Category: United States of America

Categories
Predatory delay United States of America

March 13, 2001 – Bush breaks election promise to regulate C02 emissions…

On this day in 2001, George “Dubya” Bush, recently selected as President by the Supreme Court, backed away from a promise to cut emissions he had made on the campaign trail.

,He sends a letter to Senator Jesse Helms and other awful human beings saying that’s what he’s gonna do. This is part of Bush’s awful behaviour at the guidance of Dick Cheney and other turds in the Republican Party, and thanks to their perceived short term self interest, and they thought that the climate problem was illusory or whatever. Here’s stuff from Malto Mildenberger‘s “Carbon Captured: How Business and Labor Control Climate Politics“, which you should read if you’re into all this stuff…

Why this matters. 

“We” coulda fixed this – or at least slowed things down to give our wisdom time to catch up with our knowledge. “We” didn’t.

What happened next?

Bush pulled out of Kyoto shortly after this, and Kyoto limped on, becoming law because the Russians wanted membership of the WTO. Kyoto was ultimately replaced by a “Pledge and Review”.

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

March 12, 1963 – first scientific meeting about C02 build-up

On this day in 1963, the first ever policymaker meeting – in the West at least(1) – specifically around carbon dioxide bonding happened in New York under the auspices of Laurence Rockefeller’s organisation, the Conservation Foundation, (not to be confused with the Conservation Society launched in the UK three years later, and not funded by Rockefeller.)

The account of the meeting, which you can read here, had the snappy title “Implications of rising carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere; a statement of trends and implications of carbon dioxide research reviewed at a conference of scientists.”

Present at the meeting were Roger Revelle, Gilbert Plasss, Charles Keeling, and an Englishman called Frank Fraser Darling – someone we will return to…

The context was that as of 1959, it has become clear that carbon dioxide was indeed building up in the atmosphere, and that eventually, this would lead to warming of the planet. And this would lead to ice caps melting in flooded cities, changing weather patterns, etc. 

But at this stage, in early 1963 the assumption was, this would be a problem in a couple of 100 years as per Svante Arrhenius

Why this matters. 

The Conservation Foundation report of this symposium was not a best-seller, but it DOES pop up in the reference list of various books and articles over the rest of the decade, before it starts to be supplanted by later events with more information.

What happened next?

Revelle worked on a report for Lyndon Johnson’s science subcommittee with Margaret Mead Frank Fraser Darling would talk about the build up of co2 as a problem and his reef lectures for the BBC in November of 1969

And the CO2 would continue to accumulate

For more about the Rockefellers role in postwar environmentalism this article “The Eco-Establishment “by Katherine Barkley and Steve WeissmanRamparts Magazine, May 1970, pp. 48-50

Footnotes

(1) “Fedorov and Budyko were both key instigators of a specially convened meeting on the transformation of climate which took place in Leningrad during April 1961.40 This meeting, together with a related workshop the following June, represented the first focussed Soviet discussions concerning anthropogenic climate change” (Oldfield, 2018: 45).

Oldfield, J. (2018) Imagining climates past, present and future: Soviet contributions to the science of anthropogenic climate change, 1953e1991. Journal of Historical Geography 60 41- 51.)

Categories
anti-reflexivity Denial Predatory delay Propaganda United States of America

March 4, 2003 – Republicans urged to question the scientific consensus…

On this day in March 4 2003, the Luntz memo was exposed. Frank Luntz was a Republican communications PR guru, and his memo advocated continued casting of doubt.

In the words of the Guardian’s reporter

The memo, by the leading Republican consultant Frank Luntz, concedes the party has “lost the environmental communications battle” and urges its politicians to encourage the public in the view that there is no scientific consensus on the dangers of greenhouse gases. 

“The scientific debate is closing [against us] but not yet closed. There is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science,” Mr Luntz writes in the memo, obtained by the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based campaigning organisation.”

The broader context is that the Bush administration having already reneged on promises to reduce carbon dioxide and pulled the US out of Kyoto needed to continue its perception management, and that’s what Luntz was proposing, as part of the broader war, to keep people in the dark, ignorant, confused, demoralised and it’s been a very successful effort. So here we are.

Why this matters. 

We need to see how “common sense” (in the Gramscian sense) is endlessly confected and defended…

And here’s the memo, btw

LuntzResearch.Memo.pdf (sourcewatch.org)

What happened next?

Luntz changed his tune, but the damage was done. And the emissions continue to climb. 

Categories
Activism United States of America

March 2nd, 1997- RIP Judi Bari

On this day in 1997, environmental activist Judi Bari died of breast cancer. In May 1990, Bari and her partner Darryl Cherney had been travelling in Oakland, California in a car when it exploded. They were environmental activists with Earth First, participating in what was called Redwood Summer to bring environmentalists and workers in the logging sector together in common cause against logging companies.

The FBI tried to suggest that Bari and Cherney had been blown up by their own bomb. This quickly collapsed. It is to this day not known who planted the bomb. 

Why this mattersWe need to remember that people who are trying to stand in the way of the Ecocidal machine are at best smeared, at worst assassinated. Three years earlier, Chico Mendes had been killed. In 2016 Honduran activist Berta Carceras was killed. The list of people paying the ultimate price. In defence of nature and sustainability grows longer all the time.

Atmospheric concentration of C02 at the time:

Atmospheric concentration of C02 at time of publication: 419 or so

Follow the Keeling Curve on Twitter- @Keeling_curve

Categories
Fossil fuels United States of America

Feb 27, 2003 – the “FutureGen” farce begins…

On this day 19 long long years ago George “Dubya” Bush announces “FutureGen”

Anon. 2003. Bush announces billion-dollar energy project. Agence France-Presse, 27 February.

WASHINGTON, Feb 27 (AFP) – President George W. Bush announced Thursday that the United States would lead a 10-year, one-billion- dollar effort to create the world’s coal-based, zero-emissions electricity and hydrogen power plant. [FutureGen]

The context is his resistance to anything that looks like regulation domestically, or international agreements. Still, in order to preserve electability, you have to mutter something about “technology-driven solutions and the like…” And that is pure catnip to people who don’t want to face facts (most folks, most of the time, some folks all of the time).

What happened next?

It failed, got rebranded (“FutureGen 2.0”) and failed again. Wikipedia has a decent article. fwiw.

See also

February 27, 2003: Abraham and Dobriansky announce “FutureGen” | Department of Energy

Categories
Australia International processes Predatory delay UNFCCC United Nations United States of America

Feb 25 1992- business groups predict economic chaos if action is taken on #climate

On 25th of February 1992 20 business associations from nine different countries try to slow down progress towards the impending Rio Earth Summit agreements by predicting economic calamity and doom: the same old story. 

1992 On 25 February at UN headquarters (New York City, USA), 20 business associations from 9 countries released a joint statement to the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change….

Anon. 1992. International Business Associations Issue Statement on Climate Negotiations. Global Environmental Change. Vol. 4, No. 5 13 March.

You will be shocked, shocked to learn that Australian business interests were in that mix – “The business associations, nearly half of which are from Australia, are in the fields of fossil fuel and energy production, manufacturing, and metals.”

Why this matters

We need to remember that whenever governments and state institutions are forced to consider the long-term well-being of constituents/future generations, there will be short termist vested interests pushing in the opposite direction. That’s just the way it is. 

What happened next

A weakened Earth Summit. Treaty text was put forward, not entirely due to business interest, but also the US administration of George HW Bush in June of 1992. This was then ratified and then gave us the COPs for climate and biodiversity. Meanwhile, the carbon dioxide accumulates, the biodiversity collapse accelerates. And to young folk out there, I’m sorry. We old fuckers, we blew it. You have every right to feel betrayed and gaslit let down by your parents and your grandparents

The business associations? They’re singing differently, but the song remains the same…

Categories
anti-reflexivity IPCC United States of America

Feb 19, 2011 – defunding the IPCC

On this day, 19th of February 2011, House Republicans in the United States Congress pushed through a symbolic statement throwing shade and threats of defunding at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Blaine Luetkemeyer, (still) a Missouri Republican, called the UN panel “nefarious.” [coverage here.]

The context is amusing, because it was actually their hero, Ronald Reagan, who signed off on the birth of the IPCC as an intergovernmental rather than international panel. 

This theatre, this throwing of red meat to the base, chipped away at the legitimacy of the IPCC.  So, while the resolution had no particular impact at the time (that I am aware of), it had a cultural one. It is also deeply uncomfortable for the scientists to be on the receiving end. And this is all part of more general “flak” as per Herman and Chomsky’s propaganda model of media.

Categories
Ignored Warnings United States of America

Feb 18, 1978 – “#Climate Experts see a Warming Trend”

On this day, 18th February 1978. readers of The Washington Post would have learned, via an article by a journalist called Thomas O’Toole titled “Climate Experts See a Warming Trend,” that the burning of coal and oil was causing so much carbon dioxide to build up in the atmosphere that by the year 2000, temperatures might begin to rise.  

O’Toole was reporting

“… the opinions of 24 climate experts in seven countries polled by the Pentagon’s Advanced Research Projects which yesterday released the poll’s results in a 100-page report published by the National Defense University.”

This report, bless, is available on the interwebz.

[See also a report in the New York Times]

We need to remember that in the late 1970s the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as a problem and as one that was going to get worse and cause serious difficulty had moved from the academic journals and the scientific periodicals to the quality press such as the New York Times, The Washington Post, The Canberra Times. If you go looking for these, you can find them. They usually come out of various National Academy of Science reports too. We knew. We really did.

Why this matters? 

What it says is that we’ve had almost 50 years to sort this out and, pace Donald Trump,, this problem was not invented by Al Gore, or by the Chinese as a hoax. 

What happened next? 

Well in this specific case, Carter’s Science Advisor asked some top scientists to look into the problem. This is the so-called Charney report, which said in 1979, we find no reason to believe this warming won’t happen. You can read more about it in Nathaniel Rich, and to some extent in Alice Bell’s “Our Biggest Experiment”

Categories
Activism United States of America

Feb 17, 2013 – Scientists, activists, actors, arrested outside Whitehouse, protesting #Keystone

On this day, the 17th of February 2013, nine years ago, climate scientists, activists and activists were arrested outside the White House. They were protesting against the Keystone pipeline. Those arrested included James Hansen, actor Daryl Hannah, civil rights leader Julian Bond and environmental advocate Robert Kennedy Jr.

[This wasn’t their first go at this rodeo]

There were about 40,000 people on the march (though these guesstimates are always rubbery).

Why this matters

We need to celebrate resistance. Remember that we have resisted, albeit without much success, for who knows how much worse things would have been if we hadn’t. 

What happened next? 

Keystone may have been cancelled, but the extractivist infrastructures continue to be built…

See also

Thousands rally to protest Keystone- POLITICO

Protesters Call On Obama To Reject Keystone XL Pipeline (npr.org)

Categories
Kyoto Protocol United States of America

Feb 16, 2005- The Kyoto Protocol shambles into futile existence, despite Uncle Sam’s best efforts

On this day 16th of February in the year 2005, the Kyoto Protocol finally became international law. It was an agreement reached at the third Conference of the Parties (COP) in December 97, in Japanese city of Kyoto. It had called for rich industrialised countries to cut their emissions by a certain small amount in the period 2008 to 2012… 

But before we get bogged down in the details, let’s go back to the beginning. When the climate issue arrived on the agenda in 1988, small and developing nations said “this is caused by rich countries. They have to take the lead in sorting it out.” And this was relatively uncontroversial in principle, at least. And so in 1992, you get the notion of “common but differentiated responsibilities,” and some sort of loose talk about technology transfer, etc. However – and this is crucial – the proposal to have targets and timetables for rich countries to reduce their emissions in the text of the climate treaty, due to be signed in Rio was opposed successfully.

And it was opposed successfully by our old friend, the United States of America, who basically said (and I paraphrase), “If targets and timetables are in, we will not come to Rio and you will have a worthless treaty.” So Kyoto was the first attempt, the first of many, to try to put targets and timetables back in. It was full of loopholes, famously, the Australian land clearing one (by the way, Australia got an emissions reduction target that allowed it to increase its emissions). And it also was supposed to kickstart carbon trading, something the Europeans had been sceptical about 

In 2001, the new administration of George W. Bush had pulled the US out of Kyoto process. And the following year, Australia had done its little “me too” act, under its deeply inadequate Prime Minister John Howard. 

Kyoto languished in limbo for years, and only got through, because Russia wanted to join the World Trade Organisation. And this was the quid pro quo. After the Russian Duma had ratified this, 90 days later, Kyoto became law for all the good that it did, which was virtually none. 

Why this matters

We need to remember these histories. So we remember who’s to blame – sometimes it’s the actors, sometimes it’s the nature of a given process. We need to remember that the “sausage machine” of international law has not saved us, and is very, very unlikely to save “us.” 

What happened next? 

Well, Kyoto was always supposed to be replaced by something else bigger and better. And this was supposed to happen in Copenhagen. In 2009. It didn’t. The shards of agreement got swept up and glued together in a new pisspot called the Paris Agreement, which is basically the old Japanese “pledge and review” proposal, reheated. And then, six years after Paris, nations met in Glasgow, without their enhanced ambition statements for the most part. Meanwhile, carbon dioxide continues to accumulate.