Tag: 1956

Categories
Arctic Science Scientists United States of America

March 19, 1956 – Washington Post reports Revelle’s statements

Sixty eight years ago, on this day, March 19th, 1956, the question of possible climate change due to carbon dioxide build-up gets an airing (sorry) in the Washington Post.

19 March 1956 Washington Post story on Revelle’s predictions 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 314ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Roger Revelle as well as being a really good scientist was a really good political operator. He knew how to tell Senators interesting stories so that they would give big science, big money. And one of the stories Revelle was telling in ‘56, ahead of the impending International Geophysical Year was that carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere might cause some interesting physical effects. 

What we learn from this is that the idea of the independent scientists mucking around with his test tubes is a comforting myth, but only a myth. And already, by the end of the 40s, this was entirely obvious, given how the war had been one, Manhattan Project, Vannevar Bush, all of that stuff. 

What happened next? With some of the money, a tiny portion of the money that Revellel got, he hired Charles David Keeling to make fantastically accurate measurements of atmospheric CO2, giving us the Keeling Curve and evidence that yes, carbon dioxide was definitely building up in the atmosphere. Until that point this was not entirely certain, though it was strongly suspected. It’s always good to have proper evidence to back up your suspicions, isn’t it? 

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

Norman, L. 1956. Fumes Seen Warming Arctic Seas. The Washington Post and Times Herald; March 19,  pg. 3

Also on this day: 

March 19, 1990 – Bob Hawke gives #climate speech

March 19, 1998 – industry cautiously welcoming emissions trading…

Categories
United States of America

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

Sixty seven, on this day, November 27,1956 Waldemar Kaempffert, New York Times science writer dies.

A month earlier, on October 28, the Grey Lady had run this below.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 314ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Kaempfert had been a journalist for a long time, and he had done a couple of really good articles in the New York Times about industry warming the world. He was probably good mates with Gilbert Plass. He had written the NYT article about Gilbert Plass’s comments at the AGU in May 1953.

What I think we can learn from this

Smart people were switched on to the threat in the 1950s. It wasn’t rocket science.

What happened next

Walter Sullivan became the chief science writer at The New York Times. Sullivan was heavily involved in reporting on the International Geophysical Year and at that point became aware of the potential problem of climate change from carbon dioxide build-up.

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.

Categories
United States of America

June 29, 1956 – Just DRIVE, she said…

Sixty seven years ago, on this day, June 29, 1956, the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 is signed, officially creating the United States Interstate Highway System.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 315ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the US economy after WW2 was based on the growth in car ownership, as per the quote in Noam Chomsky’s “World Orders, Old and New” with Eisenhower saying it “put a nice stable floor under the economy.” The Great Acceleration in every sense…

What I think we can learn from this

The Federal Government instituted the highway systems to improve transport pretending that it was in some way a defence gesture because you’re not allowed to do industrial policy ETC in the US nakedly – you have to dress it up usually as defence.

What happened next

The great car economy took off. There will be no survivors

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.

Categories
Uncategorized United States of America

March 15, 1956 – scientist explains climate change to US senators

Sixty seven years ago, on this day, March 15, 1956, Roger Revelle laid out the facts while trying to assure senators that taxpayers’ money was being well spent.  It got reported the following day by the Los Angeles Times.

Anon, 1956. Gas fumes suspected as factor in climate. Los Angeles Times, March 16, p. 25.

AND 

 Norman, L. 1956. Fumes seen warming arctic seas, Washington Post and Times Herald , March 19, p.3.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 314ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that big science was getting big money. And congressmen wanted to show that they were keeping informed. Revelle’s was in preparation for the International Geophysical Year. And he enjoyed, I think, testifying about this sort of stuff. At this point, it wasn’t clear that carbon dioxide levels were definitely going up. There had been a publication in 1955 querying the accuracy of the various measurements.

What I think we can learn from this

Congressmen have been aware of the issue as has anyone reading a newspaper since 1956. Actually, you can go earlier, but I would say the pivotal years are from 56 to 59. Before that, it’s just not that clear. 

What happened next

Revelle would solve that uncertainty about atmospheric carbon dioxide levels by hiring Charles David Keeling.  And by 1959, it was clear that yes, co2 levels were definitely rising. 

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..

Categories
Science Scientists

February 9, 1956 – Scientists puzzle over where the carbon dioxide is going….

Sixty seven years ago, on this day, February 9, 1956 scientist Hans Seuss  (cosmic rays) wrote to his colleague Roger Revelle (marine science, among other things)

“I am not too happy about the whole thing” – 

Weart, 1997, p 346, footnote 78

The thing he wasn’t happy about was being able to account for Gilbert Plass’s point about the build-up of atmospheric CO2…

Further context here, via an excellent 1990 book by Michael Oppenheimer and Robert Boyle, called “Dead Heat: The Race Against the Greenhouse Effect” (a race we have clearly lost, btw).

“According to Gordon MacDonald of the Mitre Corporation, who spent some time at Scripps during the 1950s, the Revelle-Suess collaboration  on the CO2 question was fortuitous, for neither was studying climate. Suess was interested in the cosmic rays that produce the carbon-14 isotope in the atmosphere. Revelle was an expert in marine sediments, which were the presumed graveyard for carbon removed from the air by the ocean. Suess and others had noted a small decline in the carbon-14 content of new tree rings versus ones that were fifty years older,  indicating that the carbon dioxide taken in by plants in recent years was deficient in carbon14 compared to earlier times. Fossil fuels are lacking in carbon-14 because it disintegrates by radioactivity over the eons of burial. The two scientists proposed that fossil-fuel combustion had gradually diluted the carbon-14 that is produced continually by cosmic rays, by adding the dominant carbon-12 to the atmosphere. In other words, emissions had not been removed completely and immediately by the ocean. From this and other data they surmised that carbon-dioxide levels would grow significantly in the future and affect climate.”

Oppenheimer M. and Boyle, R . (1990)  Dead Heat: The Race Against the Greenhouse Effect. London I.B. Tauris, page 224

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 314ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

The scientists, Suess and Revelle were puzzling over what would become their seminal paper released in early 1957. That paper suggested that scientists had made an unsafe assumption, (based on Revelle’s 1930s work), that carbon dioxide would be absorbed by the ocean because the layers of the ocean mixed well. 

This kind of dissatisfaction and puzzling is what scientists are paid to do. If they didn’t, we’d still have “earth and air and fire and water” as per the Aristotlean version of The Elements song by Tom Lehrer.

What I think we can learn from this

Smart people have been puzzling on this for a long time, and came up with some good answers that should have had us sit up and take notice. But at a societal species level, that is too much to ask, because everyone has so much else going on at any given time. And if they don’t, it is “given” to them via pay cuts and reality television.

What happened next

Suess and Revelle published their paper. Revelle hired David Keeling to measure CO2 accurately. Other people paid attention. And here we are 70 years down the line with atmospheric concentrations 100 PPM higher than they were at the time.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong?  Do comment on this post.

References

Weart, S. 1997.  Global Warming, Cold War, and the Evolution of Research Plans. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences Vol. 27, No. 2 (1997), pp. 319-356

Categories
United States of America

October 28, 1956 – New York Times reports “Warmer Climate on the Earth May Be Due To More Carbon Dioxide in the Air”

On this day, October 28 in 1956, the New York Times carried another story on the build up of carbon dioxide (something it had written about the previous year too).

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 314ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

American scientist Gilber Plass had been making noises about this issue, as were the Swedes. The International Geophysical Year was about to start (i.e. Roger Revelle was in the process of hiring Charles David Keeling)

Why this matters. 

We knew enough to worry and watch, back then, and to act if the worries about a build-up were to be proven (as they were, within a few more years of this article).

What happened next?

Roger Revelle hired Charles David Keeling to take accurate measurements of carbon dioxide.