The Fraud of “Clean” Natural Gas

The provided text consists of appendices to a report by the Center for Climate Integrity. Appendix A lists trade associations, research institutes, and PR firms—such as the American Gas Association (AGA), the Gas Research Institute (GRI), and J. Walter Thompson—that collaborated to promote natural gas. Appendix B outlines a timeline from 1968 to 1996, detailing how the industry was alerted to methane's climate impact as early as 1968, launched a "clean energy" marketing campaign in 1972, and later promoted gas as a "bridge fuel" in 1990 despite internal uncertainties regarding methane leakage rates. It specifically highlights a 1996 GRI/EPA study that reported a 1.4 percent methane emission rate, which the document claims was heavily influenced by the industry and lacked independent technical review by the EPA.

• As early as 1968, the oil and gas industry was informed via a Stanford Research Institute report that its operations, specifically "oil fields" and "[gas] distribution system leakage," contributed to atmospheric methane and carbon dioxide, with warnings that natural cycles could "be overburdened by excessive emissions."
• In 1972, the American Gas Association (AGA) and Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA) hired J. Walter Thompson to launch a PR campaign branding natural gas as "clean" energy to counteract public perceptions of pollution and a shrinking residential market.
• The Gas Research Institute (GRI), formed in 1976, served as a centralized research and development arm for the industry that functioned as "an active part of the marketing arm of the gas industry," allowing it to present itself as an objective information source while promoting gas as "clean."
• By 1990, the industry began promoting natural gas as a "bridge fuel" for the transition to renewables, while simultaneously downplaying the seriousness of methane emissions to external partners and environmental groups.
• The Natural Gas STAR program, launched in 1992 by the AGA and EPA, was a voluntary initiative where companies shared best practices for emissions reductions but were "under no obligation to implement the emissions reduction measures."
• A 1996 joint study by GRI and the EPA reported a methane emissions rate of 1.4 percent; however, the industry influenced the study and controlled the final technical review, while the EPA published it without its own independent technical review due to a lack of expertise.

APA

Center for Climate Integrity (2026). The Fraud of “Clean” Natural Gas. https://climateintegrity.org/uploads/media/Fraud-of-Clean-Natural-Gas-Appendicies-2026.pdf

Chicago

Center for Climate Integrity. The Fraud of “Clean” Natural Gas. 2026. https://climateintegrity.org/uploads/media/Fraud-of-Clean-Natural-Gas-Appendicies-2026.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Center for Climate Integrity |title=The Fraud of “Clean” Natural Gas |date=July 2026 |url=https://climateintegrity.org/uploads/media/Fraud-of-Clean-Natural-Gas-Appendicies-2026.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centerforclimateintegrity2026fraud, author = {{Center for Climate Integrity}}, title = {{The Fraud of “Clean” Natural Gas}}, institution = {Center for Climate Integrity}, year = {2026}, month = jul, url = {https://climateintegrity.org/uploads/media/Fraud-of-Clean-Natural-Gas-Appendicies-2026.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }