Category: Renewable energy

Categories
Renewable energy Wind Energy

November 17, 1978 – British Wind Energy Association launches

Forty-five years ago, on this day, November 17th, 1978,

Formed from the ITDG Wind Panel along with other interested parties and representatives from industry, to promote wind power in the United Kingdom. The inaugural meeting of the BWEA took place on 17 November 1978 at the Rutherford Laboratory with Peter Musgrove of Reading University as chairman.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that wind power was seen as a possibility, albeit at a small cranky one that might only be of use in places which were far distant from the grid. And it had started, as these things often do, in university research engineering departments. But eventually these universities can no longer do all the things needed – there’s competing commercial interests. And then a sensible thing to do, not just lobbying purposes, but also to keep the politics and commercial battles kind of at arm’s length, is to set up a kind of trade association. They’re not pure play trade associations, of course, they’re just an interest group for all the different people interested in the topic. Trade Associations tend to come later. 

What we learn is that wind has a long, long history in the UK. 

What happened next, it would take a long time for offshore wind to kick in, that wouldn’t happen until  2010. So that was mostly as a result of the extreme hostility to onshore wind by some local authorities and also by the Tory party in central government. 

What happened next? The British took over, invaded Egypt in 1883. After squabbles over the money I’m not going to talk to you about Suez ‘56.

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 and See Also

Feb 2024 article about the challenges facing wind power

https://www.ft.com/content/7f742d23-673b-47d3-9ce9-64fa5d322abe

Also on this day: 

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

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

November 17, 2018 – XR occupy five bridges in London

Categories
Australia Renewable energy

June 29, 2006 – “Wind farms don’t live up to the hype”

Eighteen years ago, on this day, June 29th, 2004 another Liberal talks nonsense about renewables.

’ Mr Peter McGauran MP, the federal Minister for Agriculture and member for Gippsland, went further in June 2006, saying ‘Wind farms don’t live up to the hype that they’re the environmental saviour and a serious alternative energy source.

ABC, 2006. Pete McGauran says wind farms a fraud. AM Program, 29 June. 2006

(Prest, 2007: 254)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 377ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context is that the Howard government was doing its absolute best to suppress the rise of renewables. It had been forced or it had in 1997, chosen to announce a renewables target As part of its, “this is why we won’t sign Kyoto” campaign.

 And then it had been forced to eventually create a mandatory renewable energy target that came into effect in April of 2001. By this time, the Howard Government had called a meeting of the Low Emissions Technology Advisory Group, a bunch of fossil fuel majors, asking for their help in suppressing renewables. So this is arguing that there is hype around renewables. But that very accurate critique of hype and unrealistic expectations around a new technology, oddly, never gets applied to carbon capture and storage or god forbid nuclear. 

What we learn is that Liberal Party, people call themselves conservative, but they’re not conserving the planet, ecosystems, quality of life for anyone. What they’re conserving is their own position, relative power and importance by cuddling up to the status quo act as they are conserving a poisonous deadly status quo. 

 What happened next? The investment environment for renewables in Australia became so hostile that Vestas the Danish wind turbine manufacturer, ended up closing its factory in Tasmania/ It would only be from 2012-13 that renewables really took off in Australia, in part, thanks to international factors, but also don’t underestimate ARENA and the CEFC. 

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 29, 1956 – Just DRIVE, she said…

June 29, 1979 – G7 says climate change matters. Yes, 1979.

June 29, 1979 – Thatcher uses carbon dioxide build-up to shill for nuclear power

Categories
Australia Renewable energy

April 27, 1999 – 2% increase in use of renewables report received

Twenty-five years ago, on this day, April 27th, 1999, another government-appointed group delivered another ‘worthy’ report.

The high-level Greenhouse Energy Group will today receive the final report of the task force set up by the Federal Government to devise ways to meet its target of a 2 per cent increase in the use of renewable energy over the next decade.

Hordern, N. 1999. Greenhouse targets study ready. Australian Financial Review, 27 April, p. 11.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 368.5ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that as part of his pre Kyoto spoiler efforts, John Howard had promised a 2% renewable energy target. That was in 1997. The whole process had been extremely painfully drawn out by it since then, meaning that it was in effect, a 1% target. And this was another small link in a long chain of events. So let’s have another report. Let’s have another Working Group. Let’s just draaaag the process out for as long as possible to demoralise and confuse everyone, so that we don’t have to do what we promised we would do. Politics business as usual. 

What we learn is they’ll make a promise but then getting them to implement it requires more energy, tenacity, and smarts than social movements and civil society tend to have. 

What happened next, A pipsqueak Mandatory Renewable Energy Target was finally introduced in April of 2002. And despite everything Howard had done, was already too successful, working too well, so by May of 2004, he was asking his business buddies for help in undermining it. 

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: 

April 27, 1979 – Ecology Party first TV broadcast ahead 

April 27, 1987 – “Our Common Future” released.

April 27, 2007 – Coal-bashing campaign by gas company ends

Categories
Australia Renewable energy

February 23, 1974 – CSIRO Solar energy conference

Fifty years ago, on this day, February 23rd, 1974, the Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) held a solar power conference.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 330ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Australia had been experimenting with wind and solar power for a few decades. Certainly wind turbines were used to pump water. And we could have used that expertise and all of the sun and all of the space and wind to wean ourselves off fossil fuels. In an alternative universe where we weren’t such stupid murder apes, we would have done that. But here we are.

What we learn is that people have been banging on about renewables for a long, long time. And see also Mark Diesendorf’s entirely plausible claim that coal interests undermined the CSIRO renewables research from the 1970s onwards.

What happened next? The solar energy people kept trying to get things to work. But it was another 40 years before shit got real. 

See also

https://publications.csiro.au/publications/publication/PIlegacy:402

Roger N. Morse, 1977. Solar Energy in Australia. Ambio, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 209-215 https://www.jstor.org/stable/4312278

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: 

Feb 23, 2009 Penny Wong flubs the CSPR… The CPSR..  THE PCRS. Oh, hell. #auspol

February 23, 1977 – UK Chief Scientific Advisor worries about carbon dioxide build-up. 

Categories
Renewable energy

December 24, 1990 – Australia as renewable energy superpower

Thirty three years ago, on this day, December 24, 1990, a letter appears in the Canberra Times… 

Renewable energy 

YOUR excellent report from Washington, DC, presenting evidence that renewable energy could substitute for coal, oil and gas in the 21st century (CT, December 17) needs to be supplemented with some information about the Australian situation… Commonwealth support for renewable energy has been very weak.

Canberra Times 24th December 1990

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/122332903/13000347

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 355ppm. As of 2023 it is 421ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that everyone was talking about moving away from fossil fuels moving towards renewables. Would it be possible? Over what time-scale? etcetera 

Except when they weren’t and they were trying to sit on things, which is what the Australian government eventually took to doing.

What I think we can learn from this

The Politics of technology R&D – what gets funded, what doesn’t, by who, with what end-goals is always really interesting, well usually.

The crucial thing is this is Australia which could have been ahead of the game on wind power solar geothermal hydrogen you name it. But the problem was we had so much damn coal and natural gas, and the people who owned those resources also, in effect, owned the state and the policymaking process and have won all the big battles.

What happened next is we didn’t do that “clean energy transition.” We may yet in the future who knows, but it will be too little too late, by definition.

The age of consequences is beginning and the dildo of consequences never arrives lubed.

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
Renewable energy Uncategorized

December 23, 2003 – Vestas opens Tasmanian wind turbine factory

Twenty years ago, on this day, December 23, 2003, a wind turbine factory opened in Tasmania…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 376ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that in 2002 the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target had finally started at a national level. It was smaller than had been promised and later than it needed to be, but nonetheless in existence; wind was always going to be a large part of that. And being able to manufacture wind turbines in Australia for the domestic market seemed like a good idea at the time the Danish company Vestas opened a factory in Tasmania.

What I think we can learn from this

 is that it would have been possible to have a proper domestic manufacturing industry. Yes you would have started with foreign-owned companies but it didn’t need to have stayed like that. But it wasn’t to be…

What happened next

Vestas just pulled out a few years later as it was obvious that the Howard government was going to do everything it could to slow down or stop renewable energy in Australia. And it wasn’t clear if that would ever end – so, cut your losses. 

See tomorrow’s post…

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
Australia Renewable energy

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

Ten years ago, on this day, June 18, 2013 there was a very sparsely attended  “National” Wind Power Fraud Rally in Canberra

https://stopthesethings.com/tag/national-wind-power-fraud-rally/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 398ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

The carbon tax battle had been lost. And now the anti-climate anti-Gillard sorts were doing their best to keep the flame alive with an anti wind power rally. But you can’t reheat a souffle. And this one was an embarrassment because people on the whole, like wind power, (especially if they don’t have to have their house immediately underneath a turbine). 

What I think we can learn from this

Some technologies catch the public mind and are considered nice and good, and others are not. It’s not entirely fair. And neither is life. 

What happened next

The anti-wind turbine people kind of more or less, folded up their tent and switched to other sorts of stuff, but then they could afford to do that because by September of 2013, their guy was in power and he hated the damn things. (See my 2017 paper ‘wind beneath their contempt’)

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
Renewable energy United States of America

May 3, 1978 – First and last “Sun Day”

Forty five years ago, on this day, May 3, 1978, the first and last “Sun Day” organised by Dennis Hayes took place

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

QUOTE FROM  In the rain! (Graetz, 2011: 117)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 338ppm. As of 2023 it is 420ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was Denis Hayes had been neck deep in the Earth Day organising of 1970 and spent the rest of the decade trying to get people to take alternative energy solar energy seriously.

The National Academy of Sciences report on climate had come out in July of 1977. Carter had signed the Climate Change Act that had been proposed by George Brown. People were beginning to think that carbon dioxide might really screw us. Increasing the amount of solar energy was clearly a good idea, but didn’t get implemented. 

What I think we can learn from this

Solutions technological, political, economic, social, have existed and they have constantly been out fought, outspent by existing vested interests and the natural small c conservatism and inertia and obduracy of large technical systems.

Getting a new technology to be accepted is a very very hard task.

What happened next

Well, famously, the Reagan administration took the solar panels off the White House in 1986. But by then Reagan’s goons had already done a very good job in destroying momentum towards ecological sanity (not that a second Carter term would necessarily have delivered).

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
Australia Renewable energy

December 16, 2002 – another knee-capping for renewable energy in Australia…

On this day, December 16 in 2002, the knee-capping of energy that isn’t fossil-based continued

“The director of the Australian Cooperative Research Centre for Renewable Energy, Frank Reid, says the organisation may have to abandon plans for a $60 million renewables venture capital fund if the Federal Government goes ahead with its decision to withdraw financial support from the organisation.”

Myer, R. (2002) Business – Energy research loses pivotal funding The Age 16th December

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 373ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

John Howard had won the 2001 election and set about further undermining renewable energy. The historical hatred of renewables among policy elites in Australia is fascinating – one speculation on it, by a devastatingly brilliant and handsome academic – is here.

Why this matters

If we had taken this seriously when the warnings started coming through, we would have

  1. Knocked the whole “consumption for consumptiton’s sake/as a replacement for meaning” thing on the head
  2. Done something about serious energy efficiency
  3. Done something about accelerating the research, development and deployment of renewables.

“We” (rich technocrats, mostly white, mostly male) didn’t think it mattered.  We thought our technology would save that subset of the species we call “us”.

What happened next?

Howard kept killing off renewables, every chance he got. Renewables have finally taken hold, but a) the delay, oh my the delay and b) they are additional to other energy demand, rather  than replacing it. We’re so toast.

Categories
Australia Fossil fuels Renewable energy

October 3, 2004 – John Howard revealed to have asked for fossil fuel CEOs to kill renewables. #auspol

On this day, October 3 in 2004, a journalist revealed that the Federal Government of Australia, led by John Howard, had had a meeting (invite-only) of top fossil fuel folks and asked for help in squishing renewable energy. 

“The Federal Government and fossil-fuel industry executives discussed ways to stifle growing investment in renewable energy projects at a secret meeting earlier this year.

Prime Minister John Howard called the meeting on May 6, five weeks before releasing the energy white paper on June 14.

The white paper favours massive investment in research to make fossil fuels cleaner, at the expense of schemes boosting growth in renewable energy.

Mr Howard called together the fossil-fuel-based Lower Emissions Technology Advisory Group to seek advice on ways to avoid extending the mandatory renewable energy targets scheme.”

Miller, C. 2004. PM called talks to derail renewable energy. The Age, 3 October

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/02/1096527990014.html

You can read the minutes here

https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/WP56_8.pdf

Possibly the best example you could imagine of how state and corporate interests act together

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 374.63ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Why this matters. 

All this talk about free markets. Yeah, right. State-managers gives favours (R&D, subsidies, tax-breaks etc) to those who can make party donations and arrange post-career sinecures NOW, not some potential future set of corporates.

What happened next?

Howard and the LNP continued to promote fossil fuels, at the expense of a) renewables and b) future generations.