Categories
Norway United Kingdom

November 30, 2005 – a “North Sea Basin Task Force” is formed

Twenty years ago, on this day, November 31st, 2005,

On 30 November 2005, Minister Enoksen of Norway and Minister Wicks of the UK agreed to establish a North Sea Basin Task Force, composed of public and private bodies from countries on the rim of the North Sea. Its purpose: to develop common principles for managing and regulating the transport, injection and permanent storage of CO2 in the North Sea sub-seabed. https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/oed/pdf_filer/rapporter/north-sea-basin-report-final.pdf

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 380ppm. 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 the North Sea had been an economic bonanza for both countries (only one of which had bothered to set up a sovereign wealth fund).

The specific context was – there was increased interest in CCS, and depleted North Sea oil fields seemed like a good idea…

What I think we can learn from this – we have been hoping for technofixes for a long time.

What happened next – the CCS bubble burst in 2011, and again in 2015, but thanks to astonishing lobbying, it’s back on the agenda, and is getting LOADS of money.

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: 

November 30, 1978 – House of Lords debate on Atmospheric Changes…

November 30, 1994 – Another denialist dolt – “Global warming a clouded issue” 

November 30, 1998 – Exxon and Mobil merge

November 30, 2014 – US TV show The Newsroom tackles climate change

Categories
United Kingdom

November 29, 1968 – Arnold Marsh of the National Clean Air Society on carbon dioxide

Fifty six years ago, on this day, November 29th, 1968,

Arnold Marsh, secretary of the UK National Clean Air Society,  namechecks the problem at a speech at the House of Lords.

“A long-term outstanding problem, in the view of serious American scientific opinion, is the effect of the gradual but steady increase in the carbon dioxide content of the air as a result of the prodigious consumption, which is still going up, of the fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide, the product of all combustion processes – including our own internal processes – is not usually regarded as an air pollutant, and most of it is absorbed by growing plants. But the amount remaining in the atmosphere is creeping up, and in due course, it is suggested, the fact that it absorbs and retains more solar heat than the air itself, will mean a rise in the mean temperature of the atmosphere. This would lead to a melting of the polar ice-caps so that the level of the sea would rise and cover all low-lying land. It is not something that could happen in our lifetimes, but, if the arguments are correct, it could become catastrophic at some future date.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 323ppm. 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 from about 1967, more and more British people were realising that carbon dioxide might be a serious problem. 

The specific context was that the impetus for this from Marsh MIGHT have been Ritchie-Calder’s speech to the Conservation Society a few days earlier (i.e. Marsh may have been in touch with Ritchie-Calder about this earlier.).

What I think we can learn from this – we knew plenty.

What happened next – the general “eco” wave began properly the next year, and lasted through until 1972 or 3 or so…

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: 

November 29, 1973 – Australian politician warns of climate change

NOVEMBER 29, 1974 – SWEDISH PRIME MINISTER SAYS “RISK OF A CHANGED CLIMATE DUE TO HUMAN ACTIVITIES … [IS] OF UTTER IMPORTANCE”

November 29, 1988 – Australian parliamentarians taught climate

November 29, 1990 and 1994 – Australian denial fools (Fred Singer and Brian Tucker) – All Our Yesterdays

CATEGORIES- 

Categories
United Kingdom

November 26, 2008 – UK MPs told climate targets inadequate 

Eighteen years ago, on this day, November 26th, 2008,

A leading climate scientist has told the Environmental Audit Committee that the international target to cut carbon dioxide is too modest and the cap on temperature rise too high to prevent dangerous climate change.

On 26 November, the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee held a special one-off evidence session on the scientific basis for global carbon reduction targets. Giving evidence was leading climate scientist Professor James Hansen of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the government’s chief scientific adviser Professor John Beddington and Environment Department (DEFRA) scientific adviser Professor Robert Watson.

Anon, 2008. Committee told climate targets are insufficient  ENDS Report Dec 19

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 386ppm. 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 the UK had at that time a 60% reduction in emissions by 2050 as its target. This was bumped up to 80% in 2008. 

Bob Watson had been telling politicians (UK and US) for 20 years at this point. See this – June 10, 1986 – scientist tells US senators “global warming is inevitable. It is only a question of the magnitude and the timing.”

The specific context was that the Climate Change Act received Royal Assent that very day.

What I think we can learn from this – the MPs were warned, but didn’t particularly give a shit – tomorrow’s problem.

What happened next – in 2019 the target was pushed up to “Net Zero” (distinct from actual zero) by 2050.  All too late.

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: 

November 26, 1979 – CCS first glimmerings, by Albanese and Steinberg 

November 26, 1966 – Conservation Society first meeting 

November 26, 1996 – Australian climate modelling is ridiculed

November 26, 1998 – “National Greenhouse Strategy” (re)-launched

November 26, 2008 – pre-CPRS meeting (yawn)

November 26, 2008 – Climate Change Act becomes law

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

November 23, 2021 – XR says will mobilise two million

Four years ago, on this day, November 23rd, 2021,

Extinction Rebellion UK claims it will have 2million ppl mobilised

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 416ppm. 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 the last climate “wave” of concern began in 2018, with the long hot summer, the IPCC’s 1.5 degrees report, Greta Thunberg and … XR.  But by late 2019, before the pandemic, it was clear that the wheels were wobbling, if not actually falling off.

See my “Does XR have the right tactics” debate in New Internationalist.

The specific context was – there had been attempts to re-heat the souffle. These had failed.

What I think we can learn from this – when the groups are on the downswing, they redouble and redouble their rhetoric.

See also my XR post with Hudson’s Law of social movement organisations and JSO anthropologically fascinating, politically terrifying

What happened next – Soon after XR announced “we quit”. And I wrote about that too.

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

Xxx

Also on this day: 

November 23, 1961 – “The Day the Earth Caught Fire” (in Denmark)

November 23, 1963 – Doctor Who begins

November 23, 1968 – “Hell upon Earth” warning about environmental destruction,inc. Climate…

November 23, 1988 – Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke gives greenhouse speech

November 23, 2009 – Global Warming Policy Foundation launched 

Categories
UNFCCC United Kingdom

November 19, 2009 – Ed Miliband on “The Politics of Climate Change”

Sixteen years ago, on this day, November 19th, 2009, 

‘If we are to tackle climate change in the years after Copenhagen, it is clear we will need to secure change of an unprecedented scale. The change needs to be very big….  In the United Kingdom we have pledged in law to cut our emissions by 80 per cent. That means we need our electricity and transport systems and homes to be near zero carbon. So we need a dramatic increase in renewable energy – we are planning for a six-fold increase by 2020.’

Ralph Miliband Lecture, 19 November 2009,

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 the British state had started making all the right noises about climate change from about 2005 (Gleneagles declarations etc etc). There had been the bipartisan “Climate Change Act” of 2008. 

The specific context was – Ed was about to go off to Copenhagen, where we were all going to save the world.

What I think we can learn from this – what was that Hamlet said? “Words words words”.

And the success stories, like offshore wind? They happen by accident. Then, the stuff that might reduce energy emissions, i.e. free solar, that happens because Chinese manufacturing capacity is overbuilt. Oh, the ironies.

What happened next- Copenhagen failed. Ed beat his brother David to the leadership of the Labour Party, by the narrowest of margins. Ed then lost the 2015 election, but is now Starmer’s energy guy. Points for tenacity, I guess.

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: 

November 19, 1943 – FIDO used for the first time

November 19, 1958 – doctor warns of long-term problem of carbon dioxide build-up

November 19, 1960 – Guy Callendar gives advice on unpopularity of C02 theory

November 19, 1990 – “The US should agree to stabilising CO2 levels”

November 19, 1998 – John Howard trolls Australia by appointing Mr Coal as Environment Ambassador – All Our Yesterdays

November 19, 2007 – Gordon Brown announces first Carbon Capture and Storage competition at WWF event

Categories
United Kingdom

November 18, 2020 – Boris Johnson’s ten point plan

Five years ago, on this day, November 18th, 2020,

The Johnson government (if you can call it that) launches a “Ten Point Plan for Green Industrial Revolution

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 414ppm. 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 Boris Johnson had become Prime Minister in July 2019, prorogued parliament illegally and then won the General Election. After shaking hands enthusiastically with people at hospitals, he’d ended up briefly in an ICU. Johnson’s wife-beating father, Stanley, had been aware of the problem of carbon dioxide build-up from the late 1960s, as the Spectator’s environment correspondent

The specific context was that the UK was going to be hosting a COP (first time) and so there had to be SOMETHING to make it look like the green show was still on the road.

What I think we can learn from this is that there can be a nice round-numbered policy document, and some nice graphics, all produced by a department of state.  That doesn’t mean it is a strategy, but academics have to pretend that it is.

What happened next – Johnson was undone by a) himself and b) a scandal people could understand. Sunak basically binned “the energy transition” and “Red Ed” is beavering away, but nobody really believes in any of this stuff, do they?

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

Also on this day: 

November 18, 1953 – Macmillan tells the truth about committees

November 18, 1979 – leaked Cabinet Papers reveal effort to “reduce oversensitivity to environmental consideration”

November 18, 1989 – Small Island States say “er, we gotta do something before the waves close over our heads”

November 18, 1998 – coal guy becomes Australian environment ambassador

Categories
United Kingdom

November 17,  2009 – Manchester CIty Council signs off on a climate action plan

Seventeen years ago, on this day, November 17th, 2009 Manchester City Council Executive agrees to a “climate action” plan.

I could go on for hours about this, but you really don’t want me to. Suffice to say the following.

It’s all “kayfabe”, designed to burnish the credibility of Labour with international investors

The councillors are mostly thick

Those who enable the councillors and the council bureaucracy are lickspittles and/or spivs (this includes the academics, btw).

The civil society organisations and social “movement” organisations are either asleep or useless or – somehow – both.

That’s it, that’s the post.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 Manchester City Council had already had one bout of pretending to care about environmental issues, back in the early 1990s.  In 2000 they signed up to the Nottingham Declaration. 

The specific context was that there had been failed attempts in 2006 to develop a “climate strategy” and eventually they’d hired a London-based consultant for £50k to write a truly terrible report called “Call to Action”. This provoked citizens (and yes, I was one) to produce a “Call to Real Action” which briefly forced the policymaking process open.

What I think we can learn from this – nasty, lying, venal stupid, sclerotic neoliberal.  Just some of the many words that can be used to describe the higher-ups in Manchester Labour Party. And the council bureaucracy too..  Also, really incompetent.

What happened next – the plan was never implemented. The emissions reductions that did happen were from the National Grid, for the most part. Nothing special about Manchester at all.  In 2018 Manchester City Council made more bold promises. All broken now, of course.

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: 

November 17, 1869 – Suez Canal opens – All Our Yesterdays

November 17, 1968 -The Observer covers carbon dioxide pollution… – All Our Yesterdays

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

November 17, 1978 – British Wind Energy Association launches – 

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

November 17, 1994 – “When consumption is no longer sustainable”… – 

November 17, 2018 – XR occupy five bridges in London

 November 17, 2023 – two degrees warmer, for the first time… – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Science Scientists United Kingdom

November 17,  2009 – “Climategate” hack

Sixteen years ago, on this day, November 17th,  ,2009 email hack at the Climatic Research Unit of University of East Anglia.

“Early on the morning of November 17, Gavin Schmidt sat down at his computer and entered his password. It didn’t work. Strange, he thought. He tried a few other accounts and none of them worked, either. Now he was alarmed. As a leading climatologist with NASA’s Goddard Institute in Manhattan, he’d been hacked before. He was used to e-mails from people who disapproved of his work, 

wikipedia

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 scientists doing “impact science” work on climate had been attacked, smeared and intimidated since 1989 (e.g. hatchet jobs on James Hansen).  It had hit an early peak in 1994-5 when the IPCC’s second assessment report was underway. It had continued against Michael Mann for the “hockey stick”. 

The specific context was the Copenhagen climate sumit was about to start – and those opposed to action were going to do absolutely anything they could to reduce the chances of progress (the chances were vanishingly low, btw).

What I  think we can learn from this – we should see this attack as part of a longer trend.

What happened next – there were various investigations and it was deemed a “nothing burger” – except the denialists, obvs, cried ‘cover-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.

Also on this day: 

November 17, 1869 – Suez Canal opens – All Our Yesterdays

November 17, 1968 -The Observer covers carbon dioxide pollution… – All Our Yesterdays

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

November 17, 1978 – British Wind Energy Association launches – 

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

November 17, 1994 – “When consumption is no longer sustainable”… – 

November 17, 2018 – XR occupy five bridges in London

 November 17, 2023 – two degrees warmer, for the first time… – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
United Kingdom

November 5, 2008 – Queen asks the key question

Seventeen years ago, on this day, November 5th, 2008,

On 5 November 2008, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was opening a new building at the London School of Economics. Speaking of the credit crunch, she turned to some of the economists present and said, ‘It’s awful. Why did no one see it coming?’ Journalists, not constrained to be diplomatic, were more forthright in condemning economists. For Anatol Kaletsky, one-time economics editor of the Times, ‘Economists are the guilty men’ (the Times 5 February 2009). The economics editor of the Guardian, Larry Elliott, claimed that ‘as a profession, economics not only has nothing to say about what caused the world to come to the brink of financial collapse … but also a supreme lack of interest’ (the Guardian 1 June 2009). Writing in the same newspaper, Simon Jenkins attributed this failure to the fact that ‘Economists regard it as their duty fearlessly to offer government what it wants to hear. … Don’t rock the boat, says the modern profession, and the indexed pension is secure.’ The whole economics profession, he contended, had ‘suffered a collapse’ (12 November 2008).  https://strangematters.coop/frederic-s-lee-profile-part-one

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 386ppm. 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 climate change had burst onto public awareness again in 2006. The Queen had lobbied Prime Minister Tony Blair to do more in 2004. And then in late 2008 the Global Financial Crisis had kicked in.

The specific context was that by now everyone was talking about the COP to be held in Copenhagen in December 2009, as the last chance to save the earth. But everything was complicated by the banking near death experience and the bail outs…

What I think we can learn from this is that smart questions come from the most unexpected quarters.

What happened next – the Queen kept banging on (well, it’s all relative) about climate change.  We’re so screwed.

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.

See also

October 31 2004 report in the Observer that the Queen had lobbied Blair on the Bush administration’s stance on climate.

Also on this day: 

 November 5, 1969 – House of Lords question about the greenhouse effect

November 5, 1992 – Jeremy Leggett calls Australian petrol price cuts “insane”

November 5, 1997 – Global Climate Coalition co-ordinates an anti-Kyoto conference

November 5, 2014 – Vince Cable and the Energy Trilemma – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
United Kingdom

November 2, 1965  – The Met Office starts twice daily weather forecasts

Sixty years ago, on this day, November 2nd, 1965,

Soon after I arrived on 1st October, I became impressed that the experimental forecasts for aircraft crossing  the Atlantic were systematically more accurate than traditional forecasts based on extrapolation of time  sequences of hand-drawn charts.  Accordingly I decided, against the advice of some senior colleagues,  who favoured a longer trial period that the numerical forecasts would be issued routinely twice a day from  Monday, 2nd November 1965.  The Press and TV were invited to witness this landmark in the history of  the Met Office and gave it wide coverage.  Fortunately the first forecast was excellent and ushered in a  new era in which weather forecasts were to become objective exercises in mathematical physics replacing  the empirical methods that, for more than a century, had depended on the skill and experience of the  individual human forecaster. 

Mason memoir  

and

By carefully stage-managing the public performance of a new,  computer-driven meteorology, new claims of objectivity could be made, with public credibility  and social authority at stake.37 Thus, on the same day as the inauguration of numerical forecasts,  Mason presided over the Office’s first-ever press conference, where he proclaimed a new dawn  in weather forecasting – a move which his deputy, A.C. Best, thought to be a “great risk” for the  office’s reputation.38 While much of the credibility economy which Shapin describes concerns  scientific claims where virtual witnesses have no direct access themselves to the phenomena in  question, the success and credibility of weather forecasting is easily adjudicated on by anybody  who cares to look out of the window. Standing before more than 100 journalists and cameramen  from the BBC, national newspapers and the technical press, Mason marked the introduction of  numerical weather forecasting in the UK with great confidence: “Today is a landmark in the  history of forecasting in the Office”, he declared, “because this afternoon you will see the  production of our first routine numerical weather forecast by the computer”.39 Britain, he continued in his first push to build social authority in the Meteorological Office, could now look  forward to increasingly accurate weather forecasts underpinned by modern, objective  technologies. As the press gallery watched the Meteorological Office’s line printer slowly  produce the UK’s first routine numerical forecasting chart, Mason patiently answered questions  for nearly an hour and then distributed souvenir copies of the chart to all attendees. The  formalities over, the press gallery toured the Central Forecasting Office at Bracknell and chatted  over coffee with senior members of Mason’s staff. 

2017 Maartin-Nielsen – 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 320ppm. 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 the Met Office had not delivered warnings about a particular cold winter in 1962, and had copped some flak for that, because US meteorologists had warned about it.

The specific context was that new boss, John Mason wanted to move things along, and take advantage of new computers etc.

What I think we can learn from this – the forecasts we now accept as normal required a hell of a lot of work, and some institutional risk-taking.

What happened next

Mason was keen to move things along (the man was dynamic but backed the wrong horse on carbon dioxide and never changed course). He was a major block on “early” action (e.g. at the First World Climate Conference).

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: 

November 2, 1957 – “Our Coal Fires are melting the poles” Birmingham Post 

November 2, 1972 – “Eco-pornography … Advertising owns Ecology”…

November 2, 1994 – Greenpeace vs climate risk for corporates… 

November 2, 2006 – “RIP C02” says New Scientist

November 2, 2009 – , Australian opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull seals own doom by not bending knee to shock jock