Category: Australia

Categories
Australia

August 23, 1997- Sydney Morning Herald does some Clintonian wish-casting…

Twenty-nine years ago, on this day, August 23rd, 1997,

United States officials expect Australia’s maverick greenhouse position to be blown away in a “big bang” at the climate change convention in Kyoto, according to confidential reports by Australian diplomats obtained by the Herald…. The documents are confidential internal communications between the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Canberra and Australian embassies.

They detail Australia’s desperate globe-trotting efforts to undermine the push for international agreement on binding, uniform targets to reduce greenhouse emissions, initially for developed nations.

In June, for example, one senior Canberra official went to Seoul and promoted the economic benefits of a “free ride” to South Korea – a key developing nation – rather than it having to face the high cost of any future emissions control regime. [Compare Exxon doing the same thing with China]

Hogarth, M. 1997. Why Our Stand On Climate Change Is Doomed. Sydney Morning Herald, 23 August, p.1.

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 the US under George H. W. Bush had succeeded in eliminating emissions reductions, targets and timetables for rich countries from the text of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Australia had gone along with that, probably quite happily. The administration under Democrat Bill Clinton had tried to take some energy efficiency conservation action with its BTU tax, and had been soundly defeated. Here we see Clinton at the beginning of his second term, after having given a speech in 1996 at the Great Barrier Reef, beginning to flex muscles ahead of COP 3, which was to be held in Kyoto.

The specific context was that the Australians were pursuing a particularly aggressive line against Australia having any discernible ambitious targets on emissions reductions. This was against the mood music that the Americans, especially under Senator Tim Wirth, as Clinton’s climate envoy were wanting to put forward, so the Clinton gang were talking about how Australia was isolated and would be more isolated and would suffer significant diplomatic consequences for its stance. And for whatever reason, the Sydney Morning Herald was going along with that wish casting. 

What I think we can learn from this – occasionally the mood-music out of Washington is a better form of kayfabe (see, for example, Obama in 2014).

What happened next – Australia got an insanely generous deal at Kyoto, through exasperation and exhaustion at its intransigence.

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: 

August 23, 1853 – first International Meteorological Conference

August 23, 1856 – Eunice Foote identifies carbon dioxide as greenhouse gas

August 23, 1971 – nuggets of ecological wisdom from Nugget Coombs.

August 23, 1971 – the Powell Memorandum

August 23, 1989 – Space Mirrors proposed to combat global warming. I am not making this up.

August 23, 2000 – Nick Minchin in gloat mode

August 23, 2002 – Stafford Beer dies

Categories
Australia

August 22, 1991 – Industry Commission report does its job (scuppering climate action)

Thirty five years ago, on this day, August 22nd, 1991,

There would be little point in Australia’s taking unilateral action to reduce greenhouse gases, according to a government report.

International consensus and concerted international action were needed if the greenhouse effect were to be addressed effectively.

The Industry’ Commission report, published today, “Costs and benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions”, examines the impact on Australian industry of an international stabilisation of greenhouse gases at 1988 levels by the year 2000 and a 20 per cent reduction in those emissions by the year 2005.

Uhlmann, C. 1991. Australia can’t work alone on greenhouse. Canberra Times, 22 August, p12

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 Australian political elites had been warned repeatedly about carbon dioxide build up from the late 60s onwards, and had adopted a wait and see strategy at various points.

The specific context was that in October 1990, in exchange for acceding to Australia, announcing a very hedged interim planning target around the Toronto proposal for a reduction in CO2 emissions of 20% by 2005 Treasurer, then-Treasurer Paul Keating had gotten the promise that the Industry Commission – a quasi-independent gang of growth-oriented intellectual thugs – would look at the greenhouse issue in the context of Australia’s economic performance.

By the time of the industry commission’s report coming out, Keating had quit government because Bob Hawke had reneged on a promise to step down in favour of Keating after the 1990 election, and was lurking on the back benches, biding his time. Graham Richardson, who had been Environment Minister, and then was butt hurt when he didn’t get the defence job he wanted was Keating’s leadership organiser (66 to 44 and “it’s enough”).

The Industry Commission report said the predictable things, and was a useful stick to beat advocates of action with because it was ostensibly independent and we were told that action was unnecessary and would be expensive blah blah blah – the usual. 

What I think we can learn from this is that there is always one of these “don’t panic, no one needs to upset the applecart” reports coming out. Some work, some don’t.

What happened next Keating succeeded in toppling. Hawke in December 1991 and then Keating basically set fire to everything environmental that Hawke had proposed, including climate actions and Keating, in order to cover his ass, allowed waste minimization and recycling to stand in for actual policy.

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: 

August 22, 1960 – JFK says “we must climb to the hilltop”

August 22, 1981 – New York Times front page story costs #climate scientists their jobs.

August 22, 1987 – “Civilisation and Rapid Climate Change” – a short book…

August 22, 1988 – scientists say “Australia, expect #climate refugees”

August 22, 2000 – Minchin kills an Australian Emissions Trading Scheme

August 22, 2011 – anti-carbon pricing rally flops

Categories
Australia Renewable energy

August 21, 2000 – Renewables boast a hoax

Twenty six years ago, on this day, August 21st, 2000,

One of the Federal Government’s key boasts on greenhouse gases that it is legislating so electricity suppliers must increase their power from renewable sources by 2 per cent by 2010 has been called a hoax.

According to industry estimates, growth is occurring at that rate anyway.

And the Opposition has been criticised for signalling that it will pass the Government’s Renewable Energy Bill in its present form, which allows burning wood from native forests to create energy to be taken into account in determining whether the target has been met.

At present, 10.7 per cent of the country’s energy comes from renewable sources. The bill would lift that to 12.7 per cent by 2010. The bill, which also applies to major electricity buyers, such as the aluminium industry, will go to the Senate later this month.

The Australian Conservation Foundation yesterday accused Dr Sharman Stone, parliamentary secretary to the Environment Minister, Senator Hill, of issuing a misleading media release. It had said wind farms, solar-driven manufacturing, tidal power and energy from methane were “destined to become a growing part of Australia’s energy options” because of the legislation.

“This is the great renewable hoax,” the foundation’s campaign director, Mr John Connor, said. “It will be woodchip-driven stuff, and there’s basic problems … legislation which just won’t drive the kind of industries [we should] base the economy on.”

Clennell, A. 2000. Government Greenhouse Gases Boast A Hoax, Says Environmental Group. Sydney Morning Herald, August 22, p.8.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 370ppm. 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 Australian governments, state and federal, had intermittently made supportive noises in the general direction of renewables, but had usually not provided funding or significant financial incentives. My favourite example is how in 1994-95 a proposal for a carbon tax where some of the profits were hypothecated towards research and development of renewables was shot down by opponents within the Labor Party before it got to cabinet. 

The specific context was in 1997 ahead of the Kyoto conference, Liberal Party Prime Minister John Howard had, with some fanfare, produced a Safeguarding the Future policy, which included a promise of a 2% renewables per target for Australian electricity provision. Howard then slow-walked the policy implementation, so that it became a much smaller amount, and here we see various environmental groups pointing this out for all the good it did. 

What I think we can learn from this is that at time of writing or narrating, John Howard is still alive, and there is still time to get him to The Hague on charges of crimes against humanity and other species, and he has very little defence, And standing next to him in the dock should be Paul Keating, Kevin Rudd, Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull, Scott Morrison, and most of all Anthony Albanese, Julia Gillard squeaks her way out by the skin of her teeth, but as well as these meat puppets, lots of industry figures whose names we barely know should also be in the dock as well and this will not happen.

What happened next LETAG. Vestas (LINKS)

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: 

August 21, 1961 – The UN holds a “new sources of energy” conference

August 21, 1972 – Nature editor John Maddox says C02-temperature fear “found wanting”

August 21, 1986 – Lake Nyos disaster

August 21, 2004 – The Australian reports on Howard cabinet split over ETS

Categories
Australia

August 20, 1987 – “we have a wait and see approach”

Thirty nine years ago, on this day, August 20th, 1987,

MJ Elliott in the Legislative Council of the South Australian parliament

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 349ppm. 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 South Australian Parliament had been hearing about carbon dioxide build up intermittently since 1971, usually from figures in the right-wing Liberal Party. 

The specific context was that by 1987 these statements were becoming more frequent, in the context of the 1985 Villach Scientific Conference and the CSIROs present at Division of Atmospheric Physics presentation to the Australian Environment Council in 1986 and the forthcoming greenhouse project of the CSIRO atmospheric physics people and the Commission for the Future.

What I think we can learn from this is that this politician was not at all lying. We had adopted a “wait and see” policy, even though from the mid 70s various scientists have been making point that a wait and see policy was not risk-free and in effect not acting in itself was an action, and it was an action in favour of increased risk.

What happened next is that in 1988 the issue exploded in the UK, the US, Australia and since then politicians have had to take a stance and most of them have chosen to pay lip service, though some especially on the right have delighted in “owning the libs” by saying they don’t actually care if there is indeed a problem, we will tough it out and technology will save the day. 

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: 

August 20, 1988 – Hansen’s model released

August 20, 1996 – Denialist wastes time, energy in stupid smear

August 20, 1997 – Australian Mining Industry operative misrepresents the #climate science. Obvs.

August 20, 2016 – Exxon’s gonna get sued?

August 20, 2018 – Greta Thunberg’s first protest

Categories
Australia Kyoto Protocol

August 18, 2002 – David Kemp is delusional

Twenty-four years ago, on this day, August 17th, 2002,

“In 2002, for example, Federal Environment Minister, David Kemp boasted – without foundation – that ‘increasingly the international community recognises that although we have taken the view that it is not in Australia’s national interests to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, we are actually at the forefront of nations that are taking the responsible attitude,’ adding, ‘We have to be a good international citizen’: “ABC,

‘Minister Defends Position on Greenhouse Gas Emissions’, Insiders, 18 August 2002

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2002/s651631.htm

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 374ppm. 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 climate issue was flaring up again, in part because George W. Bush, appointed by the Supreme Court as President of the United States, (despite losing the popular vote, and probably having lost Florida) in 2000 had pulled the United States out of the negotiations for the Kyoto Protocol, and crucially, Australia had followed suit in June 2002 two months before Kemp says what Kemp says,

The specific context

On September 10 2001 George W. Bush had apparently asked John Howard whether he was going to back the US or the rest of the world on carbon dioxide and Kyoto. Howard had, of course, said, “I’m backing the US.” Anyway, here we see David Kemp, who had replaced Robert Hill as Environment Minister. spouting utter bilge. Surely, as an intelligent man, he must have known that it was bilge.

What I think we can learn from this is that intelligent people are entirely capable of self-delusion, and ambitious, obedient intelligent people are capable of convincing themselves to believe whatever they need to believe to get through the day. 

What happened next Kemp kept spouting this stuff, and they kept working with the Americans on so-called technology partnerships, including spectacularly the AP six, which was an attempted spoiler operation against the Kyoto Protocol and meanwhile, the emissions climbed, the concentration climbed, the consequences became readily and speedily apparent, and here we are.

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: 

August 18, 1975 – it’s gonna get hotter, not cooler, say scientists

August 18, 1991- Business Council of Australia says “fuck you, future generations,” rejects energy efficiency measures

August 18, 1996, Ex-CSIRO #climate boss shows he has lost the plot

August 18, 1997 – MENSA turns out to be dumb as a rock.

Categories
Australia

August 17, 1970 – letter about pollution (inc carbon dioxide) and power in Sydney Morning Herald

Fifty six years ago, on this day, August 17th, 1970, scientist Charles Munro-Watson had a letter in the Sydney Morning Herald: “one does not know the long-term ecological effects of the addition of carbon dioxide to our atmosphere.”

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 that environmental issues and questions over energy production, especially, had become quite live in the late 60s, even before the first oil shock of 1973. Questions around carbon dioxide build up were also being asked. And here we see a letter from a prominent Australian scientist of the time to the Australian newspaper back when it was still right wing and conservative, but before it totally jumped the shark.

Actually, jumping the shark is the wrong usage, because it applied to Happy Days, which had moments of grace and usefulness, which I don’t really think the Australian ever had. 

What I think we can learn from this is that Munro was a mensch. Munro also was bezzies with Stuart Bailey, a physicist at University of Sydney, who knew all about carbon dioxide build up, and as the author of the Frontiers in Science cartoons, had been banging on about it in 1965, 1968-69 and so forth. 

What happened next Munro remained very active on questions around what sources of energy Australia should be investigating and exploiting, and he was very much in favour of renewables, especially solar. He died in 1991. 

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: 

August 17, 1982 – Crispin Tickell sounds the alarm bell

August 17, 1988 – “The Greening of Congress

August 17, 1989 – Space shields to save the earth…

August 17, 1997 – Paper etc industries want “greenhouse minister”

August 17, 1998 – Emissions Trading considered (again)

August 17, 2002 – Pacific states urge Australia to sign Kyoto Protocol

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

August 17, 2006 – Howard attacks State government plans to introduce a carbon trading scheme.

Twenty years ago, on this day, August 17th, 2006,

Prime Minister John Howard has attacked state government plans to introduce a carbon trading scheme, claiming it will cripple the resource industry and cause massive price increases for petrol, gas and electricity. He told Parliament yesterday that according to a recent Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics report, a 50 per cent cut in Australian emissions by 2050 ”would lead to a 10 per cent fall in in GDP, a 20 per cent fall in real wages, a carbon price equivalent to doubling of petrol prices and a staggering 600 per cent rise in electricity and gas prices.” [Pearse 2007 is SCATHING on this]

 Beeby, R. 2006. Howard attacks carbon trading scheme. Canberra Times, 17 August, p.3.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 382ppm. 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 there had been various efforts to get a federal carbon tax, and then an emissions trading scheme in Australia. Two emissions trading scheme proposals had gone before John Howard’s cabinet. In 2000 Nick Minchin had killed it off. In 2003 John Howard had killed it off. Insert links

The specific context was that from early 2006 onwards, and especially late 2006 the pressure for climate action became unavoidable, and here we see just before the issue breaks through in September, John Howard trying to attack state governments for being proactive on an issue that he wants to stay dead and buried.

What I think we can learn from this is that 10 years is a long time to be Prime Minister, and Howard had become more isolated and doctrinaire and had lost his feel for issues and simply couldn’t change his ways. And when he tried in 2007 it convinced absolutely nobody.

What happened next The idea of an emissions trading scheme didn’t lie down and die, and in fact, Kevin Rudd, as leader of the opposition, appointed Ross Garnaut to look into an emissions trading scheme, and this then morphed into a federal scheme. Garnaut was then sidelined because he was unwilling to sign off on enormous giveaways to big business, which Rudd felt was wise, and the rest is history. 

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: 

August 17, 1982 – Crispin Tickell sounds the alarm bell

August 17, 1988 – “The Greening of Congress

August 17, 1989 – Space shields to save the earth…

August 17, 1997 – Paper etc industries want “greenhouse minister”

August 17, 1998 – Emissions Trading considered (again)

August 17, 2002 – Pacific states urge Australia to sign Kyoto Protocol

Categories
Australia

August 16, 1976 – Energy shortages will be pleasant

Twenty five years ago, on this day, August 16th, 1976,

16 August 1976 – Energy expert shortage pleasant in the Melbourne Age

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 331ppm. 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 there had been a big oil shock in 1973-74 where oil prices had quadrupled, thanks to an Arab embargo of exports to countries that had supported Israel in the Yom Kippur War, and doubtless within this, the oil companies were finding ways to push up their prices, a nice little ancillary benefit.

The specific context was The oil shock had focused the mind on energy shortages, and here we see someone suggesting that if energy were less plentiful and more expensive, it might not automatically be a bad thing. This should be read against the context of E. F. Schumacher, “Small is Beautiful,” the back-to-the-land movement, and all the rest of it with carbon dioxide build up just creeping in around the edges now just starting to be that thing that gets mentioned.

What I think we can learn from this is that there were debates around how much energy we should use. Those debates were sidelined then, they’re being sidelined now. Nothing really changes, because we are led by neurotic narcissists who need power to bolster their self-image (and to get rich, obvs), and they tell themselves stories about the public good on some occasions, or not on others. 

What happened next – debates around sufficiency, degrowth etc continue to be ignored, scoffed at etc.

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: 

August 16, 1971 – “The changing chemistry of the oceans.”

August 16 1984 – “Why are they lying to our children?” – what a 40 year old propaganda campaign can tell us about today (and tomorrow’s) cultural battles. #Climate #CorporatePropaganda

August 16, 2000 – No future for the Sydney Futures Exchange

August 16, 2002 – “Oil Lobby Urges Bush to Keep Climate Change Off the Table at Earth Summit

August 16, 2010 – Polar Bears going through the motions

August 16, 2012 – Tony Windsor calls Tony Abbott an “absolute disgrace” on carbon tax/climate

Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage

August 15, 2000 – “Plan to bury Greenhouse Gas”

Twenty six years ago, on this day, August 15th, 2000,

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.

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

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 370ppm. 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 the idea of capturing and storing carbon dioxide because of climate change went back to 1975 when Italian physicist Cesar Marchetti did some back of envelope calculations as part of an International Institute for Advanced Systems Analysis workshop. This had been built on, looked at, and in the late 90s examined a bit more deeply and disregarded because it was palpable nonsense,

The specific context was that with the negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 it was clear that actual emissions reductions for rich nations might be unavoidable, and therefore carbon capture and storage no longer looked too expensive and too ridiculous to consider. There had been a series of international workshops on greenhouse gas technologies from the early 90s onwards, and here we see another such meeting. 

What I think we can learn from this is that a technology can be laughed at, but come back later, because it now meets either an ecological, economic, or political need.

What happened next Carbon capture and storage really started to take off by the mid 2000s as a political solution to an ecological and social problem. There was a spike in interest in the second half of the 2000s especially in the lead up to the Copenhagen climate summit. It then went away again, and it has now come back, but seems to be as far as I can tell, and I really can’t be bothered to look closely because it is way later than anyone things – on life support.

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: 

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

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

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

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

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

Categories
Australia

August 14, 1912 – That wretched news clipping that keeps doing the rounds was first published

UPDATE – Article was originally published July 17, 1912 – and then reprinted almost a month later in a New Zealand newspaper. That reprint here. Thanks to Sue Nethercott for pointing out my error.

One hundred and fourteen years ago, on this day, August 14th, 1912, this was published

https://theconversation.com/for-110-years-climate-change-has-been-in-the-news-are-we-finally-ready-to-listen-188646

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 300ppm. 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 it had been understood and accepted for decades that carbonic acid (carbon dioxide) trapped heat (see Eunice Foote and John Tyndall). In the 1890s Svante Arrhenius had spent a year calculating what would happen if the amount of carbon dioxide in the air doubled. The world would get significantly warmer, he showed, but he thought this was a good thing (less severe Swedish winters) and would take thousands of years.

The specific context was that the American magazine Popular Mechanics had done an article on whether the climate was changing and what the various theories were. This had then been excerpted/syndicated all over the show.

What I think we can learn from this is that people misunderstand how well accepted or known the carbon dioxide build-up theory was, and post it online as if “they” “knew.” “They” really didn’t. The absolute earliest date you can say “politicians etc really ought to have paid close attention” is 1953, and really, to be fair, the late 1950s…  

What happened next  People keep posting this damn thing as a conversation-ending-cliche on social media and I wish they would stop but they don’t and won’t.

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: 

August 14, 1971 – Stanford Prison Study begins…

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

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

August 14, 2002 – Australian economists urge Kyoto Protocol ratification

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

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