Tag: 1972

Categories
biodiversity

May 16, 1972 – “Carbon and the Biosphere” symposium

Fifty-three years ago, on this day, May 16th, 1972,

https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/4036#/summary

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that by the late 1960s biologists were starting to pay more serious attention to carbon dioxide build-up. The “Keeling Curve” was now ten years old. It was obvious that atmospheric concentrations would continue to rise and rise, on a timescale that was a geological eye-blink.

What I think we can learn from this. We knew. We knew. We knew.

What happened next. The scientific work continued through the 1970s. In the late 1970s, with better political leaders, we might have started responding. But we had Thatcher, and then Reagan, and so awareness proper was delayed until 1988. And the response? Well, it never actually started, did 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.

Also on this day: 

May 16, 1973 Energy and how we live. UNESCO seminar at Flinders – All Our Yesterdays

May 16, 2005 – Anthony Albanese says critical action on #climate being delayed by 20 years… #auspol

May 16, 2006 – UK Prime Minister Tony Blair goes nuclear…

May 16, 2005 – Anthony Albanese, eco-warrior…

May 16 – Interview with Rosie, about zero population growth, zero climate progress, etc…

Categories
Academia United States of America

May 1, 1972 – Walter Orr Roberts and the need for black climate scientists

Fifty three years ago, on this day, May 1st, 1972, the National Center for Atmospheric Research director Walter Orr Roberts writes a letter about the importance of training black climate scientists https://opensky.ucar.edu/islandora/object/archives:7508

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was the ferment of the 1960s (i.e. the hard dangerous work of civil rights activists and the hand-wringing of the liberals) was ramifying through the institutions. Here we see Orr Roberts, by all accounts a decent man, trying to carve out some space.

What I think we can learn from this. Institutional racism is a thing. Individuals try to ameliorate it, but you need a system to change a system…

What happened next. The 60s ended in the late 1970s, with exhaustion, repression, and the beginnings of a successful “fightback” (that never ended, but was on the back foot for a bit). By 1981 it was “Morning in America” again…

There’s plenty of books about elements of this – I should make a list I guess.

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: 

May 1, 1971 – May Day anti-war actions in Washington DC – All Our Yesterdays

May 1, 1980 – ABC talks about atmospheric carbon dioxide measurement

May 1, 1981 – scorching editorial about Energy and Climate received at Climatic Change – All Our Yesterdays

May 1, 1996 – US Congressman says climate research money is “money down a rat hole

Categories
Cultural responses United States of America

February 14, 1972 – the Lorax is animated…

Fifty three years ago, on this day, February 14th, 1972,

The book was adapted as an animated musical television special produced by DePatie-Freleng Enterprises, directed by Hawley Pratt and starring the voices of Eddie Albert and Bob Holt. It was first aired by CBS on February 14, 1972. A reference to pollution of Lake Erie was spoken by one of the Humming-Fish as they depart; it remains in DVD releases of the show, although later removed from the book. The special also shows the Onceler arguing with himself, and asking the Lorax whether shutting down his factory (thus putting hundreds of people out of work) is practical.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2025 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that everyone was running around talking about the environment. The Dr Seuss book The Lorax was part of that big picture. So. hardly surprising that an animation of it should be made.

What I think we can learn from this that old people, young people, everyone in between, people really did know in the late 60s -early 70s, what was at stake. And people who cared were unable to sustain public attention, because issues get old, and there was so much else going on; a war to protest, to try to end multiple wars for the state managers reconfiguring the American Empire. They had a lot on –  not that they ever intended to do anything about environmental degradation. 

So a few people thought that the dominant party could be persuaded. The “good chaps” theory of government, perhaps. 

What happened next Dr Seuss died in 1991. The Lorax got remade,

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage United States of America

January 26, 1972 – “Enhance Oil Recovery” with carbon dioxide kicks off.

Fifty three years ago, on this day, January 26th, 1972, a new technology came along.

CO2-enhanced oil recovery (EOR) has been carried out in the United States and Canada since the 1960s. The world’s first large-scale CO2-EOR project, Scurry Area Canyon Reef Operating Committee (SACROC), has been implemented by Chevron in the oilfield in Scurry County, Texas since January 26, 1972 [13]. The CO2 for this project comes from the natural CO2 fields in Colorado and is pipelined to the oilfield for flooding. More than 175 million tonnes of natural CO2 in total were injected in the SACROC project during 1972–2009 [14].  

Ma et al  – 2022. Carbon Capture and Storage: History and the Road Ahead. Engineering Volume 14, July 2022, Pages 33-43

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that economies were still growing at a rate that we would now consider either astonishing or Chinese. Energy companies were looking to extract more oil and gas, of course, and to do it as cheaply as possible. In retrospect, we can now see this is the formal beginning of enhanced oil recovery. But at the time, I guess it was just one more experiment (EOR had already been piloted on a much smaller scale). 

What I think we can learn from this is that EOR, which is still the raison d’etre behind CCS, or the only way that it will make money, has a long history, longer than 1972. 

What happened next

Well, CCS had a long, slow development process. There were studies in the late 70s through the 80s. There was momentary interest in it in 1989 and then the people who would have done it realized how much it would cost and how they could get more bang for their buck elsewhere. And CCS finally took off in the 2000s because the Kyoto Protocol looked like it might come into force, and rich nations needed something with which to pretend to be taking action.

Somebody should write a book. Oh, wait.

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: 

January 26, 1970 – British PM offers US a “new special relationship” on pollution. (Conservative then tries to outflank him.)

Categories
United States of America

January 18, 1972 – Plastic is in your blood..

Fifty three years ago, on this day, January 18th, 1972, the Washington Post runs a story, well

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Stockholm climate conference was coming. Eeryone was still therefore very aerated about  environmental issues, generally.

Plastics were on a kind of  similar trajectory as DDT. They’d gone from wondrous scientific, technological gift in the 1950s “Better Living Through Technology” to something regarded as potentially or actually dangerous. And the generational shift here is, of course, captured in the scene from the film The Graduate where Benjamin Braddock’s father’s friend, Mr McGuire,says “One Word. Plastics!”

 But here we are with plastic even being found in the blood. It turns out, as per Barry Commoner and his laws of ecology, “there is no ‘away.’” 

What I think we can learn from this is that these problems, these dangers, have been with us for two generations or awareness of them, but some of them are simply too hard to solve. DDT could be erased like the CFCs that were depleting the ozone. BUt carbon dioxide could not, and neither could plastics. 

What happened next

Plastics continued to be everywhere in every sense. Oceans are full of them. They’re in the clouds, and we have doomed ourselves. So it goes. 

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: 

January 18, 1964 – Nature mentions atmospheric carbon dioxide build-up

January 18, 1993 – Australian unions and greenies launch first “Green Jobs” campaign

January 18, 1993 – Job’s not a good un. “Green Jobs in Industry Plan” achieves … nothing. #auspol

Categories
Media Science Scientists United States of America

December 29, 1972 – Schneider meets Sullivan

Fifty two years ago, on this day, December 29th, 1972,

In Baltimore in December 1972 I gave a talk on the issue of human weather control to the annual convention of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). AAAS meetings are internationally known because they bring together research scientists and policy makers to discuss the societal implications of new knowledge…. After speaking for half an hour or so, on how various kinds of human activities could change the climate, I concluded that, unfortunately, only a relatively few people were aware of the possibilities. I then quipped: “Nowadays, everybody is doing something with the weather, but nobody is talking about it.”

At the front of the audience, a distinguished-looking gentleman was taking notes: he turned out to be the doyen of all science writers, Walter Sullivan of the New York Times….

Sullivan, W. 1972. Goals for US Urged on Weather Control. New York Times, Dec 29, p.50.

(Schneider, 1989: 200)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Stephen Schneider is perhaps being a little naive here, because he’d already made headlines the previous year, thanks to a paper that he had co-written that had talked about the possibility of an ice age thanks to all the dust and smoke that was being put up. That paper turned out to be wrong and was used as a club by denialists to hit Schneider over the head with it for the rest of his life. Because that’s who they are. As for Sullivan, he had been aware of the CO2 possibility at the latest 1961 but much more likely, by 1957; he had after all written a book about the International Geophysical Year. 

What we learn is that by the early 1970s carbon dioxide buildup as a problem was getting more attention. There had been an article earlier the same year in May I want to say 1972 in The New York Times. There was of course by now, the United Nations Environment Program setting up shop. 

What happened next: The carbon dioxide build-up issue kept getting random reports all through the 1970s. Only in 1988 did it finally punch 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: 

December 29, 1969 – AAAS symposium on “Climate and Man”

December 29, 1995 – Sydney Morning Herald points out year has been hottest yet…

Categories
United States of America

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

Fifty two years ago, on this day, November 24th, 1971, a Club of Rome researcher is hosted by the American Embassy in London…

At a second meeting in November 1971, Forrester’s lead researcher, Meadows, was flown in to explain the model at an event hosted by the American Embassy.119 https://ucldigitalpress.co.uk/v2-interactive/Book/Article/61/86/4766/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 326ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Club of Rome had hired some people at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to do a big computer modelling study, based on Jay Forester’s work which was state of the art at the time, but had obvious shortcomings. There had been a leak of an early draft in the Observer in June, and there was a lot of interest in what the Limits to Growth people were going to say. And so Dennis Meadows, who was one of the research team, was brought over to the United States Embassy in London and gave a briefing on this day. 

What we learn is that The Limits to Growth report in early 1972 was, as we would now say, “well-trailed.” People were talking about all of these issues. And the question of what would happen if we just kept trying to grow the economy 50 or 60 years hence, well here we are and we know. 

What happened next, we kept trying to grow the economy, we ignored the Limits to Growth. People who ought to have known better sneered at it as “Malthus with a computer” and there have been various studies showing that the Limits to Growth people are kind of tracking quite well with reality, which is more than you can say of all the lovely models of economics.

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

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

Categories
Canada International processes

October 30, 1972 – Carroll Wilson writes to Maurice Strong, pondering networks

Fifty two years ago, on this day, October 30th, 1972 the Canadian oil baron who had sorted out the United Nations environment conference receives a letter (I know, “hold the front page” right?)

 In a letter to Maurice Strong, the chairman of the Stockholm conference, Carroll Wilson wondered “how and in what ways one might develop a kind of network of the rather limited number of key influential people in a certain number of countries around the world who are globally conscious and who have a vision extending to the end of this century and beyond and who have a deep concern for the environment in its broadest sense.” Wilson to Strong, October 30, 1972, Wilson papers, M.I.T. Archives, Box 44, File 1818.

 (Hart, David, 1992 Belfer thing)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Stockholm conference had happened. And the United Nations Environment Program had been created. There was a broader question of how to maintain or even increase momentum. What sorts of networks and communities might you need? Caroll Wilson, who’d been neck deep in organising the first study of man’s environmental impact in 1970 was clearly pondering the issues. And who better to talk with that Maurice Strong who had shepherded the Stockholm conference. 

What we learn is that in the aftermath of conferences there is talk about, “well, how do we sustain the momentum.” And here we are. And of course, if you try and have those conversations before, people are resistant because they just want their big moment of orgasm. And they don’t want to have to think about what comes next because they kind of on some level know that it will be a bust and you’ll be harshing their vibe, you’ll be spoiling things for them. Let them have their moment of pure, fat free content free reality free, splurge not to be cynical or anything. 

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: 

October 30, 1983 – Carl Sagan hosts ‘nuking ourselves would be bad’ conference.

October 30, 2006 – Stern Review published.

October 30, 2008 – a worker-greenie coalition? Maybe…

Categories
Australia

September 8, 1972 – Green activist vanishes off face of Earth…

Fifty two years ago, on this day, September 8th, 1972,

On September 8, 1972, [Brenda] Hean, 55, hopped aboard a two-seater World War II Tiger Moth, being flown by experienced pilot Max Price. Leaving from Hobart, they were bound for Canberra to try to win support from federal politicians to stop the flooding of Lake Pedder by Tasmania’s Hydro Electricity Commission.

One of their intentions was to skywrite Save Lake Pedder over the national capital.

The plane never made it, and the bodies and wreckage were never located.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/14/1092340534703.html?from=storylhs

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that there was a federal election coming. The main hope for Tasmanian activists trying to save Lake Pedder from being drowned for a dam was a change of government.

What we learn is that it may well not have been murder, and if it was murder, that doesn’t necessarily mean it was anti-greenies or pro-Lake Pedder people, because apparently the pilot had pissed people off with his, ah “extracurricular activities”. So he may have been the target of sabotage of the plane. In any case wreckage was never found, nobody ever confessed. And as Christine Milne says, Tasmania is a bit different in other places, the truth would come out – not so much in Tasmania. 

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 8, 1990 – Australian #climate denialist spouting his nonsense…

September 8, 2014 – Lobster boat blockaders have charges dropped.

Categories
United Kingdom

September 2,1972 – BBC Radio speaks of “A Finite Earth”

Fifty two years ago, on this day, September 2nd, 1972,

A Finite Earth BBC Radio 3

First broadcast: Sat 2nd Sep 1972, 21:55 on BBC Radio 3

Professor Dennis Meadows , Dartmouth University, USA, co-author of The Limits to Growth in discussion with Professor Wilfred Beckerman , University College, London, member of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution. about the concept of using a computerised world model to determine the limits to continued economic growth.

The publication of The Limits to Growth has stimulated renewed controversy In the doomsday debate. Professor Beckerman attacks the assumptions of the report and challenges its conclusions.

Chaired by Michael Peacock

Producer Michael BRIGHT – (see also review of this by David Wade the following week in The Times)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 327ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Limits to Growth report had come out before this, as had the Blueprint for Survival. Since then the Stockholm Conference on the Environment had happened. Everyone was saying, thinking about limits to growth, agreeing, disagreeing, and it was fair fodder for radio programmes where you could have various talking heads. And this is one where Wilfred Beckerman got a chance to talk. He was an economist and he was on the Royal Commission of Environmental Pollution at the time. He was up against Dennis Meadows, one of the LtG authors/.

What we learn is that radio was not all radio gaga, and it was having one of its finest hours. nd the debates that we’re still having in 2024 were being had, then round and round in circles we go where it stops, nobody knows (well, the collapse of western “civ”, obvs). 

What happened next. The sorts of programmes and series kept being produced. Middle-class people kept stroking their chins while accepting promotions and ever greater comfort, believing that the system was fair, was delivering for them, because it was – without thinking about the deeper underlying costs in the long term. There was always such a short-term price to pay. If you go up against “the system” (man).

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 2, 1972 – Adelaide FOE asks “is technology a blueprint for destruction?” (Spoiler – ‘yes’)

September 2, 1994 – International Negotiating Committee 10th meeting ends

September 2, 2002- Peter Garrett argues “community action” vs #climate change