Author: drmarchudson

Categories
Australia Science Scientists

October 13, 2005 – “Climate Change: Turning up the Heat” published

On this day, 13 October 2005, a comprehensive book explaining climate change, by the Australian scientist Barrie Pittock was released. It was called, aptly, “Climate Change: Turning up the Heat.” 

[On this day the PPM was 377.19

Now it is 420ish- but see here for the latest.]

Why this matters

People like Barrie Pittock, working on climate change from the 70s onwards, deserve all the accolades for their patient, long work on trying to get Australians to take climate change seriously. It is not their fault they were overwhelmed by the forces of greed and wilful ignorance.

What happened next?

The following year, in late 2006, climate change re-emerged as an ‘urgent’ public policy issue.  Nowt got done, of course…

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

October 12, 1976 – Jule Charney throws (private) shade on fellow climatologists…

On this day, October 12 in 1976, an eminent US scientist was dismissive (in a personal letter) of Stephen Schneider et al.

12 Oct 1976 None of the “speculative ideas of people like … Schneider on future climate change are worth the paper (usually newspaper) they are written on. They mislead the public and they do the field harm,” Charney concluded in a separate letter.

Jule  Charney to Warren Kornberg, 12 October 1976, Box 13 – NSF, 1955-81, Papers of Jule Charney,  MIT Institute Archives, Cambridge, MA. 

(Henderson, 2014 Dilemmas of Reticence)

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 328.72ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

In the mid 1970s there was a flurry of books about climate change and its impacts. Only a very few of them focussed on the importance of carbon dioxide build-up – others saw the problem in dust, or ‘waste heat’. The grand old men of the field – Charney, Landsberg et al, feared that popularisation/tabloid style claims would damage the credibility of the field. 

Why this matters. 

Scientists – justifiably – worry about large claims and whether they are sound, since if the claims and predictions turn out to be wrong, all scientists suffer.

What happened next?

Charney changed his tune in 1979, agreeing that unless something very odd indeed happened, then a doubling of atmospheric CO2 would lead to serious warming…

Schneider went on to do much more great work.

Categories
Australia

October 11, 2006 – “Climate Institute” begins tour of rural Victoria

On this day, October 11 2006 the then new “Climate Institute” began a tour of rural Victoria…

A group calling itself the Climate Institute has started a tour of centres across the eastern states calling for action on climate change.

A panel of four, two farmers, a scientist and a wind power expert, spoke at a public meeting in the south-eastern Victorian city of Sale last night.

The group was started by a Hamilton grazier financed by a trust linked with the Murdoch media empire.

Panel member and former CSIRO scientist Graeme Peerman says farmers will be the first and hardest hit by climate change.

“At the federal level we don’t have an energy strategy, we have a document called ‘securing Australia’s energy futures’ which is a grab bag of all of the bits and pieces that you might have together, but nowhere in there is a real clear strategy as to how we build the real balance,” he said.

Sale hears push for climate change strategy ABC, 12 October 2006

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2006-10-12/sale-hears-push-for-climate-change-strategy/1284712?pfm=ms

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 379.33ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this –  Australia was waking up to climate change, thanks in part to the Millennium Drought, which seemed endless.  Internationally, things were moving. Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth had been released, the IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report was coming.  

The Climate Institute had been set up the year before, and was beginning to make waves

Why this matters. 

We have tried.  We have tried and we have failed. Good to remember this…

What happened next?

The Climate Institute kept going, shutting up shop in 2017. See my Conversation piece on it going under

https://theconversation.com/so-long-climate-institute-too-sensible-for-the-current-policy-soap-opera-74360

Categories
United Kingdom

October 10, 1977 – famous scientist Solly Zuckerman writes to top UK Civil Servant, warning about climate change

On this day, October 10 in 1977, the former Chief Scientific Adviser for the United Kingdom, Solly Zuckerman wrote to the Cabinet Secretary (Sir John Hunt) about global warming, having been sensitised to the issue by an IIASA presentation.

Zuckerman  ‘This was the first time that I had heard anyone take so serious a view of this particular issue’. TNA CAB 184/567. Zuckerman to Hunt, 10 October 1977.

Solly Zuckerman

Source – Jon Agar’s 2015 article. “Future forecast – changeable and probably getting worse”: the UK Government’s Early Response to Anthropogenic Climate Change

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 331.28ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

By the mid-late 1970s, the carbon dioxide issue was becoming more prominent. Organisations like IIASA were holding workshops, publishing articles. On IIASA, check out “Scientific Cooperation as a Bridge Across the Cold War Divide The Case of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis” by ALAN McDONALD

Why this matters. 

“We” “knew”

What happened next?

They tried to warn the new Prime Minister, one Margaret Thatcher. She dismissed them with “you want me to worry about the weather.”

Categories
Ignored Warnings Ireland Science Scientists

October 9, 1979 – Hermann Flohn warns Irish of “possible consequences of a man-made warming”

On this day, October 9 in 1979, Hermann Flohn (major German scientist) gave a talk about “possible climatic consequences of a man-made global warming” at a conference in Dublin, Ireland.

Flohn H. 1980: Possible climatic consequences of a man-made global warming. In: R. Kavanagh (Ed.): Energy System Analysis. Proc. Intern. Conf. Dublin, 9-11 Oct. 1979, D. Reidel Publ. Comp., Dordrecht, 558-568. (1981: Life on a warmer Earth, Possible climatic consequences of man-made global warming. Executive Report 3, based on research by H. Flohn, Intern. Inst. for Applied System Analysis IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria, pp. 59.)

https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/1097/1/WP-79-086.pdf

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 334.24ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – by the late 1970s, scientists who studied climate, energy systems etc had come to some conclusions

  1. Carbon dioxide really was building up in the atmosphere
  2. This would have real consequences 

They tried to get politicians to pay attention.  Oops

Why this matters. 

By the late 1970s we knew enough (earlier than that, I think there was room for doubt)

What happened next?

Flohn kept trying. Others kept trying. Eventually, in 1988, the issue “broke through”.

Categories
Australia

October 8, 1988 – Aussie poet and activist Judith Wright in final speech, warns of environmental problems ahead…

On this day, October 8 in 1988, Australian poet and activist, Judith Wright gave one of her last public speeches.

“Poet Judith Wright, in probably her last public speech, on Saturday [8th October] told delegates, “We have regarded the environment as a bottomless cornucopia of resources for the benefit of mankind”.

Mr Toyne said that that was no longer possible.”

Anon, 1988. Fight for better world: environmentalists. Canberra Times, 10 October, p.4.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 349.37ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – Wright had been a huge part of efforts to protect the Great Barrier Reef, 20 years previously, and was full of wisdom.and compassion.

Why this matters. 

A movement needs its poets.

What happened next?

Wright lived another 12 years. She was a mensch.

Categories
United Kingdom

October 8, 1959 – Shell says “nothing to see here” on carbon dioxide build-up

On this day, October 8 in 1959, an article appeared in New Scientist (then a pretty new publication)  by Dr M.A. Matthews, employed by Shell. It cast doubt on idea of carbon dioxide increase having any effect on climate

1959 Shell “The Earth’s Carbon Cycle” Article

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 313.33ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm – but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – The International Geophysical Year had focussed on many things, including the atmosphere. Academic articles were beginning to appear looking at carbon dioxide build-up.  Already through the 1950s various scientists had begun to speculate…

Categories
Uncategorized

October 7, 1989 – Alexander Downer says mining lobby”weak and gutless”,  too soft on greenies

On this day, October 7 [okay, possibly the 8th] 1989, future Liberal leader (for five gruesome minutes) and Foreign Affairs Minister (for one gruesome decade) Alexander Downer spoke out about environmental issues. Clearly he hadn’t received/read the memo that the Liberals were trying to catch soft-green votes at the upcoming Federal Election…

Alexander Downer, who was the Opposition’s spokesman on the environment, outlined another approach at the weekend. [7 or 8 October]  Downer’s views were made public when opening a fair at Yankallila on the Fleureau Peninsula south of Adelaide, a venue unlikely to attract too many aggressive miners. This was just as well, as Mr Downer told the fair-goers that the conservation lobby was getting more than a fair go, largely  because the mining lobby had allowed conservationists to dominate the environmental agenda. As he had been the Opposition spokesman on the environment during-the last election campaign Mr Downer felt especially strongly about the issue, as while he saw Greenies, coming to the aid of the ALP, the mining industry was not as forthcoming in their aid for the coalition.

At Yankallila, he first called the mining industry “weak and gutless”, then accused them of letting “radical Greens” dictate the agenda so that “what were previously regarded as extreme conservationists have become the mainstream spokesman of responsible conservation”.

“The business community and level-headed conservationists must now change radically the way they approach conservation issues by applying the logic of the marketplace and putting a price on Australia’s natural environment,” he said. Big

Mr Downer’s argument was that if Australia “was to pursue responsible conservation policies it would have to put a price on the environment” which would “change the signals sent out to decision-makers by , introducing market forces”.

Fraser, A. 1989. The Right forfeits claims on ecology. Canberra Times, 12 October, p.8.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 350.33ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – by this time the Australian Labor Party had been in office 6 years. There was an election coming, and green issues would matter to voters. Who would get which preferences?

Why this matters. 

Big picture? It doesn’t

What happened next?

The ALP squeaked home in March 1990 thanks to green-minded voters. Downer was briefly and disastrously Opposition Leader in 1994-5. He was then John Howard’s Foreign Minister from 1996 to 2007.

Google Downer, Woodside and East Timor. Read it and weep.

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage Technophilia

October 6, 2005 – carbon capture is doable…

On this day, October 6 in 2005, 17 years after the World Coal body said the greenhouse effect was greatly exaggerated, some people meet in Cambridge to discuss “carbon capture and storage”

This paper summarises the key points from a discussion meeting held at the Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, on Thursday 6 October 2005. The meeting was held in response to the UK Government Science and Technology Select Committee inquiry into carbon capture and storage. 

“VIABILITY OF CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE (CCS) AS A CARBON ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY FOR THE UK: FEASIBILITY AND COSTS”

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 377.19ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – the Department of Trade and Industry had just published its “Carbon Abatement Technologies Strategy,” and carbon capture and storage was in the mix… The recent G7 meeting had also hyped it. BP was saying it could do this on its Peterhead facility. It’s all gonna happen, right?

Why this matters. 

Technologies go through a long ‘incubation’ period. Lots of workshops, seminars etc. By this time, CCS had already been talked about for a long time…

What happened next?

BP pulled out of the first CCS project in the UK in early 2007. In late 2007 the government announced a competition. That didn’t end well. They announced another. That ended very badly indeed. Third time lucky?

Categories
Uncategorized

October 6, 1988 – coal lobby says greenhouse effect “greatly exaggerated”

On this day, October 6 in 1988, the coal lobby said – of course it did – that the greenhouse effect had been “greatly exaggerated.”

Because before the promises for technological fixes, for complicated (and therefore easily gamed) financial instruments… comes flat out denial and minimisation.

The international coal industry hit back yesterday at charges that coal-fired power stations are a prime cause of the climatic changes associated with over-heating of the atmosphere.

The London-based World Coal Institute, representing a wide range of national and private coal utilities and traders, said research by its members showed that the contribution of coal-fired power stations to the phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect had been ‘greatly exaggerated.’

Samuelson, M. (1988) Coal Users Fend Off ‘Greenhouse’ Accusations. Financial Times, 7 October, p. 9.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 349.37ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – Margaret Thatcher – British Prime Minister and not easily dismissed as an eco-loon – had given a surprise speech at the Royal Society a week or so earlier. The “greenhouse effect” was on the agenda, and coal was the bad boy (nuclear was trying to throw it under the bus).

Why this matters. 

These industry bodies now promising a gleaming techno-future have a loooong history of, well, um, I believe the technical term for this is “lying.”

What happened next?

The World Coal group spent a long time “in denial” and then switched to promoting “carbon capture and storage.”  In that time, emissions kept climbing. And climbing.