Category: Uncategorized

On this day, December15  in 2009 those galaxy brains at the Daily Express ran a front cover “100 reasons why global warming is natural.”

Pricks.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 387ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

The newspapers at this point were full of stories about climate change because the Copenhagen COP15 conference was underway and since 2006, a wave of climate activism and legislation had been happening. The Daily Express readers wanted to be able to dismiss it all as just another green hoax-  god forbid it turned out that the hippies and the eco nuts were actually right.  That would cause mental anguish in the tiny brains of Express readers.

Why this matters. 

We need to remember just how how stupid and irresponsible the popular press has been on the question of climate change (for well understood reasons – grok the Propaganda Model of Herman and Chomsky).

What happened next?

The Daily Express has continued to be a newspaper by and for idiots.

On this day, October 25 in 1982, the “Climate Processes and Climate Sensitivity” symposium opened in New York.

And Exxon knew about this. How do we know Exxon knew?

Because, um, they sponsored it, and one of their guys gave a speech.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2017/David.E.E.1982.EXXON.EwingSymposium.pdf

First day of Climate Processes and Climate Sensitivity . … Biennial Maurice Ewing Symposium held at Palisades, New York, October 25-27, 1982  

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 338.41ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this –  The late 70s effort to get politicians onboard had failed. The work, however, continued.

Why this matters. 

The “we didn’t know” defense is no good…

What happened next?

In 1984 a book of the same name was published https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984GMS….29…..H/abstract

Exxon? Exxon went on to help launch the Global Climate Coalition and to delay action on climate change. Of course it did.

On this day, October 7 [okay, possibly the 8th] 1989, future Liberal leader (for five gruesome minutes) and Foreign Affairs Minister (for one gruesome decade) Alexander Downer spoke out about environmental issues. Clearly he hadn’t received/read the memo that the Liberals were trying to catch soft-green votes at the upcoming Federal Election…

Alexander Downer, who was the Opposition’s spokesman on the environment, outlined another approach at the weekend. [7 or 8 October]  Downer’s views were made public when opening a fair at Yankallila on the Fleureau Peninsula south of Adelaide, a venue unlikely to attract too many aggressive miners. This was just as well, as Mr Downer told the fair-goers that the conservation lobby was getting more than a fair go, largely  because the mining lobby had allowed conservationists to dominate the environmental agenda. As he had been the Opposition spokesman on the environment during-the last election campaign Mr Downer felt especially strongly about the issue, as while he saw Greenies, coming to the aid of the ALP, the mining industry was not as forthcoming in their aid for the coalition.

At Yankallila, he first called the mining industry “weak and gutless”, then accused them of letting “radical Greens” dictate the agenda so that “what were previously regarded as extreme conservationists have become the mainstream spokesman of responsible conservation”.

“The business community and level-headed conservationists must now change radically the way they approach conservation issues by applying the logic of the marketplace and putting a price on Australia’s natural environment,” he said. Big

Mr Downer’s argument was that if Australia “was to pursue responsible conservation policies it would have to put a price on the environment” which would “change the signals sent out to decision-makers by , introducing market forces”.

Fraser, A. 1989. The Right forfeits claims on ecology. Canberra Times, 12 October, p.8.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 350.33ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – by this time the Australian Labor Party had been in office 6 years. There was an election coming, and green issues would matter to voters. Who would get which preferences?

Why this matters. 

Big picture? It doesn’t

What happened next?

The ALP squeaked home in March 1990 thanks to green-minded voters. Downer was briefly and disastrously Opposition Leader in 1994-5. He was then John Howard’s Foreign Minister from 1996 to 2007.

Google Downer, Woodside and East Timor. Read it and weep.

On this day, October 6 in 1988, the coal lobby said – of course it did – that the greenhouse effect had been “greatly exaggerated.”

Because before the promises for technological fixes, for complicated (and therefore easily gamed) financial instruments… comes flat out denial and minimisation.

The international coal industry hit back yesterday at charges that coal-fired power stations are a prime cause of the climatic changes associated with over-heating of the atmosphere.

The London-based World Coal Institute, representing a wide range of national and private coal utilities and traders, said research by its members showed that the contribution of coal-fired power stations to the phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect had been ‘greatly exaggerated.’

Samuelson, M. (1988) Coal Users Fend Off ‘Greenhouse’ Accusations. Financial Times, 7 October, p. 9.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 349.37ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – Margaret Thatcher – British Prime Minister and not easily dismissed as an eco-loon – had given a surprise speech at the Royal Society a week or so earlier. The “greenhouse effect” was on the agenda, and coal was the bad boy (nuclear was trying to throw it under the bus).

Why this matters. 

These industry bodies now promising a gleaming techno-future have a loooong history of, well, um, I believe the technical term for this is “lying.”

What happened next?

The World Coal group spent a long time “in denial” and then switched to promoting “carbon capture and storage.”  In that time, emissions kept climbing. And climbing.

On this day, 19th September, 1997,

“The 16 member South Pacific Forum meeting was held at Rarotonga in the Cook Islands and attended by Prime Minister John Howard. Greenhouse and climate change issues received significant media attention during this meeting. Australia’s position on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions differed strongly from the other 15 nations attending the forum. The AOSIS (particularly Tuvalu) demands were for a binding 20 per cent reduction in 1990 greenhouse gas emissions by 2005, while Australia aimed to avoid language calling for binding targets. At the conclusion of the meeting the Forum statement did not support the AOSIS proposal but urged parties to consider it.”

[source- https://www.forumsec.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/1997-Communique%CC%81-Rarotonga-17-19-Sep.pdf

On this day the PPM was 364ish. Now it is 420ish – but see here for the latest.

Why this matters. 

Australia has been ignoring its neighbours on the existential threat of climate change for a very long time.

What happened next?

Australia carved out a sweet sweet deal at Kyoto. Then still would not ratify. Kept increasing its coal exports, kept hampering the development of renewables locally.

On this day September 16 1969, Sir Macfarlane Burnet, an extremely eminent Australian scientist pointed to carbon dioxide as a serious potential problem. Yes, 1969.

Call to keep world at 2,000m

MELBOURNE, Monday. — The world population should be adjusted and maintained at perhaps 2,000 million, distinguished scientist Sir Macfarlane Burnet said today.

It was one of five minimum requirements that he set down for a “stable human eco-system” or an harmonious world.

Sir Macfarlane was delivering a paper at the Felton Bequests Symposium at the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons in Melbourne.

Sir Macfarlane said the other requirements included a stabilisation of the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to avoid the possibility of disastrous climatic change.

The theme of the symposium was the influence of scientific advances on the future of mankind. It was arranged by the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research in honour of Sir Macfarlane’s 70th birthday.

Anon, 1969. Call to keep world at 2000m. Canberra Times, 16 September, p.3.

On this day the PPM was 323 ish. Now it is 420ish- but see here for the latest.

The context is that by the late 1960s smart people were paying attention to – and starting to get worried about – carbon dioxide build-up. Burnet was not alone in this.

Why this matters.

Let no-one tell you this was a sudden surprise in 1988 (and even if it were, we’ve had a generation to start taking action).

What happened next?

More and more people became aware of the problems.  But awareness is not political and economic power, and those who were doing nicely from the sale of deliciously cheap and abundant fossil fuels saw no reason to stop. And every reason to stop those who wanted them to stop. So that’s what they did, very well, for a very long time. Eternity, effectively.

On this day, September 5, 2005, then Labor opposition spokesperson for the environment Anthony Albanese (where have I read that name recently?) introduced a private member’s bill

And oh, look, he’s all in favour of climate triggers…

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bills/r2416_first/toc_pdf/05140b01.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf

On this day the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide was 376.89 ppm Now it is 421ish- but see here for the latest.

The context is that the Liberal National government of John Howard was enthusiastically boosting fossil exports, doing everything it could to slow renewables and to scupper international action.  Labor were trying to make political capital out of this (and Albanese also – to be fair – seems like a decent human being who understands, on some level, what is at stake for our species).

Why this matters. 

It doesn’t, does it? “We knew.” That can be our obituary. Smart enough to understand the dumb things we were doing, not smart enough to stop doing the dumb things.

What happened next?

We kept digging and burning, burning and digging. A small subset of that “we” got seriously rich doing it.