Category: Italy

Categories
Italy Science Scientists World Meteorological Organisation

March 1, 1983 – WMO ICSU meeting of WCRP in Venice 

Forty three ago, on this day, March 1st, 1983, the scientists had been sciencing.

March 1 to 8 1983 WMO ICSU meeting of WCRP in venice 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 343ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that scientists had begun to really think hard about carbon dioxide build up as a problem in the late 60s. There had been a two or three week scientific meeting in the middle of 1971 about man’s impact on climate. By the mid 1970s, the World Meteorological Organisation was saying carbon dioxide was probably the problem. And in 1979 it had held the First World Climate Conference, which could – and should – have said, “carbon dioxide is the problem.” But for opposition from people like John Mason. 

The specific context was that by 1983 people were beginning to twig to this. There had been the Charney report and so forth, and various international efforts, a meeting with the ICSU as well. In a place like Venice! It would have been fun to be a fly on the wall. 

What I think we can learn from this is that the scientists were beavering away, as scientists do, and by the mid 1980s really, the verdict was in.

What happened next. The big, seminal moment, pivotal moment, according to people who know about these things, was Villach. Maybe Villach wasn’t quite so important scientifically, but it certainly was politically, and you can read about it here. LINK

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 1, 1954 – Lucky Dragon incident gives the world the word “fall out”

March 1, 1967 – Carbon dioxide as important waste problem

March 1, 1970 – so many tribes, so few common interests – All Our Yesterdays

March 1st 2010 – scientist grilled over nothing burger…

Categories
Italy United Nations

October 2, 1961- UNESCO conference on “climatic variations” begins

Sixty four years ago, on this day, October 2nd, 1961,

beginning of UNESCO conference – “Rome (October 2-7 1961), arranged by UNESCO and the World Meteorological Organization, to restrict the interest to climatic variations which have occurred since the latest glaciation, with particular attention to the period of the meteorological record. The reason behind this decision was no doubt the wish to talk about something which might conceivably have relevance to the nature and trends of the arid lands of to-day–relevance on the scale of economic planning, say, for a hundred years. (Sutcliffe, Nature No. 4808 December 23, 1139-40.”

And there was discussion of carbon dioxide build-up, as per this published in the Derry Standard.

“These warm years, with their economic implications, have led to a number of theories, notably one that man is changing the weather by burning fossil fuels and releasing millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Unfortunately for the theoreticians, this rising temperature curve levelled off around 1940 and has now dipped.”

Behrman, D. 1961. Science Notes. The Derry Standard, November 21, p7

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 317ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 425ppm. 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 that the International Geophysical year had got everyone thinking about the planet (its purpose) and what humans might be doing/might be able to do (make the deserts bloom etc). There had even been a UN resolution on weather modification and space.

The specific context was that some were beginning to talk about Carbon Dioxide – there had been the New York Academy of Science meeting in January 1961. 

What I think we can learn from this is that we used to believe we could make a better world…

What happened next – Ritchie-Calder got more and more interested in carbon dioxide. He tried to alert people in 1963, and then seems to have put it on the backburner for a few years, before launching a second campaign in 1968…

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 2, 1927/64 – Svante Arrhenius and Guy Callendar die.

October 2, 1942 – Spaceflight!!

October 2, 1994 – twenty years of boredom, for trying to change the system from within (Phillip Toyne becomes civil servant) 

October 2, 2014 – Low emission technologies on their way, says Minerals Council of Australia

Categories
Italy

July 10, 1976 – Seveso

Forty nine years ago, on this day, July 10th, 1976,

The Seveso disaster was an industrial accident that occurred around 12:37 on 10 July 1976, in a small chemical manufacturing plant approximately 20 kilometres (12 mi) north of Milan in the Lombardy region of Italy. It resulted in the highest known exposure to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) in residential populations,[1] which gave rise to numerous scientific studies and standardized industrial safety regulations, including the European Union‘s Seveso III Directive. This accident was ranked eighth in a list of the worst man-made environmental disasters by Time magazine in 2010.[2]

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

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 332ppm. 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 that post-war Europe reindustrialised at pace. The state wasn’t always so hot at spotting and doing anything about forms of pollution, which were largely seen as a regrettable but inevitable prie to be paid for capital-P Prosperity (which basically meant capital accumulation, obviously).

The specific context was that – oh, the usual…

“After the incident, ICMESA initially refused to admit that the dioxin release had occurred. At least a week passed before a public statement was issued that dioxin had been emitted, and another week passed before an evacuation began. Even then, the government was saddled with the responsibility of determining the boundaries of the evacuation area, and thereafter to organise the evacuation. This constituted a major imposition on the community as well as on government resources.”

What I think we can learn from this is that anyone who has fantasies about a competent regulatory state really needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

What happened next

The usual – court cases, no-one doing any serious chokey.

Follow-up health studies etc etc (check out the wikipedia article!)

Btw, Seveso ets a mention (oblique) in Ali Smith’s wonderful novel “Winter.”

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 10, 1985 – French state commits terrorist act

July 10, 1996 – National Greenhouse Advisory Panel cops a serve

July 10, 2008 – first Australian #Climate Camp begins, near Newcastle

July 10, 2010 – Rio Tinto amplifies the message…

Categories
International processes Italy

June 22, 1980 – G7 meeting in Venice

Forty-five years ago, on this day, June 22nd, 1980, the Venice G7 meeting happened. Check out this quote by Thomas Schelling.

My first serious acquaintance with the “Carbon Dioxide Problem,” as it was then called, was in 1978. The Chancellor of Germany [Helmut Schmidt] had put the issue on the agenda of a “Summit” to be held in Venice, and the White House asked the National Academy of Sciences for advice. (I believe the Chancellor’s motivation may have been that his nuclear energy programs were being attacked by greens, and he wanted to publicize the perils of coal.) I, utterly innocent of the subject, was made chairman of a committee of twelve, and had to educate myself in a hurry. It is pertinent to report here that among the very few people I found who had a broad background in the subject were Jesse Ausubel and Bill Clark, both IlASA alumni, and of course Roger Revelle, well known to IIASA. I never, at the time, discovered any other research organization that had done integrated work on the subject. Individuals worked on aspects of the subject, at numerous locations; only at IlASA did the topic appear to have organized itself

Schelling T. 1995 Research by Accident. IIASA Working Paper

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 338ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the G7 meetings had begun in 1975 with a one-off that was so enjoyed it became an annual thing. In 1979, in Tokyo, they’d even name-checked carbon dioxide build-up.

What I think we can learn from this is that we knew enough in the late 1970s for action to begin. That it did not is down primarily to Thatcher, and then to Reagan.

What happened next is that in 1985 the G7 again mentioned “climatic change” in passing, but it would be 1988 before the issue broke through, thanks to the long, hot summer and then James Hansen sticking his head above the parapet and saying that it was time to stop waffling…

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 22, 1976 – Times reports “World’s temperature likely to rise” – All Our Yesterdays

June 22 ,1988 – Roger Rabbit on forced consumption (and so on to #climate apocalypse) – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
International processes Italy

June 23, 1980 – G7 in Venice aims to sink Venice…

Forty four years ago, on this day, June 23rd, 1980, the G7 rolled back from previous “concern”

Together we intend to double coal production and use by early 1990. We will encourage long-term commitments by coal producers and consumers. It will be necessary to improve infrastructures in both exporting and importing countries, as far as is economically justified, to ensure the required supply and use of coal. We look forward to the recommendations of the International Coal Industry Advisory Board. They will be considered promptly. We are conscious of the environmental risks associated with increased coal production and combustion. We will do everything in our power to ensure that increased use of fossil fuels, especially coal, does not damage the environment.

23 June 1980 – G7 declaration in Venice (poor Crispin!!) 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 337ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the year before the G7 had at least paid lip service to the problem of CO2 buildup as something to be remarked on, albeit alongside words about increasing coal production. Here at Venice, the CO2 was absent but the coal was there, bigger and badder than ever. In Venice of all places, which is exquisitely vulnerable to sea level rise. UK diplomat Crispin Tickell must have been heartbroken about it. What can you do?

What we learn is that the fine words are just that – just fine words. You can’t expect anything more of them. 

What happened next? More G7 meetings, more warm words. The next G7 at which climate is a big deal is Paris 1989. It’s not on the agenda at all in Houston in 1990 because Bush, because oil companies of course.

And then again, I think in 91 John Major makes a song and dance about it. And then, really it’s not until it’s not until 2005 Gleneagles that all the bullshit about climate change generally and CCS really gets a boost. 

(Btw, the G7 was never supposed to be a permanent thing. But he gives the leaders a chance to schmooze each other in nice settings and strut and fret, of course, they’re gonna grab it with both hands, and it’s gonna persist.)

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 23, 1988 – it’s time to stop waffling and say the greenhouse effect is here

June 23, 1997 – RIP Hermann Flohn

June 23, 1997 – Australian Prime Minister skips climate meeting to fanboy Thatcher #auspol

Categories
Italy State Violence

July 21, 2001 – Sleeping protestors beaten by Italian Police

Twenty two years ago, on this day, July 21, 2001, sleeping protestors were beaten by police in Genoa, Italy.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 371.7ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the misnamed “anti-globalisation” movement had been mobilising in London and Cologne, in Stockholm, and in Prague. And now everyone was gathered in Genoa for the G7. Italian police had already shot and killed a young Italian man who was – to be fair – attacking a police car with a fire extinguisher. But this attack was not on protesters, was not in the heat of the moment, these police were not then under threat. This was a planned and enjoyed assault with blood halfway out the walls, leaving lots of nonviolent protesters traumatised with medical bills and horror and it should be remembered. But it isn’t. Except by the people who endured it. 

What I think we can learn from this

The state will use violence as it did with the Rainbow Warrior. And as it did here, to make people bleed and make people remember.   

What happened next

The Italian police eventually went on trial. Nothing came of it. The global movement against corporate control of the planet was stopped in its tracks by the shock of 9-11. It then morphed into a movement against the impending attack on Iraq in 2003. But  found it hard to sustain – as you do. 

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.