Category: United States of America

Categories
Geoeingeering United States of America

September 20, 2023 – Geo-engineering or (well, and) die

Two years ago, on this day, September 20th, 2023,

Billionaire investor Chris Sacca yesterday said that spraying particles into the Earth’s atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays and slow global warming may now be the only way to save humanity.

Why it matters: The Lowercarbon Capital founder has helped turn a fringe idea into one now attracting serious attention.

Driving the news: “We have no opportunity for survival on this planet unless you reflect back sunlight,” Sacca said at a summit in New York City organized by venture capital firm Equal Ventures.

“If we don’t do it as a species, it’s all over.”

Climate: 🧂 Sacca gets salty

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 the rich have always loved geo-engineering, because it sidelines questions of justice (it doesn’t really, but in the short term it does) and appeals to their messiah/god complexes.

The specific context was that the COP process was obviously dead (again) and the “well, let’s Hail Mary” this was in the air. 

What I think we can learn from this is that rich people are not necessarily smarter than anyone else.  May even become dumber by the time they’ve surrounded themselves with sycophants, if they weren’t at the start.

What happened next – the geo-engineering debate bubbles on, much like the methane in the clathrates.

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: 

September 20, 1848 – the AAAS is born… – All Our Yesterdays

September 20, 1893 – first American-made gasoline-powered car hits the road.

September 20, 1982 – “Carbon Dioxide, Science and Consensus” event – All Our Yesterdays

September 20, 2013 – CCS project mothballed/killed.

Categories
United States of America

September 17, 1978 – National Climate Program Act

Forty seven years ago, on this day, September 17th, 1978,

17 Sept 1978 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the “National Climate Program Act”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 335ppm. 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 efforts, since about 1974 iirc, to beef up Federal support for/co-ordination of climate research (n.b. At this point carbon dioxide was only one of many different matters of concern).

The specific context was Various tenacious politicians kept on the case, despite repeated failures (George Brown etc).

What I think we can learn from this

Science requires funding and leadership. What happens when you have neither? Well, we’re finding out.

What happened next

By 1979 it was pretty clear to the smarter people in the room that the carbon dioxide build-up was the problem to watch.  The politicians took a decade to convince.

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: 

September 17, 1954 – nuclear electricity will be too cheap to meter – All Our Yesterdays

September 17, 1969 – trying to spin Vietnam, Moynihan starts warning about #climate change

September 17, 1987 – report on “The Greenhouse Project” launch

September 17, 2002 – UK Government announces feasibility study into Carbon Capture and Storage

Categories
Cultural responses United States of America

September 15,1990 – Captain Planet launches

Thirty five years ago, on this day, September 15th, 1990, 

The first episode of “Captain Planet and the Planeteers” was broadcast.

Captain Planet and the Planeteers, commonly referred to as simply Captain Planet, is an American animated environmentalist superhero television series created by Barbara Pyle and Ted Turner[1] and developed by Pyle, Nicholas Boxer, Thom Beers, Andy Heyward, Robby London, Bob Forward, and Cassandra Schafausen. The series was produced by Turner Program Services and DIC Enterprises and broadcast on TBS and in syndication from September 15, 1990, to December 5, 1992

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 354ppm. 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 we’ve got to propagandise the young about how The System cares and can be fixed to solve whatever the problem seems to be. There are vast indoctrination efforts going on, all the time.

The specific context was that Ted Turner was then married to Jane Fonda, who switched him on to environmental issues. 

What I think we can learn from this is that the efforts at getting the kids riled up? Yeah, doesn’t last.

What happened next

There is a seriously hilarious spoof with Don Cheadle.

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

King, D. L. (1994). Captain Planet and the Planeteers: Kids, environmental crisis, and competing narratives of the new world order. Sociological Quarterly, 35(1), 103-120.

Also on this day: 

September 15, 1948 – Biologist Evelyn Hutchinson mentions carbon dioxide build-up at an AAAS symposium.

September 15, 1980 – Australian scientists hold “Carbon Dioxide and Climate” symposium in Canberra

September 15, 1982/1990 – “Environmental Justice” is born. And so is Captain Planet…

September 15, 1996 – A CCS posterchild is born: Sleipner Field comes online. – All Our Yesterdays

September 15, 2008- business splits over what to extort from Rudd…

Categories
United States of America

September 13, 1856 – the game’s a Foote

One hundred and sixty nine years ago, on this day, September 13th, 1856,

Her article sparked interest and praise, notably in the 13 September issue of Scientific American magazine, in an article titled ‘Scientific ladies – experiments with condensed gases’: ‘Some have not only entertained, but expressed the mean idea, that women do not possess the strength of mind necessary for scientific investigation […] the experiments of Mrs Foote afford abundant evidence of the ability of woman to investigate any subject with originality and precision.’ https://www.chemistryworld.com/culture/eunice-foote-the-mother-of-climate-change/4011315.article#/

And

Scientific American 1856: Scientific Ladies - Experiments with Condensed Gases. | Hill Heat

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 285ppm. 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 19th century was kinda exciting for “science” (new word, only just taking over from “natural philosophy”).

The specific context was Eunice Foote was a campaigner for women’s suffrage, and a scientist.  

What I think we can learn from this – we could have done better as a species, but, well, here we are…

What happened next

Foote’s work specifically on climate was forgotten, but then rediscovered by retired petroleum geologist Ray Sorenson. In January 2011, in the American Association of Petroleum Geologists‘ on-line journal Search and Discovery he had this article.-: “Eunice Foote’s Pioneering Research On CO2 And Climate Warming“

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: 

September 13, 1661 – Fumifugium! – All Our Yesterdays

September 13, 1976 – US news broadcast on ozone and climate.

September 13, 1984 – unsettling Seattle workshop on sea level rise – All Our Yesterdays

September 13, 1992/1994- Scientists traduced, ignored

Categories
United States of America

September 11, 1969 – George Brown proposes an omnibus environment bill

Fifty six years ago, on this day, September 11th, 1969, Californian Congressman George Brown introduced an “omnibus” environment bill.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 324ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it was 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 second half of the 1960s various Congressmen (mostly but by no means entirely Democrats) had introduced various bills about pollution (air, water etc).  Most of this had been performative.

The specific context was that by mid-1969 the “environment”/ecology was competing with the assault on Vietnam for people’s attention (anti-war activists were understandably suspicious, obvs).

What I think we can learn from this is that politicians have antennae, and will try to amplify the things they want amplified. (Not ALL of them are corporate meat-puppets, at least, not all of the time).

What happened next – the times were propitious, and President Nixon signed the NEPA into law in January 1970.  Various bodies were formed, reports written and released, speeches given.  Guess what – the emissions kept climbing. 

To be fair to George Brown, he was behind the successful push for a National Climate Act, that President Carter signed in 1978.

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: 

September 11, 1961 – New York Times reports “Air Found Gaining in Carbon Dioxide”

September 11, 1973 – CIA coup topples Chilean democracy

September 11, 1989 – Bill McKibben’s “The End of Nature” published – All Our Yesterdays

September 11, 2006 – Australian climate concern hits tipping point (maybe) – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Business Responses Denial Incumbent strategies Industry Associations United States of America

September 9, 1997 – “Global Climate Information Project”

Twenty nine years ago, on this day, September 10th, 1997 another pro-apocalypse propaganda outfit was launched, ahead of the UNFCCC negotiations to take place in Kyoto (COP-3).

“Global Climate Information Project” launched” 

Launched on September 9, 1997, by some of the nation’s most powerful trade associations, the Global Climate Information Project (GCIP) has rolled out an ambitious campaign for combating possible emission regulations courtesy of the Kyoto conference.

Through an advertising campaign that, according to GCIP figures, has already spent more than $3 million in newspaper and television spots and could spend as much as $13 million, the GCIP aims to cast doubt upon the need for emissions controls by questioning the politics and the science behind a United Nations agreement.

Writing on the media campaign unveiled by the GCIP, Bruce Clark of the Financial Times remarked that it “could become one of the most expensive lobbying efforts since the ‘Harry and Louise’ commercials that helped doom” the Clinton administration’s health-care reform proposal”

“A Clear View, Vol 4, No 16, Clearinghouse on Environmental Advocacy and Research” 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 364ppm. 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 business interests always mobilise and collaborate to face down challenges to their right to socialise the costs and privatise the profits. There’s lots of good research on this – Merchants of Doubt by Oreskes and Conway remains a good place to start.

The specific context was that Kyoto was coming and business had already done a great job in demonising it, in boxing in US Senators. But you can never be too sure, so thus the “Information” (sic) Project.

What I think we can learn from this. The war for the public mind goes on, and on.  

What happened next – the war for the public mind went on. 

GCIP ran a whole bunch of adverts on American TV.

New battalions were formed, new weapons tested. The strategic imperative remains unchanged – keep the peasants too busy to fight back. Buy off the smart one that you can, sideline or dephysicalise those you can’t.

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: 

September 9, 1947 – The Daily Worker talks about melting the ice-caps

September 9, 1971 – of Australian Prime Ministers and American scientists…

September 9, 1990 – classic (?) film Mindwalk released

Categories
Denial United Kingdom United States of America

September 9, 1971 – Stephen Schneider’s letter, and a World Model

Fifty four years ago, on this day, September 9th, 1971 climate scientist Stephen Schneider wrote a letter to the New York Times about some industry bullshit that the Times had run as a n op-ed.

AND on the same day, things were a foot in the United Kingdom

“Whereas Bray had been highly sceptical of the World model, Cottrell had been enthused by its demonstration. Returning to Britain, he proposed that the British government develop a similar model, stating his belief that ‘Forrester’s approach is the most important development of its kind since Keynes’ general theory’.117

Given the centrality of Keynesianism in post-war economic policy, this was a significant claim. Heath, as his early enthusiasm for management science had revealed, had some interest in forecasting and simulation, and gave his permission for a scoping study on the feasibility of a British world model. Cottrell held a meeting on the subject at the Cabinet Office in September 1971, in which he had told the assembled civil servants that developing a global model for British purposes would require £50,000 and four staff. In response, an unnamed civil servant argued that the Treasury had a more sophisticated econometric model that it used for forecasting. Despite this criticism, the general idea of a global environmental model was well received, and further work was proposed.118 “

Histories of Technology, the Environment and Modern Britain

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 in the late 1960s people started worrying about the global impact of industrialisation and population growth (as distinct from concerns about localised pollution).

The specific context was that a) Schneider was already making a name for himself as combative and b) the British state was beginning to think about systems modelling (aware that the Club of Rome report was coming)…

What I think we can learn from this is that there was mention of carbon dioxide and limits to growth way back when. It had pushed out from the undergrowth in the late 1960s…

What happened next: By 1973, we were back to sleep, for the most part. A few new NGOs, a couple of magazines (Your Environment, The Ecologist).  It is very very hard to combat a world view.

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: 

September 9, 1947 – The Daily Worker talks about melting the ice-caps

September 9, 1971 – of Australian Prime Ministers and American scientists…

September 9, 1990 – classic (?) film Mindwalk released

Categories
United States of America

September 6, 1979 – Exxon supports American Petroleum Institute on “do nothing” about climate

Forty six years ago, on this day, September 6th, 1979, the American Petroleum Institute’s “do nothing” suggestion was getting some love from RJ Campion, Exxon’s climate scientist.

1979 Exxon Memo about API’s CO2 Research Strategy – Climate Files

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 336ppm. 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 in the late 1970s scientists – both employed by the state and some of the oil majors, had a pretty good idea what was coming….

The specific context was – well, here’s a passage from Ben Franta’s PhD

“Although Exxon’s research program was notable for its sophistication, the company wasn’t alone in monitoring climate science. By 1979, the API had formed a task force focused on climate change composed of representatives from the major oil companies, including Exxon’s Henry Shaw. Initially named the CO2 and Climate Task Force and in 1980 renamed the Climate and Energy Task Force, the group’s internal memos show that much like Exxon, it viewed climate research as a strategic tool to influence public perception and government regulation in favor of the fossil fuel industry.

One of the earliest known memos regarding the task force, from 1979 and written by Exxon scientist Raymond Campion, recommended the group not pursue original climate change research, because “the industry’s credibility on such issues is not high at the present time, and should an API study indicate no serious CO2 problems, the results would be greeted with skepticism.”

What I think we can learn from this is that there were paths not taken. Don’t get me wrong – even if we’d taken serious action in the late 1970s, there was still going to be serious trouble ahead. But now, well….

What happened next: The Reagan administration came in and it would not be until the very end of that shitty period – in 1988 – that the climate problem finally broke through and became an issue.

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: 

September 6, 1991 – Titan has a greenhouse effect… – All Our Yesterdays

September 6, 2000 – Emission scheme defeated, it’s time for a gloating press release… #Climate #auspol

September 6, 2007 – “The Future of Coal under Cap and Trade” hearings…

Categories
United States of America

September 1, 1957 – Popular Mechanics asks “What is happening to the weather?”

Sixty eight years ago, on this day, September 1st, 1957, Popular Mechanics September 1957, 

Whats happening to the weather https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DeEDAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA106&dq=What%E2%80%99s+Happening+to+the+Weather&pg=PA106&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

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 it was the 1950s and everyone was freaked out about the possible impact of atomic and hydrogen bombs. The International Geophysical Year had begun, with all sorts of measurements of the atmosphere, the cryosphere etc. There was an excitement about the possibilities of weather modification – both to increase agricultural production but also as a weapon of war.

The specific context was that Popular Mechanics had – in August 1953 – run a short piece about Gilbert Plass’s May announcement of what carbon dioxide build-up might do.

What I think we can learn from this – the carbon dioxide issue came through all of this sort of sideways, or at least elliptically, for most people. 

What happened next – the emissions kept climbing. Popular Mechanics returned to the issue in August 1964. 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: 

September 1, 1970 – Environmentalism is an elite-diversion tactic, says American Maoist

September 1, 1972 – “Man-Made Carbon Dioxide and the “Greenhouse Effect” published in Nature

September 1, 1983- #climate change is all in the game, you feel me?

September 1, 1998 – Sydney Futures Exchange foresees a bright future. Ooops.

Categories
United States of America

September 1, 1933 – is our climate changing?

Ninety-two years ago, on this day, September 1st, 1933, an article appeared in the U Monthly Weather Review. 

“The present wide-spread and persistent tendency toward warmer weather, and especially the recent long series of mild winters, has attracted considerable public interest; so much so that frequently the question is asked “Is our climate changing? ”

Written by JD Kincer it did not mention carbon dioxide or Arrhenius (which is fair enough – the carbon dioxide theory was in the doldrums!)

1 Sep 1933 Kincer “Is Our Climate Changing?” article – https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/mwre/61/9/1520-0493_1933_61_251_ioccas_2_0_co_2.xml

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 308ppm. 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 – as our denialist bezzies like to point out – “the climate is always changing”.

The specific context was that there seemed to be some warming in the Arctic, and this was known and not controversial (see this 1916 article).

What I think we can learn from this is that systems like the climate are painfully complex, and doing good science requires decent global measurements, computers and humility.

What happened next – a few years later, a British steam engineer called Guy Callendar presented his paper at the Royal Geographical Society. This was basically ignored, but in 1953, thanks to Gilbert Plass, carbon dioxide entered the building…

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: 

September 1, 1970 – Environmentalism is an elite-diversion tactic, says American Maoist

September 1, 1972 – “Man-Made Carbon Dioxide and the “Greenhouse Effect” published in Nature

September 1, 1983- #climate change is all in the game, you feel me?

September 1, 1998 – Sydney Futures Exchange foresees a bright future. Ooops.