Categories
United States of America

December 24, 1968 – “Earthrise” photo

On this day, December 24 in, 1968 the Earthrise photo

showed our pale blue dot for what it is.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 323ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

The Americans were shooting for the moon, with good old American know-how, (as supplied by good-old Americans like Dr Werner von Braun) (the Soviets had given up boots on the moon as simply too expensive).

Why this matters. 

Every so often someone says “we need a global consciousness”.  Yeah, been there, done that, got the t-shirt, it wasn’t enough

What happened next?

The first big big wave of eco-concerrn, from the beginning of 1969 to the middle of 1972 or so…

Categories
Australia

December 23, 2009 – Kevin Rudd told to call double-dissolution #climate election… (spoiler – he didn’t)

On this day, December 23 in 2009, Kevin Rudd was given the strongest possible advice to go for an early “double dissolution” election and force through climate policies.

In the week before Christmas, on 23 December 2009, a leadership strategy group comprising Rudd, Gillard, Swan, Faulkner, Arbib, Bitar and Alister Jordan gathered at Phillip Street, Sydney. Accounts of this meeting differ widely and significantly. Yet the central thrust seems clear. Arbib and Bitar say they wanted an early 2010 double dissolution election to be announced around Australia Day 2010.

Paul Kelly, 2014, Triumph and Demise, p275

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 387ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Kevin “greatest moral challenge” Rudd had been enjoying watching the Liberals and Nationals tear themselves apart on climate change, while simultaneously allowing his own policy to be watered down and watered down.  When push came to shove, the Greens (whom he had been steadfastly ignoring) didn’t vote for the legislation. Tony ‘wrecking ball’ Abbott became opposition leader, the Copenhagen conference failed and Rudd lost the plot.

Why this matters. 

The ALP never point out that their man Rudd had a choice, and he blew it.  Instead they blame the Greens (full disclosure – I am not now, and never have been, a member of the Green Party of Australia/England/Mars whatever.)

What happened next?

Rudd chickened out, lost all credibility when he punted the climate issue that had been – according to him ‘the great moral challenge of our generation’. Then he tried to bring in a mining tax, incurred the wrath of the cashed up miners (obvs) and then got toppled by his deputy, Julia Gillard, after a front page of the Sydney Morning Herald story with an insinuatiion against her loyalty to Rudd against her finally broke her patience (and loyalty).  And then, then the soap opera got properly wild…

Categories
United Kingdom

December 22, 1978 – UK Energy Department chief scientist worries about CO2 levels and pressure to reduce them

On this day, December 22, 1978, the chief scientist at the UK Department of Energy, Hermann Bondi, wrote to the civil servants in the Cabinet Office, as part of the general raised awareness about climate issues in the late 1970s…

Weighing the short- and long-term effects of climate predictions, Hermann Bondi, the Chief Scientist at the Department of Energy from 1977 to 1980, wrote to the Cabinet Office in late 1978:

“If it became the accepted scientific view that the CO2 level would continue to rise largely due to the combustion of fossil fuel and that this was likely to have undesirable climatic effects then the pressure for reducing fossil fuel combustion would be immediate and severe. … Whether the scientific predictions turned out to be right or wrong the effects of the change in fuel consumption pattern induced by the prediction could be far-reaching. I regard this possibility as of far greater importance for this country than the effect of an actual climatic change. And the impact would almost certainly come very much sooner.”

H. Bondi to R. G. Courtney, 22 Dec 1978, KEW, Ref. R 2959, CAB 164/1422. Also see ‘‘Interdepartmental Group on Climatology: Comments on CPRS Paper ‘Economic Effects of Climatic Change’ by the Department of Energy,’’ KEW, CAB 164/1422

Agar 2015

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 335ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Through the mid-70s awareness and concern grew. The UK government finally set up an inter-departmental committee (despite the resistance of theMeteorological Office top dog, John Mason ).

Why this matters. 

We knew. I know I keep saying it, but by the late 1970s, there was enough knowledge out there to be properly worried….

What happened next?

A report was finally produced. New Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was briefed on it in 1980 ,and responded with incredulity “you want me to worry about the weather?” And eight more lost years would  go by on her watch until she finally was properly persuaded on the threat of the “greenhouse effect”…

Categories
United States of America

December 22, 1975 – “Scientist Warns of Great Floods if Earth’s Heat Rises” (surely “when”?)

On this day, December 22 in 1975, the New York Times ran a story “Scientist Warns of Great Floods if Earth’s Heat Rises.”

But carbon dioxide was not in the frame.

Dr Howard Wilcox, who had a book called “Hothouse Earth” argued that – in the words of the NYT-

“man’s output of heat into the atmosphere, if allowed to increase at present energy and industrial growth rates, will raise the earth’s temperature enough to melt the polar ice caps and flood many populous areas of the earth in the next 80 to 180 years.”

 That ‘heat’ would be the key driver, was not the case…, as both William Kellogg and Murray Mitchell pointed out – the final paragraphs in the story are these:

Dr. J. Murray Mitchell, Jr.; senior research climatologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration laboratory in Silver Spring, Md. in a telephone interview offered, similar observations:

“I agree with Dr. Wilcox’s concern and his scientific analysis and statistical evidence. But I feel that the more immediate danger will come from the increasing amounts of carbon dioxide that are thrown off into the atmosphere along with the heat that Dr. Wilcox talks about.”

Baynard Webster, “Scientist Warns of Great Floods if Earth’s Heat Rises,” New York Times, December 22, 1975

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 331ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Why this matters

We need to remember that – as per the Landsberg article mentioned a few days ago, carbon dioxide was not the only villain in the picture.

What happened next

Within a couple of years, it was obvious that carbon dioxide was, in fact, the big thing to worry about. 

Categories
Activism United States of America

December 21, 2005 – US activist William Rodgers commits suicide

On this day, December 21, in 2005, US environmental activist William Rodgers committed suicide in prison.

“To my friends and supporters to help them make sense of all these events that have happened so quickly: Certain human cultures have been waging war against the Earth for millennia. I chose to fight on the side of bears, mountain lions, skunks, bats, saguaros, cliff rose, and all things wild. I am just the most recent casualty in that war. But tonight I have made a jail break – I am returning home, to the Earth, to the place of my origins. Bill, 12/21/05 (the winter solstice.)”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_C._Rodgers

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 380ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Rodgers was one of six environmental activists arrested December 7, 2005 as part of the FBI‘s Operation Backfire. His charge was one count of arson for a June, 1998 fire set by the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) at the National Wildlife Research Center in Olympia, Washington

Why this matters. 

Those who try to slow down the acceleration of the destruction usually pay a price.

What happened next?

The acceleration of the destruction. Obvs.

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage China Coal

December 20, 2007 – UK opposition leader David Cameron gives clean coal speech in Beijing…

On this day, December 20, 2007, then-opposition leader David Cameron gave a speech about clean coal in Beijing

“developing green coal will be a priority for a Conservative Government: we will do what it takes to make Britain a world leader in this crucial field.”

The context was –

Globally, there was an upsurge in concern about climate change. It was apparent that coal usage in the majority world was expanding rapidly.  Don’t worry, carbon capture and storage will save the day…

In the UK, David Cameron was continuing his efforts to “de-toxify” the Conservative Party brand, by making big empty eco-modernisation promises like this one, which was also an attempt to one-up the Labour government of the day – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/mobile/uk_politics/7153139.stm

Why this matters?

The promises, oh,  they are so shiny, so seductive. You’d love to go to sleep to  those dulcet tones, wouldn’t you?

What happened next?

Once in office, Cameron did none of this. Of course.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 384ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Categories
UNFCCC United States of America

December 19, 1991- Will UN negotiations go as usual and “commit us to global catastrophe”?

On this day, December 19 in 1991 a close observer of the negotiations for a global climate treaty warned that it might end up being useless.

 Michael Oppenheimer of the Environmental Defense Fund lamented that ‘We remain confident that the texts of a Convention will emerge. However, we are not at all confident it will be an effective Convention. Those square brackets exist for the purpose of defending the supposed interests of countries. But in so doing they may yet commit us to global catastrophe (quoted in ECO, 19 December 1991).

Paterson, M (1996) page 58

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 351ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

The negotiations for a global climate treaty had finally begun – despite the best efforts of the US to stop them from happening at all – in 1991.  And it instantly became obvious that Uncle Sam was just gonna delay and block, block and delay…

Why this matters. 

If you know your history, you will know that … you’re history

What happened next?

This. What you are living.  The catastrophes.

Categories
Science United States of America

December 18, 1970 – Science article about “Man-Made Climatic Changes”

On this day, December 18 in 1970, an article was published in Science, about “Manmade climatic changes,” written by Helmut  Landsberg.

Landsberg (who would be dismissive of Stephen Schneider later in the decade) ran through a number of possible ways in which humans might inadvertently alter the climate – carbon dioxide was only one route, and as he noted, perhaps a little disingenuously, given that he knew CO2 levels were rising,

“our estimates of CO2 production by natural causes, such as volcanic exhalations and organic decay, are very inaccurate; hence the ratio of these natural effects to anthropogenic effects remains to be established.”

Landsberg (1970)

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 326ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now, well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

The first big wave of eco-concern about global issues (beyond smog and DDT, onto extinction, overpopulation, and, yes, climate change) was in full swing. Earlier in the year the first report of the President’s council on environment quality had even mentioned the possibility of carbon dioxide build up being a Very Serious Thing.

Why this matters. 

It perhaps gives you pause for thought?  We’ve been failing to act on climate for half a century.

What happened next?

Stockholm conference on the Environment in 1972. Didn’t give us much, but UNEP, and UNEP and the WMO shepherded the climate agenda forwards…  That took another sixteen long years…

Categories
Egypt International processes

December 17, 1989 – a big #climate conference in Egypt begins…

On this day, December 17 in 1989, a big conference on climate change began in Egypt. 

“During 17-21 December, the World Conference on Preparing for Climate Change was held in Cairo, Egypt. At the opening address, Suzanne Mubarak from Egypt referred to the ‘grim irony’ of the fact that, while the ‘primary responsibility’ for global warming lay with the industrialised countries, the effects would be experienced ‘mostly in the countries of the South, where the capacity to cope [was] weaker.’”

Paterson, M (1996) p.38

Also http://www.climate.org/about/archives/Cairo%20Climate%20Conference%201989.pdf

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 353ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Everyone was running around holding conferences back then. Each one was going to be the one that history remembered as The Moment It All Started To Go Right. Not a single one of them was…

Funny how nobody (that I saw) brought this up during the recent COP27 nonsense. Presumably would raise too many awkward questions about how little has been achieved…?

Why this matters. 

It doesn’t, I guess. But good to remember, as we circle the drain, that there was a time when we tried to sort ourselves out.  Or gave the impression of trying to, in any case…

What happened next?

More meetings in 1990 and then, finally, the negotiations for a climate treaty began in early 1991. And the US, predictably, did everything it could to slow down/stop progress, with considerable success…

Categories
Australia Renewable energy

December 16, 2002 – another knee-capping for renewable energy in Australia…

On this day, December 16 in 2002, the knee-capping of energy that isn’t fossil-based continued

“The director of the Australian Cooperative Research Centre for Renewable Energy, Frank Reid, says the organisation may have to abandon plans for a $60 million renewables venture capital fund if the Federal Government goes ahead with its decision to withdraw financial support from the organisation.”

Myer, R. (2002) Business – Energy research loses pivotal funding The Age 16th December

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 373ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

John Howard had won the 2001 election and set about further undermining renewable energy. The historical hatred of renewables among policy elites in Australia is fascinating – one speculation on it, by a devastatingly brilliant and handsome academic – is here.

Why this matters

If we had taken this seriously when the warnings started coming through, we would have

  1. Knocked the whole “consumption for consumptiton’s sake/as a replacement for meaning” thing on the head
  2. Done something about serious energy efficiency
  3. Done something about accelerating the research, development and deployment of renewables.

“We” (rich technocrats, mostly white, mostly male) didn’t think it mattered.  We thought our technology would save that subset of the species we call “us”.

What happened next?

Howard kept killing off renewables, every chance he got. Renewables have finally taken hold, but a) the delay, oh my the delay and b) they are additional to other energy demand, rather  than replacing it. We’re so toast.