Skier Nikolai Schirmer Delivers 21,000-Signature Petition Demanding End to Fossil Fuel Olympic Sponsorships

Skier Nikolai Schirmer Delivers 21,000-Signature Petition Demanding End to Fossil Fuel Olympic Sponsorships

Norwegian freeskier and climate activist challenges IOC to sever ties with oil and gas companies, calling sponsorships a threat to winter sports' future.

Norwegian professional skier and filmmaker Nikolai Schirmer has delivered a petition bearing more than 21,000 signatures to the International Olympic Committee, demanding that the organization end sponsorship relationships with fossil fuel companies and prohibit their involvement in winter sports events.

The petition, which Schirmer handed over to IOC representatives, argues that allowing oil and gas companies to sponsor Olympic events and athletes enables "sportswashing"—the practice of corporations using sports sponsorships to improve public perception while continuing business practices that undermine the very climate conditions winter sports depend upon.

"The irony is crushing," Schirmer said in presenting the petition. "Fossil fuel companies are sponsoring the sports that their products are actively destroying. Winter sports cannot exist without snow and cold, and we cannot have reliable snow and cold with unchecked fossil fuel emissions. The IOC must recognize this fundamental contradiction and act accordingly."

The 35-year-old Schirmer has emerged as one of winter sports' most prominent climate activists, leveraging his platform as an accomplished ski mountaineer and popular content creator to advocate for environmental action within the ski industry. His films document ski adventures while increasingly incorporating climate messaging and calls for systemic change.

The petition specifically calls on the IOC to adopt policies similar to tobacco advertising restrictions, which prohibit tobacco company sponsorship of Olympic events based on public health concerns. Schirmer and his supporters argue that climate change represents an existential threat to winter sports that justifies similar exclusionary policies toward fossil fuel sponsors.

Several major oil and gas companies currently maintain sponsorship relationships with Olympic organizations, national Olympic committees, and individual winter sports federations. These partnerships provide substantial financial support for athletic programs, event operations, and infrastructure development—creating the economic dependencies that make disentanglement challenging.

However, critics like Schirmer argue that this financial support comes at an unacceptable cost to winter sports' long-term viability and moral credibility. Accepting fossil fuel sponsorship while climate change demonstrably shortens ski seasons, reduces snowpack, and threatens the existence of lower-elevation ski areas creates what activists call a "Faustian bargain" that prioritizes short-term funding over existential survival.

The petition arrives as winter sports confront increasingly undeniable climate impacts. Ski seasons across the Northern Hemisphere have shortened measurably over recent decades, snowfall patterns have become less reliable, and several Winter Olympics have faced snow scarcity issues requiring extensive artificial snowmaking or venue relocations to higher elevations.

The 2026 Milano Cortina Olympics exemplify these challenges, with organizers investing heavily in snowmaking infrastructure to ensure reliable conditions and facing criticism about hosting winter sports in regions where natural snow can no longer be guaranteed. Future Winter Olympics face similar climate vulnerabilities that will only intensify without aggressive emissions reductions.

Schirmer's activism reflects growing climate consciousness within winter sports communities, where athletes, industry professionals, and passionate participants increasingly recognize that their beloved activities face climate-driven existential threats. This recognition has spawned organizations like Protect Our Winters (POW), which mobilizes outdoor athletes and enthusiasts for climate advocacy.

The petition's 21,000 signatures represent a cross-section of winter sports participants including professional athletes, recreational skiers, industry workers, and environmental activists. The coalition demonstrates that concern about fossil fuel sponsorships extends beyond a small activist fringe to include substantial portions of winter sports communities.

However, the issue divides winter sports stakeholders. Some argue that fossil fuel sponsorship money enables athletic opportunities and event hosting that wouldn't exist otherwise, and that rejecting this funding would harm athletes and reduce winter sports' competitive viability. Others counter that accepting money from industries actively undermining winter sports' future represents short-sighted desperation that will ultimately prove self-defeating.

The IOC faces challenging calculations in responding to Schirmer's petition. The organization depends on corporate sponsorships to fund Olympic operations, athlete support programs, and the complex logistics of hosting events. Categorically excluding an entire industry sector could create substantial revenue gaps requiring replacement funding from alternative sources.

Moreover, the IOC operates in a global context where positions on fossil fuel use and climate policy vary dramatically across member nations and cultures. Creating universal policies that satisfy diverse political, economic, and cultural perspectives while maintaining organizational unity presents formidable challenges.

Yet the IOC has also committed publicly to sustainability initiatives and carbon reduction targets, creating potential contradictions between stated environmental commitments and continued acceptance of fossil fuel sponsorships. Critics argue that these contradictions undermine the IOC's credibility and demonstrate that sustainability commitments serve primarily as public relations rather than substantive policy.

The petroleum industry has responded to sportswashing accusations by noting their investments in renewable energy, carbon reduction technologies, and sustainability initiatives. Industry representatives argue that energy companies are essential partners in achieving energy transitions rather than obstacles to be excluded from public life.

However, critics note that despite renewable energy investments, major oil and gas companies continue expanding fossil fuel production and lobbying against aggressive climate policies—activities fundamentally incompatible with the emissions reductions climate science indicates are necessary to preserve winter climates.

The debate extends beyond winter sports to encompass broader questions about corporate responsibility, activism effectiveness, and social license to operate. Similar controversies have emerged regarding fossil fuel sponsorship of arts organizations, academic institutions, and other cultural entities, with some organizations severing such relationships while others maintain them.

For winter sports specifically, the stakes feel particularly acute because climate impacts are already visible and measurable rather than abstract future threats. Skiers can observe shortened seasons, reduced snowpack, and disappearing glaciers within their own experience, creating visceral understanding of climate consequences that might seem distant in other contexts.

Schirmer's petition strategy represents a pragmatic approach to climate activism—targeting specific, achievable policy changes within winter sports governance rather than attempting to solve climate change comprehensively. By focusing on ending fossil fuel sponsorships, activists create concrete demands that organizations can either accept or reject, forcing clarity about priorities and values.

The petition's delivery to the IOC creates an accountability moment requiring some form of official response. Whether that response involves policy changes, dialogue, or dismissal will signal the organization's willingness to subordinate short-term financial considerations to long-term climate imperatives.

The broader winter sports industry will watch the IOC's response carefully, as Olympic policies often influence practices throughout competitive winter sports. If the IOC adopts restrictions on fossil fuel sponsorships, pressure will increase on other winter sports organizations to implement similar policies. Conversely, IOC rejection of such restrictions could embolden continued fossil fuel involvement.

Individual athletes also face dilemmas regarding fossil fuel sponsorships. Some have declined personal sponsorship offers from oil and gas companies despite lucrative financial terms, while others accept such relationships arguing that individual boycotts accomplish little while sacrificing needed income. These personal decisions reflect broader tensions between ideological purity and practical necessity.

Schirmer himself has acknowledged the complexities, noting that his own carbon footprint through travel to filming locations and competitions creates contradictions between his advocacy and lifestyle. However, he argues that individual consumption changes alone cannot solve systemic problems requiring policy interventions and structural transformations.

As the petition makes its way through IOC bureaucratic channels and stakeholder consultations, winter sports communities await signals about whether their governing organizations will prioritize climate considerations over traditional funding relationships. The outcome will help determine whether winter sports evolve to align with climate realities or continue down paths that prioritize short-term financial stability over long-term viability.

For Nikolai Schirmer and the 21,000 petition signatories, the delivery represents one step in ongoing advocacy rather than a conclusion. Regardless of immediate IOC responses, the petition has elevated fossil fuel sponsorship debates within winter sports and created pressure for organizations to articulate and defend their positions on climate and corporate partnerships.

The fundamental question remains starkly simple: can winter sports justify accepting money from industries whose products are destroying the climate conditions winter sports require? The IOC's response to Schirmer's petition will indicate whether the organization believes the answer is yes, no, or some complicated middle ground that satisfies neither activists nor sponsors but allows the current system to persist.

As climate impacts on winter sports intensify and activist pressure grows, the era when such questions could be avoided or deflected is ending. Nikolai Schirmer's petition forces the conversation forward, demanding that winter sports' most powerful governing body choose between financial convenience and climatic necessity. How the IOC chooses will echo through winter sports for decades to come.