The Student Assembly passed a resolution, on February 7, demanding that Cornell University divest its endowment from the fossil fuel industry by 2020. Cornell is now one of over 250 campuses on which students have called upon their administration to take a stance against the use of fossil fuels. This “divestment movement” was inspired by Bill McKibben, America’s leading environmental activist (sorry, Al Gore). Most known for his efforts to block the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline, McKibben began a new project last July - divestment. In a Rolling Stone article titled, “Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math,” McKibben calls for Universities to divest their endowments from the fossil fuel industry.

This is not the first divestment movement to find its way to Cornell. In the 1980s, a campaign to divest from companies affiliated with the apartheid regime in South Africa swept college campuses across the United States. As a result, Cornell and 154 other campuses divested and 80 cities, 25 U.S. states, and 19 countries agreed to take economic action against these businesses. The strength of this movement rested in the powerful moral case against apartheid.

McKibben now seeks to create a similar nationwide movement to divest in the fossil fuel industry, similar to the campaign of the 1980s. Likening the two as sister causes, McKibben is pushing for Universities to send a message to the oil industry that their practices are unacceptable. But there is a problem with his logic: the fossil fuel industry not inherently immoral. The need to divest in companies associated with the apartheid regime was an easy case to make; the human rights violations were, without a doubt, a shock to the conscience. The fossil-fuel industry does not produce this reaction. The companies that make up this industry are not only pillars of our economy, but of our society. So before we write off all oil companies as enemies and sell off all of our stock, let’s consider the impact of the oil industry on our University, our country, and the world.

The current discourse has operated on the unchallenged assumption that investment in oil is inherently wrong. The debate does not consider whether fossil fuels are "good" or bad", but rather, solely is about whether or not the sheer evil of the oil companies warrants divestment from them. For example, in his resounding call to divest, Bill McKibben stated, "The planet does indeed have an enemy – one far more committed to action than governments or individuals ... It has become a rogue industry, reckless like no other force on Earth. It is Public Enemy Number One to the survival of our planetary civilisation." While oil may be a finite energy source, can we truly consider Cornell’s relatively meager investment supporting Earth's public enemy number one? Is it fair to say that we, and future Cornellians, will shamefully look back on our Cornell experiences because a portion of its endowment portfolio consisted of oil securities? The zeal of the Student Assembly, KyotoNOW!, and other pro-divestment groups have halted any of these questions before they could be asked. Now, we face an idealistic coalition unwilling to contemplate the long-term effects of demonizing oil companies and pressuring Cornell into heedless divestment. Simply removing our endowment funds from the oil industry will not spontaneously generate affordable, realistic sources of renewable energy. It will only serve to satisfy the naive ideologies of a few interest groups, while oil companies will react unscathed and find eager, new investors to replace their meager losses.

Divestment is a form of economic boycott, and while all consumers have the right to choose what they financially support, it traditionally employed, and successful with, cases of near-absolute or absolute morality, such as South African apartheid. Fossil fuels may be unsustainable and environmentally suboptimal, but they are not “immoral.” Despite its flaws, petroleum technologically evolved our society beyond the wildest dreams of our ancestors. From global transportation to guaranteed warmth, oil historically and presently has given our society incredible opportunities. Conversely, apartheid brought suffering to millions of South Africans. The moralities of these two situations are clearly distinct. Divestment was an appropriate tool to put pressure on the South African government, but now it has become a reawakened instrument to hastily expedite politically partisan agendas under the guise of total moral urgency.

Certainly, the development of alternative sources of energy is crucial for the survival of the human race. Fossil fuels are a finite energy source and will eventually be depleted from the Earth. However, a lack of sustainability is not a position on the wrong side of history. The traditional energy industry provides our country with efficient, reliable power and transportation while creating hundreds of thousands of stable middle class jobs. This is not a feat that alternate energy companies can simply or presently replicate, regardless of how much money the public sector subsidizes or the private sector invests. Ideology does not drive innovation and creating a literal “power" vacuum will not hasten the development of alternative energy sources. Investment in oil companies is also critical for our international energy independence. By continuing domestic oil development, such as the Keystone XL Pipeline, the traditional energy industry is reducing our reliance on OPEC and other foreign oil cartels, which reduces both the undue influence of unfriendly nations and the need for American military intervention. Furthermore, petroleum companies are actively researching and developing renewable energy sources, simply by the nature of their business: if they are bound to a finite resource facing depletion, they must adapt by innovation or dissolve. Leading firms such as Exxon Mobil, Raizen, BP, Total, and Chevron and spent billions of dollars in the last decade investing in renewable energy projects that are developed by industry experts and reliant upon the successes of their respective companies. As one small example, Exxon Mobil has recently partnered with Synthetic Genomics Inc. to develop algae-derived biofuels, a project that is possible due to Exxon Mobil’s early operating budget of over $30 billion. These top firms have the financial capabilities, expertise, and influence to shape the future of the industry, and we simply cannot divest in oil without divesting in the critical foundations of renewable energy. Thus, the totality of what oil companies produce, both the good and bad, are undeniably linked to future energy sustainability. By divesting now, we are hindering many of our best hopes of developing long-term, renewable energy. Fossil fuel companies are not static organizations and by perpetuating these misconceptions, the divestment coalition will only succeed in stifling progress and opportunity for Cornellians and our nation as a whole.

On that note, there are few investors more deserving of profits from the oil industry than Cornell University. Stock in oil keeps Cornell endowment in good health, which makes it possible for Cornell invest in sustainability projects here on campus and offer alternative energy programs for students. Projects such as the $1 million Green Revolving Fund would not be possible without a strong endowment. Cornell can afford to train future leaders of the energy industry because of its investments. Furthermore, by owning stock in the industry, colleges maintain voting rights in company elections. If we divest from these companies, we needlessly discard the direct voices we have in exchange for virtually nothing. Who should be voting for the next Chairman of Exxon, Cornell or some Wall Street investor?

So before we risk the financial health of our University to support this political cause, let’s consider the long-term harm divestment would cause for our school, country, and world. Before we sign on the dotted line for every initiative waving a green banner, we must consider the consequences of our actions.

Jessica Reif is a junior in the Industrial and Labor Relations School and can be reached at jar453@cornell.edu. Kyle Ezzedine is a junior in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and can be reached at kje35@cornell.edu.