Categories
United Kingdom

October 31, 1992- A Schumacher lecture – “Environmental Literacy: Education as if the Earth Mattered”

Thirty four years ago, on this day, October 31st, 1992,

Environmental Literacy: Education as if the Earth Mattered

By David W. Orr https://centerforneweconomics.org/publications/environmental-literacy-education-as-if-the-earth-mattered/

Yet there are better reasons to rethink education that have to do with issues of human survival, which will dominate the world of the twenty-first century. The generation now being educated will have to do what we, the present generation, have been unable or unwilling to do: stabilize a world population that is growing at the rate of a quarter of a million each day; stabilize and then reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, which threaten to change the climate—perhaps disastrously; protect biological diversity, now declining at an estimated rate of one hundred to two hundred species per day; reverse the destruction of rainforests (both tropical and temperate), now being lost at the rate of one hundred and sixteen square miles or more each day; and conserve soils, now being eroded at the rate of sixty-five million tons per day. Those who follow us must learn how to use energy and materials with great efficiency. They must learn how to utilize solar energy in all its forms. They must rebuild the economy in order to eliminate waste and pollution. They must learn how to manage renewable resources for the long term. They must begin the great work of repairing, as much as possible, the damage done to the earth in the past two hundred years of industrialization. And they must do all of this while addressing worsening social and racial inequities. No generation has ever faced a more daunting agenda.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 356ppm. As of 2026, 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 is that whenever there is an intractable political issue that is going result in deadlock and bloodshed and so forth, you’ll always find some liberals slapping the word “literacy” after whatever it is, because information deficit model has held a role with their touching faith in humanity and the adequate ability, if not perfectibility, of man. And of course banging on about information deficit models, or within that scope allows you to avoid tricky questions about power and privilege. It also gives you a privileged position of being the lecturer, the hector who knows things that other people need to know. 

The specific context was the UN climate treaty had been signed and would – at some point in the coming years – be ratified by enough nations to become lore. Sorry law.

What I think we can learn from is there’s always people like that willing to jump here. If the problem is lack of knowledge, necessarily, it gives them status, it gives them comfort, gives them money.What happened next. Your friendly neighbourhood liberals kept banging on about literacy as the first (and often foremost and final) action. And other people kept being somewhat less impressed.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

October 31, 1994 – Four Corners reports on Greenhouse Mafia activity

October 31, 2004 – QE2 lobbied Blair on climate, reports Observer

October 31, 2006 – Stern Review “pure speculation” according to John Howard

October 31, 2018 – Extinction Rebellion makes its declaration of rebellion

Categories
United Kingdom

October 25, 2017 – Dieter Helm’s Cost of Energy Review

Nine years ago, on this day, October 25th, 2017, Dieter Helm produces the “Cost of Energy Review 2017”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 407ppm. As of 2026, 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 we have been talking about taking “cost effective action” around energy and climate for decades without ever really getting the idea of what the costs of not mitigating are, partly because those costs are discounted, because it’s the future, and mostly because we think they’re going to fall on well, obviously other generations, but other colours, colours of people (NB for the sake of clarity – nobody is accusing Prof Helm of being racist or any other -ist).

So there’s always new reviews being done and criticisms of this or that technology and this or that strategy by the current government. 

The specific context was that we were seven years into a conservative regime, initially in coalition and now independent. CCS was on its ass, but being slowly revived. Coal had been pushed out of the energy mix almost entirely, but there were all sorts of debates, and still are all sorts of debates, of course, about where you put your money. 

What I think we can learn from this – we’re toast.

What happened next from this is that the controversies are endless. It is only with the benefit of hindsight, and not even really then that people “agree” or “disagree” on path x or y or z.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

October 25, 1980 – Australian radio’s The Science Show talks about climate change…

October 25, 1982 – Exxon and “Climate Processes & Climate Sensitivity” symposium

October 25, 2000 – local authorities in England make #climate promises. Well, that went well… #NottinghamDeclaration

October 25, 2006 – David Cameron launches “Can I have the Bill?” campaign for a Climate Act

October 25, 2000 – James Hansen writes a letter

October 25, 2021 – IRENA fanbois CCS

Categories
United Kingdom

October 22, 1970 – Lord Rothschild fails to mention climate change

Fifty six years ago, on this day, October 22nd, 1970, Lord Rothschild gives the fourth Royal Society Technology Lecture and studiously avoids mentioning carbon dioxide build-up, something he was very well aware of (having told James Lovelock to not talk about it).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 325ppm. As of 2026, 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 Rothschild, as chief scientific officer for Shell, had commissioned James Lovelock in 1966 to write a report about atmospheric futures, and then had told Lovelock to keep schtum about it. 

The other broader context is that the UK had between 1967 and 1970 really woken up to environmental problems. You’d had, for example, the Torrey Canyon in ‘67 you’d had various disasters involving pesticides and dead sea birds and all the rest of it in the intervening years. In late ‘69 you’d had Frank Fraser Darling’s Reith lectures, and the Wilson government had promised action in the form of the Department of Environment and a Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, which duly happened. But the Heath Conservative Party had narrowly won and unexpectedly won the 1970 election. You’d also had Frank Ireland of the Alkali Inspectorate going off on one in August 1970 about greenhouse ‘doom-mongering’ etc.

What we learn is that environmental concerns have been something that elites have been wringing their hands about and clutching their pearls about for a long time without seriously wanting to change anything. 

What happened next Rothschild became the first head of the CPRS, the Central Policy Research Staff. Rothschild then said, as he was leaving that gig, that he wished he’d done more on the environment. 

xxx

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

October 22, 1969 – American Meteorological Society symposium on the Future of the Atmosphere, Madison, Wisconsin

October 22, 1969 – Edmund Muskie mentions CO2 build up 

October 22, 1991 – Denialist says “no more than 1 degree of warming by end of 21st century”. Turd.

October 22, 1997 – US and Australian enemies of #climate action plot and gloat

October 22, 2004 – Russian Duma votes for Kyoto ratification

Categories
Nuclear Power United Kingdom

October 16, 1981 – FT reports Bondi’s pro-nuclear warnings

Forty five years ago, on this day, October 16th, 1981, the Financial Times reports on a warning by chief scientist of the Department of Energy, Hermann Bondi, about anti-nuclear protests and protestors.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 339ppm. As of 2026, 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 the chief scientist at the Department of Energy, Herman Bondi, was very well aware of carbon dioxide build up, and didn’t want it to be a public issue per se. And he also wanted to try to win debates with the anti-nuclear crowd, and so here we see him reaching for the standard “you want black people to starve line,” which is pushed it out all the fucking time. 

What I think we can learn from this – concern for the poor of the world is a tried and tested rhetorical flourish, from people who almost certainly do not give a rat’s arse.

What happened next ? Nuclear for dealing with greenhouse gas became a talking point again in 1988-89 and it’s still there to this day. 

xxx

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

October 16, 1990 – Green groups say yes to “Ecologically Sustainable Development” – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
United Kingdom

October 9, 2025 – the launch that never happened

One year ago, on this day, October 9th, 2025,

A report by DEFRA and spooks was supposed to be released, but the launch – at the Science Museum – was cancelled at the last minute. A redacted version of the report has come out.

Fiona Harvey of the Guardian has done some good reporting on this. 

Here’s my take

https://theconversation.com/a-uk-climate-security-report-backed-by-the-intelligence-services-was-quietly-buried-a-pattern-weve-seen-many-times-before-274325

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 427ppm. As of 2026, 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 there was supposed to be a launch of a new report by DEFRA and with support from the spooks. Then the plug got pulled, and there have been attempts to get a Freedom of Information Act request-based information about it, all this has failed. The British state is utterly incapable of being democratic or transparent, and it will be no better under Andy Burnham. I’m saying, I’m narrating this in early July before he has become Prime Minister, it’ll be hitting your eyeballs, obviously, on October the ninth, and we’ll find out if I was right. 

The specific context was the COP was coming up and the British didn’t want to embarrass the hosts, Brazil.

What I think we can learn from this we are utterly doomed.

What happened next – we continued to be very very stupid.

xxx

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

October 9, 1979 – Hermann Flohn warns Irish of “possible consequences of a man-made warming”

October 9, 1991 – Greens get labeled religious fanatics, don’t like it. 

 October 9, 2006 – “Australia Responds” report about climate aid and refugees released (Spoiler, Australia didn’t in fact respond).

October 9, 2006 – @AlboMP calls for International Coalition to accept #Climate Refugees

Categories
United Kingdom

September 23, 1983 – Royal Society Members protest Thatcher’s Admission

Forty three years ago, on this day, September 23rd, 1983,

Forty-four members of the Royal Society, the world’s oldest scientific academy, have protested the election of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as a fellow, claiming her cost-cutting government has damaged science in Britain.

A spokesman for the 968-member academy confirmed press reports Friday that 44 fellows, including six Nobel laureates, wrote the society’s president, Sir Andrew Huxley, saying the Conservative prime minister’s election to the academy implied “support of a political position.”

Anon, 1983. Royal Society Members Protest Thatcher’s Admission. The Associated Press, September 23,

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 343ppm. As of 2026, 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 the Royal Society has been around for literally centuries.  

The specific context was was that Margaret Thatcher had some training as a chemist, and it was politically astute in the context of trying to keep the science budget protected to offer her membership of, or fellowship, or whatever you want to call it, of the Royal Society, not on the basis of any great scientific accomplishment, but just from straightforward emotional bribe around politics viewpoint. 

What I think we can learn from this is that honorary fellowship membership, whatever, of these organisations is contested.

What happened next Thatcher got the bribe. In 1988 gave a speech about the science budget, but also about climate change at Fishmongers Hall.

In 2006 the Royal Society wrote an unusual public letter telling Exxon to knock it off with the climate denial. 

Of late the controversy has been around Elon Musk and whether his fellowship of the Royal Society should be removed for, well, countless reasons. 

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

September 23, 1986 -Joe Biden suggests urgent #climate action…

September 23, 2007 – “Climate “clever” fools no-one…

September 23, 2013 – Media Watch versus climate denialists …

September 23, 2014 – Obama gives a wonderful speech about climate change. We are saved.

September 23, 2022 – Ad company says no to fossil fuels (spoilers -no, it doesn’t)

Categories
United Kingdom

September 18, 1970 – “UNA to discuss pollution”

Fifty six years ago, on this day, September 18th, 1970,

A branch of the “United Nations Association” is holding a meeting about pollution.

“The increase in the use of combustible fuels  has led to a 10 per cent increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere over the last century.  By 2000 AD the increase could be 25 per cent. The consequences of so much CO2 in the atmosphere  upon world weather and climate are uncertain, but could eventually be catastrophic, claim some reports. 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 325ppm. As of 2026, 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 from 1968-69 around the world environment concerns were growing. The UK had had the Torrey Canyon in ‘67. In late 1969 Frank Fraser Darling’s Reith lectures had set a cat cat amongst the pigeons (see telegraph report and economist editorial).

The specific context was, with a new Department (of the Environment) being formed, we see an United Nations Association organising a talk, and yes, on the agenda is carbon dioxide build-up. 

What I think we can learn from this is that people have known about this problem, and people have urged politicians to take action and urged society to take action and it has not worked, it did not work

What happened next we have trapped so much heat and poured stored up so many consequences for ourselves the Fafocene is just beginning.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

September 18, 2004 – Australian States back ETS plan

September 18, 2013 – Abbott’s wrecking ball starts swinging

September 18, 2013 – Feeble denialists launch feeble denialist “report”

September 18, 2013 – Greenpeace try to occupy the “Arctic Sunrise.”

Categories
United Kingdom

September 9, 1971 – enthusiasm for modelling

Fifty five years ago, on this day, September 9th, 1971,

“Whereas Bray had been highly sceptical of the World model, [UK Chief Scientific Advisor Alan] Cottrell had been enthused by its demonstration. Returning to Britain, he proposed that the British government develop a similar model, stating his belief that ‘Forrester’s approach is the most important development of its kind since Keynes’ general theory’.(117)

Given the centrality of Keynesianism in post-war economic policy, this was a significant claim. Heath, as his early enthusiasm for management science had revealed, had some interest in forecasting and simulation, and gave his permission for a scoping study on the feasibility of a British world model. Cottrell held a meeting on the subject at the Cabinet Office in September 1971, in which he had told the assembled civil servants that developing a global model for British purposes would require £50,000 and four staff. In response, an unnamed civil servant argued that the Treasury had a more sophisticated econometric model that it used for forecasting. Despite this criticism, the general idea of a global environmental model was well received, and further work was proposed.118 

Thomas Turnbull, 2018 – Project MUSE – Histories of Technology, the Environment and Modern Britain

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 326ppm. As of 2026, 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 it was obvious that there were significant environmental and economic challenges around not just energy provision, but well, everything.

The specific context was that the British state knew about the impending Limits to Growth report, and the chief scientist, Alan Cottrell, was interested. There had been a leak in the Observer already about the limits report, so this is in the context of mandarins and technocrats trying to figure out if these tools will be helpful to them. 

What I think we can learn from this is that the Limits to Growth report was influential before it was even published, and then derided as Malthus with a computer, because apparently human ingenuity will conquer all.

What happened next The chief scientific adviser after Cottrell, or the one after the one after Cottrell, was John Ashton, and he did raise the climate issue, but unfortunately the political leaders were simply not interested, and it waited until 1988 before the climate problem became an issue.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

September 9, 1947 – The Daily Worker talks about melting the ice-caps

September 9, 1971 – Stephen Schneider’s letter, and a World Model

September 9, 1971 – of Australian Prime Ministers and American scientists…

September 9, 1990 – classic (?) film Mindwalk released

September 9, 1997 – “Global Climate Information Project”

Categories
Science Scientists United Kingdom

 September 8, 1966 – John Houghton on Carbon Dioxide….

Sixty years ago, on this day, September 8, 1966, the Guardian reports on the latest meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science….

The Guardian (London, Greater London, England) · Thu, 8 Sept 1966 ·

Page 2

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 321ppm. As of 2026, 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 from the early 1950s the theory of carbon dioxide build-up had gained traction (its modern revival had begun in 1938, thanks to Guy Callendar)

The specific context was that by 1966 noises were being made in the USA about the problem, especially via the President’s Science Advisory Committee. 

This was not the first time the issue had been raised at a British Association for the Advancement of Science conference. Peter Ritchie-Calder had already spoken about carbon dioxide build-up as a problem – in 1963. 

What I think we can learn from this- people in the UK were aware of the problem by the mid 1960s, which is a bit earlier than I’d really realised when I started this project.

What happened next – John Houghton worked on a variety of things (his biography is very good) and finally, in 1982-3 became head of the Met Office, taking over from John Mason.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

September 8, 1972 – Green activist vanishes off face of Earth…

September 8, 1990 – Australian #climate denialist spouting his nonsense…

September 8, 2000 – “Minchin’s Quiet Win”

September 8, 2014 – Lobster boat blockaders have charges dropped.

Categories
United Kingdom

August 29, 1983 – Robin Page, in Daily Telegraph, worries about carbon dioxide build-up

Forty three years ago, on this day, August 29th, 1983, a gardening correspondent points to carbon dioxide build-up in his Daily Telegraph column…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 343ppm. As of 2026, 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 was that newspapers had been reporting on the potential danger of carbon dioxide build up for decades, by this point there was quite a lot of activity in the 1980s, before Hansen’s pivotal 1988 testimony.

The specific context: Here we see someone who is interested in gardening, and therefore the seasons, and when spring arrives, and how long summer is, and how hot it is, etc acknowledging the existence of the greenhouse effect and the potential dangers. 

What I think we can learn from this is that by the early 1980s the greenhouse effect was being acknowledged broadly. It was not particularly controversial. 

What happened next finally in 1988 the scientific problem became a political issue. However, we failed to act in a sane or self-preservation style, and have now condemned ourselves, future generations, and most of the other species on this planet to unimaginable pain and suffering. Homo “sapiens” my extraordinarily fat arse.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

August 29, 1981 – New York Times editorial “Heating up the Atmosphere”

August 29, 1990 – The Australian mining and forestry industries threaten to spit the dummy

August 29, 2005 – Hurricane Katrina 

August 29, 2008 – business tells Labor to go softly (Labor then does, obvs).