Month: September 2024

Categories
Cultural responses

September 11, 1989 – Bill McKibben’s “The End of Nature” published

Thirty-five years ago, on this day, September 11th, 1989, The New Yorker Magazine publishes ‘The End of Nature’ , an essay by William McKibben.

In an interview with the same magazine in 2014 McKibben recognised he had initially miscalculated what we are up against.

“It took me a long time to realize that the scientists had won the argument but were going to lose the fight, because it isn’t about data and science, it’s about power. The most powerful industry is fossil fuel, because it is the richest. At a certain point, it became clear that our only hope of matching that money was with the currencies of movement: passion, spirit, creativity—and warm bodies”

https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/peoples-climate-march-interview-bill-mckibben

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 354ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that for the past 13 months, everyone had been banging on about the “greenhouse effect” since James Hansen’s testimony. This had been neatly secured by Grant Swinger. And here was the first one of the first big philosophical pieces written by then young Bill McKibben. Talking about the End of Nature/

The New Yorker, of course, had been the venue for Rachel Carson’s 1962 effort Silent Spring. So this was in keeping with their general long form, big picture jeremiads (see also Elizabeth Kolbert’s Field Notes from a Catastrophe). 

What we learn is that there are specific publications where if you really want to have an influence, that’s where you need to be. Because everyone will be reading it and the mere fact that it got published there will mean that people take it seriously. Even if more interesting, important work is appearing somewhere else. Because we do mental shortcuts – we have to, because we’re surrounded by so many potential sources of information. 

What happened next McKibben’s essay got published as a book. Good Book. McKibben went on to found 350.org involved in divestment and so forth. Probably still thinks that the situation is salvageable. I don’t know. Maybe I should interview him. Anyway, that’s 35 years ago. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

References

https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/peoples-climate-march-interview-bill-mckibben

Also on this day: 

September 11, 1961 – New York Times reports “Air Found Gaining in Carbon Dioxide”

September 11, 1973 – CIA coup topples Chilean democracy

Categories
Canada United Kingdom

September 10, 1957 – The Times covers the International Geodesy Conference…

Sixty six years ago, on this day, September 10th, 1957, The Times runs a short piece – “Melting the Polar Ice Caps: Scientists Study Carbon Dioxide Threat” based on discussions at the International Geodesy conference in Toronto

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 315ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the International Geophysical Year was underway. And so there were these sorts of international conferences happening. The geodesy people had been going for quite a while. And it was at this one there were calls for urgent study of CO2. But that’s been largely forgotten.

What happened next is after the International Geophysical Year finished, the interest in carbon dioxide as a problem kind of died down a bit. And it wouldn’t be until the mid 60s that it started to come up again…

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

September 10, 1973- Ozone concerns on display in Kyoto…

September 10, 2007 – shiny #climate promises versus grim reality

September 10, 2008 – Greenpeace Kingsnorth protesters acquitted

Categories
Cultural responses France

September 9, 1990 – classic (?) film Mindwalk released

Thirty four years ago, on this day, September 9th, 1990, an interesting film was released. It sounds like a joke set-up: a poet, a politician and a physicist walk around a monastery…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindwalk

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 354ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Fritjof Capra was a bit of a star in New Age circles because he had a physics background and then to chuck it all in to be at the feet of Gregory Bateson and others. He had written The Turning Point, and so forth. And this film, directed by his brother is a rather interesting artefact. And it was an attempt to put these ideas to the test. I like the film. It has three significant speaking parts. There’s a poet, played by John Hurd, who’d already put on weight from the previous year’s The Package, Liv Ullman, as a Swedish nuclear physicist and Sam Waterson as a very thinly veiled Al Gore. These three meet at Mont St Michel and walk and talk. 

What we learn is that it can be hard to translate relatively abstruse ideas into something that people will watch. But this is an entirely serviceable effort in my opinion, and you should get hold of it if you can. 

What happened next Hurd went on to have a career that he thought was okay, but wasn’t as big as it could have been. Waterson has been around forever. Liv Ullman, I think is still alive. And Bent Capra never made another film; probably didn’t want to.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

September 9, 1947 – The Daily Worker talks about melting the ice-caps

September 9, 1971 – of Australian Prime Ministers and American scientists…

Categories
Australia

September 8, 1972 – Green activist vanishes off face of Earth…

Fifty two years ago, on this day, September 8th, 1972,

On September 8, 1972, [Brenda] Hean, 55, hopped aboard a two-seater World War II Tiger Moth, being flown by experienced pilot Max Price. Leaving from Hobart, they were bound for Canberra to try to win support from federal politicians to stop the flooding of Lake Pedder by Tasmania’s Hydro Electricity Commission.

One of their intentions was to skywrite Save Lake Pedder over the national capital.

The plane never made it, and the bodies and wreckage were never located.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/14/1092340534703.html?from=storylhs

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that there was a federal election coming. The main hope for Tasmanian activists trying to save Lake Pedder from being drowned for a dam was a change of government.

What we learn is that it may well not have been murder, and if it was murder, that doesn’t necessarily mean it was anti-greenies or pro-Lake Pedder people, because apparently the pilot had pissed people off with his, ah “extracurricular activities”. So he may have been the target of sabotage of the plane. In any case wreckage was never found, nobody ever confessed. And as Christine Milne says, Tasmania is a bit different in other places, the truth would come out – not so much in Tasmania. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

September 8, 1990 – Australian #climate denialist spouting his nonsense…

September 8, 2014 – Lobster boat blockaders have charges dropped.

Categories
United States of America

September 7, 1988 – media looking for more alarmist scientists…

Thirty six years ago, on this day, September 7th, 1988,

On September 7, 1988, with the Summer of ’88 still fully in American consciousness, the ABC news programme Nightline broadcast a segment dedicated to the greenhouse effect. I was contacted as a possible guest but was later told my views were “too moderate.” Some of the exchange between “Nightline” moderator Ted Koppel and the environmental activist Michael Oppenheimer, of the Environmental Defense Fund, helps to make this dilemma quite explicit.

Koppell: Dr Oppenheimer, I’d love to be able to say to you that I think the American public can get energised over some perceived threat forty years down the road, but I don’t believe it. Do you?

[Hecht was on it to]

(Schneider, 1989: 235-6)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the American airwaves were full of greenhouse. Thanks to James Hansen’s June 23 testimony and the severe heatwave summer drought. And we’re getting to that stage in the media cycle where the responsible cautious scientists have had their say. And now in order to keep things “fresh” the bookers for these programmes are needing to jazz it up a bit with more extreme pronouncements. And previously, bookable scientists and advocates like Oppenheimer, for the Environmental Defence Fund are considered passe or too cautious. And then, of course, someone more extreme and perhaps unhinged gets booked. And then it becomes part of the culture war, with the opponents pointing to scare stories and the media can then report that and round and round and round we go. 

What happened next? The climate culture war really kicked off in ‘89 with the George C Marshall Foundation, the Global Climate Coalition [it would be fun to figure out when that was born, when it started making its first pronouncements and interventions.] And this cycle continues down on to this day. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs

Also on this day: 

September 7, 1936 – The Anthropocene does for the Thylacine…

September 7, 1977 – #climate scientist Stephen Schneider on Carson for the last time…

September 7, 2005 – “rule out nuclear” say Aussie green outfits.

Categories
United States of America

September 7, 1927 – television, the drug of a nation, first cultivated

Ninety seven years ago, on this day, September 7th, 1927,

Wikipedia – On September 7, 1927, Farnsworth’s image dissector camera tube transmitted its first image, a simple straight line, to a receiver in another room of his laboratory at 202 Green Street in San Francisco.[23] Pem Farnsworth recalled in 1985 that her husband broke the stunned silence of his lab assistants by saying, “There you are – electronic television!”[23] The source of the image was a glass slide, backlit by an arc lamp. An extremely bright source was required because of the low light sensitivity of the design. By 1928, Farnsworth had developed the system sufficiently to hold a demonstration for the press.[25] His backers had demanded to know when they would see dollars from the invention;[27] so the first image shown was, appropriately, a dollar sign. In 1929, the design was further improved by elimination of a motor-generator; so the television system now had no mechanical parts. That year Farnsworth transmitted the first live human images using his television system, including a three and a half-inch image of his wife Pem.[citation needed]

Television, the drug of a nation

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 307ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that we had radio and if you could put pictures on that, well, whoop, you’d make some serious money. And of course, you could create the conditions for better education. Yeah, right. 

What we learn is that television as a technology is coming up to its 100th birthday. I didn’t know that,  I thought television was from the 30s. 

What happened next BBC suspended its television broadcasting during the war, and it came back after the war. And then in the US, ownership of televisions went through the roof between 1950 and 1956. And in the UK, the thing that really got people going was the coronation.

And for the TV/environment nexus, well, yes there was some good stuff. And then there was eco-pornography (see below). 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

References

1972 Ecopornography post

Also on this day: 

September 7, 1936 – The Anthropocene does for the Thylacine…

September 7, 1977 – #climate scientist Stephen Schneider on Carson for the last time…

September 7, 2005 – “rule out nuclear” say Aussie green outfits.

Categories
Uncategorized

September 6, 1991 – Titan has a greenhouse effect…

Thirty-three years ago, on this day, September 6th, 1991,

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 355ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that everyone in science of climate science and so forth, was aware of the whole greenhouse issue. And here was some nice science about the atmosphere of Titan, one of the moons of Saturn, and the greenhouse and reverse greenhouse or anti greenhouse effect on Titan. 

It didn’t, to my knowledge, have any bearing whatsoever on the politics of the time. That’s not why I’m talking about it; this site is already far too much about the politics and could do with a bit more science. So here we are. 

What happened next? People kept staring through telescopes figuring out the universe. Often quite expensive telescopes.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

September 6, 2000 – Emission scheme defeated, it’s time for a gloating press release… #Climate #auspol

September 6, 2007 – “The Future of Coal under Cap and Trade” hearings…

Categories
Australia Fossil fuels

September 5, 2004 – John Howard gloats about cooking the planet

Twenty years ago, on this day, September 5th, 2004, Australian Prime Minister John Howard was – this will shock you – a turd.

Howard at opening of WEC 

We are also a nation, which has been blessed by providence with very large reserves of energy. And I want to say something about the role that Australia has in mind and has executed over the years in relation to those reserves of energy. Australia is a strong and reliable supplier of energy. Australia is the world’s largest exporter of coal and it is a large exporter of LNG. We are very proud of the partnerships in energy that we have developed over the years with our friends and close partners in the Asian Pacific region.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 378ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Howard was now eight years into being Prime Minister. He had won all the big battles on environment, really, he had carved out a really good deal for Kyoto, and then pissed on it. He had stopped emissions trading, twice. True, he had been forced to take extra action to slow renewables, and he had even started talking about carbon capture and storage as a way to avoid any further talk of emissions reductions. 

He was surely feeling at this stage pretty damn pleased with himself, I’m quite sure. And so all of gloating at the World Energy Congress is to be expected really 

What we learn is that even when they’re supposed to maybe not boast too loud, for fear of alienating people, I guess if they know that they’re not alienating anyone important, and they’re sending a message that resonates with their core vote, then it’s okay. 

For a history of the World Energy Congress and what it was trying to achieve, see here.

What happened next Howard won the 2004 Federal election and why went on to cause more havoc and misery. And then Kevin Rudd came along and saved climate policy, Australia’s credibility and led us to the sunny upland of the land and milk and honey.  Oh yes. This definitely happened [subs please check this]. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obv

Also on this day: 

 September 5, 1986 – a “Safe Energy” rally, in London

September 5, 1990 – Australian Environment Minister promises deep carbon cuts – “easy”…

September 5, 2005 – Anthony Albanese introduced “Avoiding Dangerous Climate #Change” private member’s bill

Categories
Australia

September 4, 1969 – Ivory Tower types tell the truth at ANU

Fifty five years ago, on this day, September 4th, 1969, the Canberra Times is in philosophical mood/mode…

Wood, J. 1969. Man and the new biology: Finding the truth. Canberra Times, 4 September, p.23.

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/107890419

By JONATHAN WOOD

This year’s University Lectures at the Australian National University, through the contributions of four Australian biological scientists, have formed the genesis of a philosophy and religion appropriate to modern man….

NB Aftermath of AAS in Adelaide in August…. 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 324ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere conference had been held in Paris the year before. And everyone who was thinking about life on Earth and its prospects was scratching their head about impacts and what might be done. And here we have some a new Australian National University biologists scratching their heads 

What we learn is that 1969-1970 is the year that eco concern really starts to kick into high gear. 1968 is the year of violence and Vietnam. ‘69 is half fragile, biosphere and all the rest of it thanks to new science and new field configuring events and so forth. 

What happened next? The Australian scientists kept banging on about this stuff publishing books. MacFarlane Burnet, the Australian Association for the Advancement of Science got a serious makeover from a dreary magazine to Search. And for a while it looks like we might do something meaningful. But we didn’t. Ditto the same feeling in the late 80s, early 90s. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

September 4, 1990 – Industry whines about environment minister’s speech

September 4, 2000 – industry says sky will fall if there’s a carbon tax

September 4, 2006 – Royal Society to Exxon: “Knock it off with the funding to #climate deniers”

Categories
Australia

September 3, 1990 – Greenies meet Prime Minister, a cautious dance ensues

Thirty four years ago, on this day, September 3rd, 1990, Bob Hawke has to keep the promise that got him back as Prime Minister… (well, one of them).

Conservation groups left Parliament House in Canberra on Monday [3rd], resisting Federal Government pressure to join efforts to achieve consensus over sustainable development.

This followed Stage Two of a special summit process including representatives from government, environmental groups and industry.

Members of Greenpeace, the Australian Conservation Foundation, World Wide Fund for Nature and the Wilderness Society spent more than an hour with Prime Minister Bob Hawke discussing a range of issues.

Anon,1990. Greens meet Hawke but resist consensus. Green Week, September 4, p.9.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 354ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that small-g green had come out for Labor giving second preferences in the Australian Federal election of March 1990. This meant that the incumbent Labor government squeaked back home. And the quid pro quo was that there would be more serious engagement with “ecologically sustainable development.” There had been, at last, a position paper in June of 1990. That had been fairly piss-weak on climate, of course, because it’s the big unmentionable to hard basket item, really. And here was Hawke meeting with the greenies to the fear and dismay and disgust of the business sector. Which you have to remember at this point, didn’t know if Hawke might go on for years and years. 

What we learn is that there are always these sorts of meetings and quid pro quos and attempts to get mainstream parties to pay at least lip service to not being ecocidal maniacs. These usually end in tears for the ‘greenies’, because the system rewards Ecocide or maniac behaviour and punishes anything that isn’t ecocidal mania. 

What happened next? After some further toing and froing and argy bargy the Ecologically Sustainable Development policymaking process did indeed happen. The greenies performed well intellectually. Business didn’t quite know what happened. But it was all for naught because business and bureaucracy – especially bureaucracy – were able to water things down and water things down. And then they got especially lucky, when Hawke was replaced by his former Treasurer Paul Keating. And then the dismissal of ecologically sustainable development kicked up a serious gear. It was killed off in the committees and left to die by the wayside. And also, there was the infamous meeting in the middle of 1992. Supposed to be a two day event. But everyone walked out at the end of day one because the bureaucrats were such assholes.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

References

Xxx

Also on this day: 

September 3, 1988 – Ann Landers is Greta Thunberg avant la lettre…

September 3, 2002 – “Kyoto cuts too small, so we’re not going to bother”.