Author: drmarchudson

Categories
United Kingdom

July 6, 1988 – Piper Alpha blows up

Thirty six years ago, on this day, July 6th,1988, an oil drilling platform in the North Sea blows up.

The Piper Alpha drilling platform in the North Sea is destroyed by explosions and fires. One hundred sixty-seven oil workers are killed, making it the world’s worst offshore oil disaster in terms of direct loss of life.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 350ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Piper Alpha had a bad safety reputation. Workers had been complaining and… boom. 

What we learn is that energy extraction is a dangerous business. Whether it’s coal mines, oil platforms, small coal mines are definitely more dangerous. And accidents happen. Normal accidents in the world words of Charles Perrow.

What happened next? There were the usual prolonged battles over blame and compensation. At this point, in Britain, this was the third big infrastructure horror show after the Kings Cross fire and also The Herald of Free Enterprise. It did feel like things were falling apart. And then of course, the following year, Exxon Valdez. 

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: 

July 6, 1972 – “Workers and the Environment” conference in London…

 July 6, 1993 – Australian bipartisanship on climate? Not really…

Categories
United Kingdom

July 5, 2013 – that turd Michael Gove …drops plans to drop climate from curriculum

Eleven years ago, on this day, July 5th, 2013, Michael Gove had to back down on one of his more prickish gambits.

Michael Gove has abandoned plans to drop climate change from the geography national curriculum.

The education secretary’s decision represents a victory for Ed Davey, the energy and climate change secretary, who has waged a sustained battle in Whitehall to ensure the topic’s retention.

The move to omit it from the new curriculum took on a symbolic status. Gove insisted it was part of his drive to slim an unwieldy curriculum down, to give teachers greater freedom to show their initiative. 

Patrick Wintour in the Guardian

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 397ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the “Conservatives” hate anything that reminds people that the status quo that they are trying to conserve is already killing some, and is going to kill everyone. And so they would like to de-educate the young. 

What we learn here is that these sorts of decisions can be defeated. If there’s a broad enough coalition and there’s enough outrage. And the politician doesn’t think the game is worth the candle. Fine. But Read on to what happened next.

What happened next on climate is it ostensibly allegedly stayed within the national curriculum. But look, what else got torched? Have a look at this article from the Morning Star on the ninth of December 2023, pointing out what Gove was able to remove from the curriculum. I don’t know, maybe there was a similar effort to push back. But it won’t have had as many educated white people behind it, as the climate campaign did. I’m not saying that all white people are racist, or that all the people who campaigned on the climate curriculum issue are hypocrites at all. I’m just saying that for some issues people who care about them are able to mobilise this kind of cultural capital, social capital, and on other issues it’s that much harder. 

And I can see how people pushing on other issues might notice that we were silent when they needed help. I personally don’t recall being involved. And this is to my shame in either campaign. But at this point I wasn’t in a good headspace and I was focusing on Manchester City Council, those are my excuses. 

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: 

 July 5, 1973 – The Predicament of Mankind discussed

July 5, 1989 – Nuclear tries to regain some credibility, latching on to greenhouse

Categories
Uncategorized

“What to do about C02?” – and what we have lost/has been stolen from us

The “What to do about C02?” documentary, directed by Russell Porter, is 40 years old. The tweet about it did well, and I contacted Russell to say that people were watching his (excellent) documentary.

You can watch the documentary by clicking here.

He said the following in reply

“I used to say in my teaching that a good documentary film should work for any audience anywhere, beyond its own time and place.

“TV current affairs and news programmes on the same subjects are by definition ephemeral – they usually disappear after their initial broadcast. 

“The challenge for documentarians is to find the universal truths behind the specific context, and I think the enduring appeal of these CSIRO films demonstrates this point.

“But as I said in the interview, I doubt this kind of film could be made today, certainly not within an institutional context. 

“For a start the national  institutions like CSIRO no longer have the luxury of their own production and distribution facilities.

“Secondly, the integrity of the institutions themselves has been fatally compromised by the imposition of Thatcherite privatisations and the need to “make profit”  at the expense of all other values. 

“The current revelations and legal / personal disasters relating to UK sub-post masters as a result of privatised corporate greed, lies and cover-ups is a case in point. 

“It is revealing that there was no official reaction to these monumental injustices until the ITV broadcast of a compelling dramatised documentary. “Mr Bates Vs. The Post Office”.“

NB He wants to make clear that

it is just my personal view rather than anything formally connected to CSIRO. I haven’t had anything to do with the organisation since 1988

I say – one of the crucial losses in the last 40 years (not that before then was by any means perfect) has been the stupefaation and demoralisation of those opposed to escalating murder and mayhem against all other species, and future generations of humans. Our sense-making has been attacked, mostly successfully. And here we are.

Categories
Energy United Kingdom

July 4, 1989 – UK Energy Committee ponders greenhouse implications

Thirty five years ago, on this day, July 4th, 1989, a committee delivers its findings.

Energy Committee, Sixth Report, Energy Implications of the Greenhouse Effect, Volumes 1,2, 3, together with the proceedings of the Committee, HMSO,

As someone wrote.

When a report is described at its launch by one of its authors as ‘possibly the most important issued since Parliamentary departmental Select Committees began a decade ago’, it is scarcely surprising if those approaching it to study its comments do so with a mixture of anticipation and trepidation.
Having duly read not just the 65pages of the main report, but also trawled with increasing fascination through the two supplementary volumes of evidence presented (both written and oral), running to some 158 and 164 pages respectively, I have come to a simple conclusion. The topic under consideration is acknowledged by world leaders to be possibly the greatest threat to civilization-as-we-know-it; this is parliament’s latest work on the topic: ergo, it must by definition rank as ‘most important’.

Warren, A. (1989). The UK energy select committee greenhouse report. Energy Policy, 17(5), 452–454. doi:10.1016/0301-4215(89)90067-0 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 353ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

An energy committee receives a report!! Hold The Front Page. Stop the press!

The context is that by the end of 1988, politicians were setting up task forces and committees. The IPCC had its first meeting in November of ‘88, for example, but also domestically, most of this was channelled through the frame of energy, because energy was at that stage the number one issue (agriculture, aviation, industry would all start to be looked at later). 

What we learn is what else you’re going to do, of course, you’re gonna set up a committee fact finding. That in and of itself, isn’t the problem. It’s whether you then keep pushing or whether you use the fact that you set up a committee to send activists to sleep as an excuse not to do anything more. And that,  sadly, is what we did. And it seems impossible for social movement organisations to effectively follow the issue into the committees because they are the place where good ideas go to die. 

What happened next: A flurry of promises in 1989 – 1990, especially around variations on the Toronto target of rich nations cutting emissions. Then the Rio Earth Summit gave us a half-baked stabilisation target. And then it all just went away. Because it did. 

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: 

4 July, 1957 – popular UK magazine The Listener mentions carbon dioxide build-up

July 4, 1996 – article in Nature saying ‘it’s partly us’

July 4, 2004 – @WWF_Australia try to shame John Howard into #climate action…

Categories
Iran United States of America

July 3, 1988 – US Navy kills hundreds of Iranian civilians…

Thirty six years ago, on this day, July 3rd, 1988, the US navy killed hundreds of civilians

United States Navy warship USS Vincennes shoots down Iran Air Flight 655 over the Persian Gulf, killing all 290 people aboard.

Their crims and our crimes get reported differently, yes?

Robert M. Entman, Framing U.S. Coverage of International News: Contrasts in Narratives of the KAL and Iran Air Incidents, Journal of Communication, Volume 41, Issue 4, December 1991, Pages 6–27, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1991.tb02328.x

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 350ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Reagan lot had decided to intervene physically on behalf of the Iraqis in the so-called tanker wars, part of the Iran/Iraq War that had started in ‘79, or ‘80. The year before a whole bunch of Americans had been killed on the USS Stark, one of Saddam Hussein’s pilots had gotten itchy trigger fingers. Assuming it was an accident, I assume it was. And it’s extraordinary that this was basically forgiven and forgotten. It must have been very weird indeed for the families of the dead from USS Stark very weird indeed. Because of course, part of the narrative wasn’t it didn’t fit. 

What we learn is that inconvenient events can be airbrushed out of history.

See also the comparison of coverage between the KAL 007 committed by the Soviets. And this there is actually an academic paper comparing the two. 

What happened next? The tanker war finished, Saddam Hussein then miscalculated. You know, maybe he thought, “well, if I can shoot a US destroyer. And they say, ‘No problem,’ then will they really be bothered if I invade Kuwait?” This was perhaps a miscalculation on his part. Eventually, the Americans paid someone 25 million to find Saddam dumped for them in a spider hole, then they executed him. Not for being their ally, but for some stuff. For the avoidance of doubt, Saddam Hussein was a freaking monster. But for a long time he was Uncle Sam’s monster. 

Meanwhile, four months later, a Pan Am jet was blown out of the sky. The Iranians were blamed, until their acquiescence was needed for the 1991 Gulf War, and the blame got pinned on Libya.

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: 

July 3, 1986 – House of Lords debate about the atmosphere and fuel use…

July 3, 2008 – Greenpeace activists enter New South Wales coal power station

July 3, 2008 – Greenpeace occupies an Australian coal plant.

Categories
Temperature records

July 3,2003 and 2023 – it’s getting warmer. And warmer.

Twenty years ago – and one year ago – on this day, July 3rd, 2003 and 2003, temperature records all…

In an astonishing announcement on global warming and extreme weather, the World Meteorological Organisation signalled last night that the world’s weather is going haywire.

In a startling report, the WMO, which normally produces detailed scientific reports and staid statistics at the year’s end, highlighted record extremes in weather and climate occurring all over the world in recent weeks, from Switzerland’s hottest-ever June to a record month for tornadoes in the United States – and linked them to climate change.

3 July 2003 Independent report and here too

And

July 3rd 2023, the first time on record that the Earth’s temperature exceeded 17C

Remember this date. Decades in the future we will look back on 17C with fondness

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 376ppm (2003) and 421 (2023). As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that scientists have been saying it was getting warmer for 100 years. They’ve been saying that carbon dioxide was probably the cause since 1953 (earlier if you count Guy Callendar). They were saying that weather records would fall. And guess what? Temperature records did fall 20 years apart in the UK. 

What we learn from this is what we learn from history;  “the only thing we learn is that we learn nothing from history.” 

What happened next? The emissions kept climbing. The atmospheric concentrations kept climbing. The temperatures will keep climbing this year 2024 And by the way, I’m narrating in December 2023. It will be warmer still because of El Nino. And it really does look terminal for our species. Happy Days in the Samuel Beckett sense. 

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: 

July 3, 1986 – House of Lords debate about the atmosphere and fuel use…

July 3, 2008 – Greenpeace activists enter New South Wales coal power station

July 3, 2008 – Greenpeace occupies an Australian coal plant.

Categories
Australia Canada

July 2, 1988 – Scientists warn of devastation…

Thirty six years ago, on this day, July 2nd, 1988, scientists called it, and people in Australia’s capital were warned.

TORONTO, Friday (KRD).—Toronto scientists and policymakers from 46 nations say global damage from “greenhouse” warming and other man-made atmospheric changes may ultimately be second in magnitude only to the devastation of a nuclear war.

They also called on industrialised countries to tax fossil-fuel consumption to finance a fund to protect the atmosphere and drastically cut carbon-dioxide emissions.

Anon, 1988. Scientists warn of devastation. The Canberra Times, 2 July, p.6.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 350ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Changing Atmosphere conference had happened in Toronto, the days before.

The Canberra Times had been banging on about environmental issues for a long time. See, for example, a book review as far back as 1967, which mentioned the possible impacts of carbon dioxide. And already by this stage, the Greenhouse Project had launched and Greenhouse 87 had happened and Greenhouse 88 was well advanced in its planning. 

What we learn is that none of this was a state secret. Even before Bush and Thatcher got hold of it, it was all out there for anyone who wanted to pay attention. Of course, there are incentives not to pay attention. Very big incentives indeed. And most of us go for those incentives. Why wouldn’t we? And to be clear, those incentives are both internal and external, and can be dialled up or dialled down. We, as a species, have chosen to dial them down, and dial up the incentives to not pay attention. 

 What happened next? Greenhouse 88, with US scientist Stephen Schneider coming over, local scientists saying the same. And here we are 36 years later, having failed to act and having actually made things a lot worse. It is somewhat depressing, I’ll admit, if you’re attached to the idea of humans as an even potentially rational species. If you let go of that illusion, I suppose it becomes more explicable and forgivable. But think of all the other species we’re taking down with us. What a shitshow. 

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: 

July 2, 1952 – Rachel Carson says Arctic warming

July 2, 1993. Denialists versus the facts, again.

July 2, 2007 – Australia learns it has been left “High & Dry” on #climate change

July 2, 2013 – Ignorant man who became prime minister disses wind farms

July 2, 2013 – Boris Johnson, expert on energy systems, attacks windfarms

Categories
Australia

July 1, 1984 – CSIRO film “What to do about C02?”

Forty years ago today, (July 1st, 1984) a CSIRO film came out,

What to do About CO2? (1984)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 345ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Australian scientists had been trying to raise the alarm since the late 70s. The CSIRO had worked with the ABC and in 1976 released a documentary called “A Change in Climate”,which had looked at both concern over a new Ice Age and carbon-induced warming.

And in 1980, the Australian Academy of Science had held a two day conference in Canberra in 1981. CSIRO had released a monograph by Brian Tucker, about the so-called “Carbon Dioxide problem.” Unbeknownst to the public had also been the Office of National assessments. Greenhouse Effect report and of course, the CSIRO in the mid 70s had made a documentary called a Change of Climate. 

What we learn – the simple fact is that we knew but we couldn’t see a way to do anything. 

What happened next. The film was well-received, circulated in schools etc. See interview with Russell Porter.

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: 

July 1, 1950 – “Is the World Getting Warmer?” asks Saturday Evening Post

July 1, 1957- A key “year” in climate science begins…

July 1, 1983 – Australian High Court “saves” Franklin River (it woz the activists wot won it)

Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage

June 30, 2006 – Australian CCS inquiry launched

Eighteen years ago, on this day, June 30th, 2006, the fantasy technology gets an investigation,

Friday 30 June 2006 the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Science and Innovation announced an inquiry into the science and application of geosequestration technology in Australia

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that since the Prime Minister’s Science Engineering and Industry Council in 1999, geo sequestration in Australia had been in favour. The Coal 21 plan, Coal 21 conferences and so forth. And so, some senators decided it was time to start taking a closer look at what CCS might in fact, be able to achieve if everything went swimmingly. 

What we learn is that give them enough time and – bless ‘em – Parliamentarians will start demanding that the right questions are asked. 

What happened next? The report was delivered a year later. CCS died in 2010, but has since been revived – it’s too useful a fantasy to stay dead…

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: 

June 30, 2008 – Judge stops a coal-burning power plant getting built.

June 30, 2010 – CCS will be at 5GW by 2020. (nope).

Categories
Australia Renewable energy

June 29, 2006 – “Wind farms don’t live up to the hype”

Eighteen years ago, on this day, June 29th, 2004 another Liberal talks nonsense about renewables.

’ Mr Peter McGauran MP, the federal Minister for Agriculture and member for Gippsland, went further in June 2006, saying ‘Wind farms don’t live up to the hype that they’re the environmental saviour and a serious alternative energy source.

ABC, 2006. Pete McGauran says wind farms a fraud. AM Program, 29 June. 2006

(Prest, 2007: 254)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 377ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context is that the Howard government was doing its absolute best to suppress the rise of renewables. It had been forced or it had in 1997, chosen to announce a renewables target As part of its, “this is why we won’t sign Kyoto” campaign.

 And then it had been forced to eventually create a mandatory renewable energy target that came into effect in April of 2001. By this time, the Howard Government had called a meeting of the Low Emissions Technology Advisory Group, a bunch of fossil fuel majors, asking for their help in suppressing renewables. So this is arguing that there is hype around renewables. But that very accurate critique of hype and unrealistic expectations around a new technology, oddly, never gets applied to carbon capture and storage or god forbid nuclear. 

What we learn is that Liberal Party, people call themselves conservative, but they’re not conserving the planet, ecosystems, quality of life for anyone. What they’re conserving is their own position, relative power and importance by cuddling up to the status quo act as they are conserving a poisonous deadly status quo. 

 What happened next? The investment environment for renewables in Australia became so hostile that Vestas the Danish wind turbine manufacturer, ended up closing its factory in Tasmania/ It would only be from 2012-13 that renewables really took off in Australia, in part, thanks to international factors, but also don’t underestimate ARENA and the CEFC. 

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: 

June 29, 1956 – Just DRIVE, she said…

June 29, 1979 – G7 says climate change matters. Yes, 1979.

June 29, 1979 – Thatcher uses carbon dioxide build-up to shill for nuclear power