Thirty five years ago, on this day, September 21st, 1990,
Later, once the UK had established its stabilisation target, but only for the year 2005 rather than 2000 as others had done, Trippier again produced high-quality rhetoric. ‘We could go for 2000, if we wanted to close down half the coal mines in Britain and go for no economic growth’,
he stated (quoted in the Independent 21 September 1990
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 355ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.
The broader context was that in June 1888 at the Toronto conference on the changing atmosphere a target of a 20 per cent reduction in C02 emissions by 2005, on a 1988 baseline had been proposed.
The specific context was that 1990 was the year of all the conferences, and the UK had already said “nope” to Toronto, but were still trying to look like the good guys. – thus this wretched compromise.
What I think we can learn from this is that politicians will, obviously, always try to make a terrible compromise/retreat from reality look like a bold step in statesmanship. It’s perception management all the way…
What happened next – the wretched UNFCCC treaty contains an implicit expectation that rich nations will stabilise their emissions at 1990 levels by 2000. Most didn’t, obvs.
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 21, 1958, LA Times runs a Greenhouse Cartoon
September 21, 1990 – Ministers call for Toronto Target to be federal policy …
September 21, 1993 – Manchester says “no, not hot air”. Yeah, right.
September 21, 2014 – big #climate march in New York. World saved.