Categories
United States of America

June 29, 1971 – American Coal Association prez says greenies might pose national security threat

Fifty three years ago, on this day, June 29th, 1971, the “national security” argument gets an early run,

The president of the American Coal Association warned that the environmental movement could be radicalised to the point that it could weaken the United States by denying it necessary minerals and other resources.

Carl E. Bagge “Radicalism Perils Supply of Minerals.” Speech quoted in Salt Lake City Tribune, 29 June 1971, p6.

(McCormick, 1991:86)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 326ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the American Coal Association was beset by on one hand a nuclear lobby trying to eat into electricity generation and on the other side, the environmentalists. And obviously, if you want to win the argument, you slipped back into a resonant frame, and in this case, the idea of national security. They started to paint environmentalists as unwitting or witting dupes of the Kremlin. 

What we learn is that frame wars, frame walls, frame wars. Add that as a page actually. 

As per that wonderful scene in Stanley Kubrick’s Dr Strangelove the concern around “draining our vital fluids”

What happened next? On the American Coal Association the next I know of them in relation to climate change is the rather excellent August 1 1980 article in the Wall Street Journal where they dismiss it. 

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 29, 1956 – Just DRIVE, she said…

June 29, 1979 – G7 says climate change matters. Yes, 1979.

June 29, 1979 – Thatcher uses carbon dioxide build-up to shill for nuclear power

Categories
United States of America

June 16 1955 – Man’s Role in Changing Face of Earth conference begins

Sixty nine years ago, on this day, June 16th, 1955, a major environmental conference began. Not a single mention of climate change…

Beginning of Princeton conference Man’s Role in Changing Face of Earth. Lewis Mumford, Harrison Brown and lots and lots of Big Names.

There is, in the entire huge volume of proceedings, one very glancing reference – on Page 489, (Graham, M. (1956) Harvests of the Seas, pp. 487-503)

https://archive.org/details/in.gov.ignca.5089/page/n11/mode/1up?view=theater

NB Hutchinson was aware of C02 build-up at the latest in 1948

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 314ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Conservation Foundation had been set up seven years previously. And they were hosting this big meeting of all sorts of prestigious environmental thinkers, scientists, etc. And there was just one glancing mention of carbon dioxide build up, despite the facts that 

  1. Gilbert Plass had flagged it two years earlier
  2. One of the big names – G. Evelyn Hutchinson had been aware of C02 build-up, and writing/talking about it from 1948…

What we learn from this is that smart people think that they can spot future problems. But actually, the real problem might be something they’ve overlooked as trivial. And that although it’s important to listen to experts, expecting them to be able to gaze into the crystal ball with anything approaching usefulness is maybe unwise…

 What happened next? Well, the Conservation Foundation did indeed get cracking with work on CO2 in 1963. But then, at the follow-up meeting of the Conservation Foundation in I think 1964, or 1965, also had only one fleeting mention. And that was when Frank Fraser Darling raised it in q&a, only for it to be dismissed, essentially. 

It’d be interesting to see if there’s archives of that started it. And if there were people in the States that I could ask to do the research or where the files might be. 

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 16, 1971 – “Ecology Action” formed in Sydney.

June 16, 1972 – David Bowie and (Five Years until) the End of the World. Also, Stockholm

June 16, 1993 – Oooh, an international conference….

Categories
United States of America Weather modification

June 15, 1947 – Control the rain and you will reign!!

Seventy seven years ago, on this day, June 15th, 1947 an experiment took place…,

The classic cold-war pronouncement on weather control belongs to General George C. Kenney, commander of the Strategic Air Command: “The nation that first learns to plot the paths of air masses accurately and learns to control the time and place of precipitation will dominate the globe.” New York Times 15 June 1947

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 310ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The first experiment with creating rain clouds was by tipping dry ice into them. 

The context was that we just split the atom. Surely control of all of nature could not be far behind. And if you can make it rain, make the deserts bloom. You can feed the world, you can control the world. 

What we learned is the ancient dreams of predicting or even controlling the weather. Got turbo boosted with the coming of turbo jets. See what I did there? 

What happened next, lots of excitement about weather modification. And that also ended up kind of morphing into concern about inadvertent weather and climate modifications, including carbon dioxide build-up. And by the late 50s, this was being spoken of by all sorts of people. 

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 15, 1994 – Canberra Times soils itself by publishing denialist claptrap

The Guardian holds a climate summit. We. Are. Saved. June 15, 2009.

Categories
United States of America

June 13, 1926 – Tony Mazzocchi born

On this day 98 years ago, June 13, 1926, Labour and environmental giant Tony Mazzocchi was born.

You can read his wikipedia entry here.

Here’s what Noam Chomsky had to say, once.

It’s not easy, but if you say, “Well, we haven’t gotten where we wanted; I’m going to quit,” you just guarantee that the worst is going to happen. It’s a constant struggle. Take, say, Tony Mazzocchi — one of the heroes of modern labor, head of the Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers [International] Union, one of the first serious environmentalists in the country. His constituents at the front line were being murdered by pollution, destruction of the environment, and so on. This is in the early seventies, way before the environmental movement took off. His union was working toward dealing with the environmental crisis, and it moved on to try to establish a labor party in the nineties. It could have worked, but it didn’t make it.

Jacobin – https://jacobin.com/2021/06/noam-chomsky-class-war-universal-health-care-climate-justice-denuclearization

And there’s this, too.

https://laborhistoryin2.podbean.com/e/june-13-tony-mazzocchi-is-born

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327.5ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures.

Also on this day.

June 13 1963 – Revelle, Von Braun and Teller talk futures

June 13, 1988 – “‘Greenhouse Effect’ Could Trigger Flooding, Crop Losses, Scientists Say”

June 13, 2008 – activists stop coal train, throw coal off. Convictions eventually quashed…

Categories
United States of America

June 12, 1920 – “The Mad Planet” published

One hundred and four years ago, on this day, June 12th, 1920, a sci-fi novel with mention of carbon dioxide build-up was published.

But just when men were congratulating themselves on this new Golden Age, fissures opened slowly in the Earth’s crust, and carbon dioxide began pouring out into the atmosphere. That gas had long been known to be present in the air, and necessary to plant life. Plants absorbed its carbon, releasing the oxygen for use again in a process called the “carbon cycle”.

Scientists noted the Earth’s increased fertility, but discounted it as the effect of carbon dioxide released by man’s burning of fossil fuels. For years the continuous exhalation from the world’s interior went unnoticed.

Constantly, however, the volume increased. New fissures opened, pouring into the already laden atmosphere more carbon dioxide–beneficial in small amounts, but as the world learned, deadly in quantity.

The entire atmosphere grew heavy. It absorbed more moisture and became humid. Rainfall increased. Climates warmed. Vegetation became more luxuriant–but the air gradually became less exhilarating.

Soon mankind’s health was affected. Accustomed through long ages to breathing air rich in oxygen and poor in carbon dioxide, men suffered. Only those living on high plateaus or mountaintops remained unaffected. All the world’s plants, though nourished and growing to unprecedented size, could not dispose of the continually increasing flood of carbon dioxide.

By the middle of the 21st century it was generally recognized that a new carboniferous period was beginning, when Earth’s atmosphere would be thick and humid, unbreathable by man, when giant grasses and ferns would form the only vegetation.

Source: http://www.wondersmith.com/scifi/madplan.htm

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 303ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that science fiction writers had been around since Lucretius, and then Jules Verne and then on to things like “The Poison Cloud” (a London suffocates story) and so on.

What we learn: What a stupid species we are, not listening to our story-tellers…

What happened next: The emissions kept rising, albeit slowly until the 1950s and the Great Acceleration.

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

https://randy-byers.livejournal.com/82876.html

Also on this day: 

June 12, 1992 – Australia refuses to put a tax on carbon: “It’s a question of who starts the ball rolling. We won’t.”

June 12, 2011 – Nazi smears used by denialists, obvs

Categories
United States of America

June 11, 1986 – Washington Post sees a “Dire Forecast for ‘Greenhouse Earth’”

Thirty-eight years ago, on this day, June 11th, 1986, the Washington Post nailed it. with a front page story.

1986 Peterson, C. 1986. A Dire Forecast for ‘Greenhouse’ Earth. Washington Post, 11 June. p1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1986/06/11/a-dire-forecast-for-greenhouse-earth/ca99ce18-a929-48b7-8a87-ccc3c84675d2/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 347ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that nine months earlier, WMO, UNEP and ICSU had organised and held a scientific meeting in the Austrian city of Villach at which scientists had come together, done the maths, shed some illusions, and realised that the shit was about to hit the fan, and if that the human species wanted a nice 21st century it needed to get its shit together. And scientists had started to alert politicians, some of whom are already of course well sensitised. Looking at you, Al Gore. Carl Sagan had given testimony to a Senate committee in December 1985. Drums were continuing to be beat. Articles were written. And I don’t know if anyone specifically briefed the Washington Post journo, but that’s the context. 

What we learn is that I think even Joe Biden was in on the act talking about carbon protection or climate protection. 1988 was the icing on the cake of this issue that had been building in the problem stream for quite some time. Until politics stream and policy stream came together thanks to a series of focusing events such as the drought testimony the changing atmosphere conference, which was in essence another fruit of the Villach meeting. 

It’s interesting to look at that three years from Villach to Toronto, institutionally who was doing what why how? Okay. 

What happened next? The issue kept building in ‘87 and ‘88 until even George Bush and Margaret Thatcher had to talk about it.  And then we all magically solved the problem. Oh yes.

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 11, 1997 – US ambassador says Australia should stop being so awful on #climate

June 11, 2003 – US and Australian think tanks conspire vs (pluralist) democracy 

Categories
United States of America

June 9, 1971 – Carroll Wilson talks C02 build up at at Electricity Industry conference

Fifty-three years ago, on this day, June 9th, 1971, Carroll Wilson (who died in 1983) mentioned carbon dioxide build-up at an Electricity Industry conference.

For more, see this article in the Atlantic (paywalled).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 326ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was Caroll Wilson was one of those  within-institution cross-organisation movers, shakers fixers well-connected, well-respected. He had already helped put together the conferences that led to the Limits to Growth report. So he would have received a fair hearing. And would have been well aware of the work that was about to get underway about the Study of Man’s Impact on Climate in Sweden.

These guys knew. Yes, there were more pressing short term concerns around air quality in cities and smog and so forth. But Caroll Wilson will have not said anything particularly surprising to the audience, they would have been aware of the CO2 issue, most of them. 

What we learn from this is that while stuff seems shocking and new, when you’re looking without the background, once you understand any given event is part of a pattern, a flow and accretion. It kind of changes perspective a little bit. 

What happened next, Wilson died in I think, 1980. The environmental push, at least the public portion of it died by 1973. And 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: 

June 9, 1955 – Royal Society misses the point (tbf, easily done)

June 9, 1989 – the Australian Labor Party versus the unions versus the planet #climate

CATEGORIES- 

TAGS- 

Categories
International processes United Kingdom United States of America

June 8,1991 – UK environment minister Heseltine visits USA, his climate compromise rebuffed

Thirty-three years ago, on this day, June 8th, 1991, the UK Minister for the Environment, Michael Heseltine, went on a (futile) mission to the US to try to get them to be less of a blocker in the negotiations around the climate treaty that had to be agreed at the Rio Earth Summit of June 1992.

You can see lots of gory details here.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 355ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the climate negotiations were upon us in full flow. The UK had just adopted the stabilisation target at least. But it was clear that the administration of George HW Bush was digging in its heels and generally being douchey. Environment Minister Michael Heseltine was therefore dispatched to see what could be done. 

What we learn from this is that even under John Major the UK was trying to be less terrible than the Bush outfit. And they’re always these behind the scenes games. It is actually one of those little incidents that would be nice to cover. Heseltine was fresh from challenging Margaret Thatcher for the leadership and precipitating her departure. 

What happened next? The American anti climate clique went round spreading bullshit about Heseltine and there was actually very unusually a public rebuke of this. See questions in Parliament about the July 12th 1991 article in The Times. For all the good it did. And then less than a year later, the pantomime ended with the British dispatching another envoy, Michael Howard this time, to raise the white flag on behalf of the Europeans. Targets and timetables were dead. A Tale of Two envoys…

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 8, 1973 – Australian Treasury dismisses carbon dioxide build-up. Yes, 1973. 

June 8, 1973 – Australian Treasury forced to acknowledge carbon dioxide…

June 8, 1993 – Clinton defeated on his “BTU” tax.

June 8, 1997 – US oil and gas versus Kyoto Protocol, planet

Categories
Food United States of America

June 5, 1974 – “Food, the Next Crisis”

Fifty years ago, on this day, June 5th, 1974 we start to wonder about how food production might be affected…,

1 Stephen Schneider, “Food: The Next Crisis,” The National Observer (5 June 1974): p. 18. This article appears to have been the first time that Schneider mentioned publicly the idea of a “genesis strategy” to deal with the potential long-term effects of climate on the global food supply.

(Henderson 2014, Dilemmas of Reticence)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 331ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was some people were worrying about food running out as part of that Malthusian moment, and the Green Revolution hadn’t really kicked in. And past few years harvests had been weird, weird weather. Two months earlier Henry Kissinger had given his speech about the dangers of a change in the climate at the UN . And here’s Stephen Schneider talking about the impacts that changing climate will have. At this point, not everyone is entirely sure that the problem is going to be CO2 build up. That consensus doesn’t really start to firm up until ‘75 to ‘77. By ‘79, I think it’s fairly well accepted, except by a few idiots like Robert Jastrow and John Mason.

What we learn is that we’ve been worrying about where the food’s gonna come from, for a very long time. And it’s this sort of thing that we’ll have had Crispin Tickell pondering, ahead of his sabbatical at Harvard.

What happened next? There were more food and adaptation related issues. See The Great Adaptation: Climate, Capitalism and Catastrophe by Romain Felli for more details.

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 5, 1990 – The Australian Capital Territory adopts the “Toronto Target”

June 5, 1993 and 2011- let’s have a march for #climate… It will make us feel good.

June 5, 2002 – John Howard says Australia won’t ratify Kyoto Protocol

Categories
United States of America

June 3, 1970 – US Senator suggests World Ecology Unit

Fifty four years ago, on this day, June 3rd, 1970, a US Senator, Warren Magnuson, realises what’s required, for all the good it does anyone.

(If you were bothered, you could compare with Eddie Scheverzade’s comments on 27 Sept 1988 about UNEP getting beefed up into a world government…)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 325ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Earth Day had happened. Everyone was writing articles about how booming we were. And the US Senator was giving a speech, probably reading into the Senate record, an article from a newspaper, or magazine. But crucially, this guy said that there should be a World Ecology Unit because the problems are global, it will need forms of global governance. Now this is the whole kind of One World Government black helicopters stuff that gets nut jobs in the States so riled. It came two years before the Stockholm Conference, which gave us an underpowered under cooked United Nations Environment Program. As late as 1988 people were talking about it. On the same day as Thatcher’s speech at the Royal Society, Eduard Shevardnadze was telling the United Nations General Assembly that there needed to be a global eco government sort of outfit. 

What we learn is that we’ve known that this was a massive coordination problem across nations across generations, we’ve been unable to solve it. 

What happened next, the idea came to nothing, 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: 

June 3, 1989 – Liberal Party to outflank Labor on #climate?!

June 3, 1994 – Greenpeace warns of climate time bomb

June 3, 2010 – Merchants of Doubt published