Month: September 2025

Categories
Cultural responses United States of America

September 15,1990 – Captain Planet launches

Thirty five years ago, on this day, September 15th, 1990, 

The first episode of “Captain Planet and the Planeteers” was broadcast.

Captain Planet and the Planeteers, commonly referred to as simply Captain Planet, is an American animated environmentalist superhero television series created by Barbara Pyle and Ted Turner[1] and developed by Pyle, Nicholas Boxer, Thom Beers, Andy Heyward, Robby London, Bob Forward, and Cassandra Schafausen. The series was produced by Turner Program Services and DIC Enterprises and broadcast on TBS and in syndication from September 15, 1990, to December 5, 1992

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 354ppm. 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 we’ve got to propagandise the young about how The System cares and can be fixed to solve whatever the problem seems to be. There are vast indoctrination efforts going on, all the time.

The specific context was that Ted Turner was then married to Jane Fonda, who switched him on to environmental issues. 

What I think we can learn from this is that the efforts at getting the kids riled up? Yeah, doesn’t last.

What happened next

There is a seriously hilarious spoof with Don Cheadle.

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

King, D. L. (1994). Captain Planet and the Planeteers: Kids, environmental crisis, and competing narratives of the new world order. Sociological Quarterly, 35(1), 103-120.

Also on this day: 

September 15, 1948 – Biologist Evelyn Hutchinson mentions carbon dioxide build-up at an AAAS symposium.

September 15, 1980 – Australian scientists hold “Carbon Dioxide and Climate” symposium in Canberra

September 15, 1982/1990 – “Environmental Justice” is born. And so is Captain Planet…

September 15, 1996 – A CCS posterchild is born: Sleipner Field comes online. – All Our Yesterdays

September 15, 2008- business splits over what to extort from Rudd…

Categories
United Kingdom

September 15, 1830 – Manchester-Liverpool railway opened

One hundred and ninety five years ago, on this day, September 15th, 1830, 

The Liverpool and Manchester Railway[1][2][3] (L&MR) was the first inter-city railway in the world.[4][i] It opened on 15 September 1830 between the Lancashire towns of Liverpool and Manchester in England.[4] It was also the first railway to rely exclusively on locomotives driven by steam power, with no horse-drawn traffic permitted at any time; the first to be entirely double track throughout its length; the first to have a true signalling system; the first to be fully timetabled; and the first to carry mail.

Liverpool and Manchester Railway – Wikipedia

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 284ppm. 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 poor bloody horses had been pulling wagons of coal along tracks for a while. Then someone had the bright idea of getting steam engines to do the work…

The specific context was an MP got himself killed.

What I think we can learn from this Is that we are a very inventive bunch of murder apes.

What happened next “Railway mania”. And almost 200 years later, the English can’t even build a railway between London and Manchester. But we’re definitely going to build a huge CCS infrastructure. Sure we are.

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 15, 1948 – Biologist Evelyn Hutchinson mentions carbon dioxide build-up at an AAAS symposium.

September 15, 1980 – Australian scientists hold “Carbon Dioxide and Climate” symposium in Canberra

September 15, 1982/1990 – “Environmental Justice” is born. And so is Captain Planet…

September 15, 1996 – A CCS posterchild is born: Sleipner Field comes online. – All Our Yesterdays

September 15, 2008- business splits over what to extort from Rudd…

Categories
Australia South Paciific

September 15, 2005 – “A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Refugees launched by FOE Australia”

Twenty years ago, on this day, September 15th, 2005,

Friends of the Earth Australia: A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Refugees – “While the Earth has always endured natural climate change variability, we are now facing the possibility of irreversible climate change in the near future. The increase of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere from industrial processes has enhanced the natural greenhouse effect.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 380ppm. 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 the issue of climate refugees rocking up in Australia was not new – James Burke had talked about it in his 1989 documentary “After the Warming.”

The specific context was that Friends of the Earth battles on, trying to get people to think about the uncomfortable issues.  2005 was before the ‘great awakening of late 2006-2007’ and it must have seemed pretty futile, but they persisted.

What I think we can learn from this: You have to keep saying the truth.  Hardly anyone listens, but wasn’t it ever thus?

What happened next

Anthony Albanaese started wanging on about climate refugees in late 2006, as a way of cornering John Howard  (see my October last year stuff).

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 15, 1948 – Biologist Evelyn Hutchinson mentions carbon dioxide build-up at an AAAS symposium.

September 15, 1980 – Australian scientists hold “Carbon Dioxide and Climate” symposium in Canberra

September 15, 1982/1990 – “Environmental Justice” is born. And so is Captain Planet…

September 15, 1996 – A CCS posterchild is born: Sleipner Field comes online. – All Our Yesterdays

September 15, 2008- business splits over what to extort from Rudd…

Categories
Australia

September 14, 1991 – the Green Wave has receded….

Thirty four years ago, on this day, September 14th, 1991,

“In an article in the Good Weekend of September 14, Deirdre Macken produced much evidence from market research that public concern about the environment, and the public’s willingness to buy eco-friendly products, had subsided markedly since their surge in 1989.”

Ross Gittins

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 356ppm. 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 the first wave of global eco-concern (1969 to 1972 or so) had given us UNEP and also the “issue-attention cycle”.

The specific context was that we were near/at the end of the public interest in/concern about the greenhouse effect etc. The media was covering it less – no new angles to be had.  These things then enter a kind of death-spiral.   

What I think we can learn from this – creating organisations that can cope with this death-spiral, this “abeyance” is really tough. They become bureaucratic, soulless grant-grubbers, or they wink out of existence. There oughta be a third way…

What happened next

“The climate” did not burst back onto the scene in a big way until the end of 2006.  And then followed the pattern – by 2010 everyone was exhausted. But the 2010 election, and Prime Minister Gillard’s reliance on Independents and Greens, kept the policy window open…

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 14, 1993 – scientists suffer backlash (not outa thin air though)

September 14, 1994 – Business told to brace for climate regulation/tax (which it then handily defeats) – All Our Yesterdays

September 14, 2004 – Blair “shocked” by scientists warnings – “time is running out for tackling climate change”

Categories
United States of America

September 13, 1856 – the game’s a Foote

One hundred and sixty nine years ago, on this day, September 13th, 1856,

Her article sparked interest and praise, notably in the 13 September issue of Scientific American magazine, in an article titled ‘Scientific ladies – experiments with condensed gases’: ‘Some have not only entertained, but expressed the mean idea, that women do not possess the strength of mind necessary for scientific investigation […] the experiments of Mrs Foote afford abundant evidence of the ability of woman to investigate any subject with originality and precision.’ https://www.chemistryworld.com/culture/eunice-foote-the-mother-of-climate-change/4011315.article#/

And

Scientific American 1856: Scientific Ladies - Experiments with Condensed Gases. | Hill Heat

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 285ppm. 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 the 19th century was kinda exciting for “science” (new word, only just taking over from “natural philosophy”).

The specific context was Eunice Foote was a campaigner for women’s suffrage, and a scientist.  

What I think we can learn from this – we could have done better as a species, but, well, here we are…

What happened next

Foote’s work specifically on climate was forgotten, but then rediscovered by retired petroleum geologist Ray Sorenson. In January 2011, in the American Association of Petroleum Geologists‘ on-line journal Search and Discovery he had this article.-: “Eunice Foote’s Pioneering Research On CO2 And Climate Warming“

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 13, 1661 – Fumifugium! – All Our Yesterdays

September 13, 1976 – US news broadcast on ozone and climate.

September 13, 1984 – unsettling Seattle workshop on sea level rise – All Our Yesterdays

September 13, 1992/1994- Scientists traduced, ignored

Categories
Renewable energy United Nations

September 12, 2023 – Gone with the wind

Two years ago, on this day, September 12th, 2023,

“No bids were received by offshore wind developers due to what companies said were unrealistically low prices.

Afterwards, wind farm manufacturers said they held positive discussions with Claire Coutinho, the new Energy Security Secretary, but were left bewildered days later by a meeting with Graham Stuart, the Net Zero Minister, who appeared to play down the auction results.

His comments during a meeting on Tuesday [12 September 2023] left some attendees unsure whether the Government was committed to addressing the issues in next year’s auction, multiple sources said. 

Oliver, M. 2023. “Industry on hold after auction flop spooks developers. Sunday Telegraph, September 17”

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QLlam1rJWJ76VZ66kfh81SwlRhxeZwnO8BuxaJj7CxA/edit?usp=sharing

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 376ppm. 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 offshore wind was the accidental success story of UK renewable energy policy.  There was a de facto ban on on-shore wind, thanks to the government of David “cut the green crap” Cameron, so offshore began to look attractive….

The specific context was that by this time two years ago (god it feels like forever) the Sunak government had decided that pissing on the environment might be a vote winner.

What I think we can learn from this is that we are stumbling into some very nasty situations. With our eyes open. Oh well.

What happened next

There’s another auction – with results due in December or so (everything’s delayed at present).

UK to Launch Seventh CfD Auction in August, Offshore Wind Has Its Own AR7 Timeline | Offshore Wind

Here’s Reform’s Richard Tice on the latest auction

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 12, 1958 – Letter in The Times about … carbon dioxide build-up

September 12, 1994 – Greenpeace lays into Keating government over climate failure – All Our Yesterdays

 September 12, 2003 – Newcastle Herald thinks the future of coal looks ‘cleaner’…

Categories
Australia South Paciific

September 11, 2015 – Pacific Island leaders fail to shift Australia and New Zealand…

Ten years ago, on this day, September 11th, 2015,

AAP, 2015. Pacific island leaders fail to shift Australia and NZ on climate targets. The Guardian, 11 September

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/11/pacific-island-leaders-fail-to-shift-australia-and-nz-on-climate-target

Pacific islands nations failed to convince Australia and New Zealand to back stronger targets on limiting global warming as the showdown at the Pacific Islands Forum on Thursday ended in a stalemate.

The 16 leaders at the forum agreed to disagree on whether to take a two degree or 1.5 degree warming limit stance to UN talks in Paris in December.

Small island nations facing rising seas pushed hard for the 1.5 degree target, saying anything higher risked their survival.

Pacific Islands Forum meeting in Port Moresby ends with leaders agreeing to disagree over whether to take 1.5 or two degree target to Paris climate talks

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 401ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it was 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 the UNFCCC was stuffed from the start. The George H.W. Bush administration resisted all efforts to get targets and timetables for rich nations to reduce their emissions into the text of the treaty.  Eventually, the French, who’d proposed it, raised the white flag.  So we got a meaningless but nice sounding treaty with “common but differentiated responsibilities.” Everything since then can be seen as an attempt to heal that early wound.  No success.

The specific context was that Paris was coming and Australia’s government was made up of climate deniers like Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull. God help us.

What I think we can learn from this is that the governments of rich countries are perfectly happy with everyone else – and this is especially the case of brown people – basically dying. A few will be “let in”, for show, but the rest? They can burn or fry.

What happened next

Paris was a farce.

The 1.5 promise was made, but no action to meet it was ever taken. Now, well, 1.5 is toast and we are not going to avoid 2 or 2.5 or probably even 3.  This, people, is why I didn’t breed. I could see this sort of shit coming in the 1990s. And here we are. 

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

September 11, 1973 – CIA coup topples Chilean democracy

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

September 11, 2006 – Australian climate concern hits tipping point (maybe) –

Categories
United States of America

September 11, 1969 – George Brown proposes an omnibus environment bill

Fifty six years ago, on this day, September 11th, 1969, Californian Congressman George Brown introduced an “omnibus” environment bill.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 324ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it was 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 through the second half of the 1960s various Congressmen (mostly but by no means entirely Democrats) had introduced various bills about pollution (air, water etc).  Most of this had been performative.

The specific context was that by mid-1969 the “environment”/ecology was competing with the assault on Vietnam for people’s attention (anti-war activists were understandably suspicious, obvs).

What I think we can learn from this is that politicians have antennae, and will try to amplify the things they want amplified. (Not ALL of them are corporate meat-puppets, at least, not all of the time).

What happened next – the times were propitious, and President Nixon signed the NEPA into law in January 1970.  Various bodies were formed, reports written and released, speeches given.  Guess what – the emissions kept climbing. 

To be fair to George Brown, he was behind the successful push for a National Climate Act, that President Carter signed in 1978.

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

September 11, 1973 – CIA coup topples Chilean democracy

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

September 11, 2006 – Australian climate concern hits tipping point (maybe) – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage United Kingdom

September 10, 2015 – one of those “whither CCS?” articles

Ten years ago, on this day, September 10th, 2015, the Financial Times did one of its “Big Reads.”

More than $30bn has been committed, or spent, on carbon capture and storage schemes to deal with CO2 emissions curb climate change but so far the sector – the preferred option of the fossil fuels industry – has fallen short of expectations. By Pilita Clark

Today it is just a scrubby field next to the enormous Drax coal and wood pellet power station in the English county of North Yorkshire. But in a matter of months, this could be the spot where the UK finally gives the go-ahead for what has become one of the world’s most perplexing tools in the quest to combat climate change : a carbon capture and storage plant.

Clark, P. 2015. Miracle machine or white elephant? FT BIG READ: CLIMATE CHANGE. Financial Times, 10 September, p.11.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 401ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it was 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 the much hyped Paris COP was only two months away, and the full-page adverts of greenwash were starting to appear in the pink’un (aka the Financial Times). So, time to let one of the hacks (quite a good one, imo) educate the rich.

The specific context was that it was also hot times for CCS policy – a second competition (the first had fizzled out)) was picking up speed.

What I think we can learn from this  is that we’ve been talking about turning points and last chances for a very very long time.

What happened next

The second competition for CCS was very abruptly cancelled (people were seriously butt-hurt, understandably).

Paris was a joke, but one we still, apparently, have to take seriously.

And Drax?  Well, there’s an FCA investigation about its “sustainability” claims just firing up…

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, 1957 – The Times covers the International Geodesy Conference… – All Our Yesterdays

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
Business Responses Denial Incumbent strategies Industry Associations United States of America

September 9, 1997 – “Global Climate Information Project”

Twenty nine years ago, on this day, September 10th, 1997 another pro-apocalypse propaganda outfit was launched, ahead of the UNFCCC negotiations to take place in Kyoto (COP-3).

“Global Climate Information Project” launched” 

Launched on September 9, 1997, by some of the nation’s most powerful trade associations, the Global Climate Information Project (GCIP) has rolled out an ambitious campaign for combating possible emission regulations courtesy of the Kyoto conference.

Through an advertising campaign that, according to GCIP figures, has already spent more than $3 million in newspaper and television spots and could spend as much as $13 million, the GCIP aims to cast doubt upon the need for emissions controls by questioning the politics and the science behind a United Nations agreement.

Writing on the media campaign unveiled by the GCIP, Bruce Clark of the Financial Times remarked that it “could become one of the most expensive lobbying efforts since the ‘Harry and Louise’ commercials that helped doom” the Clinton administration’s health-care reform proposal”

“A Clear View, Vol 4, No 16, Clearinghouse on Environmental Advocacy and Research” 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 364ppm. 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 business interests always mobilise and collaborate to face down challenges to their right to socialise the costs and privatise the profits. There’s lots of good research on this – Merchants of Doubt by Oreskes and Conway remains a good place to start.

The specific context was that Kyoto was coming and business had already done a great job in demonising it, in boxing in US Senators. But you can never be too sure, so thus the “Information” (sic) Project.

What I think we can learn from this. The war for the public mind goes on, and on.  

What happened next – the war for the public mind went on. 

GCIP ran a whole bunch of adverts on American TV.

New battalions were formed, new weapons tested. The strategic imperative remains unchanged – keep the peasants too busy to fight back. Buy off the smart one that you can, sideline or dephysicalise those you can’t.

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…

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