Categories
Uncategorized

October 6, 1988 – coal lobby says greenhouse effect “greatly exaggerated”

On this day, October 6 in 1988, the coal lobby said – of course it did – that the greenhouse effect had been “greatly exaggerated.”

Because before the promises for technological fixes, for complicated (and therefore easily gamed) financial instruments… comes flat out denial and minimisation.

The international coal industry hit back yesterday at charges that coal-fired power stations are a prime cause of the climatic changes associated with over-heating of the atmosphere.

The London-based World Coal Institute, representing a wide range of national and private coal utilities and traders, said research by its members showed that the contribution of coal-fired power stations to the phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect had been ‘greatly exaggerated.’

Samuelson, M. (1988) Coal Users Fend Off ‘Greenhouse’ Accusations. Financial Times, 7 October, p. 9.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 349.37ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – Margaret Thatcher – British Prime Minister and not easily dismissed as an eco-loon – had given a surprise speech at the Royal Society a week or so earlier. The “greenhouse effect” was on the agenda, and coal was the bad boy (nuclear was trying to throw it under the bus).

Why this matters. 

These industry bodies now promising a gleaming techno-future have a loooong history of, well, um, I believe the technical term for this is “lying.”

What happened next?

The World Coal group spent a long time “in denial” and then switched to promoting “carbon capture and storage.”  In that time, emissions kept climbing. And climbing.

Categories
United Kingdom

October 5, 2006 – Greenpeace sues Blair Government over shonky energy “consultation”

On this day, October 5 in 2006 Greenpeace took the Blair Government to court over its incredibly shoddy and shonky “consultation” on energy.

See Guardian article here – “Greenpeace sues over Energy Review.” 

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 379.33ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – the 2003 Energy White Paper had put nuclear on the backfoot, instead focussing on renewables, energy efficiency and so forth. The nuclear lobby did not take this lying down, and by 2005 Blair was making pro-nuclear speeches. The Blair government then wanted to ram through pro-nuclear policies, but needed to be seen to have ‘consulted’, so did a terrible process. That is what Greenpeace sued over (successfully – see below).

Why this matters. 

We should remember that ‘consultation’ is often just another of those governance devices that our Lords and Masters try to use. And fake consultation needs to be called out, resisted.

What happened next?

Greenpeace won the case  on February 15 2007 –

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/feb/15/nuclear.greenpolitics1

Categories
United States of America

October 5, 1988 – Vice Presidential Debate and ‘the Greenhouse Effect’

On this day, October 5 in 1988, the vice presidential debate in the Presidential elections took place. The Democratic Party’s Lloyd Bentsen squared off against Republican Dan Quayle. You can watch the video here

1988 Bentsen and Quayle veep debate.

What’s interesting is that Qyayle did not deny the reality of climate change and it wasn’t really until a few years later that proper full-on denial became an acceptable position within the Republican party. Since 2015 also it has become an absolute litmus test for MAGA Republicans and this has “polarised” the issue.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 349.37ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Why this matters. 

We should remember that this current culture war nonsense that the Republicans are waging did not use to include climate change. It is now of course too late to do anything substantial but it’s good to know

What happened next?

Bush won the 1988 election, having neutralised Democratic candidate Michael Dukakis very effectively with some race-baiting that would be considered tame now. Bush then did nothing while his chief of staff wreaked havoc on what could have been a vaguely consensual process in creating the UNFCCC.

Categories
Activism United States of America

October 4, 1969 – “If we melt the Antarctic, our problems are solved because all of the ports of the world would vanish and the ocean will rise 200 feet.”

On this day, October 4 in 1969, an American activist and journalist, Roger Caras, laid it out for people at a leadership conference of the American Humane Society.

“Our population is insane in its rate of growth. This was pointed out to you yesterday. I’m sure you all know it. Our air is unbreathable. Lake Erie is gone. We are told that the oceans can be gone within 10 years. There will be no fish out of the sea to eat. Our soil is disappearing. The pollutants in the air are creating a greenhouse effect. I stood at the South Pole a few years ago. The snow is 9600 feet deep; there are 6 million square miles of it. If we melt it, our problems are solved because all of the ports of the world would vanish and the ocean will rise 200 feet.”

Caras, R. (1969). The humane movement and the survival of all living things. In C. Burke (Ed.), The Power of Positive Programs in the American Humane Movement: discussion papers of the National Leadership Conference of The Humane Society of the United States: October 3-5, 1969, Hershey, PA (pp. 89-94).  [could be 5th October]

https://www.wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=acwp_wmm

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 321.78ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now, well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – People had begun to worry over the past 10 years about the impact of rapid industrialisation. In 1962 Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring had been published and since that time more and more activist and scientific work had been done on air pollution in cities especially Los Angeles. A couple of months before this presentation the idea for a a 1-day teaching called “Earth day” had been put forward

Why this matters. 

In and of itself it doesn’t but as with everything in this site if you know your history you will know where you’re coming from and you will not be taken in by the idea that this is a new problem and that we need further time to study it

What happened next?

A few months after this speech Earth Day happened millions of Americans participating either in protests or Teach-ins. There was a general sense of optimism or possibility that the worst of the problems could be dealt with. They weren’t.

Categories
Australia Fossil fuels Renewable energy

October 3, 2004 – John Howard revealed to have asked for fossil fuel CEOs to kill renewables. #auspol

On this day, October 3 in 2004, a journalist revealed that the Federal Government of Australia, led by John Howard, had had a meeting (invite-only) of top fossil fuel folks and asked for help in squishing renewable energy. 

“The Federal Government and fossil-fuel industry executives discussed ways to stifle growing investment in renewable energy projects at a secret meeting earlier this year.

Prime Minister John Howard called the meeting on May 6, five weeks before releasing the energy white paper on June 14.

The white paper favours massive investment in research to make fossil fuels cleaner, at the expense of schemes boosting growth in renewable energy.

Mr Howard called together the fossil-fuel-based Lower Emissions Technology Advisory Group to seek advice on ways to avoid extending the mandatory renewable energy targets scheme.”

Miller, C. 2004. PM called talks to derail renewable energy. The Age, 3 October

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/02/1096527990014.html

You can read the minutes here

https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/WP56_8.pdf

Possibly the best example you could imagine of how state and corporate interests act together

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 374.63ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Why this matters. 

All this talk about free markets. Yeah, right. State-managers gives favours (R&D, subsidies, tax-breaks etc) to those who can make party donations and arrange post-career sinecures NOW, not some potential future set of corporates.

What happened next?

Howard and the LNP continued to promote fossil fuels, at the expense of a) renewables and b) future generations.

Categories
Germany Science

October 2, 1942 – Spaceflight!!

On this day, October 2 in 1942 – Spaceflight: The first successful launch of a V-2 /A4-rocket from Test Stand VII at Peenemünde, Germany. It is the first man-made object to reach space. 

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 311ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – the war!!  And there is nothing like a war to get the state to fund research and development and deployment of novel technologies…. If only we’d put such determination into not wiping ourselves out. Oh well, so it goes.

Why this matters. 

Being able to put objects in space (including meatsacks, I guess) made studying the world’s climates and systems “doable”.  See “The Vast Machine” by Paul Edwards…

https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/vast-machine

What happened next?

After the war the Soviets and Americans tussled over who got which Nazis and technology. Operation Paperclip and all that.

And you know

“Once the rockets are up

Who cares where they come down?

That’s not my department

Says Wernher von Braun”…

See also – Gravity’s Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon.

And V2 by Robert Harris

Categories
Science

October 2, 1927/64 – Svante Arrhenius and Guy Callendar die.

On this day, October 2nd 1927, Swedish scientist and Nobel Prize winner Svante Arrhenius died.

The guy who did the back of envelope calculations (big envelope, it took him a year).  

The atmospheric c02 level was 305ppm. It is now about 421ppm.

See also “Megascience” thing from Ambio

From Arrhenius to megascience: interplay between science and public decision making https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4314553.pdf

By coincidence, exactly 37 years later, British scientists and engineer Guy Callendar died. (See here).

On Callendar, James Fleming has done excellent work (link).

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 316.87ppm. At time of writing it was 421ish ppm – but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Categories
Science United States of America

October 1, 1957 – US Oil company ponders carbon dioxide build-up…

On this day, October 1 1957, a US Oil Company ponders carbon dioxide build-up in the atmosphere. 

1 October 1957 Humble Oil study – Radiocarbon evidence on the dilution of atmospheric and oceanic carbon by carbon from fossil fuels. H. R. Brannon Jr.  A. C. Daughtry  D. Perry  W. W. Whitaker  M. Williams

First published: October 1957 https://doi.org/10.1029/TR038i005p00643

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 315.6 or thereabout ppm. At time of writing it was 421ish ppm – but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – by the early 1950s, various folks were beginning to take note of carbon dioxide as a potential issue. (See for example, Gilbert Plass). Accurate atmospheric measures were not yet, however, being taken.

As Ben Franta noted in his 2018 article –  

“In 1954, the geochemist Harrison Brown and his colleagues at the California Institute of Technology submitted a research proposal to the API entitled “The determination of the variations and causes of variations of the isotopic composition of carbon in nature.” The scientists proposed the use of new mass spectrometers to investigate the ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-13 in terrestrial, marine and mineral systems to understand geological and biological carbon cycling”

Source.- Franta 2018.

Why this matters. 

Even with International Geophysical Year barely being underway, we knew enough to plant a big fat warning flag in the ground and say “we really need to think about this one.”. The oil companies certainly did…

What happened next?

Awareness of the potential climate impacts of carbon dioxide build-up grew and grew through the 60s, into the 70s and 80s. There was a thirty year history of scientists saying “er, look” before 1988, when the issue broke through into the public sphere.

Categories
Australia

September 30, 2009 – Tony Abbott says #climate science is “absolute crap”

On this day, 30 September 2009, Tony Abbott had another of his Moments, which led him to become the opposition leader, and then three years later, the Prime Minister…

“Abbott’s ‘road to Damascus’ was in fact the road between Bendigo and Beaufort in country Victoria. He explains in his book Battlelines that it was during a car trip to a Liberal Party fundraiser on 30 September that former House of Representatives speaker David Hawker told him there would be a bush revolt against what was being seen as just another tax. Farmers were worried that an ETS would put them out of business.”

(Cassidy, 2010:23)

and then

“Abbott spoke for about 20 minutes, plugged his book Battlelines, outlined the difficulties confronting the party and then opened the floor to questions. After several questions on the ETS, including the impact on farmers and whether it was wise to commit to a policy before Copenhagen, Abbott called for a show of hands on whether the Coalition should support the ETS. Only a handful voted yes.

Abbott, until that point Turnbull’s main defender on the ETS, became increasingly blunt. According to many in the room, he left no doubt that he was a climate change sceptic. He ruminated there had been many changes of climate over the millennia not caused by man. Finally, he said the science behind climate change was “crap”, at which stage Wilson snapped awake.

“I think I was nodding off down at the back of the room when all of a sudden he came out with the comment that the science around climate change was `absolute crap’ and I kind of jumped back awake and wrote down his quote,” [Craig Wilson, editor of the Pyrenees Advocate] says.

Rintoul, S. (2009) The town that turned up the temperature. The Australian 12 December.

The context was that in October 2009 the “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme” was coming up for its second attempt at becoming law. The problem for the opposition parties was whether to support or oppose. The National Party were implacably opposed, the Liberals split (they needed to win back seats they had lost in 2007, in the first climate change election). The problem for them was that they had gone into that election promising an emissions trading scheme not that dissimilar to what was about to be voted on.

The Liberal Party leader, Malcolm Turnbull, was already unpopular in his party, and about to become more so (see a blog post coming up in early October). 

See also –

Tony Abbott, once the ‘climate weathervane’, has long since rusted stuck

On this day the PPM was 384.95 ppm. Now it is 421ish – but see here for the latest.

Why this matters. 

It doesn’t, really, unless you are a politics tragic and history buff…

What happened next?

Abbott toppled Turnbull. Then put the frighteners on Rudd. Then did his wrecking ball impression with Gillard. Then became Prime Minister, briefly. What a horror show.

Categories
United Kingdom

September 29, 1969 – British Prime Minister Harold Wilson blah blah “second industrial revolution” blah blah pollution blah blah

On this day, 29 September 1969, British Prime Minister Harold Wilson first spoke of the “environment” in a speech to Labour party conference, in Brighton, 1969)  

“First, our environment. There is a two-fold task: to remove the scars of 19th century capitalism – the derelict mills, the spoil heaps, the back-to-back houses that still disfigure so large a part of our land. At the same time we have to make sure that the second industrial revolution through which we are now passing does not be­queath a similar legacy to future genera­tions. We must deal with the problems of pollution – of the air, of the sea, of our rivers and beaches. We must also deal with the uniquely 20th century problems of noise and congestion which will increasingly dis­turb, unless checked, our urban life.   http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=167

The context is – well, the Torrey Canyon had already happened, people were beginning to get worried not just about cars and smog, but extinction. Wilson had an election to face soon (one he was expected to win, but didn’t).

On this day the PPM was 322.38. Now it is 421ish – but see here for the latest.

Why this matters. 

Labour parties intermittently talk a good game, rarely deliver. Have to be wedded to industrial growth.

What happened next?

Oh, laws were passed. Ministries established. All the paraphernalia. None off the action. But what did you expect?