climate challenge, I will be among the first to wave a flag. I see no signs of this happening, however. Indeed, climate has been a central focus of every Irving Institute event I have attended thus far.
Several fossil fuel companies have recently gone on record favoring the United States staying in the Paris Climate Agreement. Further change and commitment are necessary, to be sure. We need to ask ourselves whether modern society can move more effectively to a sustainable energy future with oil companies open to reform or without such companies. The former approach is in my view more likely to succeed.
I am reminded of the story of the establishment of the Nobel Prize. Reminiscent of Dickens’ A Christmas CaroI, Swedish armaments magnate Alfred Nobel was distressed to read his own obituary when he was mistaken for his recently deceased brother. Determined to change his legacy, Alfred Nobel endowed the Nobel Prizes — including the Peace Prize to recognize “the person who shall have done the most or best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congress.”
Today the world honors the pure intent and scrupulous implementation of the Nobel Prize although many would wish that the wealth that endowed the prize had been generated differently. I suggest that the same grace be afforded the Irving Institute and its donors, assuming the best in the absence of contrary evidence while remaining vigilant on behalf of academic freedom.
Lee Lynd is the Paul and Joan Queneau Distinguished Professor of Engineering and adjunct professor of biology at Dartmouth College. He does not receive funding from the Irving Institute. He can be reached at Lee.r.Lynd@Dartmouth.edu.