In an aerial view, the ETC Mi Vida Gas Plant is seen on March 18, 2026 in Pecos, Texas.Brandon Bell/Getty
About half of Americans think natural gas—a methane-based, planet-warming fuel—is a “clean” energy source, according to a recent poll. And a long-running fossil fuel industry marketing campaign might be to blame.
The “clean natural gas” label is a myth. Methane, the primary component of natural gas fuel, is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. But the myth persists in large part due to a savvy, decades-long branding campaign by oil and gas corporations.
A new report released by the Center for Climate Integrity, a research and advocacy group, reveals that fossil fuel companies knew as early as the 1960s that branding gas as “clean” was deceptive.
An internal report from Shell in 1966 indicated that methane gas was released in “embarrassingly large quantities” at oil fields. And in 1968, a review sponsored by the American Petroleum Institute declared that methane in the atmosphere was connected to “oil fields,” and that methane seepage was “not unlikely.” So in response, fossil fuel companies sponsored and promoted their own research, founding entities like the Gas Research Institute to create an appearance of objectivity and change the narrative. They aimed to drown out research that indicated gas might be harmful to the environment or human health, the Center for Climate Integrity suggests.
Throughout the 1970s, the American Gas Association, a trade group, worked with public relations firms to sell gas as a “clean” and environmentally-friendly fossil fuel. The gas industry launched a public relations campaign in 1971 called “GAS, CLEAN ENERGY FOR TODAY AND TOMORROW.” A 1972 report from the American Gas Association (AGA) said the “environmental benefits of an adequate natural gas supply are outstanding,” in that it offered a “very positive answer” to collective concern about the planet.
As the report further details, by 1996, the AGA was co-running studies with the Environmental Protection Agency. Internal communications published in the report show that EPA officials said they “simply do not have the expertise” to independently review the data presented by the gas industry in the study and they were “unlikely to find problems even if they exist.” (The EPA did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the CCI report.)
The public-relations campaign was effective—and in the 2000s, with the advent of fracking, American natural gas-extraction infrastructure expanded dramatically. The companies building that infrastructure were sometimes even eligible for “green” fuel subsidies and tax breaks. Today, natural gas is still classed as “green” in at least four states. The gas-appliance industry, meanwhile, still lobbies relentlessly against labeling standards that might designate its products as harmful.
“Officials who continue to justify expanding natural gas reliance by still claiming it’s clean or safe for the climate are using the same script and manipulated science that gas executives and their PR teams concocted decades ago,” Center for Climate Integrity President Richard Wiles said in a statement published with the report. “It’s time that these profoundly dangerous lies are finally put to rest.”
