Category: Uncategorized

Three posts today about something that happened on Monday 9th October 2006

1. Australian scientists and charities produced a report  “Australia Responds: Helping Our Neighbours Fight Climate Change”  – see this blog post
2. The Australian Labor Party piggy-backed its own statement about climate refugees – see this blog post

3. Therefore someone born on that day in the South Pacific would be turning 18. Happy Birthday (a letter to them here)

The only thing left to talk about, imo, is what is to be done now, by people of good intentions and determination?

I offer – for what it is worth, a few suggestions about what white middle-class people like me, with training and education, might usefully do. I am happy to be told I am wrong, but please be specific. I am happy to be told what I have missed – as per the organisations, I will add advice.  

Then I link to organisations working on this stuff. I have no idea if they’re any good. The list is NOT exhaustive. If you know of other good organisations, please share and I will add them.

What is to be done

1. Educate yourselves and others about climate change – not the science (bare bones is enough there) but the politics, the techniques used by those who want to slow or stop action, the pathologies that affect social movements and civil society in their (so-far not all that impressive) efforts to make states and corporations be less ecocidal. Or do the ecocide slower.

One resource (I don’t do false modesty – is the AOY site. It’s ramshackle, under-signposted but not actually THAT hard to use. There’s a search box.

Another resource (I don’t do false modesty; it’s a passive-aggressive extortion bid for attention and reassurance) is ME. I am MORE than happy to come on podcasts, do workshops etc.  I am, on my day, a good communicator and also designer/executor of formats that are genuinely participatory and energising. Hit me up

You need to know about – the history (at least a little) of Australia’s international criminality on climate change, which is ABSOLUTELY 100% bipartisan.  There is net zero significant different between LNP and ALP on this.

2. Take sustained action. Sorry, but that means being involved, at least a little bit, in a group.

Groups suck.  They are riven with (usually undeclared) turf wars, brittle egos, dysfunction etc.  They waste time on pointless meetings

But if you try to do stuff on your own you will be a) less effective and b) very likely shorter-lived in your efforts.

Groups suck. But suck it up…

3. Try to be a less-terrible ally.

People of colour, poor people etc have got far more immediate (and, gasp) important things to be doing than helping well-meaning white people be less-terrible allies. It’s exhausting emotionally, it means they have less time for the stuff they need to do.

There already exist LOADS of resources for white people to get stuck into.  Here’s a brief. Please suggest additions. Please USE these resources.  Please step into discomfort (together) and stay there.

What White People Can Do Next by Emma Dabiri (2021 book)

No more white saviours, thanks: how to be a true anti-racist ally by Nova Reid (Guardian 2021)

And for people who find they benefit from academic work

• Hesford, Wendy S. “Reading the signs: Performative white allyship.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 107, no. 2 (2021): 239-244.

• Badenhorst, Pauli, James Jupp, Jenna Min Shim, Timothy J. Lensmire, Zachary A. Casey, Samuel J. Tanner, Veronica Watson, and Erin Miller. “Doesn’t Your Work Just Re-Center Whiteness? The Fallen Impossibilities of White Allyship.” Journal of Curriculum Theorizing (2022).

• Clark, Meredith D. “White folks’ work: Digital allyship praxis in the# BlackLivesMatter movement.” Social Movement Studies 18, no. 5 (2019): 519-534

• Liu, Helena. “White allyship.” In Redeeming Leadership, pp. 141-156. Bristol University Press, 2020

4. If you have academic training and access to resources, do two things

First, share the skills you have – research, writing, etc – with people who want to take on those tasks. Don’t be a chokepoint,  for your own particular needs

Secondly, expose lies and tell the truth. Study the rich.  There is so much to be done, so few doing it.

Organisations

[NB This is from a google search. If someone else who actually knows first-hand has made a better list, I will take this down and point to their work]

South Asian Climate Solidarity

Asia Pacific Network of Refugees

Home

Melbourne Friends of the Earth (held a workshop in February – 

How we build solidarity for climate justice lunch & workshop

This workshop will explore how we can build solidarity with climate impacted and marginalized communities, by understanding the ways that systems of oppression impact our activism, everyday lives and those of our communities.

Rising Tide Australia

Human Rights Law Centre (policy stuff, legal advocacy)

You might also be interested in

Australia commits $9 million to help Pacific neighbours meet climate targets by Joshua Hill [reeweconomy]

Accidents will happen. It’s what you do next.

On Saturday 6th (well, Sunday 7th am Australia time)  I was uploading already written and proofed blog posts to the website. I had enough attention left in me to  realise that at least a year ago I had fouled up my database, and the upcoming post for “October 9” was utterly invalid.  To see if I could easily Close The Gap,I went to my SHED (Secret Huge Eco Database) to see what I had for that date.

I found something old that I knew about but had never really understood its implications. Or maybe, to be extra-fair to myself – the implications weren’t apparent when I entered it.

This has led to, shall we say “a flurry of activity.”

The “What to do about C02?” documentary, directed by Russell Porter, is 40 years old. The tweet about it did well, and I contacted Russell to say that people were watching his (excellent) documentary.

You can watch the documentary by clicking here.

He said the following in reply

“I used to say in my teaching that a good documentary film should work for any audience anywhere, beyond its own time and place.

“TV current affairs and news programmes on the same subjects are by definition ephemeral – they usually disappear after their initial broadcast. 

“The challenge for documentarians is to find the universal truths behind the specific context, and I think the enduring appeal of these CSIRO films demonstrates this point.

“But as I said in the interview, I doubt this kind of film could be made today, certainly not within an institutional context. 

“For a start the national  institutions like CSIRO no longer have the luxury of their own production and distribution facilities.

“Secondly, the integrity of the institutions themselves has been fatally compromised by the imposition of Thatcherite privatisations and the need to “make profit”  at the expense of all other values. 

“The current revelations and legal / personal disasters relating to UK sub-post masters as a result of privatised corporate greed, lies and cover-ups is a case in point. 

“It is revealing that there was no official reaction to these monumental injustices until the ITV broadcast of a compelling dramatised documentary. “Mr Bates Vs. The Post Office”.“

NB He wants to make clear that

it is just my personal view rather than anything formally connected to CSIRO. I haven’t had anything to do with the organisation since 1988

I say – one of the crucial losses in the last 40 years (not that before then was by any means perfect) has been the stupefaation and demoralisation of those opposed to escalating murder and mayhem against all other species, and future generations of humans. Our sense-making has been attacked, mostly successfully. And here we are.

Thirty years ago, on this day, June 27th, 1994, a Democrat tries to get Labor to be less terrible.,

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:%22media/pressrel/HPR06004907%22

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 359ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Senator John Faulkner was a relatively new Federal Environment Minister, and was going to be making various launches of policy documents. John Coulter had been around talking and thinking about environmental issues since the early 70s. And as a Senator for the Democrats, was well entitled to offer some free advice. 

What we learn is that there have been decent parliamentarians and I should say that I think both Coulter and Faulkner were decent parliamentarians trying to grapple with these issues. 

What happened next? I don’t know if Faulkner took on board anything that Coulter said, there was then the battle over carbon tax. On Friday, February 10 1995 Faulkner ran up the white flag and instead we got the frankly ridiculous Greenhouse Challenge. And here we are. The emissions kept rising.

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 27, 1998 – we’ll trade our way outa trouble (not)

June 27, 2000 – crazy but well-connected #climate denialists schmooze politicians

Fourteen years ago, on this day, April 20th, 2010, another of those normal accidents happened…,

2010 Deepwater Horizon rig explodes

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 390ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was the clue is in the name, Deepwater and Horizon, both implying that we’re having to go further and further to find oil, that the energy return on investment is lowering and it’s getting riskier. And so it did. The context was that we’ve been extracting oil. If you don’t count Burma for 170 years, we’re very good at it. If by good you want to overlook the inevitable leaks, and the inevitable tanker disasters, these normal accidents. 

What we learn Is that accidents happen. Normal accidents happen…

What happened next, BP tried to dodge the blame with a certain amount of success. The marine environments were devastated. people’s livelihoods were devastated. But we’ve moved on… other disasters we can expect. And there’s the Onion story, clearly inspired by Deepwater Horizon…

Millions Of Barrels Of Oil Safely Reach Port In Major Environmental Catastrophe

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 20, 2006 – David Cameron does “hug-a-husky” to detoxify the Conservative “brand”

April 20, 1998 – National Academy of Sciences vs “Oregon petition” fraud

On this day four years ago, February 22 2020, a pipeline carrying carbon dioxide ruptured. It turns out that Carbon Dioxide is Not Good For You…

It was just after 7 p.m. when residents of Satartia, Mississippi, started smelling rotten eggs. Then a greenish cloud rolled across Route 433 and settled into the valley surrounding the little town. Within minutes, people were inside the cloud, gasping for air, nauseated and dazed.

Some two dozen individuals were overcome within a few minutes, collapsing in their homes; at a fishing camp on the nearby Yazoo River; in their vehicles. Cars just shut off, since they need oxygen to burn fuel. Drivers scrambled out of their paralyzed vehicles, but were so disoriented that they just wandered around in the dark.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/gassing-satartia-mississippi-co2-pipeline_n_60ddea9fe4b0ddef8b0ddc8f

The context

Pipelines are everywhere, transporting things we rely on without even knowing about. It’s only when something goes wrong (and things always go wrong, eventually) that you notice.  The broader context is that the CCS proponents are suggesting an INSANELY LARGE number of pipelines, built almost instantaneously.  Yeah, that’s gonna happen…

What we learn

Normal accidents will happen. And we never learn, really, because that would require close and sustained attention of those with power…

What happened next

It oddly didn’t get a lot of global coverage. But it will if pipelines from capture sites (be they power plants or from “Direct Air Capture” start springing up…

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

https://eu.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/agriculture/2022/09/11/here-minute-details-2020-mississippi-co-2-pipeline-leak-rupture-denbury-gulf-coast/8015510001/

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/21/1172679786/carbon-capture-carbon-dioxide-pipeline

https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/26/22642806/co2-pipeline-explosion-satartia-mississippi-carbon-capture

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/gassing-satartia-mississippi-co2-pipeline_n_60ddea9fe4b0ddef8b0ddc8f

https://www.desmog.com/2023/09/14/satartia-disaster-an-anomaly-james-millar-damage-control-carbon-capture-canada/#:~:text=A%2024%2Dinch%20pipeline%20exploded,concerns%20that%20mention%20the%20incident.

CO2 Pipelines and Carbon Capture: The Satartia Mississippi Accident Investigation

Also on this day: 

Feb 22, 2000 – Japanese coal-burning to be dealt with by Australian trees?

February 22, 2013 – Idiotic “Damage” astroturf attempted by miners

Fifty-five years ago, on this day, February 11th, 1970.

Two things on this day.

One is a European Conservation Year event with Prince Philip and Anthony Crosland, who was still the relevant Secretary of State  as reported in The Spectator by one Stanley Johnson (the wife beater).

And

Showing of Shell-Mex and BP film “Environment in the Balance” – (see issue 2 of “Your Environment”) 

Here’s the beginning of a review from the second issue of Your Environment…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 324ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that everyone had started wringing their hands about conservation issues, and the European Year of Conservation Year had been announced and was providing an opportunity for this sort of nonsense. Then in the evening in London, there was a showing of a BP film “Environment in the Balance.”  BP had been making so-called educational films – you could also call them propaganda –  for years. And this film was typical hand-wringing, pushing the responsibility on to individuals. 

What we learn is that everyone was running around at this point, saying that “something must be done.”  And that would go on for a couple more years, until they stopped saying it because they were bored, hearing themselves say it, and because it was clear that nothing was going to be done. 

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: 

February 11, 1993 – Liberal Party plans would not meet climate goals, says expert

Feb 11, 1994 – President Clinton proclaims the end of environmental racism.  Yeah, right.

Feb 11, 1980 – First UK Government climate report released.

Twenty six years ago, on this day, December 31, 1997, the Federal environment minister Robert Hill took a pop at the peak green group in Australia.

“THE Australian Conservation Foundation claims that opinion polls show Australians “do not agree with the Government’s push for the right to increase our greenhouse gases while other countries reduce” (Kyoto Harmed Our Reputation, Letters, 22/12).

“Perhaps if the ACF and others had not embarked on a deliberate campaign of misinformation on the greenhouse issue the results may have been different.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 364ppm. As of 2023 it is 421ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Australian government had extorted an eye-wateringly generous deal at Kyoto. Robert Hill had got a standing ovation from the Liberal party room – or possibly the cabinet I forget the details – but Australian environmentalists were understandably really horrified that the whole process had been treated just so shabbily and went public.

What I think we can learn from this is that when push comes to shove, well, states are going to defend existing powerful interests in most circumstances rather than think about the future. And individual functionaries will not take kindly to being reminded of their shabby behaviour.

What happened next

Hill signed the Kyoto protocol in April 1998. His boss John Howard clearly didn’t want it to be brought forward to the Australian Parliament for ratification and he made sure that it wasn’t, finally announcing this on Earth Day, in June of 2002.

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

Hill, R. 1997. There was no `diplomatic tension’ at Kyoto. The Australian, December 31

First thing is – I screwed up, and there’s absolutely nobody else to blame.

I posted yesterday this blog post.

It’s something that I wrote the first draft of a year ago, and had updated at some point since.

The problem with it is that the quoted scientist, Mike Pentz, was not warning about C02 build-up, but rather ‘waste heat’. If I had been paying closer attention, I would have spotted that.

The consequence is that I’ve put out a blog post (and it gained some traction – a bunch of likes and retweets) which is inaccurate, which pisses me off.

Fortunately, someone on Twitter, Mike Holderness, very kindly pointed out my error. See here.

The whole story – that some scientists were worried about an ice age from all the dusty and aerosols (Reid Bryson, and early Stephen Schneider), while others worried about ‘waste heat’ (Howard Wilcox, Mike Pentz) while still others (Keeling, Bolin, Flohn, MacDonald, Commoner, Kingsley Dunham, etc) were worried about carbon dioxide – is a MORE interesting version than what I told.

So, that means that a) people have been misled (albeit unintentionally) by me and b) I look like either i) I don’t know what I am talking about or ii) I am deliberately over-egging the pudding (which I don’t need to do – there are plenty of earlier-than-1973 examples of carbon dioxide warnings). Not a good day’s work…

It happened, as far as I can reconstruct, because I was so taken with the opportunity for a “50 years” post (I do like my round numbers) and didn’t read the article carefully enough. Then there was the symmetry with the Canberra Times article comparing climate to nuclear war… So, I saw what I wanted/needed to see, and didn’t double-check…

Can this be avoided in future? Well, I can try, but to be honest, in the absence of someone vetting every single post, I can’t exclude the possibility that it will recur. If it does I’ll do a retraction/explanation.