Sixty five years ago, on this day, May 20th, 1959, the Times of India ran a letter, under the title “Getting Hotter?” by S.B. Kulkarni and R. Mani about Edward Teller’s warning on carbon dioxide.
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 315ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures.
The context was that Edward Teller had been talking about CO2 buildup. And this had caught the eye of a couple of people in India who had written letters about it.
What we learn is that people all around the world were aware. They’d already been in January of 1957 the Otago Herald times in New Zealand.
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.
June 7, 1959 – another letter about carbon dioxide build up in the Times of India
Sixty four years ago, on this day, June 7, 1959, two Indian writers sought to alert people to the dangers of carbon dioxide build-up
7 June 1959 Second letter by Kulkarni and Mani in Times of India
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 317.2ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures.
The context was that Edward Teller had been giving various talks about the buildup of co2. And this had been picked up by press services, such as Associated Press, and people in other parts of the world were paying attention. This was the second letter by these authors to The Times of India.
What I think we can learn from this is that there was no deep dark secret. People knew from the mid 1950s that there was a problem. We have forgotten that, partly because the story then receded and nobody really did anything. And so we skip over we skip forward to 1988, but that’s not really historically accurate.
What happened next
Teller didn’t really talk that much more about carbon dioxide. I personally think it was all part of his pro-nuclear rampage. And for various reasons, the pronuclear rampage hit the buffers.
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.
Thirty one years ago, on this day, March 6, 1992, US Public Radio had a segment with polar opposite views on its environment segment with Fred Singer (denialist idiot) and Anil Agarwal, of the Center for Science and the Environment, in New Delhi [link]. Agrawal made the point that while the West was talking about its luxury emissions, the mere survival emissions of poor people were being ignored, or worse, thrown into the mix as something that must be reduced. Oh how times have changed…
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 356ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures.
The context was that negotiations for the text of a climate treaty were entering the end game, centred on US intransigence on the question of targets and timetables versus the desire of the Europeans to have a stronger treaty.
Singer had just orchestrated an open letter (see Feb 27 1992)
And National Public Radio was trying to educate people about all aspects of the debate, the science, the policy, etc. Agrawal made the point that there are such things as necessity, “survival emissions” versus “luxury emissions”, and that countries like India should have capacity to increase their emissions. Singer was just spewing the usual shite.
What I think we can learn from this
We should remember that what we now see, as a matter of fact, text of a climate treaty has been, from the beginning, intensely fought over. And the battles that were won by the evil bastards in 1992 have made it much easier for the opponents of climate action to continue to win, though they have never, to my knowledge, rested on their laurels, or taken their ongoing victory for granted.
What happened next
The French and Europeans blinked. There were no targets and timetables in the treaty. And here we are 31 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...
