Month: December 2025

Categories
Australia International processes Kyoto Protocol United States of America

December 8, 1997 – Gore and Hill at Kyoto

Twenty eight years ago, on this day, December 8th, 1997,

Al Gore, then Vice-President of the United States, there at Kyoto. And on the same day

“Senator Hill’s entrance was a bit rockier, with a smaller Australian demonstration led by Greens’ Senator Dee Margetts jostling him on his entrance to the main summit hall. Two hours after Mr Gore, Senator Hill rushed through his speech – the 16th out of 67 – in front of a half-empty hall.”

Lunn, S. 1997. US juggernaut swamps small beer at Kyoto. The Australian, December 9, p.8

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 the UNFCCC had been kneecapped at birth by the US refusing to allow targets and timetables for emissions reductions by rich countries into the treaty’s text. George HW Bush said he’d boycott the Earth Summit if they weren’t removed from the draft text – and the French blinked. Everything since then has been an attempt to get some targets in. The Paris farce is the latest and the last (presumably).

The specific context was in the run up to Kyoto there were fierce public campaigns, funded by the oil companies etc, against Kyoto. Meanwhile, Australian Prime Minister John Howard had been trying to get people to accept the ridiculous position that Australia deserved special treatment (he succeeded).

What I think we can learn from this – we were doomed a long time ago.

What happened next – The US pulled out of Kyoto negotiations at the beginning of 2001. Australia followed the next year, despite having extorted an insanely generous deal. 

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: 

December 8, 1976 – IIASA holds a workshop on climate and solar energy conversion 

December 8, 1981 – Thames TV shows “Warming Warning” documentary

December 8, 2003 – Chief Scientific Advisor under microscope for Rio Tinto role

Categories
Australia

December 7, 1975 – Climate and Australia meeting

Fifty years ago, on this day, December 7th, 1975 “Climate and Australia” academic conference began in Melbourne.

On the 11th, at the conference, Herman Flohn gave a warning… December 11, 1975 – German scientist gives stark climate warning in Melbourne

A book was published based on the conference – 

“Climatic change and variability : a Southern perspective : based on a conference at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, 7-12 December, 1975, which was co-sponsored by the Australian Academy of Science and Royal Meteorological Society (Great Britain). Australian Branch.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 331ppm. 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 there had been increased concern in the early 1970s, in US, UK and Australia (and elsewhere no doubt) about disruptions to weather patterns and its implications for security (food supplies etc).

The specific context was that in 1974 Whitlam’s Minister for Science had been persuaded by Nugget Coombs (legendary and recently retired public servant) to set up an inquiry. Mind you, by the time the conference happened, Whitlam had been sacked by the Governor-General (with a little help from our friends at Langley?).

What I think we can learn from this – the debates have been there for fifty years. This inquiry was about two years too early to have a strong “carbon dioxide is the problem” theme.

What happened next – a report was produced, but sank without trace. Meanwhile, the CSIRO kept beavering away. There was a conference on Philip Island in 1978, and an academic conference in Canberra in 1980, a monograph in 1981. Plenty of warnings. Ignored, obviously.

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: 

December 7, 1928 – Noam Chomsky born

December 7, 1967: Towards Tomorrow “Assault on Life”

December 7, 1967 – Swedish “Monitor” program talks environmental crisis

December 7, 2011 – a CCS network is launched

Categories
Australia

December 7, 1989 and 1992 – “Ecologically Sustainable Development” goes from hero to zero

Thirty-six/thirty-three years ago, on this day, December 7th, 1989/1992, ESD went from hero to zero.

CANBERRA: The Prime Minister, Mr Hawke, won approval yesterday from industry, union, farm and green groups in aiming to achieve the “ecological sustainability” of all Australia’s major resource industries within a year.

Seccombe, M. 1989. Hawke backed in bid to gain ecology-industry harmony. Sydney Morning Herald, December 8, p.4.

and

ESD and greenhouse agreement COAG, Perth Council of Australian Governments (COAG), Communique, ‘Environment – ESD and greenhouse’, COAG Meeting, Perth, 7 December 1992,

(By this time Keating and his gang had obliterated all concern for environment, and especially greenhouse gas reduction hopes).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 353-356ppm. 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 there had been a previous wave of eco-concern from the late 1960s to the early 1970s. It had run into the buffers, thanks to industry lobbying, state resistance and civil society exhaustion. From 1987 or so, first with the ozone layer and then the “greenhouse effect”, demands for actual action had grown.

The specific context was that these two events mark the beginning of hope and the triumph of experience.

What I think we can learn from this – the defeat then shaped the battlespace forever after.

What happened next – failure and defeat piled upon failure and defeat, as the scale of the problems grew beyond wicked to, well, existential and impossible. And yet we breed…

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: 

December 7, 1928 – Noam Chomsky born

December 7, 1967: Towards Tomorrow “Assault on Life”

December 7, 1967 – Swedish “Monitor” program talks environmental crisis

December 7, 2011 – a CCS network is launched

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

December 6, 2005 – James Hansen speech about imminent tipping points, at AGU

Twenty years ago, on this day,

“On 6 December 2005, in a presentation to the American Geophysical Union (AGU), James Hansen stated that, “we are on the precipice of climate system tipping points beyond which there is no redemption” (Hansen, 2005, p. 8). Hansen’s warning helped initiate a tipping point trend in climate change communication that was quickly reflected in public debate. These warnings were front page news by January 2006, with The Washington Post reporting that, “[t]his ‘tipping point’ scenario has begun to consume many prominent researchers in the United States and abroad…” (Eilperin, 2006, p. A01).”

The tipping point trend in climate change communication – ScienceDirect

See also Bowen Censoring Science 1 to 6

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 that James Hansen had been getting in trouble with asshole Republican administrations since 1981, when a front page story on the New York Times had led to a research grant already given being withdrawn and people losing their jobs. The George HW Bush administration had also tried to sideline/silence Hansen in the key period 1989-1992. And on and on it went.

The specific context was HW’s dumb son, “Dubya” was nominally President, but you gotta assume a lot of the direction was coming from Dick Cheney. By this time the US was having to contend with the fact that the UN process, which it thought it had rendered pointless by withdrawing from Kyoto negotiations, was “back on track” (it’s all relative) and there would be more fights to come about this.

What I think we can learn from this – Hansen is worth listening to. It’s scary af.

What happened next – Hansen took (enforced) retirement. GISS got slaughtered in 2025. The emissions kept climbing, and the Republicans stopped pretending to be anything other than devastation-bots.

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: 

December 6, 2005 – CCS is our only hope, says Chief Scientist….

December 6, 2006- Turns out 0.1% of a Very BIG NUMBER is … quite a lot…

December 6, 2018 – Macron scraps a fuel tax because of protests – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Activism Australia Coal

December 5, 1994 – direct action against Yallourn coal power station, in Victoria

Thirty one years ago, on this day, December 5th, 1994,

“Conservation groups yesterday stepped up pressure on the Federal Government to adopt tougher measures to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. Federal Cabinet will consider the issue tomorrow.

In Yallourn, Greenpeace activists chained themselves across railway tracks used by coal trains which feed the Yallourn W power station.

They also unfurled a huge banner down the side of one of the station’s smoke stacks.”

 Birnbauer, B. 1994. Greenies Mount Campaign For Greenhouse Tax. The Age, December 6, p.3.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 359ppm. 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 Greenpeace Australia had had a boom and bust cycle in the late 1980s early 1990s, and had almost gone bankrupt. But it survived, and people wanted to take action…

The specific context was there were plans afoot to expand coal burning (and even exports of brown coal – I mean, wtaf?). Meanwhile, there was a carbon tax debate underway in Canberra.

What I think we can learn from this – direct action (albeit symbolic) against fossil fuel infrastructure has been going on for a generation.

What happened next – Greenpeace kept doing blockades, occupations etc. There was also a trend to protests in Melbourne (LINK).

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: 

December 5, 1952 & 2009 London sees climatic pollution events

December 5, 1994 – Taxing times for Australia, maybe… – All Our Yesterdays

December 5, 2002 – Australian Government CCS support begins…

Categories
Fafocene

Four “Quatrains” for the FAFOcene

Not quatrains – doggerel. Whatever.

Our Lords and Masters

ignore disasters

While hoi polloi

just shrug, destroy

xxx

A stale uppercrust

Lacking care and trust

Washing hands and data

Thinking they are smarter

xxx

While those with freedom –

of info, assembly, speech –

Think their work is done

If they but beseech

xxx

Our Lords and Masters

Just sticking plasters

And society (so civil)

Will march, and snivel.

Categories
Scientists

December 4, 1893 – John Tyndall dies

One hundred and thirty two years ago, on this day, December 4th, 1893,

In his last years Tyndall often took chloral hydrate to treat his insomnia. When bedridden and ailing, he died from an accidental overdose[79] of this drug in 1893 at the age of 73, and was buried at Haslemere.[80] The overdose was administered by his wife Louisa. “My darling,” said Tyndall when he realized what had happened, “you have killed your John.”[81]

: 1893 John Tyndall dies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 294ppm. 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 Tyndall had, in the 1860s, proved that carbon dioxide was a greenhouse gas (did he rip off Eunice Foote? Possibly. Probably say some. I am less convinced, fwiw).

What I think we can learn from this – be super careful with potentially lethal cures for insomnia? Er, that’s all I got…

Also, I listened to a podcast where they interviewed the climate scientist Kate Marvel – in her new book she speculates (and she admits this is speculation) that it may not have been an accident…

What happened next? They named a climate centre after him.

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: 

December 4, 1969 – Black Panther Fred Hampton assassinated by FBI, Chicago cops – All Our Yesterdays

December 4, 1989 – first anti-climate action economic “modelling” released in Australia

December 4, 1989 – Greenhouse tax urged…

Categories
Poland UNFCCC United Kingdom

December 3, 2018- David Attenborough on the end of civilisation

Seven years ago, on this day, December 3rd, 2018,

“The collapse of civilisation and the natural world is on the horizon, Sir David Attenborough has told the UN climate change summit in Poland.

“The naturalist was chosen to represent the world’s people in addressing delegates of almost 200 nations who are in Katowice to negotiate how to turn pledges made in the 2015 Paris climate deal into reality.

“As part of the UN’s people’s seat initiative, messages were gathered from all over the world to inform Attenborough’s address on Monday. “Right now we are facing a manmade disaster of global scale, our greatest threat in thousands of years: climate change,” he said. “If we don’t take action, the collapse of our civilisations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon.”

3 Dec 2018 Guardian

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 409ppm. 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 Attenborough had been slow to acknowledge the carbon dioxide problem (see 2006 piece by George Monbiot).

The specific context was that with the IPCC’s 1.5 degree report, and the Thunberg school strikes, and XR’s “declaration of rebellion”, it was all systems go for climate doom.

What I think we can learn from this – “words words words” as Hamlet would have it.

What happened next – Attenborough kept making documentaries. The emissions, at a global level, kept climbing. So did atmospheric concentrations and temperature. We are fubarred.

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: 

December 3, 1968 – UN General Assembly says yes to a conference about environment. CO2 mentioned.

December 3, 1970 – Olof Palme looks to the future… 

December 3, 1972 – #climate scientists write “gizza grant” letter to President Nixon

Categories
United Kingdom Weather modification

December 3, 1974 – Commons debates “The Weather Machine”

Fifty one years ago, on this day, December 3rd, 1974,

The CO2 question (that is, long-term temperature and precipitation changes caused by rising carbon dioxide levels) was absent from the Dynamical Climatology Branch and rarely touched on by Mason. This changed with the airing of Nigel Calder’s BBC television programme, The Weather Machine, in 1974. Calder, a well-known British science writer and former New Scientist journalist, painted the imminent coming of a new Ice Age in such dramatic terms that the House of Commons ordered the Meteorological Office to report on Calder’s pronouncements 

‘Meteorological Office: Ice Age Predictions, House of Commons Debate,’’ 3 Dec 1974, Hansard, Vol. 882, cc. 440-2W 

via Martin-Nielsen, 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 330ppm. 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 all sorts of predictions – about getting hotter and getting colder, for various reasons, were being thrown about in the 1960s and 1970s. Carbon dioxide build-up was acknowledged by all, but some (including Nigel Calder) were not interested.

One does wonder what Nigel’s dad, Lord Ritchie-Calder, thought…

The specific context was – 1974 was busy year, politically, and there was still ambiguity about what the future would hold for the climate (it wasn’t really for another 10 years that all doubt could be removed, though certainly by the second half of the 1970s more and more people were saying “it’s gonna get hotter, and carbon dioxide is the reason why”).

What I think we can learn from this – the BBC used to have the power to upset the applecart.

What happened next – a fierce prolonged two year spat between the BBC and John Mason, who was, by all accounts, an, ah “forceful personality.”

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: 

December 3, 1968 – UN General Assembly says yes to a conference about environment. CO2 mentioned.

December 3, 1970 – Olof Palme looks to the future… 

December 3, 1972 – #climate scientists write “gizza grant” letter to President Nixon

Categories
Activism Australia

December 2, 2015 – Parliament sit-in

Ten years ago, on this day, December 2nd, 2015, Australian climate protesters held a Parliament House sit-in. 

Climate Change: Sit-In Protesters Dragged Out Of The Australian Parliament

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 401ppm. 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 parliament has proved itself to be largely stuffed with mental or moral defectives (the two are not mutually exclusive, obvs) with the smartest being venal corporate meat-puppets. This is part of the overall assault on civil society by both corporate and state interests, a phenomenon that is going on around the world, with dire consequences. Oh well.

The specific context was – oh, I don’t know. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull being useless.

What I think we can learn from this – we are fubarred. 

What happened next – protests continued. Emissions continued to climb. But then, thank goodness, a Labor government came to power in 2022 and there began a stark improvement in climate policy. Oh yes.

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

December 2, 1964 – Mario Savio’s “bodies on the gears” speech at Berkeley..

December 2, 1981 – “Is the world getting warmer?” (YES)

December 2, 1991 – “Ecologically Sustainable Development” bites the dust…

December 2, 2023 – Exxon’s boss vs IEA, planet – All Our Yesterdays