Category: United States of America

Categories
Cultural responses United States of America

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

Ten years ago, on this day, November 30th, 2014,Aaron Sorkin’s drama show The Newsroom “does” climate change.

“The person has already been born who will die due to catastrophic failure of the planet.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 399ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Sorkin has tried to get people thinking about climate change before. Check out “The American President” from 1995.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_American_President

What I think we can learn from this

We ignored all the warnings, because to not do so would require collective action, and we really suck at that.

What happened next

Which then got chided by various “lefties” for, oh the usual – insufficiently hopey-changey blah blah blah

https://grist.org/living/aaron-sorkin-tackles-climate-change-on-the-newsroom-and-oy/  

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/11/climate-desk-fact-checks-aaron-sorkins-climate-science-newsroom/

The emissions kept climbing and the predictions came closer. Some of them have arrived. Others, well, they’re pending. 

References/further reading

Black, M. (2017). Environmental Deadpan: New Scales and Sensations of Ecological Fallout. American Quarterly 69(2), 397-409. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/aq.2017.0033.

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, 1998 – Exxon and Mobil merge

Categories
United States of America

November 27 1967 – Newsweek wrings its hands about future ecological problems, including carbon dioxide

Fifty-seven years ago, on this day, November 27th,1967, Newsweek flagged carbon dioxide build-up as one thing to worry about..

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 322ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the weekly news magazines like Time and Newsweek were beginning to wring their hands about smog, water pollution, air pollution, etc. It sold newspapers and probably resonated with a proportion of voters. Lyndon Johnson had already in 1965, given his seal of approval to the issue by doing a special message to Congress. And I suppose in 1967, it was possible – if you wanted to criticise the state of the world, but you didn’t want to criticise your government and say anything about Vietnam – you could find another issue i.e. the environment, which was “less controversial.” Though, of course, you’d soon start offending the advertisers. And the local Chamber of Commerce, if you named too many names.

What we learn is that 1968-69 and especially ‘69 really is when the whole thing takes off.

What happened next? Time and Newsweek ran stories about, you know “our polluted planet” and all the rest of it. And then it really kicked into much higher gear after the Santa Barbara Oil Spill in January 1969. And politicians like Edmund Muskie, and Scoop Jackson for getting hold of the issue as well. As was new President Tricky Dick Nixon with his idea for a government subcommittee that he would chair. 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: 

November 27, 1956 – New York Times science writer who covered C02 build-up dies.

November 27, 1969 – Canberra Times runs pollution article, mentions melting ice-caps

November 27, 1978 – “Impacts of climate on Australian Society and Economy” begins…

Categories
United States of America

November 24, 1992 – I’ve seen the future baby, it is murder (Cohen’s “The Future” released)

Thirty two years ago, on this day, November 24th, 1992, Leonard Cohen’s The Future released.

Give me crack and anal sex

Take the only tree that’s left

And stuff it up the hole in your culture…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 357ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

21 years after Meadows gave his briefing at the US Embassy, Leonard Cohen’s album, the Future was released. Cohen had been making a bit of a comeback with “I’m Your Man.” The Future is a brilliant album that you should all own a copy of, or download or whatever. I’ve seen the future baby it is murder. Everybody knows the war is over. Everybody knows the good guys lost, etc. It’s a staggering artistic achievement. In my opinion. 

What we learn is that Buddhism provides poetry, provides a good way of looking at the world, thinking about the world.

What happened next, Leonard Cohen played at being a monk and then had to go on the road to make money because he’d been looted.

My wife and I saw him twice. It was brilliant, it was absolutely bloody brilliant.

Here’s a video I made, of Hitler discovering his Cohen tickets are fakes.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhRuLBb1b1M

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 24, 1977 – Canberra Times reports “all coal” plan would “flood US cities”

November 24, 2009 – the Climate War in Australia goes kinetic…

Categories
United States of America

November 24, 1971 – I’ve seen the future baby, it is murder (Meadows explaining Limits to Growth at US Embassy)

Fifty two years ago, on this day, November 24th, 1971, a Club of Rome researcher is hosted by the American Embassy in London…

At a second meeting in November 1971, Forrester’s lead researcher, Meadows, was flown in to explain the model at an event hosted by the American Embassy.119 https://ucldigitalpress.co.uk/v2-interactive/Book/Article/61/86/4766/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 326ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Club of Rome had hired some people at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to do a big computer modelling study, based on Jay Forester’s work which was state of the art at the time, but had obvious shortcomings. There had been a leak of an early draft in the Observer in June, and there was a lot of interest in what the Limits to Growth people were going to say. And so Dennis Meadows, who was one of the research team, was brought over to the United States Embassy in London and gave a briefing on this day. 

What we learn is that The Limits to Growth report in early 1972 was, as we would now say, “well-trailed.” People were talking about all of these issues. And the question of what would happen if we just kept trying to grow the economy 50 or 60 years hence, well here we are and we know. 

What happened next, we kept trying to grow the economy, we ignored the Limits to Growth. People who ought to have known better sneered at it as “Malthus with a computer” and there have been various studies showing that the Limits to Growth people are kind of tracking quite well with reality, which is more than you can say of all the lovely models of economics.

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 24, 1977 – Canberra Times reports “all coal” plan would “flood US cities”

November 24, 2009 – the Climate War in Australia goes kinetic…

Categories
United States of America

November 21, 1969 – the first permanent ARPANET link

Fifty-five years ago, on this day, November 21st, 1969,

The first permanent ARPANET link is established between UCLA and SRI.

And computer shall talk unto computer… And all will be fine…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 324ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that computers had been getting smarter and smaller. And there was the bright idea of getting them to talk to each other via phone lines. This is all part of the Advanced Research Programme Agency? There’s an entirely fictitious scene near the beginning of Sneakers, the 1991 Robert Redford film of some hacking on these lines. 

What we learned is that the internet is 55 years old though of course, it wasn’t until HTML came along that things started to get really interesting. 

Fwiw, I think that Smartphones have really screwed the pooch, because we don’t have the capacity to really understand how to use it. We’re trying to sip from a fire hydrant. 

What happened next. I for one welcome our new digital overlords.

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 21, 1994 – Skeptic invited to engage with IPCC (Spoiler, he doesn’t)

November 21, 2013 – “Cut the Green Crap” said UK Prime Minister

Categories
Australia China United States of America

November 14, 2014 – US and China sign climate deal, in part to troll Australian Prime Minister

Ten years ago, on this day, November 14th, 2014,

The US and China governments make joint announcement on emission reductions: The two nations announce bilateral cooperation to adopt a binding protocol at the Paris COP meeting in 2015. US will aim cut emissions by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025 and China pledged to peak emissions around 2030.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 399ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Tony Abbott as Australian Prime Minister and host of a G20 meeting in Brisbane had very publicly kept climate change off the agenda literally. So what Obama and Xi did – this is back when Xi wasn’t yet nuts – was making a bilateral deal as a way of pointing out to Abbott, who was the boss/ 

What we learn was that it’s fun to make fun of Tony Abbott.

What happened next, well it turned out that US/China deal was consequential in terms of getting things moving a bit for investors and governments and so forth. It took a hit when Trump pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement. Biden has been mostly mending fences on this stuff, doing statecraft, which is what you’d expect of a president. But yeah, sometimes stuff that initially seems like a gimmick turns out to be really important. 

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 14, 1977 – Met Office boss forced to think about #climate change – first interdepartmental meeting…

November 14, 2013, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse’s 50th #climate speech

Categories
United States of America Weather modification

November 13, 1946 – first human-made snowstorm

Seventy-eight years ago, on this day, November 13th, 1946,

On November 13, 1946 pilot Curtis Talbot, working for the General Electric Research Laboratory, climbed to an altitude of 14,000 feet about 30 miles east of Schenectady, New York. Talbot, along with scientist Dr. Vincent J. Schaefer, released three pounds of dry ice (frozen carbon dioxide) into the clouds. As they turned south, Dr. Schaefer noted, “I looked toward the rear and was thrilled to see long streamers of snow falling from the base of the cloud through which we had just passed. I shouted to Curt to swing around, and as we did so we passed through a mass of glistening snow crystals! Needless to say, we were quite excited.” They had created the world’s first human-made snowstorm.

Novak, 2011.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 310ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was in the aftermath of World War Two it looked like we, as a species, would be able to do absolutely anything after all. We had just killed 200,000 of our own with two bombs. How powerful is that? 

What we learn is that weather modification was an integral part of post war Climate Science. You can’t separate it easily.

What happened next the dream of weather modification continued, until it bumped up against complexity and scale in the 60s and 70s.

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 13, 1963 – Ritchie Calder warns of trouble ahead because of carbon dioxide…

November 13, 1975 – climate testimony to House of Reps committee

November 13, 2008 – Coal industry tries to get some ‘love’

Categories
Denial United States of America

November 11, 1988 – Gore blames Reagan and Reaganites for loss of US leadership

Thirty-four years ago, on this day, November 11th, 1988,

At that [Nov 11, 1988] conference [organised by Time] French environmental official Brice Lalonde remarked, “Through the late 1970s, lots of things we learned about the environment came from the United States. And [in the] late seventies, it stops, and the lead [switched to] Scandinavia, Germany, and the Netherlands.” To this, Tennessee Democrat Senator Albert Gore quickly responded “January of 1981, to be precise.”

(Schneider, 1989: 225)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Time magazine was holding a conference about the environment and climate change and so forth. Because that sold newspapers and they wanted to get another story out of it. 

So convene a big bunch of big names. You can put it on your cover, get reflected/halo glory, future connections. It’s then easier for journalists to phone up and get quotes. Bish bosh.

And what Gore was doing was telling the truth about how the Reagan administration had been, at best indifferent, at worst, actively hostile to all environmental concerns.There had been in effect, a lost decade, longer by the time you took the incoming President Bush into account.

What we learn is that there was a lost decade,

What happened next, Gore went toe-to-toe with Bush Snr over the subject of global warming. revealing that NASA scientist James Hansen had been gagged, etc, etc. Gore was then Clinton’s running mate in 1992, at the same time “Earth in the Balance” came out. 

And here we are, with the emissions still 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: 

November 11, 1963 – “Is man upsetting the weather?”

November 11, 1988 – IPCC finishes its first meeting

Categories
United States of America

November 3, 1916 -measurement of ice flow shows climate change

One hundred and eight years ago, on this day, November 3rd, 1916,

But let’s go way back to Nov. 3, 1916, courtesy of Google News’s archive search, where we’ll see a story in the Hartford (Conn.) Courant headlined, “Fossil Rocks in Canada Studied.” The subhead under the headline reads, in part, “Measurement of Ice Flow Shows Climate Change.” https://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Bright-Green/2009/0908/why-are-they-calling-it-climate-change-now

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 302ppm. As of 2024 it is 423.7ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the earth seemed to be warming up. And this was quite possibly just some sort of natural fluctuation. Carbon dioxide is only in the normal order of things, one among many, many factors. Before the denialists leap on this, I would say that since the 1800s, it has not been a normal run of things, because we have been putting so much fossil fuel residue into the atmosphere. It wasn’t the Industrial Revolution so much as the Fossil Fuel Revolution.

What we learn is that from very early in the 20th century, people were saying there was a slight warming (possibly cyclical). Then by the late 1930s, the Arctic was visibly warming. There’s reports on that in various newspapers. And then by 1951. Rachel Carson was talking about it in her book, “The world beneath us”.

What happened next? We kept burning fossil fuels. And the emissions kept climbing. Be interesting to know if Svante Arrhenius saw this, or said anything more after his 1896 piece of work? Did he keep a folder saying the earth is warming? Was it the sort of thing that Guy Callendar was looking at?

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 3, 1990 – money for independent climate scientists? Yeah, nah

November 3, 1990 – more smears about the IPCC, in the Financial Times 

November 3, 2000 – Australian denialists get American scientist to testify about Kyoto Protocol, smear IPCC

Categories
Canada Carbon Capture and Storage United Kingdom United States of America

October 27, 2002 – International CCS study tour begins

Twenty two years ago, on this day, October 27th, 2002, some people fly off to the US and Canada.

Report of DTI International Technology Service Mission to the USA and Canada from 27th October to 7th November 2002

Carbon dioxide capture and storage : report of DTI International technology Service Mission to the USA and Canada from 27th October to 7th November 2002 / Advanced Power Generation Technology Forum ; Mission leader Nick Otter.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 373ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that CCS had been climbing the agenda for a few years, especially since it looked like the political negotiations around the Kyoto process were going nowhere. So you know, maybe throw your eggs in the technology basket and there were always these opportunities for nice conferences and PowerPoint slides and fun dinners and schmoozing. So it goes.

What we learn is that there’s always a new technology that’s going to save us. And that those technologies need “selling.”

What happened next, CCS started climbing in the popularity stakes. The Americans were throwing money at it with FutureGen. And then, years later, the Europeans and the Brits said that they were going to throw money at it. And here we are 23 years later. And how much C02 was actually being saved? Or stored? 

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: 

October 27, 1967 – “the Swedish environmental turn” picks up speed

October 27, 1990 – The Economist admits nobody is gonna seriously cut C02 emissions