[The guy working for Saudi Aramco] had declared the relationship on the IPCC’s conflict of interest form. “That didn’t seem to me a very good answer, but he was friendly and we had a very nice breakfast.”

Oh well, then I’m relieved. They are nice!

The article is quite good, but the situation is depressing. If the IPCC is not trustworthy, then what is there even left? But that’s apparently not the first time that problem came up. According to the article, the conflict of interest policy only exists since 2011, when similar things happened.

Here are some highlights from the article

At least a dozen IPCC lead authors are employed by or linked to Saudi Aramco, Saudi institutions and other oil and gas interests, the investigation found. One IPCC vice-chair, part of the body’s leadership group, also represents the kingdom at global climate negotiations as a government employee.

De Pryck sees the growing presence of Saudi-linked authors in the context of a broader shift in the kingdom’s climate diplomacy. Its longstanding opposition to cutting fossil fuel burning in UN climate negotiations is increasingly complemented by the promotion of technological climate solutions. “When it comes to the IPCC, the Saudi strategy now focuses on advocating technologies like carbon capture that would limit the impact on its fossil fuel economy,” says De Pryck.

Hoteit, at King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, said: “There is no conflict of interest. My research and contributions related to the IPCC work were fully funded and supported by my employer, which is acknowledged in the referenced paper.” The multi-author paper also states: “We thank Saudi Aramco for conceiving and conducting this pilot project and for providing substantial financial support.”

That’s an interesting understanding of a “conflict of interest”.

And the last sentence hammers it home:

The IPCC said there was no process currently under way to amend its conflict of interest policy.