Author: drmarchudson

Categories
Australia

 July 20, 1997 – Howard appoints a taskforce…

Twenty nine years ago, on this day, July 11st, 1997, John Howard gets his ‘gotta kill any expectations of Australia being a responsible actor on climate’ taskforce together.

Mr Howard yesterday appointed a top level climate change task force, including senior Canberra bureaucrat Roger Beale and Australia’s Ambassador for the Environment Howard Bamsey, to visit Washington, Tokyo and London, following up his recent greenhouse talks with world leaders.

Lunn, S. 1997. Gas targets framed as bargaining chip. The Australian, July 21, p.2.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was xxxppm. As of 2026, 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 Australian government had initially said the right words on climate, but this melted away through the early 1990s.  By 1996, and especially with its performance at the second COP, in Geneva in July, it was obvious Australia would be a bad-faith player.

The specific context was the Kyoto COP was coming, and John Howard was pulling out all the stops to try to avoid any emissions reductions commitments.

What I think we can learn from this, it is not too late to send Howard to the Hague.

What happened next – At Kyoto, through whining and exhaustion, Australia got a 108% emissions “reduction” target, that was actually 130% once you took into account the land-clearing clause.

And Australia STILL did not ratify, until 2007 under Kevin Rudd (that’s another story).

xxx

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 20, 1989 – New “Ambassador for the Environment” role makes greenies happy 

July 20, 1989 – Bob Hawke fumbles the green football… 

July 20, 1995 – Patrick Moore at the National Press Club 

July 20, 2014- the “Green Blob” blamed 

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

July 20, 1979 – Little Green Book gets a shout out…

Forty seven years ago, on this day, July  11st, 1997, the Little Green Book (review here) got a shout out.

Birmingham Post 1979 07 20 p04 Little Green Book

“One of its great virtues is that it is only just over five inches by four and, though it is packed with information, it slips easily into the pocket or hand-bag. 

It is sub-titled “An owner’s manual to the planet” and it has been produced by the editors of Vole magazine for The Green Alliance, formed last year by a group of environmentalists with the aim of ensuring “that the political priorities of the UK are determined with an ecological perspective.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was xxxppm. As of 2026, 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 various groups and publications forming in the late 1960s early 1970s (The Ecologist, Our Environment, Friends of the Earth etc etc).

Vole was kinda interesting, and Ted Hughes, the poet, was heavily involved. You can see copies in the British Library.

What I think we can learn from this – “environmentalism’ has been with us for fifty years. It has not been able to do terribly much to slow down the race to extinction, either of other animals or of the hairless murder apes.

What happened next – Vole folded quite soon after this (1980?)

xxx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 20, 1989 – New “Ambassador for the Environment” role makes greenies happy 

July 20, 1989 – Bob Hawke fumbles the green football… 

July 20, 1995 – Patrick Moore at the National Press Club 

July 20, 2014- the “Green Blob” blamed 

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

July 19, 2010 – Stephen Schneider dies

Sixteen years ago, on this day, July  11st, 2010 scientist Stephen Schneider died.

Stephen H. Schneider 1945-2010

Dr. Stephen H. Schneider was the Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies, Professor of Biology, Professor (by courtesy) of Civil and Environ mental Engineering, and a Senior Fellow in the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University. Dr. Schneider received his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering and Plasma Physics from Columbia University in 1971. He studied the role of greenhouse gases and suspended particulate material on climate as a postdoctoral fellow at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. He was awarded a postdoctoral fellowship at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in 1972 and was a member of the scientific staff of NCAR from 1973-1996, where he co-founded the Climate Project.

Internationally recognized for research, policy analysis and outreach in climate change, Dr. Schneider focused on climate change science, integrated assessment of ecological and economic impacts of human-induced climate change, and identifying viable climate policies and technological solutions. He consulted with federal agencies and/or White House staff in the Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, Clinton, G.W. Bush, and Obama administrations.

[continues]

https://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/References/Biography.html

Trenbeth at American Meteorological Jan 2011.  

https://ams.confex.com/ams/91Annual/webprogram/Paper180230.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was xxxppm. As of 2026, 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 Schneider’s first encounter with climate change/media had come in 1971, when he had co-authored a paper which got taken up as “an ice age is coming”. By the mid-1970s he was writing books like The Genesis Strategy and appearing on the Johnny Carson show

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

. By the late 1970s he was giving clips to documentary makers like this –

Schneider was in Australia for the Greenhouse 88 conference(s), fielding media enquiries and generally doing a good job of being a public intellectual.

He was then first (iirc) ‘thinker in residence’ in South Australia.

Anyway, he died too young and there was a lot more he had to contribute.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

September 9, 1971 – Stephen Schneider’s letter, and a World Model

December 29, 1972 – Schneider meets Sullivan

November 1, 1975 – Stephen Schneider tries to clear up the “Carbon Dioxide Climate Confusion.”

January 28, 1990 –  Stephen Schneider and the dirty crystal ball.

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 19, 1968 – “man has already rendered the temperature equilibrium of the globe more unstable.” 

July 19, 1976 – , Scientist warns “ “If we’re still rolling along on fossil fuels by the end of the century, then we’ve had it.” 

July 19, 1977 – American public hears from a climate scientist 

July 19, 1979 – “a political view on C02”

Categories
United Kingdom

 July 19, 2006 – David Miliband gives a speech

Twenty years ago, on this day, July  11st, 2006, newly-appointed Climate minister David Miliband gives a speech

“Furthermore, if we wait until the problem is at crisis point, it will be too late to put right.“

D. Miliband, The Great Stink: Towards an Environmental Contract, Audit Commission Annual Lecture, Wednesday, 19 July

https://www.darkoptimism.org/DavidMiliband.pdf

2006, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20061209022624/http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/ministers/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 382ppm. As of 2026, 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 after a flurry of announcements and pronouncements from 1988 to 1992 or so, the climate issue had slipped down the agenda, wheeled out for election point-scoring (swing voters etc etc).  However, from about 2005, with the EUETS, the ratification of Kyoto and Blair’s desperation that the G7 meeting he was hosting not be about the Iraq War, climate moved back centre(ish) stage. Much as Kevin Rudd in Australia would use climate as a stick to wield, so young David Cameron, new leader of the Conservatives, would do.

The specific context was some of us were neck-deep in making Climate Camp happen. What fools.

What I think we can learn from this Talk is cheap.

What happened next.  Oh, lots of stuff, including a possible carbon rationing scheme. Then Miliband lost the leadership contest to his brother Ed, and the rest is history.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

 November 19, 2009 – Ed Miliband on “The Politics of Climate Change”

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 19, 1968 – “man has already rendered the temperature equilibrium of the globe more unstable.” 

July 19, 1976 – , Scientist warns “ “If we’re still rolling along on fossil fuels by the end of the century, then we’ve had it.” 

July 19, 1977 – American public hears from a climate scientist 

July 19, 1979 – “a political view on C02” 

Categories
Fafocene

Burnham, the brown M&Ms, and the Fafocene

On Monday the UK gets its sixth Prime Minister in 7 years (May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak, Starmer, Burnham). Already the speculative briefings are clogging up the airwaves and people’s rage streams (especially around whether he will give the go ahead for more North Sea oil drilling, and who will be Chancellor).

I do not intend to add to that speculation, because, well, who cares what I think about that (not even me) and life is very short.

Instead, a) a failed FT letter, b) the Van Halen test and how it applies and c) the Fafocene.

  1. I submitted the following letter to the FT. They didn’t publish it.

In her encomium to former leader of Manchester City Council Richard Leese (“Manchester’s turnaround predates the Burnham era” FT, July 4) Professor Marcia Pointon neglects to mention one characteristic Leese and the soon-to-be PM share.  On the thorny issue of climate change, both have a history of making big shiny promises and then passing the blame onto  others when the promises turn out to be illusions. Burnham, especially, has shown himself adept at defanging critics by inviting them on stage, sometimes literally. As the anthropologist Professor Hannah Knox noted in 2019, at the Mayor’s Green Summit:

“…Extinction Rebellion stormed the conference at the end of the day, shouting out to the now depleted audience, ‘do more, faster, now’, and ‘we demand more’ …. Unfazed, Burnham muted their urgent cries by giving them the microphone and inviting them to put their views across, telling us he couldn’t agree with them more.”

Burnham may find this trick somewhat harder to pull off in Westminster and Whitehall. We shall see.

2. The Van Halen/Brown M&M test

What do you do when there are too many things to check to see if someone is doing a safe/competent job. You set up a very small and ‘easy’ test to see if they have the mechanisms in place to pay attention to detail. Here’s the wikipedia article in full –

A Van Halen test refers to any question that is asked to assess whether the full set of instructions given to another party has been thoroughly and correctly read.[1][2] It has also been used to describe asking necessary questions.[3]

The name of the test refers to the contractual clause Van Halen would give to venues at which they were to perform. There was a clause requesting that a bowl of M&Ms be supplied, with all the brown candies removed. If this bowl with the correct contents was not provided by the venue, they knew their contract was not thoroughly reviewed, and that there may be safety issues.[4][5] The worry was that with complex safety requirements involving pyrotechnics, large voltages, and stage construction, any lapse in following instructions could be a danger.[6] Rumors about this clause date back to 1980.[7]

So, your mileage may vary but for me the M&M tests would be

a) the North Sea oil permissions (obvs)

b) the continuance of the prosecutions under sections 11 and 12 of the PTA (2000) for people holding placards at various venues.

The rest of it, the affable comms, the Greggs visits, the endless invocation of “Labour values” – yeah, mate, nah.

3. The Fafocene

So it turns out the concept of the Fafocene (the ‘fuck around, find out’ -ocene) is getting the imprimatur of university course title. It has arrived!

We are in it, and people like Burnham are, I fear, examples of its progression. We will continue to believe that we can have the nice things some of us have gotten used to, and that changes that need to be made can be made without upsetting anyone important. Yeah, mate, nah.

Categories
Coal United Kingdom

July 18, 1991  – “Clean Coal” says Commons Energy Select Committee. 

Thirty five years ago, on this day, July  11st, 1991, the House of Commons Energy Select Committee produces a report calling for – in the light of ‘the greenhouse effect’ – “clean coal.”

Guardian

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Sr3-V4fIY8IZTvM_QIv2DA-dnOAEhjn6/view?usp=drive_link

The Times

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VWimV0nX9i33Ijg6wEl6QkFL6E4Dm8Ez/view?usp=drive_link

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 355ppm. As of 2026, 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 environmental consequences of coal burning were, shall we say, well known, from the 19th century especially (not that 1661 had been a quiet year).


From the mid-1950s onwards, the climate implications had been spoken off here and there, but it was only in the mid-1970s on that this became a common feature of discussions.  Various people had done their best to silence the issue (looking at you, John Mason).

The specific context was in 1988 everyone had started to get het up about the Greenhouse Effect (as climate change from carbon dioxide build-up was then called). Panels and committees were established etc etc.

What I think we can learn from this We knew plenty. Clean coal is a joke, at least as far as carbon dioxide is concerned.

What happened next The British coal industry got privatised.  What expertise there was was scattered to the four winds.  The emissions kept climbing. Coal was finally kicked out of the electricity generation mix in the 2010s.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 18, 1979 – US Senators ask for synthetic fuel implications for greenhouse warming. Told. 

July 18, 1996 – Australian Prime Minister snubs #climate talks 

July 18, 1996 – Geneva Ministerial Declaration noted but not adopted 

July 18, 2005 – inconvenient energy targets scrapped 

July 18, 2012: Climate Justice poem – “Tell Them” by Kathy Jetnil-Kijiner – hits the internet 

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

 July 17, 2022 – in case of emergency, break glass

Four years ago, on this day, July  17th, 2022

On 17th July 2022 local activist and general practitioner, Dr David McKelvey joined other healthcare professionals to carefully and symbolically crack panes of glass at JP Morgan in London. The action was shortly before the hottest day ever record in the UK; JP Morgan is the largest funder of fossil fuels in the world. The group had signs which read “In medical climate emergency break glass.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 419ppm. As of 2026, 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 have been urgent warnings, broadly publicised, about climate change caused by carbon dioxide build-up, since 1988.  Let that sink in. People have been born, educated, had children and those children have had children in that time.

The specific context was XR had turned up in 2018 and was going to save the world. By late 2019 it was pretty obvious that they were not, in fact, going to save the world.  The pandemic saved their blushes, but reality does continue…

What I think we can learn from this – we are stuck in the emotacycle, and we “memory wand” ourselves all the time.

What happened next

The jury would not convict.

17 Feb 26 Share: 

Six members of Health for XR unanimously acquitted of criminal damage by a jury, despite legal defences being withdrawn

Six medical professionals (doctors and nurses), all members of Health for XR, have been unanimously acquitted of criminal damage, having been charged following a protest in 2022. Health for XR is aligned with Extinction Rebellion, “a socio-political movement which utilises nonviolent resistance to avert climate breakdown, halt biodiversity loss and minimise the risk of human extinction and ecological collapse”.

In July 2022, the six medical professionals cracked windows at the European Headquarters of JP Morgan in Canary Wharf, the world’s largest financier of fossil fuels, as an intervention to try to save lives in the face of an unprecedented heatwave and the climate and ecological emergency.

All six were charged with criminal damage and first tried at Snaresbrook Crown Court in 2024. The jury, however, were unable to reach a verdict, despite all available legal defences having been withdrawn prior to trial.

The retrial commenced on 4th February 2026 and, following a nine-day trial, the jury unanimously acquitted all six defendants under four hours on 16th February 2026.

https://www.doughtystreet.co.uk/news/six-members-health-xr-unanimously-acquitted-criminal-damage-jury-despite-legal-defences-being

This is of course entirely unrelated to the government wanting to restrict jury trials.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 17, 1912 – Braidwood Dispatch and Mining Journal on climate change 

July 17, 1968 – Scoop Jackson’s colloquium 

July 17, 1991 – G7 DOESN’T talk about climate… 

July 17, 2006 – Australian Prime Minister shits on renewables, blah blah “realistic” 

July 17, 2014 – Australian elected idiot is highly visibly idiotic 

Categories
Energy United States of America

July 17, 1979 – Synthetic fuel hearings

Forty seven years ago, on this day, July 17th, 1979,

U.S. Senate, Committee on Governmental Affairs, Synthetic Fuels, Hearing, 17–20 July 1979)

Googlebooks

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 337ppm. As of 2026, 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 dream of turning coal into oil/gas was an old one. It is, technically doable but only at enormous (financial and ecological) cost.

In the aftermath of the 1973 Arab oil embargo and the quadrupling of energy prices, governments were looking again at synthetic fuels…

The specific context was that the Carter administration had been forging ahead, even as climate scientists (then a new breed) were warning of the carbon dioxide implications…(the first world climate conference had just happened).

What I think we can learn from this:  We are not a terribly bright species.

What happened next – Helmut Schmidt got Abraham Ribicoff switched onto the climate problem. The synfuels never happened.  The emissions and atmospheric concentrations kept climbing. Oh well. 

xxx

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

July 30, 1979 – synfuels would be sinful…

July 30, 1979 – scientists warn US Senators about synfuels and carbon dioxide build-up

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 17, 1912 – Braidwood Dispatch and Mining Journal on climate change 

July 17, 1968 – Scoop Jackson’s colloquium 

July 17, 1991 – G7 DOESN’T talk about climate… 

July 17, 2006 – Australian Prime Minister shits on renewables, blah blah “realistic” 

July 17, 2014 – Australian elected idiot is highly visibly idiotic 

Categories
United States of America

July 16, 1970 – Nixon aide spots climate problem

Fifty six years ago, on this day, July  16th, 1970,

On July 16, 1970, Nixon aide John C. Whitaker received a set of documents from  the newly created Council on Environmental Quality. One item specifically caught his  attention. “Man’s Inadvertent Modification of Weather and Climate” presented what  Whitaker called a “particularly hairy” problem: the capacity for humans to alter the long- term trajectory of the earth’s climate.2  https://www.worthingtoncaron.com/documents/Climate-Change-and-the-Clean-Air-Act-of-1970.pdf

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 325ppm. As of 2026, 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 Gilbert Plass, building on the work of Arrhenius and Callendar, had started raising the alarm in 1953. By 1965, Presidents (LBJ) were mouthing the pieties.

In the second half of the 1960s the possible dangers of carbon dioxide build-up became wide-spread.

The specific context was that soon after his inauguration Nixon was made to look weak/uncaring at the Santa Barbara oil spill. He then used environmental issues as a way of trying to get NATO to stop wanging on about the slaughter in Vietnam.  By late 1969 you had people like Daniel Moynihan writing memos etc.

What I think we can learn from this – we have known plenty plenty plenty. PS the CEQ documents Whitaker was looking at were almost certainly written by/supplied by Gordon MacDonald.

What happened next

It took another 20 years (well, 18) before American politicians would be forced to pretend to care.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 16, 1989 – Paris agreement on climate… 

July 16, 1989 – Paris Agreement….

July 16, 1990 – Canberra Times gives denialist tosh a platform 

July 16, 1992 – American scientist claims “no firm evidence” of #climate change Australian National Press Club #denial 

Categories
Australia Denial UNFCCC

July 15,  1996 – Geneva games

Thirty years ago, on this day, July  11st, 1996,

The Australian Democrats have publicly undermined the Howard Government’s strategy at the historic climate change summit in Geneva by urging the meeting’s president to ignore whatever arguments Australia’s delegation puts forward.

This is an extraordinary break with diplomatic convention, under which domestic political disputes are left behind at international meetings.

The Democrats’ leader, Senator Kernot, and deputy leader, Senator Meg Lees, last night faxed a three-page letter to the summit president, Mr Chen Chimutengwende, asking him not to be “fooled by the Government’s slick-talking attempt to avoid its responsibilities to all other governments concerned with the impact of climate change”.

Gilchrist, G. (1996) Kernot Breaks Ranks On Climate Sydney Morning Herald, July 16 page 2

And

On July 15, 1996, at an international negotiating conference in Geneva, Patrick Michaels released an article, title “New Data Cast Doubt on Human Fingerprint,” that criticised the Nature article [of Santer et al]

Gelbspan, R. (1998) Page 22.

And

On July 15, 1996, at an international negotiating conference in Geneva, Patrick Michaels released an article, title “New Data Cast Doubt on Human Fingerprint,” that criticised the Nature article [of Santer et al]

Gelbspan, R. (1998) Page 22

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 362ppm. As of 2026, 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 after an initial bout of helpfulness/proactive behaviour (1988-1989), the Australian government had moved towards petulance on the path to obstruction under late-Hawke and Keating (Prime Ministers).

The specific context was in March 1996 Liberal John Howard had become Prime Minister. He was adamantly opposed to all climate action.  The 2nd COP would be his first big test. On his lights, he ‘passed it’.  For the planet? Not so much.

What I think we can learn from this is that it is not too late to get John Howard to the Hague for crimes against humanity.

What happened next – the next COP, Kyoto, would end in “success”.  Many more “successes” like that followed.  The carbon dioxide kept accumulating. 

xxx

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

June 3, 1996 – Business Council of Australia versus even the idea of a carbon tax

July 8, 1996 – National Greenhouse Advisory Panel tells the truth…

July 11, 1996 – Celebrity Death Match: Australian fossil fuels industry versus The World (Spoiler: world lost)

July 12, 1996 – medics slam energy companies for outright denial and obstruction

July 14, 1996 – Australian Medical Association and Greenpeace

July 18, 1996 – Geneva Ministerial Declaration noted but not adopted

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

July 15, 1968 – first(?) UK government attention to the possibility of climate change 

July 15, 1972 – Soviet Weekly on how man affects the weather… 

July 15, 1977 – “Heavy Use of Coal May Bring Adverse Shift in Climate” 

July 15, 1988 – “Racing on Capitol Hill for Title of “Mr Greenhouse” 

July 15, 1991 – RIP Roger Revelle 

July 15, 1994 – ALP and BCA in good cop bad cop routine 

July 15, 2005 – The “Stern Review” into #climate is announced…