Author: drmarchudson

Categories
Science United States of America

August 15, 1977 – “Theoretical climate effects of doubling the atmospheric carbon dioxide content”

Forty-eight years ago, on this day, August 15th, 1977,

Theoretical climate effects of doubling the atmospheric carbon dioxide content.

 Presented at the Third Ecology-Meteorology Workshop, University of Michigan Biological Station, 15-18 August 1977

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 333ppm. 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 by the mid-1970s scientists studying the issue were getting more and more concerned. In 1975 the first “global warming” paper appeared – vale Wally Broecker) and the National Academies of Science started paying attention to “Energy and Climate”. President Carter had kicked off the “Global 2000” report too. Word was getting round…

The specific context was that American science wasn’t at that time under full assault by a bunch of crooks, thugs and wilfully ignorant theocratic racists. So, the good old days.

Also, in 1975 this paper had come out – The Effects of Doubling the CO2 Concentration on the climate of a General Circulation Model in: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences Volume 32 Issue 1 (1975)

What I think we can learn from this – People knew. Not everyone, but more than you’d think.

What happened next – in 1979 the First World Climate Conference happened in Geneva, Switzerland, organised by the World Meteorological Organisation. It could have been pivotal, but wasn’t. The thick end of another decade was wasted.

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: 

August 15, 1952 – flash flood – caused by Weather Modification experiment? – All Our Yesterdays

August 15, 1989 – Queenslander mayor says the greenhouse effect is like“a bird urinating in the Tweed River while in flight”

August 15, 2010 – Russia halts grain exports because of droughts and heatwaves

August 15, 2010 – a walk against warming fails to catch fire. #RepertoireRot

Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage Technophilia technosalvationism

August 14, 2000 – Carbon Capture Technology will save us. Oh yes.

Twenty five years ago, on this day, August 14th, 2000,

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry, Science and Resources, Warren Entsch MP today officially launched the 5th International Conference on the Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies in Cairns, saying the Government is committed to meeting its greenhouse obligations while continuing to protect jobs and economic growth.

M2Presswire, 2000. Australia meeting Greenhouse Gas challenge. M2 Presswire 14 August.

AND

Emissions soar 17 per cent despite $1b spent on crisis

AUSTRALIAN scientists are investigating a scheme to bury carbon dioxide underground as a way of reducing our burgeoning greenhouse gas emissions.

A research team, which is in the middle of a four-year project, claims it can find a cost-effective way of sealing carbon dioxide in the earth, safely and permanently, by putting it back where it came from.

They are looking at sedimentary basins across Australia – deep saline areas, coal seams which cannot be mined and depleted oil and gas reservoirs – for spaces big enough to hold big volumes of carbon dioxide.

The continuing research will be presented at an international conference on greenhouse gas control technologies in Cairns today, after new figures which warned of the effects of global warming.

2000 Rose, R. 2000. Plan To Bury Greenhouse Gas. The West Australian, 15 August, p.9.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 369ppm. 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 dreams of “carbon capture and storage” had been around since the mid-1970s. Promises, promises.

The specific context was the Howard government, aware that it might – just might – have to ratify Kyoto if Democrat Al Gore got the White House, was making non-committal noises about CCS.

What I think we can learn from this – is if there is the possibility of having to make a real commitment to action, politicians will keep their options (especially their techno-options) open.

What happened next. In November 2000, Gore did not get the White House – he lost the vote 5-4 in the Supreme Court. Bush got the White House. Pulled out of Kyoto, meaning Australia could do likewise.

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: 

August 14, 1989 – South Australia creates “interdepartmental committee on #climate change”…

August 14, 1971 – Stanford Prison Study begins…

August 14, 2002 – Australian economists urge Kyoto Protocol ratification

Categories
Greenland

August 14, 2021 – It’s raining (again) oh no our world’s at an end…

Four years ago, on this day, August 14th, 2021,

On August 14, 2021, it rained, an event so remarkable that it made news around the world. (“For the First Time on Record, Rain Fell at the Summit of Greenland,” ran the headline in the Sydney Morning Herald.) Kolbert New Yorker 2024 https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/10/14/when-the-arctic-melts

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 416ppm. 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 we had had, by this point, almost 70 years of warnings, if you take it (as I do) from Gilbert Plass in May 1953. By 1988 the politicians could pretend the problem wasn’t an issue no longer.

The specific context was that the top of the world is beginning to defy our efforts at understanding what is going on and what comes next. Fun times.

What I think we can learn from this – to paraphrase Jason Bourne to the journalist Simon Ross in the third (and best?) Bourne film – “You have no idea what you’re into here”.

What happened next – we kept on keeping on. There were no efforts worthy of the name at rapid decarbonisation. We’re so 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: 

August 14, 1989 – South Australia creates “interdepartmental committee on #climate change”…

August 14, 1971 – Stanford Prison Study begins…

August 14, 2002 – Australian economists urge Kyoto Protocol ratification

August 14, 2007 – CCS report in Australia “between a rock and a hard place”

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

 August 13, 2009 – Senate kibboshes “CPRS”

Sixteen years ago, on this day, August 13th, 2009, Kevin Rudd’s car crash of a climate “policy” began to collide with, well, everything…

Endeavoring to keep its commitment to enact the CPRS into law prior to the meetings in Copenhagen in December 2009, the CPRS Bill was introduced to Parliament on May 14, 2009, and was passed by the House of Representatives on June 4th. It was defeated, however, in the Australian Senate on August 13, 2009, by a 42 to 30 vote where the Opposition, the Greens, and two independent Senators hold the balance of power. Carbon Capture and Storage:

Wishful Thinking or a Meaningful Part of the Climate Change Solution MICHAEL I. JEFFERY, Q.C.*

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd had used climate change as one of his ways of attacking John Howard (Prime Minister from 1996 to 2007). Once in office he avoided doing simple powerful good things and instead went for a complex  “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme” that was, by this time very clearly, a give-away to the most powerful industries – the carbon intensive manufacturing, fossil fuel export and energy production sectors.

The specific context was that Rudd and his supporters were not bothered about the legislation the first time – they expected it and enjoyed watching the Liberals and Nationals tear each other apart.

What I think we can learn from this is that Rudd was terrible on many things. Most consequentially, climate.

What happened next  The CPRS was re-introduced in November, and defeated. It brought down Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull, who was replaced by Tony Abbott.  Rudd was delighted, thinking that Copenhagen would be a success and he could come back and defeat Abbott… tumbleweed…. Funny how life turns out, isn’t it?

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: 

August 13, 1882 – William “Coal Question” Jevons dies

August 13, 1991 – clouds and silver linings 

August 13, 2007 – Newsweek nails denialists

Categories
United States of America

August 13, 2004 – “Stabilisation wedges”

Twenty one years ago today, Science publishes the “Stabilisation Wedges” paper…

*Steven Pacala and Robert Socolow, “Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies,” Science 305, no. 5686 (August 13, 2004): 968-972,

“Humanity already possesses the fundamental scientific, technical, and industrial know-how to solve the carbon and climate problem for the next half-century. A portfolio of technologies now exists to meet the world’s energy needs over the next 50 years and limit atmospheric CO2 to a trajectory that avoids a doubling of the preindustrial concentration. Every element in this portfolio has passed beyond the laboratory bench and demonstration project; many are already implemented somewhere at full industrial scale. Although no element is a credible candidate for doing the entire job (or even half the job) by itself, the portfolio as a whole is large enough that not every element has to be used.”

Ha ha, we are so fubarred.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 377ppm. 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 discussions of “what to do” had been going on for a long long time.  

The specific context was – the Bush administration had pulled out of Kyoto Protocol negotiations. Those wanting to “do something” were turning to technology. 

What I think we can learn from this – the numbers around mitigation were daunting then. Now they’re laughable.

What happened next. Stabilisation wedges were flavour of the month for a while. Now? Haven’t heard them referenced for ages. It’s apparently all about the speed of wind and solar roll-out.

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: 

August 13, 1882 – William “Coal Question” Jevons dies

August 13, 1991 – clouds and silver linings 

August 13, 2007 – Newsweek nails denialists

Categories
France

August 12 2003 – French heatwave

Twenty two years ago, on this day, August 12th, 2003,

French heatwave

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3190585.stm

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 the things scientists warned us about? Yeah, they were starting to come true. Science can be irritating like that.

The specific context was – the Europeans had long been better (slightly less terrible) on climate than the settler colonies (USA, Australia)

What I think we can learn from this – you fuck around, you find out. Except those who find out first (the poor, and to some extent the old) did the least fucking around. Nobody said life was fair.

What happened next. We continued to fuck around. Now we are finding out. We will continue to find out. We will not enjoy finding out.

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: 

August 12, 1970 – US Senate warned about climate change

August 12, 1990 – Channel 4 shows crackpot documentary “The Greenhouse Conspiracy”

August 12, 2009 – Deutsche bank enters modelling war in Australia – All Our Yesterdays

August 12, 2010 – BZE launches energy plan for Australia

Categories
Australia

August 11, 2005 – Bob Brown in the Senate

Twenty years ago, on this day, August 11th, 2005, Bob Brown, a man of undoubted physical and moral courage, said the following in the Australian Senate,

The motion calls on the Minister for the Environment and Heritage to explain to the Senate his denial in the Federal Court that global warming exists and that the burning of coal contributes to global warming. He did not do that in his 20-minute speech to the Senate. It was his opportunity. The debate could have been concluded and we could be discussing other things, but he steered totally away from that because there is no way that he can answer his duplicity on the matter. There is no way that he can answer the double standards being exhibited as he tries to do the impossible—firstly, address climate change and, secondly, deny it.

Just yesterday in the Senate, in answer to a dorothy dixer on climate change from Senator Adams, the Minister for the Environment and Heritage said:

… climate change is already affecting the climate in Western Australia, with quite significant reductions in rainfall in the south-west affecting farm production. It shows all of us in Australia just how important saving the climate is, just how important addressing climate change is and how important it is not only to mix substantial domestic policies to address this within Australia’s borders but to work steadfastly internationally to ensure that we have policies that work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions …

And

The extraordinary thing about the Australian newspaper’s page 7 story today, headed ‘Canberra in denial over greenhouse’, is that right next to it is an advertisement from Energy Australia. It has a little heading up the top, over a picture of a sprig growing out of a power pole, saying, ‘Nature-friendly power.’ This is one of the nation’s biggest energy providers, from the state—the coal state, if you like—of New South Wales. The first two sentences say:

It’s time to make the switch. Traditional coal-fired electricity produces large amounts of greenhouse gases, which cost our environment dearly.

How can we have everybody agreeing that that is a fact but the minister going into court and denying it? It is Alice in Wonderland; it is a total absurdity. It would be laughable were it not so serious.

ParlInfo – GLOBAL WARMING 

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 Greens had formed nationally when it was obvious that it was a waste of time and energy – and opportunity – expecting the Labor Party (social democratic at its very best) to be anything more than a meat puppet for corporate interests, especially extractive ones (forestry, mining etc). They’d finally set up in the early 1990s, and Bob Brown was a key player in this.

The specific context was that Brown was protesting the utter criminal uselessness of the Howard government, which was resolutely trying to avoid doing ANYTHING that would inconvenience its fossil fuel mates.

What I think we can learn from this – Brown has behaved with honour, dignity, intelligence and courage. You can’t say that about many recent Labor sorts (Tom Uren gets a pass, obvs, Moss Cass, and a few others). Gillard on a very generous reading gets a “C+” on climate, which is better than Rudd, Keating etc. 

What happened next Brown stuck around and was instrumental in shepherding through the first carbon pricing scheme in Australia in 2011.

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: 

August 11, 2005 – Greenpeace protest Hazelwood power station

August 11, 2009 – Kevin Rudd is actually shut up (by a power cut) – All Our Yesterdays

August 11, 2010 – @TheOnion reports “Millions Of Barrels Of Oil Safely Reach Port In Major Environmental Catastrophe”

Categories
Activism Australia

August 10, 2021- climate protest with burning pram…

Four years ago, on this day, August 10th, 2021,

The IPCC planned to release their sixth report and a spate of protests had been planned around Canberra ahead of it. CoCo was among a group of eight who planned to take their message directly to parliament. Their group included ANU Associate Professor Nick Abel, a climate scientist and kicked off when CoCo set fire to a pram and glued herself to the pavement. In the background was parliament house. As her fellow activists began to spray paint the words “Duty of Care” and “No Time” on columns across parliament, CoCo live streamed a speech about how she wanted to be a mother but could not “in all conscience bring a child into the world to face hell on earth.”

“The government, beholden to the fossil fuel lobby, has burnt my dreams,” she said.

It was a hammy performance, acted-up for the camera but the underlying message was true. CoCo had always wanted to be a mother but as she learned more about climate change, it was a future she would deny herself.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 416ppm. 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 – wait, you can’t remember 4 years ago? – The bushfires, the brutal heatwaves, the floods. The chickens coming home to roost.

The specific context was that Scott Morrison was still Prime Minister of Australia. Among other portfolios.

What I think we can learn from this is that we are toast. Sorry, but there it is. I’ve done ten of these posts on the trot, and have clearly got to stop (for now) before it just becomes a prolonged howl of rage. 

What happened next – More emissions. More jail terms for activists. More disasters. More despair.

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: 

August 10, 1974 – Stockholm conference on climate modelling ends 

August 10, 1978 – Ford Pinto deaths spark class action lawsuit – All Our Yesterdays

August 10, 1980 – “Energy, Climate and the Future” seminar in Melbourne

August 10, 2003 – a UK temperature record tumbles…

Categories
Australia

August 10, 2000 – States’ greenhouse gas failure

Twenty five years ago, on this day, August 10th, 2000 – as part of the “we’re gonna do stuff, and the states aren’t doing their bit” strategy, Environment Minister Robert Hill is dishing out smears.

“State governments – including South Australia – have failed “abysmally” to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions satisfactorily, Environment Minister Robert Hill said yesterday. Senator Hill said most states would achieve only half the cuts they had promised two years ago on signing the National Greenhouse Strategy.”

Anon, 2000. States’ greenhouse gas failure. Adelaide Advertiser, August 11, p. 13.

The Federal Environment Minister, Senator Hill, yesterday threatened to withhold up to $400 million in State funding for greenhouse gas abatement, and said NSW was more interested in producing “glossy brochures” than in taking real action. [POTS AND KETTLES]

The threat came as he said he believed the United States would ratify the Kyoto Protocol on limiting greenhouse gas emissions regardless of who won this year’s presidential election. In addition, he said the Government would announce in a few months an early-credit scheme to encourage businesses to keep reducing emissions even before the protocol was ratified.

Senator Hill’s statements follow BHP’s threat last week to opt out of the Federal Government’s Greenhouse Challenge program, saying there were inadequate incentives to reduce emissions.

Clennell, A. 2000. Style Put Ahead Of Substance On Greenhouse: Hill. Sydney Morning Herald, 11 August, p.7.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 369ppm. 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 Federal Government was happy to blame state governments when it suited their interests – state-federal tensions are hardly new.

The specific context was that Howard and his colleagues were engaging in the usual blame-shifting.

What I think we can learn from this – Federal systems have more room for experimentation, but also blame-shifting.

What happened next Howard kept on blocking all action, including undermining the growth of renewables etc etc. Criminal.

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: 

August 10, 1974 – Stockholm conference on climate modelling ends 

August 10, 1980 – “Energy, Climate and the Future” seminar in Melbourne

August 10, 2003 – a UK temperature record tumbles…

Categories
Australia

August 9, 2000 – a new Greenhouse Strategy – including on LNG. Yeah, yeah sure.

Twenty-five years ago, on this day, August 9, 2000,

The Federal Government is set to announce a new national strategy on greenhouse gases after a Cabinet subcommittee resolved key issues this week.

At a three-hour meeting on Wednesday [9th August], the Cabinet subcommittee on greenhouse agreed on a broad national greenhouse strategy, which would subsume ministerial wrangling over how individual industries such as liquefied natural gas should be affected by future government greenhouse decisions.

Taylor, L. 2000. Government set to unveil greenhouse strategy. Australian Financial Review, 11 August. P 15.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 369ppm. 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 John Howard had made it clear he wasn’t going to take climate action, especially if it interfered with growth in fossil fuel exports. He’d already carved out an extremely generous deal at the Kyoto conference in 1997. 

The specific context was that the Howard government was about to discuss whether to debate an emissions trading scheme, and presumably this sort of thing was there to make at seem that SOMETHING was being done. 

What I think we can learn from this – much of what passes for “policy” announcements is there as perception management/public relations.

What happened next – Howard kept on blocking all action, including undermining the growth of renewables etc etc. Criminal.

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: 

August 9, 1955 – Canadian physicist Gilbert Plass submits his paper

August 9, 2001 – OECD calls on Australia to introduce a carbon tax. Told to… go away…

August 9, 2013 – BP writes the rules (de facto)