Category: France

Categories
France

December 6, 2018 – Macron scraps a fuel tax because of protests

On this day six years ago...

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 409ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Gilets Jaunes had been protesting about the petrol tax that Macron had unilaterally installed. He was forced eventually to back down. 

What we learn is that there will be understandable pushback against taxes that make life even harder for poor people who are dependent upon private modes of transport who are living hand to mouth and if you want to have a decent climate policy, carbon policy, it has to be socially publicly acceptable and ultimately, the rich are going to have to cough up but that will never happen because the rich control climate policy. We are doomed. 

Poor people are being fucked. If the rich had taken the “correct” actions in the 1980s and 90s, this might not have needed to happen, but that’s a fantasy. It was always going to play out like this. What can I tell you? 

What happened next Macron is still in charge. But the next president will probably be Marine LePen. Fun and games we will have. 

December 6, 2005 – CCS is our only hope, says Chief Scientist….

December 6, 2006- Turns out 0.1% of a Very BIG NUMBER is … quite a lot…

Categories
Cultural responses France

September 9, 1990 – classic (?) film Mindwalk released

Thirty four years ago, on this day, September 9th, 1990, an interesting film was released. It sounds like a joke set-up: a poet, a politician and a physicist walk around a monastery…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindwalk

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 354ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Fritjof Capra was a bit of a star in New Age circles because he had a physics background and then to chuck it all in to be at the feet of Gregory Bateson and others. He had written The Turning Point, and so forth. And this film, directed by his brother is a rather interesting artefact. And it was an attempt to put these ideas to the test. I like the film. It has three significant speaking parts. There’s a poet, played by John Hurd, who’d already put on weight from the previous year’s The Package, Liv Ullman, as a Swedish nuclear physicist and Sam Waterson as a very thinly veiled Al Gore. These three meet at Mont St Michel and walk and talk. 

What we learn is that it can be hard to translate relatively abstruse ideas into something that people will watch. But this is an entirely serviceable effort in my opinion, and you should get hold of it if you can. 

What happened next Hurd went on to have a career that he thought was okay, but wasn’t as big as it could have been. Waterson has been around forever. Liv Ullman, I think is still alive. And Bent Capra never made another film; probably didn’t want to.

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 9, 1947 – The Daily Worker talks about melting the ice-caps

September 9, 1971 – of Australian Prime Ministers and American scientists…

Categories
France United Nations

September 1, 1968 – UNESCO Biosphere Conference begins in Paris

Fifty six years ago, on this day, September 1st, 1968, people talked eco, at a pivotal meeting.

The Bisophere Conference was held under the auspices of UNESCO in Paris from 1 September to 13 September 1968.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 323ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that people had been banging on about the biosphere for a while. You can take it back to Vladimir Vernadsky (see also Dinshaw 2013). And this had especially picked up pace with things like the International Biological Programme in the mid-60s and the US interest in it.

What we learn is that seemingly new ideas, new-ish ideas can have a very long history and that certain individuals like G. Evelyn Hutchinson (among many others) had to work crucial in translating these and saving these and popularising them. 

What happened next? UNESCO’s Biosphere conference was a bit of a kickstart for concerns about what was happening and what was being done to “the natural world.” Concerns were well underway before, but this kind of crystallised them. And from it, the report in May of ‘69, about issues including carbon dioxide buildup that U Thant, then Secretary General of the United Nations, made was significant. 

And twenty-five years later…

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 1, 1972 – “Man-Made Carbon Dioxide and the “Greenhouse Effect” published in Nature

September 1, 1983- #climate change is all in the game, you feel me?

September 1, 1998 – Sydney Futures Exchange foresees a bright future. Ooops.

Categories
France International processes

July 16, 1989 – Paris agreement on climate…

The Paris Agreement; World leaders gather in Paris and talk about climate change and make big promises. Am I talking about 2015? No, I’m talking about the G7 in 1989 thirty five years ago, on this day, July 13th, 1989.

1989 Economic Declaration “We believe that the conclusion of a framework or umbrella convention on climate change to set out general principles or guidelines is urgently required to mobilize and rationalize the efforts made by the international community… Specific protocols containing concrete commitments could be fitted into the framework as scientific evidence requires and permits.”

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/paris-economic-summit-economic-declaration

THATCHER GIVES PRESS CONFERENCE, usual warm words https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107731

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 353ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the G7 meetings had started originally as a one-off at Rambouillet in November 1975 as part of the concern that Western leaders had about stagflation. labour unrest (which is a cute way of setting the slaves aren’t willing to be slaves at the same rate anymore) and general sense of things falling apart. The leaders liked it so much they made it an annual event. And in 1979, carbon dioxide buildup and climate change even been onto the agenda, some vague promises, {LINK]

But then by 1980, Venice, that was all forgotten. And it was more coal all the time [link}. 

Fun fact. The pivotal “Changing Atmosphere” conference that had happened in 1988, the pivotal one had taken place in the same venue as the G7 meeting.

What we learn is that people like turning up in Paris and making agreements. It makes them feel good and important. So, beautiful city even if it has become a theme park for itself. And here we are.

What happened next? Well, funnily enough, the G7 in Houston next year didn’t mention climate at all. Why could that be? And the climate issue rose to a peak in summer of ‘92. And then it was perceived to have been more or less resolved. Because you know, now we had a treaty, we had some fine words, everything would be fine.

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: 

July 16, 1990 – Canberra Times gives denialist tosh a platform

July 16, 1992 – American scientist claims “no firm evidence” of #climate change Australian National Press Club #denial

Categories
France

 June 18, 1984- OECD holds conference on “environment and economics”

On this day forty long long years ago, an OECD conference about the environment and economics began in Paris.

Report on the International Conference on Environment and Economics, OECD, Paris, France, 18-21 June 1984

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 344ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was the Brundtland Commission was underway, and transborder issues (acid rain especially) were exercising European wonks.

What we learn

BFWRs (Big Fat Worthy Reports) keep coming round. And around. And around. The production and reception of them creates networking opportunities and distractions for a certain class of person who might – theoretically at least – be a problem otherwise…

What happened next

The Brundtland Commission released its “Our Common Future” report in 1987. The following year, the climate issue burst to life.  And we are not saved.

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 18, 1976- UK Meteorological Office explains things to Cabinet Office

June 18, 2008 – Carbon Capture and Storage is going to save Australia. Oh yes.

June 18, 2013 – Feeble ’Wind Fraud’ rally in Canberra

Categories
France New Zealand

: July 10, 1985 – French state commits terrorist act

Thirty seven years ago, on this day, July 10, 1985 French secret service agents planted bombs that led to the sinking of the Greenpeace ship the “Rainbow Warrior”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 346.9ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the French state was getting pissed off with Greenpeace’s activities around nuclear testing in the Pacific, and thought it would be a good idea to treat a non-state actor like a state and go and blow up its assets. The death came from the photographer wanting to go back on board to get his cameras, against advice.

What I think we can learn from this, and certainly what I learned in 1985, when I was not quite an adult, is that states behave terribly, especially the intelligence services. And if they can’t win the argument, then they resort to, well, blowing shit up.

What happened next: The French intelligence service operatives got caught, sentenced to minimal jail time and then released. Greenpeace didn’t go away – you can judge the strength of an actor by the nature of its enemies, and the lengths to which it is willing to go.

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.

Categories
France International processes

June 16, 1993 – Oooh, an international conference….

Thirty years ago, on this day, June 16, 1993, an OECD/IEA conference “International Conference on the Economics Of Climate Change” ended in Paris.

What a doomed species we are.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 359.6ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

The Earth Summit happened. And now everyone was gonna have to figure out the economics of climate change. The IEA and the OECD were good venues for this, both of them with one foot in the technology. So see for examplethe carbon disposal symposium in Oxford earlier in the year. And IEA had been playing around with the science since well, February of 1981, at the latest. IEA had been looking ideas about what would you do about the economics of climate change? This stuff had been discussed as far back as the mid 1970s by Nordhaus for IASSA 

What I think we can learn from this

And the same sets of ideas get moved around the chessboard. And then a new game starts and they set the chess pieces up. And round and round and round it goes. Questions of political and social cultural power, are, of course, bracketed or sidestepped altogether, because that would be normative and not easily quantified. And might take you towards things like new international economic orders, an old unpopular (with the rich) idea from the 1970s…

What happened next

The carbon dioxide kept accumulating. And the economists and so forth, kept flying from conference to conference. 

See also – Stern admits he under-estimated speed of changes

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.

Categories
France

March 21, 1768 – Joseph Fourier born

Two hundred and fifty five years ago, on this day, March 21, 1768, French scientist Joseph Fourier was born.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 280ishppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

Why am I talking about some 18th 19th century French scientist? Because he is the one who’s credited with pointing out that if you look at how far the Earth sits from the sun, and how much heat hits us, and what the temperature of our planet is, then something is trapping a certain amount of the heat. 

Fourier was an interesting character you can read more about on his Wikipedia page, and also here.

What I think we can learn from this

We have to understand that the idea of a greenhouse effect, not the theory, or use of the term was not invented by Al Gore, Greta Thunberg. It is basic 19th century physics. It is not controversial. And anyone who wants to make it controversial, is clearly trying to sell you Sydney Harbour Bridge for whatever reason. 

What happened next

1n 1824 he first published on this stuff. Snuffed  in 1830.

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..

Categories
France International processes

Feb 26, 1981 – Science writer warns readers about the greenhouse in the Guardian….

Forty two years ago, on this day, February 26, 1981,  science writer John Gribbin had a long detailed piece in the Guardian about the state of the art of climate science, and the geopolitical implications, based on a briefing for Earthscan. “Carbon dioxide, the climate and man“ 

Read it and weep…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 340.5ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

The Carter administration had just ended. The willingness of US politicians to even talk about the climate problem would plummet, and efforts like the “Global 2000” report were on the scrap heap. (The workshop Gribbin mentions will have been organised before Reagan won the November election.)

What I think we can learn from this

We knew a lot quite early. By the late 1970s there was momentum growing.  The First World Climate Conference could have been consequential, but people like John Mason (Met Office supremo) played a blocking role.  Still, salvageable, if Thatcher and Reagan hadn’t… ach, we’d have pissed it against the wall and still been in the same omni-messes now, let’s be honest.

The lack of any digital record (I could find) about the carbon dioxide workshop of the IEA and OECD is intriguing, and makes me want to know who was there!….

What happened next

It took another seven years for the issue to climb high enough up the agenda for it to be too costly for so-called “conservative” politicians to ignore it.

References

Gribbin, J. 1981. When the climate becomes too hot to handle. The Guardian, February 26