Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage

December 5, 2002 – Australian Government CCS support begins…

On this day, December 5 in 2002 the Australian “Prime Ministers Science and Industry Council” released a report called  “Beyond Kyoto- Innovation and Adaptation.”

This can be seen as the starting gun for Carbon Capture and Storage in Australia (it had already started moving in the UK).

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 373ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now, well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

John Howard had managed to get an absurdly sweet deal for Australia at the Kyoto conference in December 1997. Nonetheless, Australia had delayed ratifying, and on World Environment Day in June 2002 Howard finally did what people had long assumed – he copied George W. Bush in saying “nope.”  That meant that he’d have to put forward some other”solutions” to a problem he did not believe (and still does not believe?) is a problem.

It didn’t hurt that the chair of the PMSEIC, his chief scientist, Robin Batterham, was only doing the job part-time, i.e. when he wasn’t working for … Rio Tinto.

Why this matters. 

CCS for energy systems is absurd (CCS might have a role to play for industry, if the business models can be made to work).

What happened next?

A really good critique of the PMSEIC report was released shortly afterwards – see here.

Large sums of public money in Australia got wasted on CCS, with really nothing to show for it. But it’s too useful a rhetorical move to ever be finally killed off… And so here we are, twenty years later…

Categories
Australia Economics of mitigation

December 4, 1989 – first anti-climate action economic “modelling” released in Australia

On this day, December 4 in 1989, the first anti-climate action “economics modelling” in Australia came out, and was reported by the business press. Oddly, they neglected to mention that the funding for this “research” came from… a company that was digging up and selling coal.  Can only have been space constraints that stopped them mentioning it, oh yes….

Australia will have to suffer the consequences of reduced economic growth to achieve the proposed international goal of a 20 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions over 15 years, according to a group of leading economists.

A paper to be presented to a conference entitled Greenhouse and Energy, which starts at Macquarie University in Sydney today, states that, among other effects, the fight against the greenhouse effect will result in increased electricity bills and reduced increases in real wages.

Lawson, M. 1989. Fighting Greenhouse has an economic cost. Australian Financial Review, 4 December.  

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 353ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Everyone was talking about emissions cuts and how much (earlier in the year the Thatcher government had shat all over the Toronto Target (see here).

Why this matters. 

The “models” do not “reflect” reality. They are just made up bullshit.

John Kenneth Galbraith said it best – “The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable.”

What happened next?

Those who want to stop climate action – because it would cut their profits and/or power, because it offends them, will always find some shonky “modellers” to give them the answers they want. Then equally shonky “journalists” will uncritically run the crap on page 1, and it will get picked up by shonky politicians… and presto, “common sense” is created.

See also – May 13, 1992 – Australian business predicts economic armageddon if any greenhouse gas cuts made

Categories
Australia

December 2, 1991 – “Ecologically Sustainable Development” bites the dust…

On December 2 1991, the Australian policy experiment of “Ecologically Sustainable Development” basically ended, just over a year after it began. It had been set up because the ALP’s Bob Hawke needed small-g green (the Greens didn’t exist yet) votes to win the 1990 election.  The ESD process had rattled along,and there’s lots of interesting stories (see AOY posts here and here).


Well, with Hawke mortally wounded (politically), and the Fight Back! by fossil interests (including right-wing Labour and Federal bureaucrats – this isn’t just Those Evil Capitalists Over There), the ESD’s days were numbered.

“The Ecologically Sustainable Development Working Groups final report received a “cautious welcome” yesterday, although there were fears the Government might not act to implement the report’s recommendations.

Union, conservation, business and political groups were generally pleased with the 272-page report which contains more than 300 recommendations for measures to achieve development which is consistent with preservation of the environment. The report was issued yesterday by the heads of the working group, Professor Stuart Harris and Professor David Throsby. However, some groups believed the report had “not gone far enough.”

The president of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Martin Ferguson, said the working group process had been “very useful” for setting an agenda but not for “developing solutions to Australia’s economic and environmental problems.”  [THAT? Martin Ferguson??? Yes, that one… ]”

Iffland, K. 1991. Ecology report finds approval. Canberra Times, 3 December, p.3.

and

“When the chairmen released their work on Monday [2nd December], they took the opportunity to say the Opposition’s plan to cut the price of petrol would make it harder for the Government to meet its targets on reduction of greenhouse gases. Reducing the price of petrol by up to 19 cents a litre, as proposed by Dr John Hewson, could lead to greater use of petrol, in contrast to the theme of the Ecologically Sustainable Development taskforce of reducing energy use.”

Peake, R. 1991. A Tapestry That Weaves The Green With The Gold. The Age, 4 December, p.13.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 355ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Why this matters. 

There was a time ‘rational’ (or at least sane and understanding of limits) policymaking could be cosplayed. Now, not so much. We should remember where we failed for the last consequential time. It will soothe us so much as everything falls apart.

What happened next?

The next Prime Minister, Paul Keating, buried the ESD. The next Prime Minister after him, Honest John Howard, buried Australia’s chance of responding to climate change in ways that could have saved something from the wreckage. And here we are.

Categories
Australia

November 29, 1973 – Australian politician warns of climate change

On 29 November 1973, Don Jessop, a Liberal senator for South Australia, made this statement in the Australian parliament:

It is quite apparent to world scientists that the silent pollutant, carbon dioxide, is increasing in the atmosphere and will cause us great concern in the future. Other pollutants from conventional fuels are proliferating other gases in the atmosphere, not the least of these being the sulphurous gases which will be causing emphysema and other such health problems if we persist with this type of energy source. Of course, I am putting a case for solar energy. Australia is a country that can well look forward to a very prosperous future if it concentrates on solar energy right now.”

http://historichansard.net/senate/1973/19731129_senate_28_s58/#subdebate-21-0

   

Don Jessop – wikipedia

Jessop may have learned from Sept 1972 Friends of the Earth conference at University of Adelaide

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 327ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Energy was in the, um, air, because the “first Oil Shock” was under way

Why this matters. 

We need to remember we have been failing to do anything serious about climate change for a very very long time, and while this or that recalcitrant politician or devious mofo of an oil industry shill is certainly blameworthy,they are a symptom as much as a cause of the underlying problem…

What happened next?

A collective shoulder shrug.  Though to be fair, legendary Australian civil servant Nugget Coombs did, the following year, get the Minister of Science to ask the  Australian Academy of Science to look into the climate issue…

Categories
Australia

November 27, 1978 – “Impacts of climate on Australian Society and Economy” begins…

On this day, November 27, 1978 a three day conference on “Impacts of climate on AustralianSociety and Economy”, sponsored by the CSIRO, began on Philip Island, near Melbourne.

In a report on its first 30 years the  Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering wrote- 

As 2005 Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE)  document continues –

“The Phillip Island conference had a substantial impact on government approaches to the management of climate variability and laid the foundation for a subsequent major contribution of the Academy to the problem of human-induced climate change over the following decades.” (p. 10).

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 335ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

There had been an inconclusive AAS report in 1976 (no shade on the scientists involved – the evidence wasn’t there). But from 1976 onwards, the carbon dioxide drumbeat got louder, internationally…

Why this matters. 

We knew. Let us not forget that we knew.

What happened next?

The scientists kept working on it all. The politicians ignored them. Starting from 1988 the politicians didn’t ignore them, at least in public. But they never let the science get in the way of a “good” investment decision. And civil society was unable to stop them.  —-. And here we are.

Categories
Australia Economics of mitigation

November 26, 1996 – Australian climate modelling is ridiculed

On this day, November 26, 1996  an Australian politician ripped into the “official” modelling on which Australian governments (BOTH LABOR AND LIBERAL) had relied to say “oh, no, can’t do anything that might reduce the acceleration of our coal mining and coal exporting, or else the sky will fall.”

Leader of the Democrats, Senator Cheryl Kernot stated in the Senate:

“Let us not forget who ABARE is. It is the ideological cousin of the Industry Commission and it never misses an opportunity to slip the boot into environmental or social causes, churning out statistics from its largely discredited macro-economic modelling, showing how much better off we would all be if only we mined more coal, produced more electricity and puffed more carbon dioxide every day. I am willing to bet that if ABARE existed 150 years ago, it would have produced a whopping great spreadsheet proving that the economy could not afford to ban child labour in the coal mines”

(Senate Hansard 26.11.96 p 6014).

On ABARE, see also  “High and Dry” by Guy Pearse and “Scorcher” by Clive Hamilton.

On economic forecasting – I recently learnt the brilliant John Kenneth Galbraith quote – ““The  only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable,”

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 362ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Australian governments were looking for excuses to do nothing to slow down the acceleration of Australian coal exports. ABARE helped to provide those excuses.

Why this matters. 

The way economic modelling is used to justify all sorts of horror (usually the continued enrichment of the already filthy rich, and/or the galloping desolation of our being-murdered planet), is a) by now very obvious and b) never-ending, despite a).

What happened next?

ABARE and its “MEGABARE” nonsense was thoroughly exposed and discredited(see here). Which did nothing to stop the Howard Government from continuing to use it.

Categories
Australia United States of America

November 24, 1977 – Canberra Times reports “all coal” plan would “flood US cities”

On this day, November 24 in 1978, the Canberra Times ran a story “All coal plan to flood cities”, based on a UPI wire story about an American Physical Society meeting the day before in Florida where Dr Peter Fong called an all-coal energy policy “tantamount to suicide”

1977 All coal plan to flood cities Canberra Times…p. 4.

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/110879451?searchTerm=All%20coal%20plan%20to%20flood%20cities#

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 334ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Why this matters. 

By the late 1970s, carbon dioxide from coal and other fossil fuels was beginning to be publicly talked about as a SERIOUS long-term threat, around the world.

What happened next?

There was a late 1970s attempt to get international action. It failed. We went instead for a second Cold War, bleeding the Soviet Union to death and then rolling drunk on triumphalism into the 1990s…  By which time the chance to take a different path was… well, you know the rest…

Categories
Australia

November 22, 2002 – private business battles on #climate become public in Australia

On this day, November 22 2002, the nasty spat within Australian business over whether to call for Australia to ratify the Kyoto Protocol broke out into public., with an article “Big business splits over greenhouse” by Miranda McLachlan in the Australian Financial Review

The dominant big business association, the Business Council of Australia, had backed Prime Minister John Howard in not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol (even though Australia had been able to extort an absurdly generous “reduction” target of … an 8 per cent increase in emissions (more once you added the land-clearing loophole.

But over time, key business leaders – proponents of renewables, carbon trading etc, fought within the BCA for a change in its position.  They fought each other to a standstill, as reported in the Fin, and the BCA went to a “no position” position on Kyoto ratification…

See also – Bell, S. (2008). Rethinking the Role of the State: Explaining Business Collective Action at the Business Council of Australia. Polity, Vol. 40,. 4, 464-487

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 373ppm. At time of writing it was 417ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

Why this matters. 

When the business lobby splits, that’s when the fun starts. Which is why incumbent actors work so hard to stop those splits…

What happened next?

Howard held the line. Public pressure on climate only really kicked in in Australia in the second half of 2006.  The BCA promptly moved to various fall back positions.

The emissions kept climbing. The atmospheric concentrations kept climbing. Then came the ‘natural’ disasters.

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

 November 16, 1994 – Industry lobbyists trot out “sky will fall” argument against emissions cuts. Again. Of course. As ever.

On this day, November 16 in 1994, in the midst of another flare up in the “should we put a price on carbon?” battles, the Aluminium industry released more “evidence”.

THE Commonwealth’s current targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions will cost the economy almost $200 billion over the next decade, wiping out Australia’s aluminium industry in the process, a new study released yesterday claims.

Dwyer, M. 1994. Emission cuts ‘to kill aluminium industry’. The Australian Financial Review, 17 November, p.13.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 359ish ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

The fossil fuel lobby and its mates were determined to kill any carbon taxes/prices at birth. This was part of the effort.  Basically, find an economist willing to produce a “report” that shows the sky will fall, that the economy will collapse and we will all be reduced to living in mud huts and eating each other’s corpses if so much as a molecule less of coal/oil/gas is extracted.  Time the release of the “report”, give it to your tame mates in the media, then get tame mates in Parliament to quote the report and newspaper coverage. Bish bosh…

Why this matters. 

Think where we might have got to with political leaders with spine!!  We might be as much as 10 per cent less doomed than we are now!!

What happened next?

No carbon tax.  A carbon price in Australia didn’t kick in until July 2013. And then was killed off a year later.  Ha ha ha ha .

Categories
Australia Denial Fossil fuels

November 13, 2008 – Coal industry tries to get some ‘love’

On this day, November 13, 2008, the Australian Coal Industry launches a propaganda (that’s what “public relations” is called when our official enemies do it) campaign, dangling the promise of “NewGenCoal.”

THE coal industry feels unloved. Its polling tells it Australians have no idea what, if anything, it is doing to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions – and most say they’ve never heard of carbon capture and storage.

So the coalminers want to convert us. Today the Australian Coal Association launches a $1.5million ad campaign – and a $1million website – to tell us what it’s doing to develop what it calls “NewGenCoal”.

Association executive director Ralph Hillman predicted that carbon capture and storage would be commercially viable by 2017, and said the industry was investing $1 billion to ensure coal a future as a low-emission technology.

Colebatch, T. 2008. Coal industry reaches out for love. The Age, 13 November, p.3.

(Check how they put land-clearing and intensive agriculture AHEAD of fossil fuels!)

On this day the atmospheric PPM for carbon dioxide was roughly 385.

Now it is 419ish- but see here for the latest.

Why this matters. 

We need to remember just how much effort (you might even say energy) goes into trying to polish the turds…  How much the fossil fuel industry sector invests in trying to keep its legitimacy, and having people think well of it…

For an overview of Australian coal industry efforts, see https://theconversation.com/recycling-rules-carnival-of-coal-is-a-blast-from-the-pr-past-45819

What happened next?

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd played politics, failed to get his terrible legislation through. The climate wars. The ACA was wound up in 2013 or so I think, but the coal lobby did a reverse takeover of the Minerals Council of Australia.  My proof?  Scotty from Marketing and that lacquered lump…