Categories
United Kingdom

November 26, 2008 – UK MPs told climate targets inadequate 

Eighteen years ago, on this day, November 26th, 2008,

A leading climate scientist has told the Environmental Audit Committee that the international target to cut carbon dioxide is too modest and the cap on temperature rise too high to prevent dangerous climate change.

On 26 November, the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee held a special one-off evidence session on the scientific basis for global carbon reduction targets. Giving evidence was leading climate scientist Professor James Hansen of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the government’s chief scientific adviser Professor John Beddington and Environment Department (DEFRA) scientific adviser Professor Robert Watson.

Anon, 2008. Committee told climate targets are insufficient  ENDS Report Dec 19

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 386ppm. 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 UK had at that time a 60% reduction in emissions by 2050 as its target. This was bumped up to 80% in 2008. 

Bob Watson had been telling politicians (UK and US) for 20 years at this point. See this – June 10, 1986 – scientist tells US senators “global warming is inevitable. It is only a question of the magnitude and the timing.”

The specific context was that the Climate Change Act received Royal Assent that very day.

What I think we can learn from this – the MPs were warned, but didn’t particularly give a shit – tomorrow’s problem.

What happened next – in 2019 the target was pushed up to “Net Zero” (distinct from actual zero) by 2050.  All too late.

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 26, 1979 – CCS first glimmerings, by Albanese and Steinberg 

November 26, 1966 – Conservation Society first meeting 

November 26, 1996 – Australian climate modelling is ridiculed

November 26, 1998 – “National Greenhouse Strategy” (re)-launched

November 26, 2008 – pre-CPRS meeting (yawn)

November 26, 2008 – Climate Change Act becomes law

Categories
anti-reflexivity Australia Denial

November 25, 2010 – GB Tucker dies

Fifteen years ago, on this day, November 25th, 2010,

2010 GB Tucker dies, after writing a bunch of shite in the IPA Review after retirement (f.ex. November 30, 1994 – Another denialist dolt – “Global warming a clouded issue”)

In 1986, he was singing a different tune.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 Tucker had written the 1981 monograph on C02. (LINK)

The specific context was that upon retiring from the CSIRO’s Atmospheric Physics division Tucker had written a couple of dodgy denialist articles for the Institute of Public Affairs. An ignominious end to what could have been a reasonable career.

What I think we can learn from this – 1) people get Relevance Deprivation Syndrome.  2) Education is no real protection against being spectacularly wrong.

What happened next – denialism continued, obvs.

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 25, 1968 – First atmospheric layers collection of carbon dioxide… – All Our Yesterdays

November 25, 1993 – House of Commons briefing on carbon taxes

November 25, 2000 – CoP meeting ends in official disarray…

Categories
Activism

November 24, 1979 – Anti-nuclear campaign launch

Forty six years ago, on this day, November 24th, 1979 an Anti Nuclear campaign launch – see  two pager about this in the London Greenpeace

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 337ppm. 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 1970s saw a huge growth in anti-nuclear power movements.

The specific context was – Thatcher had come to power, and was as gung-ho for nuclear as her predecessors (because, well, there’s a permanent pro-nuclear establishment, isn’t there?).

What I think we can learn from this – smart people have been writing about the problems faced by social movements/NGOs for a long time, and we could do worse than listen and learn. But we won’t do that, because it requires time, access to materials, courage, curiosity and humility.

What happened next – the coalition didn’t really last, as I suspect many knew it wouldn’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: 

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

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

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

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

Categories
Germany

November 24, 1973 – German speed limits

Forty six years ago, on this day, November 24th, 1973,

24 Nov 1973 – A national speed limit is imposed on the Autobahn in Germany because of the 1973 oil crisis. The speed limit lasted only four months.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 330ppm. 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 1973 Oil Shock was forcing governments to constrain some forms of behaviour.

What I think we can learn from this – it didn’t last. Humans desire for speed – and the illusions of freedom that can bring – is a very powerful force.

What happened next – the law didn’t last. 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 24, 1971 – I’ve seen the future baby, it is murder (Meadows explaining Limits to Growth at US Embassy) – All Our Yesterdays

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

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

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

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

November 23, 2021 – XR says will mobilise two million

Four years ago, on this day, November 23rd, 2021,

Extinction Rebellion UK claims it will have 2million ppl mobilised

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 416ppm. 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 last climate “wave” of concern began in 2018, with the long hot summer, the IPCC’s 1.5 degrees report, Greta Thunberg and … XR.  But by late 2019, before the pandemic, it was clear that the wheels were wobbling, if not actually falling off.

See my “Does XR have the right tactics” debate in New Internationalist.

The specific context was – there had been attempts to re-heat the souffle. These had failed.

What I think we can learn from this – when the groups are on the downswing, they redouble and redouble their rhetoric.

See also my XR post with Hudson’s Law of social movement organisations and JSO anthropologically fascinating, politically terrifying

What happened next – Soon after XR announced “we quit”. And I wrote about that too.

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

Xxx

Also on this day: 

November 23, 1961 – “The Day the Earth Caught Fire” (in Denmark)

November 23, 1963 – Doctor Who begins

November 23, 1968 – “Hell upon Earth” warning about environmental destruction,inc. Climate…

November 23, 1988 – Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke gives greenhouse speech

November 23, 2009 – Global Warming Policy Foundation launched 

Categories
Science Scientists

November 23, 1965 – Walter Orr Roberts “carbon dioxide is clearly rising in the atmosphere”

Sixty years ago, on this day, November 23rd 1965, American scientist Walter Orr Roberts gave a speech. In it, this – 

“Perhaps, through this mechanism, we are already modifying the atmosphere, unknowingly and on a large scale, as we clearly are already doing on the city scale. Indeed, can we be sure that city-scale modification is simply city-scale? Or are the atmospheric solids and gases put in over the city bringing changes on a larger scale? The relative abundance of carbon dioxide is clearly rising in the atmosphere, almost certainly through man’s intervention. But no one seems at all secure about what this is doing to the climate.”

Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society  Vol. 47, No. 3, March 1966 Based on an address delivered at the International Symposium on Electromagnetic Sensing of the Earth from Satellites, Miami, Fla., 23 November 1965.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 320ppm. 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 since the early 1950s the question of carbon dioxide build-up and its possible climatic consequences had been known. Not necessarily taken seriously, but by the mid-1960s, this was -just- beginning to shift.

The specific context was Roberts gave his speech in the aftermath of the release of the PSAC report on November 7th 1965.

What I think we can learn from this – it wasn’t secret or arcane information.  I am not saying “everyone knew” but, well, a lot of people did.

What happened next – the emissions kept climbing. NCAR kept investigating.

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 23, 1961 – “The Day the Earth Caught Fire” (in Denmark)

November 23, 1963 – Doctor Who begins

November 23, 1968 – “Hell upon Earth” warning about environmental destruction,inc. Climate…

November 23, 1988 – Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke gives greenhouse speech

November 23, 2009 – Global Warming Policy Foundation launched 

Categories
Australia United States of America

November 22, 1996 – Clinton in Australia, gives climate speech about Great Barrier Reef…

Twenty nine years ago, on this day, November 22nd, 1996, freshly re-elected US President Bill Clinton is in Australia….

“Finally, we must work to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions. These gases released by cars and power plants and burning forests affect our health and our climate. They are literally warming our planet. If they continue unabated, the consequences will be nothing short of devastating for the children here in this audience and their children.

“New weather patterns, lost species, the spread of infectious diseases, damaged economies, rising sea levels: if present trends continue, there is a real risk that sometime in the next century, parts of this very park we are here in today could disappear, submerged by a rising ocean. That is why today, from this remarkable place, I call upon the community of nations to agree to legally binding commitments to fight climate change.”

Remarks on the International Coral Reef Initiative in Port Douglas, Australia | The American Presidency Project

Prime Minister John Howard dissed it of course – see Gordon, M. 1996. “Howard defends stand on emissions.” The Australian, November 25, p.4.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 363ppm. 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 Clinton had started his first term with promises of climate action, and then had his arse handed to him over the BTU tax.

The specific context was that Clinton had just won re-election, defeating Bob Dole, and knew that there would be fun and games ahead, internationally, because the Kyoto conference was coming up in December 1997. Given the Australian stance at COP2, it was clear there was gonna be Australian resistance and shitfuckery.

What I think we can learn from this – Clinton was not stupid. Corrupt, venal, slimy, yes. Stupid, no.

What happened next – Australia spent 1997 demanding special treatment, and got it, carving out an increase in emissions as its emissions “reductions” target.

Obama made some nice speeches.

http://www.news.com.au/national/18-years-on-us-president-barack-obama-follows-bill-clinton-to-queensland-for-the-same-outcome/news-story/32318f45fbde89461f9e5fba8db343c0   

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 22, 2000 – protests at COP6 at The Hague

November 22, 2002 – private business battles on #climate become public in Australia

November 22, 2004 – another denialist screed foisted upon the world

Categories
Australia

November 21, 1997 – Shell is getting out of Aussie coal

Twenty nine years ago, on this day, November 21st, 1997,

ENERGY giant Shell is considering pulling out of coal production in Australia in what would be the first major move anywhere in the world by a multinational company to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

The Dutch chairman of the corporation, Mr Cor Herstroter, has told two London newspapers the groups’ coal assets “were at present under review with the aim of divestment”. But Shell Australia executives yesterday played down the reports from London, claiming that the company fully intended to stay in coal production.

Benson, S. 1997. Coal too hot for Shell. Daily Telegraph, November 21

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, awash in cash in the 1970s, oil companies had bought up all sorts of assets. Some they got out of quickly, others, more slowly. 

The specific context was Shell was having a think…

What I think we can learn from this – companies invest, divest, everything changes.

What happened next – Shell did in fact get rid of its Australian coal mines…

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, 1969 – the first permanent ARPANET link – All Our Yesterdays

November 21, 1978 – Sydney Channel Ten news on Carbon Dioxide build-up and trouble ahead – All Our Yesterdays

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

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

November 21 2023 – EU: CDR AOK – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Uncategorized

November 20, 1997 – John Howard’s safeguarding bullshit

Twenty-eight years ago, on this day, November 20th, 1997, Australian Prime Minister John Howard gives a “everything is cool” speech, leading to birth of the Australian Greenhouse Organisation (AGO) and the Mandatory Renewables Energy Target (MRET)

Greens Senator Bob Brown concluded:

A$65 million for renewable energy over five years… does not even retrieve the A$75 million (over five years) lost when the Energy Research and Development Corporation and Renewable Energy Industry Programs were abolished…. The target of an extra 2% of electricity from renewables (making a total of 11% including current large-scale hydro electricity generation) compares miserably with international standards (e.g. Britain’s target of 20% from renewables by 2010)… There are no targets for energy efficiency… There is no move to halt clearing of native vegetation which accounts for 23% of emissions.

(Taplin and Yu, 2000: 104)  [Big Brother and the Chocolate Rations]

R Brown, PM’s Greenhouse Package – 18% Increase! Media Release, Australian Senate, 20 November 1997

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 Australian policy elites had decided not to do anything about climate change by about 1994. John Howard turbo-charged that contempt for future generations when he became Prime Minister in 1996.

The specific context was that Howard had spent 1997 sending emissaries to try to carve out the sweetest deal possible at the December 1997 COP in Kyoto.  He had come under some pressure from within the Liberal Party (from grandees who had been aware of carbon dioxide build-up for decades) and also needed to pretend to care to shore up the small-l liberal voting block. Therefore, this wretched speech.

What I think we can learn from this – just because they are evil denialists, doesn’t mean they lack the skills to manipulate people.

What happened next – the vaunted “Australian Greenhouse Office” was a joke – its boss never even got to brief Howard once.  The whole thing fell apart, and Howard did everything he could to slow the growth of renewables too (for example, this).

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

J Howard, ‘Safeguarding the future: Australia’s response to climate change’, House of Representatives, ministerial statement, Debates, 20 November 1997. 

Also on this day: 

November 20, 1930 – the Fox is born!! 

November 20, 1973 – “Is the West Antarctic Ice Sheet Disintegrating?”

November 20, 1974 – BBC airs “The Weather Machine”

November 20, 1974 – “The Weather Machine” is broadcast – All Our Yesterdays

November 20, 1988 – Will Thatcher pick up the Green Gauntlet? (spoiler: no, no she won’t) – All Our Yesterdays

November 20, 2008 – Green capitalism flexes a (weak) BICEP

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage

November 20, 1991 – IEA CCS etc

Thirty four years ago, on this day, November 20th, 1991,

On 20th November 1991 a number of countries signed an agreement to take part in a programme of research and development aimed at potential mitigation techniques as a response to the issue of global warming. Formed under the aegis of the International Energy Agency (IEA), the programme brings together those countries interested in establishing the techniques, costs, and environmental consequences of removing CO2 from power station flue gases and storing or otherwise disposing it. 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 355ppm. 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 IEA had been set up in the aftermath of the 1973 Oil Shock. It had held various relatively consequential meetings (it’s all relative) about climate change through the 1980s. 

The specific context was that now, with the Rio Earth Summit just around the corner, they were wanting to be an important institutional player in the climate technology game.

What I think we can learn from this – the institutions matter, in terms of where the funding comes from, where the hype from technology enthusiasts can go to get nurtured, given an imprimatur…

What happened next – through the 1990s, CCS kept bubbling under. By 1999-2000 it was beginning to break through. 

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 20, 1930 – the Fox is born!! 

November 20, 1973 – “Is the West Antarctic Ice Sheet Disintegrating?”

November 20, 1974 – BBC airs “The Weather Machine”

November 20, 1974 – “The Weather Machine” is broadcast – All Our Yesterdays

November 20, 1988 – Will Thatcher pick up the Green Gauntlet? (spoiler: no, no she won’t) – All Our Yesterdays

November 20, 2008 – Green capitalism flexes a (weak) BICEP