Category: United Kingdom

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

August 31, 2006 – activists try to “Reclaim Power”

Nineteen years ago, on this day, August 31st, 2006 the first “Camp for Climate Action” has a day of “non-violent direct action” at Draw Power Station.

Day of action

On 31 August 2006, up to 600 people attended a protest called Reclaim Power converging on Drax and attempted to shut it down. There was a ‘kids march’ to Drax Power Station, with a giant ostrich puppet, made by The Mischief Makers. Two protesters climbed a lighting pylon at the edge of the Drax site and four others broke through the fence.[22] Thirty-eight protesters were arrested. The police reported that work at the power plant was not disrupted.[23]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_for_Climate_Action#Drax_2006

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 382ppm. 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 there had been previous efforts to do direct action on climate change (Rising Tide) but the issue wasn’t yet “salient” enough among environmentalists to get things moving. At the G8 protests in Gleneagles in July 2005, dissatisfied environmentalists had proposed “A Camp for Climate Action.” Its first public meeting had been in Manchester in January 2006.

The specific context was that there were enough people who could tell that there was trouble ahead. But they/we lacked basic anthropological/sociological/whateverical insights into what movement building actually WAS. Oh well, all too late now, and was probably too late then. 

What I think we can learn from this – is that good intentions are really really not enough. But nothing was ever going to be enough, frankly. The inevitability was written in decades earlier – this is all just wriggling on the hook. 

What happened next – “Camp for Climate Action” which had begun because people were fed up with summit-hopping had, inevitably, within three years, degenerated into (checks notes) summit-hopping. And bewildered, they gave up the ghost in 2011. There was then “Reclaim Power” before XR came along and… oh, one loses the will to live, you know?

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: 

August 31, 1998 – Green dollar growing on trees?

August 31, 1992 – “Community Energy Audit” in Canberra 

August 31, 2005 – “Stop Climate Chaos” launched

August 31, 2011 – anti-carbon tax protesters call Anthony Albanese a “maggot”

Categories
United Kingdom

August 25, 1969- “Global Circulation in the Atmosphere” Conference in London

Fifty-seven years ago, on this day, August 25th, 1969,the American Meteorological Society and Royal Society Conference

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 324ppm. 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 questions of meteorology and climate were beginning to heat up (sorry). There were concerns about weird weather, local air pollution etc etc.

The specific context was that the previous year the American Association for the Advancement of Science had run a symposium…

What I think we can learn from this – that events like this were important for the emerging “epistemic community”, in the lead up to the Stockholm conference and beyond.

What happened next

Within a few months scientific meetings about manc’s impact on the environment – and then in 1971 a meeting on possible climatic changes – were held.  By the late 1970s, the picture was pretty clear. Everything since then has been refinements, really.

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: 

August 25, 1933 – South Coast Bulletin reports “Carbon dioxide: climatic influence” 

August 25, 1970 – Margaret Mead and James Baldwin rap on race…

August 25, 2013 – The IPA loses support, for being stupid climate deniers.

Categories
United Kingdom

August 23, 2002 – Stafford Beer dies

Twenty-three years ago, on this day, August 23rd, 2002, Stafford Beer died.

Anthony Stafford Beer (25 September 1926 – 23 August 2002) was a British theorist, consultant and professor at Manchester Business School.[1] He is known for his work in the fields of operational research and management cybernetics, and for his heuristic in systems thinking, “the purpose of a system is what it does.”

n mid-1971 Beer was approached by Fernando Flores, then a high-ranking member of the Chilean Production Development Corporation (CORFO) in the newly elected socialist government of Salvador Allende, for advice on applying his cybernetic theories to the management of the state-run sector of the Chilean economy.[9][10]

This led to Beer’s involvement in the never-completed Cybersyn project, which aimed to use computers and a telex-based communication network to allow the government to maximise production while preserving the autonomy of workers and lower management.

Beer also was reported to have read and been influenced by Leon Trotsky‘s critique of the Soviet bureaucracy.[11] According to another senior member of the Cybersyn team, Herman Schwember, Beer’s political background and readings completely derived from works written by Trotsky and Trotskyists. Schwember himself disapproved of Trotsky’s approach.[12]

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 373ppm. 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 Beer was an interesting thinker, and who knows where the experiments in Chile might have led? The whole point is that the technocrats – the “pigs” in the language of Animal Farm, need to stop the chickens and sheep etc from learning to run things for themselves. Experiments in alternatives must be scuppered…

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: 

August 23, 1853 – first International Meteorological Conference

August 23, 1856 – Eunice Foote identifies carbon dioxide as greenhouse gas

August 23, 1971 – nuggets of ecological wisdom from Nugget Coombs.

August 23, 1971 – the Powell Memorandum

August 23, 1989 – Space Mirrors proposed to combat global warming. I am not making this up.

Categories
United Kingdom

July 29, 2023 – Sunak all in on oil and gas drilling

Two years ago, on this day, July 29th, 2023,

The Prime Minister announced on Monday that his Government will grant potentially hundreds of new licences for oil and gas drilling in the North Sea in a dramatic departure from the Government’s stance on fossil fuels. https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/tory-backlash-as-rishi-sunak-vows-to-max-out-north-sea-oil-and-gas-reserves-2517491

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 421ppm. 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 UK had been an early “leader” on climate policy, or so it liked to tell itself. Funny though, it never stood up to the American vandalism in the early 1990s, for fear of damaging the “Special Relationship”. So, for example, was climate on the agenda of the G7 in London in 1991? Well no, no it wasn’t.

Meanwhile, thanks to the reduction in the amount of coal in the electricity mix, and deindustrialisation (factories shipped to cheaper places), the UK looked like it was doing its bit, or more than its bit (which is narrowly true, so long as you don’t look too closely, or think about consumption emissions). 

So, thanks to all this, there was a broad but turns-out-thin “consensus” on the need/desirability for further climate action. And then came Rishi…

The specific context was that Sunak had become Prime Minister thanks to Liz Truss (and that six weeks is beginning to take on the aura of a cheese dream). And Sunak, who is clever but dim, thought he could use the perceived “ahead of the curve” ness of UK decarbonisation as cover for business as usual.

What I think we can learn from this is that the British political elite – like the Australian political elite and probably any other you care to mention – wouldn’t know a Keeling Curve if it bit them on the ass. They think the only reality is spreadsheets. They have doomed us all to fiery death. Ah well, so it goes.

What happened next – Sunak was turfed by the electorate and replaced by the towering political colossus, with unimpeachable political instincts and deep respect for human rights and the environment – known as Keir Starmer.

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: 

July 29, 1974 – the World (will be heating) according to GARP

July 29, 2013 – unreadable denialist screed published.

Categories
United Kingdom

July 21, 1970 – Carol Mather talks climate in the House of Commons

Fifty five years ago, on this day, July 21st, 1970, Carol Mather, Conservative MP for Esher has this to say – 

The signs are very clear for all to see, and confirmation of these signs appears regularly in the newspapers. I will give only a few examples. It is said that jet aircraft landing and taking off in New York deposit 36 million tons of carbon dioxide into the air each year. This has a “greenhouse” effect because it allows the sun’s rays to come down but prevents them from escaping into the atmosphere. …

However, if this goes on, it is thought that by the end of the century the temperature of the earth could be raised by two degrees Centigrade, and this would begin to melt the ice caps. Water generated by this melting process could, they say, be sufficient in mass to flood many cities. But all is not lost. We are pumping so much grit into the air that the sun’s rays are not able to get through, and they are deflected back into the atmosphere. The ice-cap thus is catching up with us.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1970-07-21/debates/44081be8-99e7-4a01-91a2-691347ccb5c4/EnvironmentalPollution?highlight=%22carbon%20dioxide%22%20atmosphere#contribution-a0bb4299-de7e-4649-ab16-32a903824711

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 326ppm. 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 mid-1960s onwards, more and more articles and books were appearing that at least referenced the possibility of global warming from carbon dioxide build-up (at the same time, there were also fears of an induced ice age). Mather was one of the first parliamentarians to raise the issue.

The specific context was that by 1970 newspapers were running regular “pollution” columns, features editorials. Carbon dioxide was not mentioned in all of them, or even, in fact, a majority. But it was cropping up… The issue had even been flagged in the first Environment White Paper, released in late May 1970.

What I think we can learn from this is that we have known that there might be trouble ahead for a lot longer than most people think. Well informed people might guess “1988”, and that indeed was mostly my impression before I started the All Our Yesterdays project. Truth is, it was on the radar for almost 20 years before that.

What happened next – the issue got hammered a month later by the Chief Alkali Inspector. It was on the agenda through the 1970s, but it was only in 1988 that indifference, complacency and resistance was overcome, and that largely due to political opportunism. Ah, what a species!

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: 

July 21, 1991 – “Greenhouse Action for the 90s” conference leads to “The Melbourne Declaration”

July 21, 2001 – Sleeping protestors beaten by Italian Police

Categories
Energy United Kingdom United States of America

July 19, 1979 – “a political view on C02”

Forty six years ago, on this day, July 19th, 1979, 

“The increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide may be accelerated by President Carter’s new-found enthusiasm for synthetic fuel. But the atmospheric ‘crisis’ may come too slowly to bother the politicians, argues Michael Glantz.”

Glantz, M. A political view of CO2. Nature 280, 189–190 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1038/280189a0

A political view of CO2 | Nature

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 337ppm. 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 through the 1970s scientists got more interested in – and alarmed about – the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In February 1979 the First World Climate Conference had happened in Geneva.

The specific context was that in response to the second oil shock, plans for the US to make shale oil were on the front burner. People like Glantz were part of the move to say “whoa, before you get moving on this, have you thought about the carbon dioxide implications?”

What I think we can learn from this is that by the late 1970s, a moderately well-informed person would have known that there was a better-than-trivial chance of serious trouble ahead.

What happened next is that the better-than-trivial chance happened. Oh well.

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: 

July 19, 1968 – “man has already rendered the temperature equilibrium of the globe more unstable.”

July 19, 1976 – , Scientist warns “ “If we’re still rolling along on fossil fuels by the end of the century, then we’ve had it.”

Categories
United Kingdom

July 10, 2015 – Zero carbon homes policy abolished

Ten years ago, on this day, July 10th, 2015,

the Tories abolished the zero-carbon homes policy. It was part of their “Fixing the foundations: Creating a more prosperous nation” gag.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/10/uk-scraps-zero-carbon-home-target

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 401ppm. 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 British housing stock is largely crap – poorly insulated etc etc. This was spotted as a problem for energy conservation in the 1970s (probably earlier), but actually doing anything about it is tremendously difficult – so many stakeholders, so much ick about having strangers in your house etc.

The specific context was a relatively sensible Labour policy had been that all new houses would need to be super-energy efficient. The big house-building companies etc didn’t like it, but had to bide their time. Then, with the implosion of the Liberal Democrat vote in the 2015 general election, the moment came. The Cameron government really began to “cut the green crap.”

What I think we can learn from this is that you can go to a posh school and emerge an ignorant sociopath. Who knew? Also, lobby groups can be patient.

What happened next is that crap energy standards for new housing remained the norm (in all neo-institutional theory senses of ‘norm’).

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: 

July 10, 1985 – French state commits terrorist act

July 10, 1996 – National Greenhouse Advisory Panel cops a serve

July 10, 2008 – first Australian #Climate Camp begins, near Newcastle

July 10, 2010 – Rio Tinto amplifies the message…

Categories
United Kingdom

June 22, 1978 – ETSU report about Human Activity and Carbon Dioxide

Forty seven  years ago, on this day, June 22nd, 1978, a report about “Human Activity and Carbon Dioxide”, written by A.T. for the Energy Technology Strategy Unit was released.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that the bodies within the general energy/environment policy networks had been aware of carbon dioxide build-up since the late 1960s (it’s mentioned in the first Environment White Paper, published in May 1970, for example). There had been the drought of 1976, and in the same year the World Meteorological Organisation Executive had flagged C02 build-up as something to watch. By the time this report came to be written, the WMO had decided on hosting the first World Climate Conference, to be held in Geneva in February 1979.

The specific context was that ETSU was under some pressure to justify its existence, and this particular report was subject to criticism for perceived duplication (the IEA Clean Coal Research people were producing something at the same time).

What I think we can learn from this is that by the late 1970s, various UK science and technology groups were looking closely at carbon dioxide.

What happened next – the report sank without trace, having little or no influence on the “Climatic Change” report finally released in February 1980. 

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 22, 1976 – Times reports “World’s temperature likely to rise” – All Our Yesterdays

June 22 ,1988 – Roger Rabbit on forced consumption (and so on to #climate apocalypse) – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

June 20, 1995 – Shell raises the white flag in Brent Spar battle

Thirty years ago, on this day, June 20th, 1995, Shell surrenders in the Battle of Brent Spar

See this from Greenpeace’s 1995 Annual Report

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 363ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that there had been a decent run of “environmental successes” (if you squint) over the previous decade, most memorably on ozone. And a “convention” on climate change (squint a LOT, ‘kay?).  But the oil companies never sleep, and were looking for a cheap way of disposing of dozens/hundreds of old oil rigs. If they could get one done, then, well, the precedent is established, isn’t it?

What I think we can learn from this was that this was about the last time TNCs (transnational corporations) were under the cosh of the ENGOs (environmental non-governmental organisations)  (Though I’d happily be corrected).

What happened next.  The greenwashing and the lobbying kicked into higher gear. The emissions kept climbing. We are so 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: 

June 20, 1977- “Alternative Three” – An early Climate Hoax  – All Our Yesterdays

June 20, 1979 – Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the White House – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

June 18, 2015 – Power station petition

Ten years ago, on this day, June 18th, 2015,

PRESS RELEASE: Power station petition signed by over 110,000 to be handed to DECC by giant White Elephant

Jun 17, 2015 | Press Releases

When: 8:30-9:30, Thursday 18th June 2015

Where: DECC offices, 3 Whitehall Place, London SW1A 2AW

Who: Biofuelwatch, London Mining Network & Care2 Petitions https://londonminingnetwork.org/2015/06/pr-biofuelwatch-white-elephant/

“The UK Government is expected to make an imminent announcement of a grant of up to £1 billion to a coal power station ‘carbon capture’ project by a consortium including Drax Plc, owners of the UK’s largest power station [1]. In response to this, campaign groups Biofuelwatch, London Mining Network and US-based Dogwood Alliance, started a Care2 petition [2] against public support for the new power station, which was signed by over 113,000 people. Campaigners plan to deliver it to the Department of Energy and Climate Change with the aid of Rosie, a giant inflatable White Elephant.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 403ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that carbon capture and storage was close to getting some money…

What I think we can learn from this is that not every technofix arrives on time…

What happened next  The second competition for CCS funding fell over and was followed by a  long process of the shards of the Ming Vase being put together again, and then waiting for a long time…

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 18, 1976- UK Meteorological Office explains things to Cabinet Office – All Our Yesterdays

June 18, 2008 – Carbon Capture and Storage is going to save Australia. Oh yes. – All Our Yesterdays