Category: Australia

Categories
Australia

August 31, 1992 – “Community Energy Audit” in Canberra

Thirty two years ago, on this day, August 31st, 1992, a community energy audit began.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/137177083

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 356ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that everyone was running around “getting their house in order.” There was still money sloshing about for greenhouse stuff. Although the tap had dried up. Mostly there was still old water coming through the Rio Earth Summit that happened and now Local Agenda 21 was going to kick in and everyone was supposed to hold hands, sing Kumbaya, and do local energy audits and so forth, to “save the world.” 

What we learn is that there was a period between 1988 and 1993 when and – this was crucial, because it happened as I was hitting adulthood, or at least chronologically, if not emotionally – when it looked like we might do something, or that something could be done. And then neoliberalism which had been there, got turbocharged because it was now for a while, a unipolar world. There was nothing outside the market. 

And all that is gone and forgotten. And this All Our Yesterdays is in part a project to remember that sense of possibility. 

 What happened next, the community energy audits, either dried up or weren’t done or they continued to be done, but they were ignored, because the greenhouse issue was irrelevant, and it had been “solved” anyway because we’d held a meeting in Rio and everything was going to be fine because something something technology something something promises something something Emissions Trading something something. 

The lies we tell ourselves so that we can turn over and go back to sleep and not challenge power are astonishing. Challenging power is very very costly because power by definition can make your life miserable. 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: 

August 31, 1998 – Green dollar growing on trees?

August 31, 2011 – anti-carbon tax protesters call Anthony Albanese a “maggot”

August 31, 2005 – “Stop Climate Chaos” launched

Categories
Australia

August 30, 1986 – Adelaide warned about climate change by Environment Minister Don Hopgood

Thirty eight years ago, on this day, August 30th, 1986,

ADELAIDE: Ocean levels would rise about a metre over the next 60 years and have a significant effect on the Australian coastline and coastal communities, the South Australian Minister for Environment and Planning, Dr Hopgood, said yesterday.

Dr Hopgood told the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects’ national conference that the startling prediction on ocean levels was included in the most recent information on the “greenhouse effect” known to be heating up the earth.

Anon (1986) Sea level ‘to rise metre in 60 years’ Canberra Times, August 31, p1

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 348ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the CSIRO, via the Australian Environment Council and elsewhere, had finally sounded the alarm bell, about climate change, CO2 buildup, sea level rise, etc. And so here’s Don Hopgood, a decent Australian South Australian politician, telling some people the facts of life of what the 21st century will be.

What we learn is that by 1986, Australian political elites were beginning to understand the shitstorm that was coming. Not all of them, not all evenly. It would be another couple of years before it really started breaking out. And then you got the denial in response to that. 

What happened next? In ‘89, they set up a South Australian greenhouse committee. And it made some fine promises.  And over time, indeed (since 2003) South Australia has reduced its electricity-based carbon emissions, thanks to clever policy-making, federal policies 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: 

August 30, 1971 – Bob Carr (ex- NSW premier) ‘gets’ climate change

August 30, 1975 – The Science Show does climate change…

August 30, 1989 – A global tax on emissions?!

August 30, 1990 -Australian diplomats (probably) tried to water down IPCC recommendations

Categories
Australia

August 28, 1977 – First  Australian“Greenpeace” action, against whaling 

Forty seven years ago, on this day, August 28th, 1977, the  first under-a-Greenpeace-banner action took place. It was against the last whaling in the English speaking world, Albany Western Australia 

On 28th August 1977, activists in inflatable zodiacs took on a whaling ship in Albany, Western Australia. And they won. Known back then as the ‘The Whale and Dolphin Coalition,’ they blockaded the Cheynes Beach whaling station for three weeks, drawing global media attention to the issue of commercial whaling.

In November 1978, Australia harpooned its last whale. This long blockade was the first-ever Greenpeace action in Australia – and it was the beginning of the end of our country’s whaling industry.

Source – https://media.greenpeace.org/archive/Greenpeace-Australia-Pacific-40th-Anniversary-27MZIFJXDAG7U.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 334ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Australia was still permitting whaling, having perpetrated awful crimes for a couple of hundred years so that we could have lighting and so forth. You all should read Moby Dick. And this was the first Greenpeace Australia action. Greenpeace was then a very new beast, having been set up to protest nuclear testing. 

What we learn is Greenpeace got a foothold and then more in the Australian political scene. And then in 1985, I think the Rainbow Warrior got scuttled by French secret agents. Because France, because states and terrorism. 

What happened next. Greenpeace has kept going, with various peaks and troughs…

Whaling still happens – carried out by Iceland and Japan for “research”. We humans are a relentlessly barbaric species. And no, I’m not vegan. I’m a hypocrite like everyone else. 

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: 

August 28, 1971 – snarky opinion piece in New York Times. Stephen Schneider rebuts days later.

August 28, 2003 – EPA says Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant

Categories
Australia

August 25, 1933 – South Coast Bulletin reports “Carbon dioxide: climatic influence”

Ninety one years ago, on this day, August 25th, 1933, carbon dioxide’s influence on climate gets a mention in an Australian publication, the South Coast Bulletin.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 309ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context being that Svante Arrhenius’s proposal of Anthropogenic Global Warming had been poo pooed thanks to people like Angstrom and his mis-understanding of how carbon dioxide behaves in the stratosphere. There were still people out there interested in Arrhenius’s proposals around the weather, industrialization, etc. There was Lotka. And I think Weber, for example, said something about significantly vaporising coal mines. And this stuff was “in the air” at the time – see New York Times article the year before…

In 1912 Popular Mechanics had run an article which led to syndicated snippets in papers around the world, which occasionally get tweeted at this site as some sort of ‘gotcha’, I think.

Anyway, here we were in 1933. And in the middle of the Great Depression, people probably had a lot else on their mind.

 What we learn is that ideas like carbon dioxide impacting climate, were quiet in the 20s and 30s, but they were still there.

What happened next? The next big CO2 event was Guy Callendar in 1938 at the Royal Meteorological Society in London.

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: 

August 25, 1970 – Margaret Mead and James Baldwin rap on race…

August 25, 2013 – The IPA loses support, for being stupid climate deniers.

Categories
Australia

August 24, 1992 – Bureaucrats kill greenie-business consensus on climate action

Thirty two years ago, on this day, August 24th, 1992, the last chance to do something differently is killed off.

The Canberra Times has a front page story that begins thus:

Federal and state bureaucrats have watered down and fatally weakened recommendations agreed to by industry, conservationists and scientists to lessen the greenhouse effect, according to the Institution of Engineers, Australia.

The IEA’s claims are similar to those made by Australia’s green groups, who have pulled out of the final stages of the Ecologically Sustainable Development process in protest at what they see as undermining by the Federal Government.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/137175203

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 357ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the greenies (small g because the Green Party didn’t exist,) had forced then Prime Minister Bob Hawke to launch an Ecologically Sustainable Development policy-making process in 1990. This had come up with some good ideas, which were then watered down. And the whole thing was then being vigorously killed off by 1992. Not so much by Paul Keating, but by federal bureaucracy henchmen, who were determined that Australia’s future was about digging up more and selling it, chopping down more and selling it. And then for them, development meant growth, industrial growth, GDP growth at any cost, and they didn’t see why they should have to pretend to listen to a bunch of Luddite hippies. Now that the media was bored of listening to the “Luddite hippies”, and there was this ridiculous summit had been agreed. 

What we learn is that when we only pay attention to politicians, and business, we miss an important aspect of the resistance to sanity. Namely, the permanent bureaucracy that thinks it runs the show and often does run the show. But activists are very loathe to talk about this – some activists anyway – perhaps because it seems like a conspiracy theory. And also you’re beating up on people who can’t talk back to you but can sabotage you. Assholes, in other words. 

What happened next: A carbon tax, which would have been one small part of an overall intelligent response, was defeated in 1995. The emissions kept climbing. And the consequences are beginning to pile up…

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: 

August 24, 1989 – a Sydney council takes greenhouse suggestions on-board (or says it will).

August 24, 1994 – first signs of a split in the anti-climate action business coalition…

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

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

Twenty years ago, on this day, August 21st, 2004, a newspaper tells the tale… (I know this because the ALP’s Anthony Albanese was using the article to attack Prime Minister John Howard in March 2005.)

Albanese speech in parliament 9 March 2005

“Even Treasurer Peter Costello and the former environment minister, David Kemp, supported a national trading scheme. As reported by the Australian on 21 August 2004:

Federal cabinet rejected such a scheme— an emissions trading scheme in 2003— … even though Environment Minister David Kemp and Treasurer Peter Costello promoted it, after industry lobbied John Howard

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 378ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Australian Prime Minister John Howard had polished off the emissions trading scheme for the second time, even though his Cabinet had been united against him. He’d hit a pause button, gone and talked to his business mates, came back and said “nah.”

And here we were a year later. I think in the run up to the 2004. Federal election (which happened in October. Mark Latham. Remember him?). A good old fashioned scoop that the Australian ran, presumably because they knew that if they didn’t, it would get given to someone else. It also made them look like journalists, which is always difficult when you’re The Australian. [Interesting question would be who leaked it and why? I don’t know that they ever necessarily got to the bottom of that. But it would be fun to find out.]

What we learn is that when somebody would leak something, you’d have to ask, what were they trying to achieve? What’s the timing? And have they protected themselves enough? Sarah Tisdall and all that.

What happened next, Howard won the 2004 election. Latham went way off the deep end. And Howard got another three years of being a complete fuck knuckle on climate.

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: 

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”

Categories
Australia Business Responses Energy

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

Thirty three years ago, on this day, August 18th, 1991 the rich people told future generations (especially of poor people) to go fuck themselves.

The Business Council of Australia yesterday rejected proposals to make industry more energy-efficient.

The council criticised recommendations by the Federal Government’s taskforce on ecologically sustainable development to increase energy prices and impose new taxes, such as a tax on fuel with high carbon levels.

The council said the country’s future lay in continuing to develop its natural resources. Its executive director, Mr Peter McLaughlin, said the sustainable development process could significantly damage industry unless it adopted a “much more realistic tone”.

Peake, R. 1991. Business Rejects Lower Energy Use. The Age, 19 August, p.14.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 355ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Business Council of Australia, the main club for big business, was shouting no at everything, a bit like Ian Paisley did. And even stuff that made absolute sense on any level of economic thinking was shouted down. I think there are two things going on there, around fear of a slippery slope, and also that regulation might be shown – gasp – to be beneficial.

What we learn; two things. First, in the midst of a culture war, the red mist or the green mist descends. And the other thing we need to remember is that all of the economic modelling that outfits like the BCA were relying on and commissioning, assumed perfect efficiency already. And no matter how many empirical examples were given to them, by Alan Pears and other energy efficiency advocates, if it didn’t fit the theory, it was discarded. It was ignored. And so if you believe that things are already perfectly energy efficient, agreeing to further energy efficiency measures is actually merely agreeing to wasteful government regulation in and of itself, which will then encourage more bureaucrats to breed in dark corners. 

What happened next, the BCA won, and the Australian housing industry is still miserably inefficient, of course. But the economic models that say it’s impossible for business to be inefficient, persist and have their death grip on the minds – if you can call them “minds” – of business elites. 

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: 

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

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

Categories
Australia

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

Twenty seven years ago, on this day, August 17th, 1997,

The Australian energy, mining and paper industries have united to call on the Government to appoint a Cabinet-ranked sustainable development minister to combat “piecemeal management” and to take a national approach to greenhouse gas abatement.

Yesterday, industry peak bodies issued a joint statement saying the lack of coherent management was “one of the greatest threats to a robust, coherent and consistent industry policy and certainly to resources and energy policy”.

1997 Taylor, L. (1997) Industry wants minister for `greenhouse’ The Australian Financial Review 18th August

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 364ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that it was clear some sort of “Greenhouse Office” or greenhouse minister was going to be required, if only to keep the Libs quiet. And so this call from industries like Paper happening as it was, at the same time as the Countdown to Kyoto conference is a classic spoiler move, demand a ministerial post is created: that helps give small L-libs that something is being done (see also Macmillan Manoeuvre). And then you make damn sure that your guy is in charge. And if your guy isn’t in charge, you have fallback plans about withholding information, not inviting them to meetings, all the rest of it. And this is one of those good tactics that the dickheads have at their disposal. 

What we learn is that in isolation, a bold statement of fact can seem confusing, but once you put the pieces together of the puzzle, you see what else was happening. You see what else their motivations might have been. Then it becomes a little bit clearer. 

What happened next, there was no greenhouse minister that there was the Australian Greenhouse Office with pitiful funding that Howard appointed and then ignored. It was a total waste of money as the Australian National Audit Office pointed out in 2004.

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: 

August 17, 1982 – Crispin Tickell sounds the alarm bell

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

August 17, 1998 – Emissions Trading considered (again)

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

Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage

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

Seventeen years ago, on this day, August 14th, 2007, a CCS report comes out

2007 Between a rock and a hard place report of House of Representatives Standing Committee on Science and Innovation (Australia)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 384ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the year before the Senate had called for a report about CCS and Australia. This was in the broader context of CCS being pushed by Howard since about 2004 (earlier if you count the PMSEIC stuff). 

What we learn is that these sorts of investigations throw up reports of varying quality and usefulness. 

What happened next? The CCS bandwagon kept going for a couple of years before it finally the wheels came off in late 2010. 

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: 

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

August 14, 1971 – Stanford Prison Study begins…

August 14, 2002 – Australian economists urge Kyoto Protocol ratification

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

August 12, 2009 – Deutsche bank enters modelling war in Australia

Fifteen years ago, on this day, August 12th, 2009, the climate wars continue…

A leading global authority on carbon trading has questioned the claimed cost savings of the hybrid emissions trading model being considered by the federal opposition.

Deutsche Bank’s global head of carbon markets, Mark Lewis, said international experience suggested Frontier Economics was wrong to say its model would result in much smaller electricity price increases than would occur under the Rudd government’s proposed ETS.

Breusch, J. 2009. Doubts over emission cost savings. The Australian Financial Review, 12 August, p. 6.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 388ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Liberals, then led by Malcolm Turnbull, were trying to offer an alternative to Kevin Rudd CPRS. But of course, it had to be distinct enough and therefore far enough from accepted economic practice norms. Which meant that outfits like Deutsche Bank would be compelled to say it’s crap. 

What we learn is that when there is a consensus around what is “economically efficient,” then bucking that will open you up to all sorts of attacks. And so it came to pass. 

What happened next? I don’t know if the Libs put Deutsche Bank on a blacklist or anything. But what’s interesting is that during the white heat of the climate wars (2010 to ‘13). various consultancies played as dead as they could for fear of missing out on future government contracts.

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: 

August 12, 1970 – US Senate warned about climate change

August 12, 1990 – Channel 4 shows crackpot documentary “The Greenhouse Conspiracy”

August 12, 2010 – BZE launches energy plan for Australia