Category: International processes

Categories
International processes Science Scientists UNFCCC

March 29, 1995- Kuwaiti scientist says if global warming happening, it’s not fossil fuels. #MRDA

On the 29th of March 1995, in Berlin at the first “Conference of the Parties” of the UNFCCC, Kuwait, put forward a scientist, who said that if global warming was happening, it wasn’t the fault of coal and oil. Of course, they would say that;  “Mandy Rice Davies applies.” You need to think about Kuwait, as a spoiler in all of this, along with Saudi in the US and Australia. And if you’re looking for the gory details, Jeremy Leggett’s book, The Carbon War is really good on this. 

What happened next?

COP1 ended with the Berlin Mandate – rich countries agree to cut emissions first.  Two years later, in Kyoto, the first agreement to reduce emissions was agreed for what that was worth (not much). Kyoto was not replaced, and eventually a laughable “pledge and review” system got implemented (Paris). And the emissions climb and climb.

Categories
International processes IPCC Science

March 25, 1988- World Meteorological Organisation sends IPCC invites.

On this day in 1988 the World Meteorological Organisation, (the clue is in the name) sent out invites to be part of what is now known as the IPCC

“In the absence of an official US initiative, WMO took the lead and held discussions with UNEP on this proposal. Eventually, a slightly modified version was sent out by the Secretary General of WMO on March 25, 1988 to member governments inquiring whether their country would like to be represented on a proposed ‘Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’ (Obasi, 1988).”

Agrawala, S. (1998a, p 615)

The context is this

The discovery of the ozone “hole” gave atmospheric scientists a high profile and trust.  Atmospheric scientists had finally decided at a meeting hosted by WMO, UNEP and ICSCU,, in Villach, Austria, in October 1985, that the carbon dioxide problem they had been studying and talking about in-depth for roughly 15 years, needed proper policy responses

The right-wing administration of the US “President” Ronald Reagan was split, but mostly opposed to this. They DEFINITELY did not want independent scientists pushing them around.  So, we get an intergovernmental panel rather than an international one.  They key sources – but by no means the only ones –  for this, are

Agrawala, S. Context and Early Origins of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climatic Change 39, 605–620 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005315532386

Agrawala, S. Structural and Process History of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climatic Change 39, 621–642 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005312331477


What happened next

The IPCC first met in November 1988, in Geneva. Within a year and a half its first assessment report was ready. It was, of course, attacked and enormous attempts were made to water it down.  Things really got heated (ho ho) when the second assessment report came out.  That was very very nasty indeed…

Meanwhile, the carbon dioxide accumulates

Categories
International processes

March 11, 1989 – warm words at The Hague, where the climate criminals should be sent…

On this day in 1989 the Hague declaration was signed. 

This was one of a flurry of meetings after the emergence of the climate issue in the summer of 1988. In the lead up to discussions about a climate convention Noordwijk, Bergen, Cairo, etc. 

Initiated by “the Netherlands, France and Norway … the conference declaration called for a ‘new institutional authority’ to combat global warming (Hague Declaration 1989, p. 1309). Although a number of major states were not invited (including the US and the USSR) or did not attend (as in the case of the UK), the fact that 17 heads of state or government were present reflected the growing prominence of climate change as a political issue” [source].

At this stage the USA, USSR and Australia were still actively resisting the idea of a global treaty on reducing climate change emissions.  Because that’s really how they roll..

Of course, the Hague is where the people who slowed/stopped climate action belong for crimes against humanity. They won’t go there, of course, because they are from the rich nations. And justice is only dished out to homicidal maniacs, leading weak nations.

If we ever do hold crimes against humanity for delaying climate action trials, then the 1989 meeting can be dredged up…

Why this matters. 

This early history has shaped everything that has followed

What happened next?

A climate convention began to be negotiated in 1991. The word “negotiation” basically means everyone tries to get the American government administration to act as if there’s a problem. And the American administration, resist and resist and resist until the proposals are piss weak. And then they reluctantly sign – that’s what’s called negotiation.

Categories
Australia International processes Predatory delay UNFCCC United Nations United States of America

Feb 25 1992- business groups predict economic chaos if action is taken on #climate

On 25th of February 1992 20 business associations from nine different countries try to slow down progress towards the impending Rio Earth Summit agreements by predicting economic calamity and doom: the same old story. 

1992 On 25 February at UN headquarters (New York City, USA), 20 business associations from 9 countries released a joint statement to the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change….

Anon. 1992. International Business Associations Issue Statement on Climate Negotiations. Global Environmental Change. Vol. 4, No. 5 13 March.

You will be shocked, shocked to learn that Australian business interests were in that mix – “The business associations, nearly half of which are from Australia, are in the fields of fossil fuel and energy production, manufacturing, and metals.”

Why this matters

We need to remember that whenever governments and state institutions are forced to consider the long-term well-being of constituents/future generations, there will be short termist vested interests pushing in the opposite direction. That’s just the way it is. 

What happened next

A weakened Earth Summit. Treaty text was put forward, not entirely due to business interest, but also the US administration of George HW Bush in June of 1992. This was then ratified and then gave us the COPs for climate and biodiversity. Meanwhile, the carbon dioxide accumulates, the biodiversity collapse accelerates. And to young folk out there, I’m sorry. We old fuckers, we blew it. You have every right to feel betrayed and gaslit let down by your parents and your grandparents

The business associations? They’re singing differently, but the song remains the same…