Category: Canada

Categories
Activism Canada Uncategorized

March 3,  2010 – protest about tar sands

Sixteen years ago, on this day, March 3rd, 2010, 

RBS bankrolling tar sands protest

March 3rd: Take action against RBC tar sands financing!

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 390ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that Canada has been looking at exploiting tar sands for a long time. Though they weren’t, largely, economically viable, however they became so for various reasons, technological advances, willingness to pollute the crap out of everything. And therefore protest movements sprung up to try and stop this insanity. There’s not much else to say.

And here is a google search…

Key Impacts on Oil Sands Development

  • Equalization of Tax Treatment: Before 1996, in-situ projects (which use wells) were treated differently than open-pit mines. The 1996 changes aligned them, allowing both to benefit from rapid capital write-offs, which encouraged the development of complex in-situ technologies like Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD).
  • Investment Surge: Combined with Alberta’s 1995 generic royalty regime (which featured a low 1% royalty until costs were recovered), the 1996 federal tax change helped trigger a 300% increase in capital investment in the oil sands after 1997.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&q=what+was+the+impact+on+oilsands+development+of+the+federal+CCA+change+in+1996+to+100%25+rate

The specific context was that we are dumb as a rock.  I am sure there is other specific context, but I can’t be bothered to look, and the key thing is that we are as dumb as a rock.

What I think we can learn from this is that our leaders chase the money and are wholly owned subsidiary Meat Puppets, for the most part. 

What happened next

The protest went ahead. In all probability A few skulls got cracked, a few cops got their jollies, got their rocks off. A few people got charged. Maybe some even got convicted, 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: 

March 3, 1980 – International Workshop on the energy climate Interactions in Germany

March 3, 1990 –  “A greenhouse energy strategy : sustainable energy development for Australia” launched … ignored #auspol

March 3, 1990 – Energy efficiency could save billions a year, Australian government told (says ‘whatevs’).

March 3, 1990 – The Science Show on the “backlash to Greenhouse warnings”

Categories
Canada

November 17, 1975 – “Living with Climatic Change” conference begins in Toronto

Fifty years ago, on this day, November 17th, 1975 Living with Climatic Change conference begins in Toronto.

 In 1975 there was an important conference in Toronto entitled “Living with Climate Change”, sponsored by the Canadian Meteorological Society, the Mexican Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Society and the Science Council of Canada. It was attended by leading persons in atmospheric sciences at the time from Mexico, the United States, and Canada, many of whom became familiar figures in climate change issues in subsequent years. I think that it is of interest, and provides important perspective to our work today to quote from the first sentence of the report of thirty-four years ago (McTaggart-Cowan and Beltzner, 1976): 

“There is growing evidence that the world is entering a new climate regime. Both the rate of change of the climate and the amplitude of short-term climatic variations will be much more pronounced than in the recent past.” 

And the last sentence of the preface reads: 

“We hope that this discussion will be a significant impetus toward furthering our ability to live more securely and more contentedly with climate change.” 

Could not this statement from 1975 apply equally well to our symposium in 2009?

(SOURCE)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 331ppm. As of 2025, 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 by the mid-1970s there had been a lot of freaky bits of weather/desertification/crop failures etc.  Carbon dioxide was not the only culprit (see also dust, thermal pollution).

The specific context was the Canadians were alive to the problems, given their long long winters, and a bunch of decent scientists.

Meanwhile, the first academic article to use the phrase “global warming” had been published earlier that year.

What I think we can learn from this – we worried for a long time. By the mid 1970s, the worries were coalescing around carbon dioxide…

What happened next – the Americans were publishing, there was a push for a World Climate Conference, which happened in 1979. That could/should have been the moment a serious political push started. Oh well…

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: 

November 17, 1869 – Suez Canal opens – All Our Yesterdays

November 17, 1968 -The Observer covers carbon dioxide pollution… – All Our Yesterdays

November 17, 1968 – UK national newspaper flags carbon dioxide danger…

November 17, 1978 – British Wind Energy Association launches – 

November 17, 1980 – International meeting about carbon dioxide build up.

November 17, 1994 – “When consumption is no longer sustainable”… – 

November 17, 2018 – XR occupy five bridges in London

 November 17, 2023 – two degrees warmer, for the first time… – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Canada

November 10, 1969 – “Carbon Dioxide and All That”

Fifty six years ago, on this day, November 10th, 1969, climatologist Kenneth Hare gave a talk titled “Carbon Dioxide and All That”.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 324ppm. As of 2025, 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 a much younger Kenneth Hare had been there that day in 1938 when Guy Callendar addressed the Royal Meteorological Society in London, about carbon dioxide (Callendar had got a relatively polite but dismissive hearing).

The specific context was by 1969, carbon dioxide was the “in” gas – people were coming out and saying it would be a problem. Hare wasn’t yet so sure.

What I think we can learn from this – the awareness and concern is there from the late 1960s. Our governance systems failed us (mostly because they were about capital accumulation and protecting incumbents, not doing any horizon-scanning). Oh well.

What happened next – it would take another twenty years (1988) before politicians would be forced to start paying serious lipservice.  Funnily enough, a big conference in Toronto was part of the irresistible pressure.

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: 

November 10, 1988 – Activists demand even steeper emissions cuts than “Toronto.” Ignored, obvs. But were right…

November 10, 1994 – “profit or planet – choose one” (Victorian electricity) – All Our Yesterdays

November 10, 1995 – moronic “Leipzig Declaration” by moronic denialists

November 10, 1995 – Ken Saro-Wiwa and other Ogoni executed

Categories
Canada International processes

June 30, 1988 – Toronto conference on “Our Changing Atmosphere” ends

Thirty six years ago, on this day, June 30th, 1988 

TORONTO conference ends

You can read some reflections on this from 2013 (25 years later) here.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that a scientific conference in Villach in September 1985 had been the starting gun for atmospheric scientists to push every button/pull every lever they could (at least in Australia and the US) on the question of “the greenhouse effect.”

One fruit of this was the “Our Changing Atmosphere” conference in Toronto, from which the “Toronto Target” – a 20 per cent reduction in human emissions by 2005 – was born.

What I think we can learn from this is that we knew almost four decades that there was trouble ahead (really, the awareness goes back to the late 1970s).

What happened next – the Toronto Target was ignored, derided or agreed to with such provisos that it would never be implemented. It did not make it into the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Human emissions have gone up by almost 70% since then. Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide are surging, as are temperatures.  My 2004 decision not to have kids is looking smarter with the fall of each new temperature record. Breeders – wtaf?

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: 

June 30, 2008 – Judge stops a coal-burning power plant getting built. – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Air Pollution Canada United States of America

January 11, 1909 – Boundary Object(ions).

One hundred and sixteen years ago, on this day, January 11th, 1909, a deal on international pollution gets inked.,

Since early in this century the Consolidated Mining-and Smelting Company of Canada, Ltd., has operated a smelter for refining lead and zinc at Trail, B.C., in the Columbia River Valley. The plant is seven miles (eleven miles along the river channel) north of the international boundary line between Canada and the United States. As the capacity of the plant increased through the years, its emissions of SO2 increased correspondingly. Between 1924 and 1926 the amount doubled, and beginning in 1925 damage to crops in the Columbia River Valley south of the border became serious enough for the United States to request indemnity and corrective action.

The claim for damages was referred in 1928 to the International Joint Commission, United States and Canada, under Article IX of the Convention of January 11, 1909, between the United States and Great Britain.’ 

page 23-4 of Neiburger, Morris. (1973). International Aspects of Air Pollution. Stanford Journal of International Studies, 8, 16-30. 

Boundary Waters and Questions Arising along the Boundary with Canada, January 11 , 19o9, art. IX, 36 Stat. 2448, 2452 [9igog T.S. 548

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 299ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the US and Great Britain, who had fought various wars against each other and were apparently close again in 15 years before this, signe an agreement about boundary issues. This treaty that was invoked much later, 15 years later, because of a giant Canadian smelter causing environmental problems in the US. Now this is really obviously very obscure, and I only found it via a Google Scholar search for “January 11” and “greenhouse effect”. But what it tells us, what we learn, is that trans boundary air pollution has been on the agenda in the courts, etc, since, well, for 100 years, at least, 

What happened next? Well, I didn’t know how that was resolved. I do know that in 1971 the Nixon government was thinking about imposing a tax on sulfur emissions, and of course, emissions trading, using the example of The Clean Air Act of 1990 has held us up for a long time as a really small policy solution to much bigger, transformative issues. 

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: 

Jan 11, 1964 -: The Merchants of Doubt have work to do

January 11, 1970 – A new Ice Age on its way?

January 11, 2010 – Bad news study about trees and the warming Arctic…

Categories
Canada International processes

October 30, 1972 – Carroll Wilson writes to Maurice Strong, pondering networks

Fifty two years ago, on this day, October 30th, 1972 the Canadian oil baron who had sorted out the United Nations environment conference receives a letter (I know, “hold the front page” right?)

 In a letter to Maurice Strong, the chairman of the Stockholm conference, Carroll Wilson wondered “how and in what ways one might develop a kind of network of the rather limited number of key influential people in a certain number of countries around the world who are globally conscious and who have a vision extending to the end of this century and beyond and who have a deep concern for the environment in its broadest sense.” Wilson to Strong, October 30, 1972, Wilson papers, M.I.T. Archives, Box 44, File 1818.

 (Hart, David, 1992 Belfer thing)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Stockholm conference had happened. And the United Nations Environment Program had been created. There was a broader question of how to maintain or even increase momentum. What sorts of networks and communities might you need? Caroll Wilson, who’d been neck deep in organising the first study of man’s environmental impact in 1970 was clearly pondering the issues. And who better to talk with that Maurice Strong who had shepherded the Stockholm conference. 

What we learn is that in the aftermath of conferences there is talk about, “well, how do we sustain the momentum.” And here we are. And of course, if you try and have those conversations before, people are resistant because they just want their big moment of orgasm. And they don’t want to have to think about what comes next because they kind of on some level know that it will be a bust and you’ll be harshing their vibe, you’ll be spoiling things for them. Let them have their moment of pure, fat free content free reality free, splurge not to be cynical or anything. 

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: 

October 30, 1983 – Carl Sagan hosts ‘nuking ourselves would be bad’ conference.

October 30, 2006 – Stern Review published.

October 30, 2008 – a worker-greenie coalition? Maybe…

Categories
Canada Carbon Capture and Storage United Kingdom United States of America

October 27, 2002 – International CCS study tour begins

Twenty two years ago, on this day, October 27th, 2002, some people fly off to the US and Canada.

Report of DTI International Technology Service Mission to the USA and Canada from 27th October to 7th November 2002

Carbon dioxide capture and storage : report of DTI International technology Service Mission to the USA and Canada from 27th October to 7th November 2002 / Advanced Power Generation Technology Forum ; Mission leader Nick Otter.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 373ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that CCS had been climbing the agenda for a few years, especially since it looked like the political negotiations around the Kyoto process were going nowhere. So you know, maybe throw your eggs in the technology basket and there were always these opportunities for nice conferences and PowerPoint slides and fun dinners and schmoozing. So it goes.

What we learn is that there’s always a new technology that’s going to save us. And that those technologies need “selling.”

What happened next, CCS started climbing in the popularity stakes. The Americans were throwing money at it with FutureGen. And then, years later, the Europeans and the Brits said that they were going to throw money at it. And here we are 23 years later. And how much C02 was actually being saved? Or stored? 

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: 

October 27, 1967 – “the Swedish environmental turn” picks up speed

October 27, 1990 – The Economist admits nobody is gonna seriously cut C02 emissions

Categories
Canada Carbon Capture and Storage

September 30, 2014 – a big CCS demonstration project opens.

Ten years ago, on this day, September 30th,2014 

Boundary Dam ccs goes online (ribbon cutting on 2nd October – source The Guardian)

And it hasn’t gone quite to plan or promise (aka hype)… Of course.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 399ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that despite FutureGen having failed, people were still banging on about CCS as The Way Forward. And were willing to put vast sums of taxpayers’ money where their mouths were…

What we learn is that not all pilot projects work. CCS advocates are remarkably schtum about Petra Nova, Boundary Dam and Gorgon. Instead they bleat on about Sleipner Field…

What happened next? Boundary Dam really hasn’t worked.

See for example 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.

References

Xxx

Also on this day: 

September 30, 1969 -US activist publication mentions climate change

September 30, 2009 – Tony Abbott says #climate science is “absolute crap”

Categories
Canada United Kingdom

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

Sixty six years ago, on this day, September 10th, 1957, The Times runs a short piece – “Melting the Polar Ice Caps: Scientists Study Carbon Dioxide Threat” based on discussions at the International Geodesy conference in Toronto

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 315ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the International Geophysical Year was underway. And so there were these sorts of international conferences happening. The geodesy people had been going for quite a while. And it was at this one there were calls for urgent study of CO2. But that’s been largely forgotten.

What happened next is after the International Geophysical Year finished, the interest in carbon dioxide as a problem kind of died down a bit. And it wouldn’t be until the mid 60s that it started to come up again…

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: 

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

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

September 10, 2008 – Greenpeace Kingsnorth protesters acquitted

Categories
Academia Canada

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

Thirty seven years ago, on this day, August 22nd, 1987, a conference took place in Canada, with the snappy title

Civilization and Rapid Climate Change, University of Calgary 22 – 24 August 1987. A short book “Thinking the Unthinkable” by Lydia Dotto emerged…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 349ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Canadians had been aware of CO2 build-up for a good 15 years, like everyone else (actually, it goes back to the 1950s, but only spottily). By the early 1970s, it was becoming more of a ‘thing’. By this time, probably the June 1988 Changing Atmosphere conference had been announced.

The person who acted as the rapporteur was Lydia Dotto, who had written a book about ozone. And, you know, the anthropologists and so forth were quite right when they said “don’t expect us to meet the challenge. That’s not who we are.” And so it came to pass…

What we learn is that before Thatcher and Bush, there were plenty of people saying, “watch out.” Not just climate scientists by the mid late 80s. It also had been that Canadian documentary and so forth. And they were keeping an eye on what was happening in the US. Carl Sagan Philip called the rest of it.

What happened next: Thatcher Bush and a generation of bullshit

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

Dotto, L. 1987.

Also on this day: 

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

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

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

August 22, 2011 – anti-carbon pricing rally flops