Categories
United Kingdom

December 19, 1982 – BBC on “the State of the Planet”

Forty three years ago, on this day, December 19th, 1982,

Horizon BBC Two Sun 19th Dec 1982, 15:20 on BBC Two England

The State of the Planet

This year 100 world authorities on the environment met in London; their task, to assess progress in the ten years since the first major UN Environment Conference in Stockholm.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 341ppm. 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 yes, the big Stockholm “save the earth” conference was ten years ago. There were some signs of progress on some issues (lead in petrol, etc) but clearly other problems were growing.

The specific context was – the international bureaucracy loves an anniversary – another chance for more reports, more meetings, more pledges.

What I think we can learn from this – we knew plenty a very long time ago. The best time to slam your foot on the brakes is before the bus goes off the cliff.

What happened next – the facts kept getting told. And ignored. By the late 1980s, for a variety of reasons, they became unignorable. BBC Horizon kept making programs about this.

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: 

December 19, 1988 – the launch of “Ark”

December 19, 1991- Will UN negotiations go as usual and “commit us to global catastrophe”?

December 19, 2010 – CCS dies in Queensland

December 19, 2017 – BHP exits World Coal Association.

Categories
International Geophysical Year United Kingdom

December 16, 1957 – Met Office discusses Atmospheric Chemistry at RSA – CO2 build up “might be disastrous” (in a few centuries).

Sixty eight years ago, on this day, December 16th, 1957, there was a Meteorological Office discussion of Atmospheric Chemistry at the Royal Society of Arts.

And

“If carbon dioxide continued to be generated by human activities at the present rate, and if it all remained in the air, there would be a change in the world’s climate which within a few centuries might be disastrous.”

(see 1958 Meteorological Magazine)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 315ppm. 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 Met Office has been around for yonks! The Royal Society of the Arts is somewhat older.

The specific context was that the International Geophysical Year was underway, with a lot of data analysis to come…

Even before the data was collected, however, there was knowledge that there might be trouble ahead.

NB John Sawyer was present (more on this later).

What I think we can learn from this – The IGY generated a lot of things to talk about!

What happened next

The Met Office didn’t start getting seriously interested in carbon dioxide until 1976…

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: 

December 16, 1991 – European Energy Charter becomes a Thing

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

December 16, 2004 – “2 degrees of warming to be a catastrophe”

 December 16, 2008 – “The Australian” attacks on climate change

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

December 15, 2008 – police smears about Climate Camp exposed

Seventeen years ago today, December 15 2008, the late John Vidal writes up the facts in an article titled “Those Kingsnorth police injuries in full: six insect bites and a toothache”  

When climate camp protesters descended on the site of the Kingsnorth power station for a week-long summer demonstration, the scale of the police operation to cope with them was enormous.

Police were accused of using aggressive tactics, confiscating everything from toilet rolls and board games to generators and hammers. But ministers justified what they called the “proportionate” £5.9m cost of the operation, pointing out that 70 officers had been injured in the course of their duties.

But data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act puts a rather different slant on the nature of those injuries, disclosing that not one was sustained in clashes with demonstrators.

Papers acquired by the Liberal Democrats via Freedom of Information requests show that the 1,500 officers policing the Kingsnorth climate camp near the Medway estuary in Kent, suffered only 12 reportable injuries during the protest during August.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/dec/15/kingsnorth-climate-change-environment-police

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 those agitating for crazy ideas, like (checks notes) an end to slavery, votes, votes for women etc etc are always ignored, and once they can’t be ignored are repressed and smeared. That’s just the way it is.

The specific context was that Climate Camp had been allowed to run for two years already (the police were well aware of the plans to take the Drax site, since those discussions were held in the flat of one of the Spycops). Probably by now they were getting bored, and the SDS was being closed down. So, time to up the harassment (confiscating board games, blasting music at 3am etc etc) and also try to smear the activists with the help of a credulous/compliant media.

What I think we can learn from this – you shouldn’t straight up believe everything you read in a newspaper, even (especially if?!) it comes from an “official source.”

In the words of the journalist Nicholas Tomalin – “they lie, they lie, they lie.” 

What happened next

Same same same. Some things just don’t change.

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: 

December 15, 2005 – James Hansen versus Bush again…

December 15, 2007 – Bali COP closes with “Road Map to Copenhagen” – All Our Yesterdays

December 15, 2009 – Monbiot versus Plimer on Lateline

December 15, 2009 – Daily Express expresses its irresponsibly idiocy…

Categories
Science Scientists United Kingdom

December 13, 1984 – Thatcher warned about climate change. Again.

On this day 41 years ago, the Chief Scientific Advisor, B.N. Nicholson wrote a report which included this –

The predicted changes in climate accompanying increases in atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and other gases will have widespread and possibly catastrophic impacts on agriculture, energy supply and demand, sea-defences etc.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 352ppm. 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 by the early 1980s climate scientists were pretty sure that there was a quick (in geological terms basically instantaneous) warming on the way. Not that anyone in “power” seemed to give a damn.

The specific context was that Thatcher had already been warned about carbon dioxide build-up by her previous Chief Scientific Advisor, John Ashworth. Meanwhile, by 1984 it was becoming obvious to scientists who could add up that there was serious trouble ahead.

What we learn.  There were plenty of warnings – our “leaders” did not lead.

What happened next. Thatcher was finally convinced in 1988, and the next phase started – one of empty promises.

Also on this day

December 13, 1967 – Sweden begins to save the world…

December 13, 1973 – Edward Heath announces Three Day Week

December 13, 1978 – BBC Radio talks about climate change “One Degree Over” – All Our Yesterdays

December 13, 1984 – Christian Science Monitor monitors the #climate science – ooops.

Categories
Coal United Kingdom

 December 10, 1980 – the future for coal and the environment

Forty five years ago, on this day, December 10th, 1980, the National Coal Board’s top science bod says what he thinks…

10 December 1980 lecture THE FUTURE FOR COAL AND THE ENVIRONMENT

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 339ppm. 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 carbon dioxide build-up as a problem was by now almost 30 years old. There had been waves of concern, each had receded leaving, well, not very much.

The specific context was that Gibson had been up to his neck for the last few years in various investigations of what to do about C02 build-up, if anything could in fact be done.

In 1979 Margaret Thatcher, as the new Prime Minister had met her chief scientific advisor. He tried to get her interested/concerned and her retort was “you want me to worry about the weather?”

What I think we can learn from this – the warnings were there. They were largely ignored.

What happened next – the problem would not become an issue until 1988…

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: 

 December 10, 1978 – Academic workshop on “Climate/Society Interface” begins in Toronto…

December 10, 1985 – Carl Sagan testified to US Senators on #climate danger

 December 10, 1991 – denialist hosted by the “Tasman Institute” – All Our Yesterdays

December 10, 2006 – Shergold Group announced

Categories
United Kingdom

December 9, 1955 – Tribune writes on carbon dioxide and Weather Control

Seventy years ago, on this day, December 9th, 1955,

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 313ppm. 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 the late 1940s the possibilities of what we would not call geo-engineering – melting the Arctic on purpose etc – were popping up in the popular press and the left-wing press.

The specific context was that the International Geophysical Year was coming up, and questions of changes in the weather/climate and the possibilities of man-made weather were becoming a commonplace.

What I think we can learn from this – the knowledge was there, for a very long time, but mostly “lost in the noise.”

What happened next – these sorts of articles kept getting published. The emissions kept climbing. 

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: 

December 9, 1974 – UK Department of Energy launches “energy efficiency” programme

December 9, 1998 – Canberra bullshit about environment

December 9, 2004 – “Real Climate” hits the web, bless it.

Categories
Poland UNFCCC United Kingdom

December 3, 2018- David Attenborough on the end of civilisation

Seven years ago, on this day, December 3rd, 2018,

“The collapse of civilisation and the natural world is on the horizon, Sir David Attenborough has told the UN climate change summit in Poland.

“The naturalist was chosen to represent the world’s people in addressing delegates of almost 200 nations who are in Katowice to negotiate how to turn pledges made in the 2015 Paris climate deal into reality.

“As part of the UN’s people’s seat initiative, messages were gathered from all over the world to inform Attenborough’s address on Monday. “Right now we are facing a manmade disaster of global scale, our greatest threat in thousands of years: climate change,” he said. “If we don’t take action, the collapse of our civilisations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon.”

3 Dec 2018 Guardian

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 409ppm. 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 Attenborough had been slow to acknowledge the carbon dioxide problem (see 2006 piece by George Monbiot).

The specific context was that with the IPCC’s 1.5 degree report, and the Thunberg school strikes, and XR’s “declaration of rebellion”, it was all systems go for climate doom.

What I think we can learn from this – “words words words” as Hamlet would have it.

What happened next – Attenborough kept making documentaries. The emissions, at a global level, kept climbing. So did atmospheric concentrations and temperature. We are fubarred.

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: 

December 3, 1968 – UN General Assembly says yes to a conference about environment. CO2 mentioned.

December 3, 1970 – Olof Palme looks to the future… 

December 3, 1972 – #climate scientists write “gizza grant” letter to President Nixon

Categories
United Kingdom Weather modification

December 3, 1974 – Commons debates “The Weather Machine”

Fifty one years ago, on this day, December 3rd, 1974,

The CO2 question (that is, long-term temperature and precipitation changes caused by rising carbon dioxide levels) was absent from the Dynamical Climatology Branch and rarely touched on by Mason. This changed with the airing of Nigel Calder’s BBC television programme, The Weather Machine, in 1974. Calder, a well-known British science writer and former New Scientist journalist, painted the imminent coming of a new Ice Age in such dramatic terms that the House of Commons ordered the Meteorological Office to report on Calder’s pronouncements 

‘Meteorological Office: Ice Age Predictions, House of Commons Debate,’’ 3 Dec 1974, Hansard, Vol. 882, cc. 440-2W 

via Martin-Nielsen, 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 330ppm. 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 all sorts of predictions – about getting hotter and getting colder, for various reasons, were being thrown about in the 1960s and 1970s. Carbon dioxide build-up was acknowledged by all, but some (including Nigel Calder) were not interested.

One does wonder what Nigel’s dad, Lord Ritchie-Calder, thought…

The specific context was – 1974 was busy year, politically, and there was still ambiguity about what the future would hold for the climate (it wasn’t really for another 10 years that all doubt could be removed, though certainly by the second half of the 1970s more and more people were saying “it’s gonna get hotter, and carbon dioxide is the reason why”).

What I think we can learn from this – the BBC used to have the power to upset the applecart.

What happened next – a fierce prolonged two year spat between the BBC and John Mason, who was, by all accounts, an, ah “forceful personality.”

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: 

December 3, 1968 – UN General Assembly says yes to a conference about environment. CO2 mentioned.

December 3, 1970 – Olof Palme looks to the future… 

December 3, 1972 – #climate scientists write “gizza grant” letter to President Nixon

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-