Category: Australia

Categories
Australia

September 19, 2007 – Bob Carr brandishes ‘Earth in the Balance’

Nineteen years ago, on this day, September 19th, 2007,

Former New South Wales state premier Bob Carr displays a copy of former US vice-president Al Gore’s 1992 book ‘Earth in the Balance’ during the opening of the FEX Sustainability and Cleantech Investment Market (FEX-SIM) in Sydney, 19 September 2007. FEX-SIM is an Australian initiative aimed at concentrating sustainable and clean technology businesses to provide coherent sector-specific investing opportunities and capital raising. 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 384ppm. 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 a young Bob Carr had been switched on to environmental problems by watching an ABC discussion programme with Paul Ehrlich on a visit to Australia in September 9th, 1971 and Ehrlich had talked about the greenhouse effect. You can read all of this in Carr’s book. 

Carr had then on gone on to become premier of New South Wales and had tried in his way to get some environmental action going within the constraints of neoliberalism, which means frankly not much, but you know, emissions trading schemes and so on and after leaving office. 

The specific context was Carr had continued trying to get climate action going, and here we see him in 2007 as the issue has exploded, clutching a copy of his mate Al Gore’s book, Earth in the Balance, from 1992 (on Gore, you might want to watch Mindwalk, where Sam Watterson plays a thinly veiled Gore) and Carr then went on to serve as foreign affairs minister in Julia Gillard’s government. 

What I think we can learn from this is that people try within the system that they’re given, understandably, and you can criticise them as deluded or cynical or whatever, and that will make you feel good about yourself. I’m not sure it will automatically tell you much about the world. This is not to say that anyone whose heart is in the right place is above criticism, but it’s also a warning about the pleasures of denunciatory history, and if anyone needs warnings about the pleasures of the denunciatory history, it’s me. 

What happened next The carbon trading delusion is I think largely dead now. Still functional as a money making scheme, but the delusion is dead.

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: 

September 19 1969 – ABC Radio warns listeners about carbon dioxide

September 19, 1991 – Ötzi the Iceman is discovered by German tourists

September 19, 1997 – John Howard condemns the South Pacific to hell. Again.

September 19, 1998 – Public Health Association calls for “life-saving green taxes”

Categories
Australia

September 19, 1970 – to freeze or drown?

Fifty six years ago, on this day, September 19th, 1970, the Sydney Morning Herald Weekend Magazine carried a story about where the climate might be going…

“By putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, he may cause the world to grow warmer.” (then again, all the dust might blot out the Sun, cause an Ice Age).

Brian O’Brien on Fate of the world… to freeze or drown? Sydney Morning Herald Weekend Magazine 

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 in 1969 Australia had become woken up in a big way to the question of global environmental damage, global environmental change. And prominent among that was what would happen to weather. 

The specific context was Brian O’Brien delivering a not bad summation of current thinking that we might see an ice age or we might see heating and with heating the melting of ice caps and drowning. 

What I think we can learn from this is that the idea of carbon dioxide build-up as a threat to the atmosphere and to civilization was quite widely spread by 1970. You did not need to be reading arcane scientific journals. 

What happened next is hilarious. Brian O’Brien became an energetic climate denier in the late 1980s and only died quite recently. I don’t know if he changed his tune, and nor do I care. He was a silly old man with relevant deprivation syndrome,

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: 

September 19 1969 – ABC Radio warns listeners about carbon dioxide

September 19, 1991 – Ötzi the Iceman is discovered by German tourists

September 19, 1997 – John Howard condemns the South Pacific to hell. Again.

September 19, 1998 – Public Health Association calls for “life-saving green taxes”

Categories
Australia South Paciific

September 17, 1997 – Howard does some PR…

Twenty nine years ago, on this day, September 17th, 1997,

“Federal Cabinet will tomorrow consider the Government’s crucial domestic greenhouse policy, which it intends to use to convince the international community Australia is not seeking a “free ride” on climate change.”
Taylor, L. 1997. Cabinet to look at new tack on climate change. The Australian Financial Review, 15 September, p. 5

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 364ppm. 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 John Howard had become Prime Minister in March 1996 and it was pretty clear that he was going to oppose any commitments for Australia on reducing its emissions. He had sent people around the world to try and drum up diplomatic support, or at least tolerance, for his view ahead of the impending conference of the parties in Kyoto at which rich nations were supposed to come with their emissions reductions proposals.

The specific context was that this sort of flat out intransigence was causing consternation both within the Liberal Party and across business and voters more generally, so Howard was having to do a little bit of his PR shtick. 

What I think we can learn from this is that in any society, but especially one with elections, politicians will have to pretend to give a shit about issues they really do not give a shit about.

What happened next Howard’s Environment Minister, Robert Hill, managed to extort a fantastically generous deal at Kyoto (de jure 108% de facto, once you took into account the so-called land clearing clause, the Australia clause).

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: 

September 17, 1954 – nuclear electricity will be too cheap to meter

September 17, 1969 – trying to spin Vietnam, Moynihan starts warning about #climate change

September 17, 1978 – National Climate Program Act

September 17, 1980 – Canberra Times reports “fossil fuels changing climate”

September 17, 1987 – Policymakers turn from Ozone to Greenhouse, says Wall Street Journal

September 17, 1987 – report on “The Greenhouse Project” launch

September 17, 1992 – Paul Keating versus climate action (spoiler: Keating wins)

September 17, 2002 – UK Government announces feasibility study into Carbon Capture and Storage

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

September 15, 2010 – BHP says carbon tax is essential

Sixteen years ago, on this day, September 15th, 2010, 

THE world’s biggest mining company, BHP Billiton, is urging the Gillard government to impose a tax on carbon before any international agreement.

This is in order to protect Australia’s long-term economic interests. BHP Billiton chief executive Marius Kloppers has also warned the government not to try to change the terms of the pre-election mining tax deal negotiated with the big three miners.

In a major address yesterday, Mr Kloppers made it clear the mining industry did not intend to be passive in the face of the political uncertainty created by minority government.

BP bod Marius Kloppers speech to Australian Business Chamber of Commerce http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2010/9/16/cleantech/their-words-marius-kloppers

Hewett, J. 2010. BHP boss Marius Kloppers: It’s time for carbon tax. The Australian, September 16

SEE FOR POLITICAL ANALYSIS OF THIS – (Effendi and Courvisanos, 2012: 251)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 BP had been looking at the greenhouse effect in the late 1980s as a way of flogging more uranium. It had also been mildly perturbed by the resources tax proposal of former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, and here we see them stirring the pot, talking about a carbon tax, global carbon tax, which is one of those delay techniques, because you know it will never happen. 

The specific context was that Julia Gillard had become Prime Minister. There was an election campaign happening. 

What I think we can learn from this is that incumbents like BHP, who’d also been involved in the so-called Greenhouse Challenge bullshit, are pretty astute when they want to be and can claim brownie points for advocating things that they know aren’t going to happen.

What happened next Gillard did not win the next election, but she was able to form a minority government, the price of which, though, was that she introduced carbon pricing, leading to real hilarity (ymmv).

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: 

September 15, 1830 – Manchester-Liverpool railway opened

September 15, 1948 – Biologist Evelyn Hutchinson mentions carbon dioxide build-up at an AAAS symposium.

September 15, 1980 – Australian scientists hold “Carbon Dioxide and Climate” symposium in Canberra

September 15, 1982/1990 – “Environmental Justice” is born. And so is Captain Planet…

September 15,1990 – Captain Planet launches

September 15, 1996 – A CCS posterchild is born: Sleipner Field comes online.

September 15, 2005 – “A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Refugees launched by FOE Australia”

September 15, 2008- business splits over what to extort from Rudd…

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

September 14, 1994/1999 – Carbon tax shenanigans

Thirty two years ago, on this day, September 14th, 1994,

A carbon tax, which could have a significant impact on Australia’s resources sector, will be examined as part of the Federal Government’s business tax reforms.

While it is not one of the Ralph report recommendations, a paper has been prepared by Treasury that is expected to be used by the Government when it begins negotiations with the Australian Democrats on the business tax reform package.

In negotiations to secure approval for the Government’s landmark business tax reforms, the Democrats are expected to push for a more systematic approach to Australia’s commitment to reduce greenhouse emissions under the Kyoto targets. This might involve a tax on emissions or other measures, such as greenhouse credits for tree plantations.

Dodson, L. and Lewis, S. 1999. Government puts carbon tax on agenda. The Australian Financial Review, 14 September, p.1.

AND

Industry has reacted with horror to the prospect of a carbon tax being floated simultaneously with the release of the Federal Government’s business tax reform package.

WMC executive officer Mr Ray Evans described the Government’s decision to float a carbon tax proposal as “a unilateral act of self-mutilation”.

1999 Hordern, N. 1999. Industry greets plan for carbon tax with horror. The Australian Financial Review, 15 September, p.3.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 359/368ppm. 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 … well, look,one of the obvious things you do when bad things are happening is you disincentivize them. You either make them illegal or you raise the economic /social price.

The idea of putting a price on carbon dioxide had been pushed by Barry Jones, the Science Minister, or at least mentioned by him in 1988/9 but the basic idea had gone back to 1965, if you look at the President’s Scientific Advisory Council report, Restoring the Quality of Our Natural Environment.

And the proposal for a carbon tax had been there in the Ecologically Sustainable Development policy papers, and it had been kiboshed, and it was now on the table in 1994 again as part of the budget discussions, and so that the Environment Minister John Faulkner would have something in his hand to go to the first COP in the way that Ros Kelly, the Environment Minister in 1990 needed something in her hand for the Second World Climate Conference. 

Five years later, the idea of an emissions carbon tax was dead. Long live an emissions trading scheme. 

What I think we can learn from this is that putting a price on carbon was a small but useful part of the policy solutions, it was not liked by the incumbents, and therefore it was attacked with ferocity and finesse. 

What happened next. An emissions trading scheme proposal was defeated in 2000 thanks to South Australian Senator Nick Minchin, and again in 2003 thanks to John Howard acting on his own. It was not until 2006/7 that an emissions trading scheme became “inevitable.” Kevin Rudd still managed to fuck it up as Prime Minister, and it was left to Julia Gillard to clean up the mess, but her scheme only lasted a couple of years before it was then abolished by Tony Abbott. 

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: 

September 14, 1991 – the Green Wave has receded….

September 14, 1993 – scientists suffer backlash (not outa thin air though)

September 14, 1994 – Business told to brace for climate regulation/tax (which it then handily defeats)

September 14, 2004 – Blair “shocked” by scientists warnings – “time is running out for tackling climate change”

Categories
Australia Coal

September 13, 1991 – Australians worry about coal exports…

Thirty five years ago, on this day, September 13th, 1991,

Export markets for Australian coal could start to disappear by the end of the decade because of advancing energy technology. Overseas research is concentrating on treatments to make coal burn more efficiently. The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) has made research into the field a priority to defend Australian markets.

Forman, D. 1991. CSIRO crusades for coal’s future. BRW, September 13

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 negotiations for the climate treaty, which would become the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, were underway, and the Australians are beginning to realise that a strict treaty might actually have impacts on the amount of coal they can flog to developing nations. This is also the exact moment that it’s becoming clear that Bob Hawke will not be Prime Minister for much longer, and that Paul Keating, who hates environmentalism and environmentalists, will be grabbing the throne.

What I think we can learn from this is the old line, follow the money. It’s not much more complicated than that. It is somewhat more complicated, but not that much more. 

What happened next Australia became an opponent of climate action, and here we are completely fucked with emissions climbing, well plateauing at about 40 billion tonnes a year, concentrations climbing, and as the sinks fail, those concentrations will climb more quickly, regardless of emissions, unless emissions take a massive nosedive. No one’s explained to me how they think emissions are going to take a massive nose dive. 

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: 

September 13, 1661 – Fumifugium!

September 13, 1856 – the game’s a Foote

September 13, 1976 – US news broadcast on ozone and climate.

September 13, 1984 – unsettling Seattle workshop on sea level rise

September 13, 1992/1994- Scientists traduced, ignored

Categories
Australia United States of America

September 10, 2001 – Bush asks Howard “which side are you on, boy, which side are you on?”

Twenty five years ago, on this day, September 10th, 2001,

US President George “Dubya” Bush asks Australian Prime Minister John Howard “will you side with US or go with Europe on Kyoto”

Manne in ‘Liberals and Power: The Road Ahead’ (2008, P28). 

(says Guy Pearse was told by well-placed source)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 371ppm. 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 in the late 1980s the Americans had decided to stake out a position on climate that was basically “fuck you” to the entire world except their bezzies, the petro-states of the Middle East. Australia had initially been alongside the middle powers advocating for more action, but then they took a look at the amount of money they were making from exporting coal and how climate goals would upset the domestic apple cart, and they said “yeah, nah.” The president from ‘88 to ‘92 was George H. W. Bush, who had won the ‘88 election fair and square (give or take a little light race-baiting), which is more than you can say about his son, President George W. Bush in 2000. 

The specific context was that Bush had already pulled out of the Kyoto protocol, and it was fairly clear that John Howard, Australian Prime Minister, was minded to do the same, but he had an election coming up and wasn’t going to make the announcement before that. Howard was on a trip to the United States, and this exchange happened according to one source at this time. 

What I think we can learn from this It’s not too late to get John Howard and George W. Bush to The Hague for crimes against humanity. 

What happened next Well, the next day was September 11th, 2001.

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: 

September 10, 1957 – The Times covers the International Geodesy Conference…

September 10, 1973- Ozone concerns on display in Kyoto…

September 10, 2007 – shiny #climate promises versus grim reality

September 10, 2008 – Greenpeace Kingsnorth protesters acquitted

September 10, 2015 – one of those “whither CCS?” articles

Categories
Australia

September 8, 1989 – Deputy PM John Kerin on environment and economics

Thirty seven years ago, on this day, September 8th, 1989,

John Kerin (Deputy PM, Industry) gives a speech to CEDA on environment and economics (he cites it in his Nov 1, 1989 speech) 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 353ppm. 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 almost two decades of warning about the greenhouse effect to Australian political elite, they were finally having to start talking about it very much in public.

In late 1988 and for the first few months of 1989, the opponents of action seemed quite flat footed, presumably simply waiting for it to burn itself out.

The specific context was And here we see Deputy Prime Minister John Kerin giving a speech on environment and economics, just as the penny is beginning to drop for the opponents of action that they’re gonna have to enter the fray that they can’t wait for this wave to die down.

What I think we can learn from this is that you should never take any event out of its context.

What happened next The Labor government decided to rat fuck environmentalism and environmentalists, and to side with the big end of town. By the mid 90s they were basically indistinguishable from the Liberals. The Liberals went off the deep end. Labor used the climate issue as a way to get back into power in 2007, then comprehensively fucked up the response, and has basically been running scared ever since, and under the thumb of big business, 

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: 

September 8, 1972 – Green activist vanishes off face of Earth…

September 8, 1990 – Australian #climate denialist spouting his nonsense…

September 8, 2000 – “Minchin’s Quiet Win”

September 8, 2014 – Lobster boat blockaders have charges dropped.

Categories
Australia

September 5, 1990 – “emissions reductions targets will strengthen the economy” says Australian Env Minister

Thirty six years ago, on this day, September 5th, 1990,

Targets to reduce greenhouse gases would strengthen the Australian economy, not cripple it, according to the Minister for the Environment, Ms Kelly.

Speaking to a Metal Trades Industry Association seminar, Ms Kelly made a preliminary sortie in the battle she will fight with her Cabinet colleagues next Monday to try to persuade them to set targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Ms Kelly said a report for her department by Deni Greene Consulting Services showed that a 20 per cent reduction in greenhouse emissions by 2005 “is not only possible, it is pretty easy to obtain”.

Industry groups have been lobbying the Government hard in recent days against setting a target to reduce emissions, which they argue could dramatically increase costs.

Garran, R. 1990. Kelly sees big savings in cutting greenhouse gases. Australian Financial Review, 6 September, p. 5.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 354ppm. 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 greenhouse effect had burst onto the public scene around the world, but especially in Australia, in 1988. There were now fierce debates about what was to be done. In March of 1990 there had been a federal election, and the Liberal Party had had a more ambitious emissions reduction target than Labor. Yes, that’s true.

The specific context was that here, just as the Ecologically Sustainable Development policy making process was about to kick off, we see a speech about how emissions reductions targets will not weaken the economy but strengthen it. This was a narrative that was hated and challenged repeatedly, usually by commissioning so-called independent reports, which could be thumped down on the table, “Our modelling shows that dot dot dot”.

What I think we can learn from this is that we could have had nicer things, we could have delayed a greenhouse warming, but the powers of darkness, the forces of well, evil, were stronger, and they won the day, and the week, and the month, and the year, and the decades.

But they will not win eternity. Well, they will, if their aim was to cause mayhem.

What happened next The following month the Australian Government agreed to a version of the Toronto Target, but with so many caveats that it was rendered useless. This agreement was simply so the Environment Minister could go to the second World Climate Conference in Geneva with something in her hand. 

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: 

September 5, 1986 – a “Safe Energy” rally, in London

September 5, 1990 – Australian Environment Minister promises deep carbon cuts – “easy”…

September 5, 1995 – Australian Aluminium Council joins “Greenhouse Challenge”

September 5, 2004 – John Howard gloats about cooking the planet

September 5, 2005 – protest about the brown coal in Melbourne

September 5, 2005 – Anthony Albanese introduced “Avoiding Dangerous Climate #Change” private member’s bill

Categories
Australia Energy

September 4, 2014 – Labor Senators help repeal large scale Energy Efficiency Opportunities program

Twelve years ago, on this day, September 4th, 2014,

On Thursday Labor Party Senators lined up with the Government, Palmer United Party and crossbench independent senators to repeal the large-scale Energy Efficiency Opportunities (EEO) program set up with bipartisan support in 2006 under the Howard Government. In a division in the Senate of 55 votes to 10, only the Greens Senators opposed the dumping of this program which had made substantial business energy savings of over $800 million dollars and 8.21 megatonnes reduction in carbon emissions.

The Energy Efficiency Opportunities program was recognised by the International Energy Agency as a world-class program helping businesses to save energy and a key element of energy efficiency policy framework and in addressing climate change.

http://takvera.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/labor-votes-with-government-to-dump-key.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 399ppm. 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 previous eight years had been an exhausting series of battles – legislative, political, cultural – in the climate wars in Australia, but ultimately the forces of stupidity had prevailed, as they so often do. Tony Abbott, as Prime Minister, had repealed much of the legislation within Julia Gillard’s Clean Energy Package, especially, for example, the actual emissions trading scheme. 

The specific context was – here you see Labor senators, there aren’t that many of them after the 2013 electoral wipe-out, accepting political realities and voting to abolish the large scale energy efficiency opportunities programme. Energy efficiency is always hated and derided, even though there were and still are significant savings to be made.

What I think we can learn from this – is that there is no depth of stupidity we won’t sink to.

What happened next is that the culture war over climate has never really ended, that we are not smart enough collectively to fix this, and that doom is coming. If the social movement organisations had learned how to harness emotion and to create opportunities for legitimate peripheral participation, and had avoided being co-opted, repressed, or exhausted things might – might – have been a bit different, i.e. the horrors would have been delayed.

But they didn’t, and the horrors have not been delayed. The horrors are here with us now, and they’re only just warming up.

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: 

September 4, 1969 – Ivory Tower types tell the truth at ANU

September 4, 1990 – Industry whines about environment minister’s speech

September 4, 2000 – industry says sky will fall if there’s a carbon tax

September 4, 2006 – Royal Society to Exxon: “Knock it off with the funding to #climate deniers”

September 4, 2007 – Climate Change Coalition launches