On this day, December 2 in 1964 Mario Savio, American activist, gave his famous “Bodies on the Gears” speech on the Berkeley campus of University of California.
What to do with climate change? Well, the Black Civil Rights movement, (Savio’s speech came at the end of the Freedom Summer), was an “initiator movement” for women’s liberation, gay rights and what we used to call the ecology movement. We could learn something by studying the history. And the rhetoric is first rate.
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 319ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
On December 2 1991, the Australian policy experiment of “Ecologically Sustainable Development” basically ended, just over a year after it began. It had been set up because the ALP’s Bob Hawke needed small-g green (the Greens didn’t exist yet) votes to win the 1990 election. The ESD process had rattled along,and there’s lots of interesting stories (see AOY posts here and here).
Well, with Hawke mortally wounded (politically), and the Fight Back! by fossil interests (including right-wing Labour and Federal bureaucrats – this isn’t just Those Evil Capitalists Over There), the ESD’s days were numbered.
“The Ecologically Sustainable Development Working Groups final report received a “cautious welcome” yesterday, although there were fears the Government might not act to implement the report’s recommendations.
Union, conservation, business and political groups were generally pleased with the 272-page report which contains more than 300 recommendations for measures to achieve development which is consistent with preservation of the environment. The report was issued yesterday by the heads of the working group, Professor Stuart Harris and Professor David Throsby. However, some groups believed the report had “not gone far enough.”
The president of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Martin Ferguson, said the working group process had been “very useful” for setting an agenda but not for “developing solutions to Australia’s economic and environmental problems.” [THAT? Martin Ferguson??? Yes, that one… ]”
“When the chairmen released their work on Monday [2nd December], they took the opportunity to say the Opposition’s plan to cut the price of petrol would make it harder for the Government to meet its targets on reduction of greenhouse gases. Reducing the price of petrol by up to 19 cents a litre, as proposed by Dr John Hewson, could lead to greater use of petrol, in contrast to the theme of the Ecologically Sustainable Development taskforce of reducing energy use.”
Peake, R. 1991. A Tapestry That Weaves The Green With The Gold. The Age, 4 December, p.13.
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 355ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
The context was this –
Why this matters.
There was a time ‘rational’ (or at least sane and understanding of limits) policymaking could be cosplayed. Now, not so much. We should remember where we failed for the last consequential time. It will soothe us so much as everything falls apart.
What happened next?
The next Prime Minister, Paul Keating, buried the ESD. The next Prime Minister after him, Honest John Howard, buried Australia’s chance of responding to climate change in ways that could have saved something from the wreckage. And here we are.
On this day, December 1 in 2005, newly-minted Opposition leader David Cameron set about “detoxifying the Tory brand” by hugging a husky, and wearing??? a hoodie, and giving a speech at the launch of the Renewable Energy Association…
“Low carbon living should not be a weird and worthy obligation, but a mainstream, aspirational lifestyle choice. Microgeneration and local distribution networks have the potential to capture people’s imagination.”
David Cameron speech at launch of the Renewable Energy Association 1 December 2005
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 332ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
The context was this – The Tories were still in the wilderness (though the 2005 election had gone better for them than the last two!) David Cameron knew that he had to paint them as “green” and “modern.” And so he did…
Why this matters.
There are moments of “bi-partisan consensus” – this was the beginning of one of them. The Climate Change Act got through.
What happened next?
Cameron became PM in 2010, thanks to the Lib Dems. Never really interested in anything other than being PM, and by 2013 he was all “cut the green crap.”
On this day, December 1st, in 1976, the Director-General of the Meteorological Office, John Mason, gave a speech to the Royal Society of Arts. It was reported in Nature by John Gribbin, under the headline “Man’s influence not yet felt by climate”
“THE message conveyed by Professor B. J. Mason, Director-General of the UK Meteorological Office, in a recent lecture was- don’t panic. The theme of Mason’s lecture (given to the Royal Society of Arts on December I) was “Man’s Influence on Weather and Climate”, and his conclusion was that -the climatic system is so robust, and contains so much ·inherent stability through the presence of negative feedback mechanisms, that man has still a long way to go before his influence becomes great enough to cause serious disruption to the natural climatic system.”
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was xxxppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
The context was that through the mid-70s many scientists (including but not limited to those pesky young Americans with better computers than the Brits) had started saying “whoah, this build up of carbon dioxide, this might become a serious thing.” As had Europeans (including Hermann Flohn). As had the WMO, as reported in the Times earlier that year – June 22, 1976 – Times reports “World’s temperature likely to rise”
And Mason? Mason didn’t buy it, hadn’t bought it and continued not to buy it, including at the First World Climate Conference, in Geneva in February 1979…
Why this matters.
You can imagine an alternative world, where gatekeepers like Mason were able to see the nose on their faces, and the actual response to climate change began early enough to do something substantive. If you smoke some serious weed, that is…
The whole process culminated in a 1980 report and a briefing to Margaret Thatcher, who dismissed it all with an incredulous “you want me to worry about the weather?”
On this day, November 30 in 1978, during a House of Lords debate, Lord Tanlaw —a crossbench member with long-standing environmental and energy conservation interests—asked ‘
‘if the recent exceptional weather conditions that have been reported from all parts of the globe in the last few years are a first indication that man’s industrial activities have already begun to affect the global weather pattern,’’ and specifically, whether ‘‘these anomalies are directly linked to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide.’’
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 335ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.],
Why this matters.
By the late 1970s, the long-term threat of climate change was becoming better and better understood (though by no means everyone agreed).
What happened next?
Three months later, in February 1979, the First World Climate Conference happened in Geneva. John Mason of the Meteorological Office did not cover himself in glory. New Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was briefed in 1980. Her response “You want me to worry about the weather?”
The Chief Scientific Advisor tried to alert new Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in early 1980. Her response was “you want me to worry about the weather?”
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 335ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
November 28, 1974 Olof Palme tells Sweden “The risk of a changed climate… is of utmost importance.”
Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme, in a newspaper interview, nails the big long-term threat.
“Three months after the conference, the momentum concerning the threat of climate change seems to have led Olof Palme to speak out on the issue. In an article structured as a duel, Palme and the leader of the Conservative Party (Moderaterna), Gösta Bohman, talked about their vision of Sweden in 2000. Palme was asked which threat concerned him the most and answered: ‘The risk of a changed climate due to human activities … To me, this question seems of utter importance.’”
Tom Selander, ‘Partiledare om Sverige år 2000’, SvD 29 Nov. 1974,
On 29 November 1973, Don Jessop, a Liberal senator for South Australia, made this statement in the Australian parliament:
“It is quite apparent to world scientists that the silent pollutant, carbon dioxide, is increasing in the atmosphere and will cause us great concern in the future. Other pollutants from conventional fuels are proliferating other gases in the atmosphere, not the least of these being the sulphurous gases which will be causing emphysema and other such health problems if we persist with this type of energy source. Of course, I am putting a case for solar energy. Australia is a country that can well look forward to a very prosperous future if it concentrates on solar energy right now.”
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 327ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
The context was this –
Energy was in the, um, air, because the “first Oil Shock” was under way
Why this matters.
We need to remember we have been failing to do anything serious about climate change for a very very long time, and while this or that recalcitrant politician or devious mofo of an oil industry shill is certainly blameworthy,they are a symptom as much as a cause of the underlying problem…
What happened next?
A collective shoulder shrug. Though to be fair, legendary Australian civil servant Nugget Coombs did, the following year, get the Minister of Science to ask the Australian Academy of Science to look into the climate issue…
On this day, November 28, in 2008 someone broke into a coal-plant and shut down one of the turbines.
As the Guardian puts it –
The £12m defences of the most heavily guarded power station in Britain have been breached by a single person who, under the eyes of CCTV cameras, climbed two three-metre (10ft) razor-wired, electrified security fences, walked into the station and crashed a giant 500MW turbine before leaving a calling card reading “no new coal”. He walked out the same way and hopped back over the fence.
All power from the coal and oil-powered Kingsnorth station in Kent was halted for four hours, in which time it is thought the mystery saboteur’s actions reduced UK climate change emissions by 2%. Enough electricity to power a city the size of Bristol was lost.
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 386ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
The context was this –
This was in the midst of wave of climate action (2006 to 2010), with coal power a significant focus. The third climate camp had happened there that summer.
Why this matters.
What’s that line by Tom Hardy in Inception “You mustn’t be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.”
On this day, November 27, 1978 a three day conference on “Impacts of climate on AustralianSociety and Economy”, sponsored by the CSIRO, began on Philip Island, near Melbourne.
In a report on its first 30 years the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering wrote-
As 2005 Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE) document continues –
“The Phillip Island conference had a substantial impact on government approaches to the management of climate variability and laid the foundation for a subsequent major contribution of the Academy to the problem of human-induced climate change over the following decades.” (p. 10).
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 335ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
The context was this –
There had been an inconclusive AAS report in 1976 (no shade on the scientists involved – the evidence wasn’t there). But from 1976 onwards, the carbon dioxide drumbeat got louder, internationally…
Why this matters.
We knew. Let us not forget that we knew.
What happened next?
The scientists kept working on it all. The politicians ignored them. Starting from 1988 the politicians didn’t ignore them, at least in public. But they never let the science get in the way of a “good” investment decision. And civil society was unable to stop them. —-. And here we are.
On this day, November 26, 1996 an Australian politician ripped into the “official” modelling on which Australian governments (BOTH LABOR AND LIBERAL) had relied to say “oh, no, can’t do anything that might reduce the acceleration of our coal mining and coal exporting, or else the sky will fall.”
Leader of the Democrats, Senator Cheryl Kernot stated in the Senate:
“Let us not forget who ABARE is. It is the ideological cousin of the Industry Commission and it never misses an opportunity to slip the boot into environmental or social causes, churning out statistics from its largely discredited macro-economic modelling, showing how much better off we would all be if only we mined more coal, produced more electricity and puffed more carbon dioxide every day. I am willing to bet that if ABARE existed 150 years ago, it would have produced a whopping great spreadsheet proving that the economy could not afford to ban child labour in the coal mines”
(Senate Hansard 26.11.96 p 6014).
On ABARE, see also “High and Dry” by Guy Pearse and “Scorcher” by Clive Hamilton.
On economic forecasting – I recently learnt the brilliant John Kenneth Galbraith quote – ““The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable,”
[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 362ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]
The context was this –
Australian governments were looking for excuses to do nothing to slow down the acceleration of Australian coal exports. ABARE helped to provide those excuses.
Why this matters.
The way economic modelling is used to justify all sorts of horror (usually the continued enrichment of the already filthy rich, and/or the galloping desolation of our being-murdered planet), is a) by now very obvious and b) never-ending, despite a).
What happened next?
ABARE and its “MEGABARE” nonsense was thoroughly exposed and discredited(see here). Which did nothing to stop the Howard Government from continuing to use it.
