Category: Australia

Categories
Australia Nuclear Power

January 12, 2006 – the nuclear option, yet again

Nineteen years ago, on this day, January 12th, 2006,

 “NUCLEAR power will be examined as part of the solution to global warming when ministers from six countries meet this morning in Sydney for talks on climate change…”  

Peatling, S. 2006. Nuclear question looms large at climate change talks. Sydney Morning Herald, 12 January. 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was  that everyone knows there’s going to have to be a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, even though (because) t was far too weak. And so the proponents of action are talking about a stronger emissions trading scheme with fewer loopholes. And the opponents are, of course, talking about “technology.” The Bush and Howard governments had been banging on and creating these entirely fake and stupid bodies that would allow world leaders to stand at a podium in front of a new logo and declare “hydrogen” or “nuclear” or “CCS” or some other nonsense instead of any actual emissions cuts, And this is further examples of that. 

What I think we can learn from this

Technology is always invoked as the get out of jail free card. Enough people find it convenient to believe, or easy enough to pretend to believe.  And the emissions keep climbing.

What happened next

And the emissions kept climbing. 

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: 

Categories
Australia

January 13, 2009 – Medical Journal of Australia warns about climate impacts

Sixteen years ago, on this day, January 13th, 2009,

 Aborigines living in remote parts of Australia will feel the impact of climate warming more than other Australians, a report says. With temperatures in the tropical north and interior tipped to rise by three degrees Celsius by 2050, worsening already searing summer heat, the government needs to urgently improve Aboriginal health and housing, researchers wrote in the Medical Journal of Australia. 

….”Elevated temperatures and increases in hot spells are expected to be a major problem for Indigenous health in remote areas, where cardiovascular and respiratory disease are more prevalent and there are many elderly people with inadequate facilities to cope with the increased heat stress,” they wrote.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-01-13/aborigines-to-feel-climate-shift-most-report/265222Donna Green, Ursula King and Joe Morrison

Green, et al. 2009.Disproportionate burdens: the multidimensional impacts of climate change on the health of Indigenous Australians Med J Aust ; 190 (1): 4-5. || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2009.tb02250.x

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 387ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was  that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd had gained power in part by saying that he would take action on climate change. Already by this time, however, it was pretty clear that that “action” would be utterly inadequate to the scale of the challenge at best. Meanwhile, the Millennium drought was still making life hell.

What I think we can learn from this  is that bodies such as the Medical Journal of Australia were wanting to raise the issue of the most vulnerable people getting it in the neck.

What happened next Rudd couldn’t get his piss-weak climate legislation through, and the next year was toppled by his deputy prime minister, Julia Gillard, and we finally got legislation in 2012 (repealed two years later)

The danger for vulnerable communities, poor, rural, isolated continues to climb, and there will be places that will have to be abandoned because of heat. And we Are A Stupid, Stupid species. 

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:

Categories
Australia United Kingdom

January 8, 2018 – Joe Root doesn’t come back to bat

Seven years ago, on this day, January 8 2018, English batsman Joe Root didn’t come out to play…

But on Monday morning he was taken to hospital suffering from severe dehydration and diarrhoea. It was assumed that this was a consequence of his being in the field for almost all of Sunday when temperatures in the middle soared as high as 57 degrees, initially trying to marshal England’s flagging attack, then defiantly batting for some pride and the draw.

Marks, 2018.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 408ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

Australia has always had some hot days, but they’re getting hotter. And why could that be? Why this matters is we’re beginning to see cultural events and sporting events being affected by the extremes. but we dismissed them because “here always been heat waves” or whatever. 

And there are sports where it’s simply becoming too dangerous to play, or it will become too dangerous to play at certain times of day. 

But in response, these concerns will be derided as woke and people will point to one off days in 1930s when it was hotter.

NB  further on Marks writes “Later, it transpired that Root had a viral gastroenteritis bug and that his illness had noting to do with heat exhaustion, although the temperatures on Sunday could not helped his condition.”

What I think we can learn from this

Yeah, like we ever learn anything…

What happened next

Root is still playing and batting “quite well” shall we say?

He’s now the highest scoring English batsman and might reasonably expect to overtake at least Ricky Ponting quite soon and who knows, conceivably overtake Sachin Tendulkar to score the most runs in Tests. 

Sidebar, Just Stop Oil protesters tried to interfere with the 2023 Ashes and Johnny Bairstow picked one up and removed him from the field. Stewart Lee had something good to say about this…

Also on this day

Jan 8, 1958 – “The masters of infinity… could control the world’s weather”, says LBJ

January 8, 1968 – LaMont Cole to AAAS about running outta oxygen, build-up of C02 etc

January 8, 2003 – Energy firms plan to “bury carbon emissions”…

January 8, 2013 – Australian Prime Minister connects bush fires and #climate change

Categories
Australia

January 7, 2006 – Bureau of Meteorology with another climate warning

Nineteen years ago, on this day, January 7th, 2006,

RISING food prices, increased bushfire risk and diminishing water supplies are some of the challenges Australia will face as the pace of global warming accelerates. The Bureau of Meteorology delivered its annual climate summary this week, showing that 2005 was Australia’s hottest year on record. The nation’s annual mean temperature for 2005 was 1.09C above the average, well above the previous record of 0.84C in 1998.

Anon. 2006. Dire warming warning; Dearer food, more bushfires, less water on way. Canberra Times 7 January.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was the Millennium Drought was still going on, and the impacts were piling up, The policy blocking from the Liberals and Nationals continuing, was continuing.

What I think we can learn from this is that there hasn’t really been any scientific debate or doubt about climate since, wow, you can, you can vary it, but the early 90s, maybe (I personally would say late 1970s).

And the messages have been clear enough, but the politicians have been able to do the bidding of the incumbent fossil fuel interests in ignoring these warnings. How so? Because they are not forced to take action that would upset their donors and, frankly, string pullers,Why?  Because there is no engaged enraged civil society. Bcause people have it drilled into them from an early age that they are to “stay in their lane,” that they are to do what their lords and masters tell them to do.

Btw, we will prioritize obedience and sycophancy, because these are rewarded and anything else is punished by the passively or actively, until we’re all dead. What happened next The Bureau of Meteorology has been on the receiving end of various accusations from the nut job denialists, of course. How could they not be? The Millennium drought broke in sort of 2010. A  carbon price, which was basically the smallest part of what an adequate response would look like, became politically impossible in Australia after 2012

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

January 5, 1995 – Victorian premier comes out against carbon tax

Thirty years ago, on this day, January 5th, 1995,

“The Industry Greenhouse  sought support from the states for its campaign. Participant F says the network lobbied premiers, ministers, and the state bureaucracy, and forward copies of its carbon tax correspondence and reports.  ‘I think Kennett came out with a statement against carbon tax that I think was prompted by some of our lobbying of the Premier’s Office.’ The Victorian Premier sent out a news release on 5 January 1995 opposing carbon tax and using many of the points put forward by the Industry Greenhouse Network….”

(Worden, 1998: 111) 

(On the same day the greenhouse interdepartmental committee met for first time to plan Faulkner’s next submission… (see Henderson, 12 Jan 1995) 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 361ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that John Faulkner, Federal Environment Minister, morning, was pushing for a small carbon tax that would help fund renewables research and development. The fossil fuel industries were up in arms about this, and were drawing in as many allies as they could. One of them was state premiers who were that way inclined, including Jeff Kennet, who of course, had famously privatized the State Electricity Commission of Victoria, and with that, destroyed any hope of a response to the greenhouse effect. 

What I think we can learn from this  is that, as well as “venue shopping,” policy entrepreneurs will go “ally shopping.” And in this case, they went for allies at the state level, as well as trades unions, the real two pronged approach. 

What happened next was that the carbon tax proposal was defeated because Faulkner realized he didn’t have the numbers in Keating’s cabinet.  Australia eventually got a carbon price, an emissions trading scheme in 2011/12, and it was then abolished by the next government, of Tony Abbott. The emissions have kept climbing, and we’re toast. 

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:

Categories
Australia

January 4, 2015 – Christine Milne warns about extreme weather events, knackered infrastructure etc.

10 years ago, on this day, January 4th, 2015, the Greens leader Christine Milne points out the obvious,

“Every year we are going to face these extreme weather events, which are going to cost lives and infrastructure, and enough is enough,” she said.

“The Abbott Government has to stop climate denial and help to get the country prepared to adapt to the more extreme conditions.”

Ms Milne said now was the time to talk about Australia’s preparedness for extreme weather events.

“Look at what is happening to people, communities, our environment, loss of infrastructure and for goodness sake abandon your nonsense about climate variability,” she said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-04/south-australia-victoria-bushfires-climate-change-greens-milne/5999342

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 400ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

Milne makes another plea for sanity and a warning about the consequences that lie ahead, as she had in June 2009.

But she is, of course, only a woman, and she is, once again, basically ignored. I should definitely read Cassandra by Crista Wolf. But to be fair, her gender is only part of the story. Because lots of men who are saying the same thing are also being ignored

The context was that the emissions trading scheme the Greens had worked with independents and the minority-ALP government to enact was toast.  Tony Abbott was doing everything he could to slow down the growth of renewables. Desperate times.

What I think we can learn from this is that a good minority of political elites have known, perhaps a tiny minority of political elites have both known and been willing to speak out. What was always missing and is still really missing is engaged enraged, civil society. We have a few NGOs, but that doesn’t count as civil society. 

What happened next

Milne stepped down as Green Party leader a few months later. The emissions, of course, they kept climbing, and here we are.

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: 

January 4, 1977 – US politician introduces #climate research legislation

January 4, 1982 – Global 2000 Report updated

Categories
Australia Cultural responses

January 3, 1988 – The Sea and Summer, early Australian cli-fi, is reviewed.

Thirty six years ago, on this day, January 3rd, 1988 the Australian newspaper the Sun Herald, ran a review of The Sea and Summer by George Turner  under the heading “Melbourne is drowning” (possibly gleeful, given the Sydney-Melbourne rivalry).

The book itself? As Ruth Morgan explains

“Over a decade after his novel The Cupboard Under the Stairs won the Miles Franklin Award in 1963, Turner had turned to writing science fiction (Milner, ‘The Sea’ 112). The Sea and Summer, published as Drowning Towers (1988) in the United States, had earlier appeared as a short story, ‘The Fittest’ (1985), and reflected the growing popular awareness of the potential impacts of anthropogenic climate change in Australia. Turner envisioned a Melbourne drowned as a result of rising sea levels in the middle of the twenty-first century, its population cleaved into haves and havenots, the Sweet and the Swill.” (Morgan, 2014).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that “the Greenhouse Effect” was becoming newsworthy, thanks to a combination of the ozone hole (sensitising people to atmospheric pollution generally) and the post-Villach efforts of scientists, including at the Australian CSIRO.

What I think we can learn from this

When an issue is “hot” (i.e. salient) then journalists will figure out a hook, books that might otherwise not get reviewed, get reviewed.

What happened next

In the second half of 1988 climate change became a public policy issue, that politicians etc had to have opinions about, say warm words about etc.  

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.

References

Morgan, Ruth. ‘Imagining a Greenhouse Future: Scientific and Literary Depictions of Climate Change in 1980s Australia.’ Australian Humanities Review 57 (2014): 43-60.

Turner, G. 1987. The Sea, the Summer

Also on this day: 

January 3, 1984 – US report on energy transition to combat climate released.

Jan 3, 1992 – Greenpeace vs POTUS on Climate Change

January 3, 2007 – Smoke, Mirrors and Hot Air, says Union of Concerned Scientists

Categories
Australia

January 2, 2016 – Australian environmental NGOs write another wish list…

Nine years ago, on this day, January 2nd, 2016, green groups seek planning permission for more castles in the air…

 A “new deal” blueprint for sweeping reform of Australia’s environment laws that puts climate change at the centre of ­future economic decision-­making is being prepared by a coalition of 40 leading conser­vation groups.

The reform agenda marks an aggressive new phase in environmental lobbying in the wake of the Paris climate meeting, at which Australia agreed to a new “high ambition” agenda to limit future warming to 1.5C.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/green-groups-push-for-environmental-law-reform/news-story/f01474a7609d8041f2f96ef46a2d3d29

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 403ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that a perfectly reasonable (if totally inadequate) emissions trading scheme had been junked by Prime Minister Tony Abbott in 2014.  But Australia was now led by a “green” Liberal, Malcolm Turnbull, and greenie groups felt that there might be some wiggle room. And presumably, needed to be seen to be busy, for reasons of self-respect, career and getting direct debits from guilty/frustrated middle-class people.

What I think we can learn from this

The environmental NGOs are always writing these wish lists, as challenges (1988’s “Green Gauntlet”, anyone) and the politicians are always either flat out ignoring them or else pretending to listen while doing virtually nothing.

What happened next

Turnbull got turfed by another Liberal (seriously, these were hilarious days). Eventually a Labor government won office and instantly did everything on this 2016 list. Oh yes.  (sarcasm).

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: 

January 2, 1955 – Commie newspaper covers climate

January 2, 2008 – tiresome (but sound) “Green Fatigue” warning is made

.Jan 2, 2014- “This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bullshit has got to stop,

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing Economics of mitigation

December 30, 1997 –  “How seriously should we take the greenhouse effect?” asks deeply unserious economics hack

Twenty six years ago, on this day, December 30th, 1997

How seriously should we take the greenhouse effect – how fast is the world’s temperature rising, and how important is it that we should take precautionary measures, and of what kind? How much should we spend now, given the uncertainties of the whole issue? And how, or on whom, should we spend? 

1997 MCGuinness on ‘environmentalist propaganda’ McGuinness, P. 1997. Running risks of global warming. Sydney Morning Herald, 30 December, p.6

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 364ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that people have been talking about Australia’s “national interest” and climate change and limits to carbon for a long time because the negotiations around the Kyoto Protocol had been going on all year. And here’s Paddy McGuinness, a libertarian economist who had given aid and comfort to the Centre for Independent Studies recycling his bullshit, and refusing to actually think that gosh, he and his beloved ideology might be wrong. 

What we learn is stupid people gonna stupid, especially if their stupidity gets them a seat at the top table, and helps make rich people stay rich/get richer. They need useful idiots in the war of ideas. 

What happened next? Well, McGuinness died, which is why I can speak freely about him. 

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: 

December 30, 1957 – a letter from Gilbert Plass to Guy Callendar

December 30, 1976 – President Jimmy Carter is lobbied about #climate change

December 30, 2006 – “Industry snubs climate strategy”

December 30, 2007 – Bert Bolin dies.

Categories
Australia Renewable energy

December 28, 2002 –  Renewable Energy vs John Howard, round 55ish…

Twenty-two years ago, on this day, December 28th, 2002

RENEWABLE Energy Generators of Australia Limited has dismissed as flawed a recent government report, saying it would lead to the abandonment of renewable energy developments

Hobart Mercury (2002) Report on renewable energy `flawed’. 28th December

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 373ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that in 1997, John Howard had – in the run up to the Kyoto COP – promised a 2% renewable energy target for Australia. He had slowed that process down as much as humanly possible. In the end, a Mandatory Renewable Energy Target had come in, in April of 2001. And started working. And then of course, another Howard acolyte launched a review that threw the whole thing into doubt. And here we have small trade association trying to point this out, getting a hearing and that leads to Hobart Mercury, and maybe elsewhere. Possibly of interest to Hobart, in Tasmania, because that’s just at this point Vestas must have been deep in the planning of starting its factory. 

What we learn is that trade associations for new sectors struggle, because they don’t have many member companies. And those companies tend to be small and poor. And incumbents have better lobbyists, better connections, and it can be a real uphill battle. And often these little trade associations fall apart under lack of money and lack of personnel and all the rest of it. 

What happened next 

Howard successfully made life so hellish for renewables that his preferred options – coal, LNG – dominated throughout his reign. (Vestas pulling the plug in 2005 etc etc)

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: 

December 28, 1978 – fly the plane. Don’t keep tapping the fuel light.

December 28, 1994 – Australian Financial Review says “say yes to Tradeable Emissions Quotas”