Tag: 1978

Categories
International processes Science World Meteorological Organisation

September 21, 1978 – Draft Agreement between WMO and ICSU

Forty eight years ago, on this day, September 21st, 1978,

Draft Agreement between WMO and ICSU re: climate research programme

https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/toward-a-u-s-climate-program-plan-comprehensive-review-and-recommendations-from-the-1978-workshop/289538439#88

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 335ppm. As of 2026, 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 World Meteorological Organisation had been beavering away on any number of issues, but a subgroup had in 1976 come out in favour of a warming world, because of carbon dioxide build up. This had been reported in the Times, and here we see the agreement for a kind of successor programme to the GARP in the lead up to and to be agreed at the first World Climate Conference to be held in Geneva in February of 1979.

The specific context was that the reports and conferences about carbon dioxide build-up were beginning to come quicker.

What I think we can learn from this is that the wheels of the bureaucracy go round and round, they grind very fine, but you’re not going to get big research programmes funded unless you do things like this, draft programmes, revised drafts, etc.

What happened next. The First World Climate Conference happened. It was not the pivotal moment it could have been. The problem did not become a public issue until 1988.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

Xx

References

xx

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

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.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

September 21, 1958, LA Times runs a Greenhouse Cartoon

September 21, 1990 – Stabilisation in 2005, says the UK

September 21, 1990 – Ministers call for Toronto Target to be federal policy …

September 21, 1993 – Manchester says “no, not hot air”. Yeah, right.

September 21, 2014 – big #climate march in New York. World saved.

Date for your diary – Sun Day, Sept 21st 2025

Categories
United States of America

May 1, 1978 – Comprehensive plan for CO2 effect research and assessment

Forty eight years ago, on this day, May 1, 1978, 

Comprehensive plan for carbon dioxide effects research and assessment. Part I: the global carbon cycle and climatic effects of increasing carbon dioxide

Technical Report · 01 May 1978 as cited in CO2 Newsletter Vol 1 no 1

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2026 it is 4xxppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that scientists had been aware of carbon dioxide build-up as a definitive fact since the late 50s. Through the 60s and into the early 70s, it had slowly built up momentum as “something to worry about.” In the mid 70s, that changed because of new science, a consensus that we were on the brink of a pronounced global warming, as per Wally Broecker in August 1975.

 The specific context was that the Energy Research and Development Agency, which was transmogrifying into the Department of Energy, had funded by this stage, a bunch of studies into CO2 build up, some of which had been published, but most which had not. The obvious one is Oliver Markley.

And you see here in this scientist trying to figure out who should study what, or what should be studied, when and how, what assessments etc.

What I think we can learn from this. 50 years since the work began, and here we still are, 50 years later: “how many angels on the head of a pin.” The caravan should have moved on to “Why haven’t we been doing anything about it?” and perhaps even to “Why didn’t we do anything about it?” And here we are still not tackling those questions, because they would be way too painful. 

What happened next. Well, the DOE and AAAS held a four day symposium in Annapolis, Maryland, April 2 to April 6, 1979 which should have been an important event for UK climate. Tom Wigley of CRU was there, as was Crispin Tickell, and there was an editorial, presumably by David Davies in Nature of May 1979, which we will come to in a couple of days. 

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

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

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

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

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

Categories
Australia

April 26, 1978 – The first tank of Grim news…

Forty eight years ago, on this day, April 26th, 1978 – Australian carbon dioxide measurements from a ground based station at Cape Grim begin.

Tanks were immersed in liquid nitrogen to condense the air (Fig. 7), under ‘baseline’ conditions (strong onshore winds) in these 35 L stainless steel tanks, commencing mid 1978. The first tank filled was CG260478, CG reflecting its Cape Grim origin, filled 26 April 1978, and remains intact in the Air Archive at Aspendale today 

Fraser et al. 2018

March 8, 1978 – Parliamentarian talks about it

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that accurate measures of CO2 in the atmosphere had begun in 1958 with Charles Keeling as part of the International Geophysical Year, Roger Revelle had managed to carve out some money. (We now know that Keeling had done CO2 measurement for the oil companies in 1954 thanks to the work of Rebecca John,)

The specific context was that Australian measurements of CO2 had begun in the early 1970s –  they were initially from equipment attached to aeroplanes, TAA, commercial flights. However, something more permanent was required. So we should remember as well that from September of ‘77 there was an increase in awareness of the CSIRO scientists around atmospheric pollution by carbon dioxide. 

What I think we can learn from this is that we knew plenty.  

What happened next:  Cape Grim is still measuring CO2 to this day. There was a conference on Philip Island in December 1978. There was a CSIRO symposium in Canberra in 1986, which got coverage in the Canberra Times. In 1986 the greenhouse project stuff started kicking in. 

So where will the files for the commission for the future be and the greenhouse project and so forth? That would be quite. A good National Archives of Australia, find 

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: 

April 26, 1992 – Ros Kelly abjures a carbon tax – All Our Yesterdays

April 26, 1998 – New York Times front page expose on anti-climate action by industry

April 26, 1998 – “Industrial Group Plans to Battle Climate Treaty”

Categories
United States of America

November 27, 1978 – Harvey Milk assassinated

Forty eight years ago, on this day, November 27th, 1978,

On this day in San Francisco, city mayor George Moscone and openly gay city supervisor Harvey Milk are assassinated by former supervisor Dan White.

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 the upsurge of the 1960s had led to all sorts of positive changes in US society, including the ability of openly homosexual people (men at first) to run for public office.

What I think we can learn from this – liberation comes with risks, as shown in the film Milk.

What happened next – the killer, Dan White, took his own life a few years later.

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

November 27 1967 – Newsweek wrings its hands about future ecological problems, including carbon dioxide

November 27, 1969 – Canberra Times runs pollution article, mentions melting ice-caps

November 27, 1978 – “Impacts of climate on Australian Society and Economy” begins…

November 27, 1974 – “The Fear of Climatic Change” – presentation to Australian Royal Meteorological Society 

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
United Kingdom

June 22, 1978 – ETSU report about Human Activity and Carbon Dioxide

Forty seven  years ago, on this day, June 22nd, 1978, a report about “Human Activity and Carbon Dioxide”, written by A.T. for the Energy Technology Strategy Unit was released.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that the bodies within the general energy/environment policy networks had been aware of carbon dioxide build-up since the late 1960s (it’s mentioned in the first Environment White Paper, published in May 1970, for example). There had been the drought of 1976, and in the same year the World Meteorological Organisation Executive had flagged C02 build-up as something to watch. By the time this report came to be written, the WMO had decided on hosting the first World Climate Conference, to be held in Geneva in February 1979.

The specific context was that ETSU was under some pressure to justify its existence, and this particular report was subject to criticism for perceived duplication (the IEA Clean Coal Research people were producing something at the same time).

What I think we can learn from this is that by the late 1970s, various UK science and technology groups were looking closely at carbon dioxide.

What happened next – the report sank without trace, having little or no influence on the “Climatic Change” report finally released in February 1980. 

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: 

June 22, 1976 – Times reports “World’s temperature likely to rise” – All Our Yesterdays

June 22 ,1988 – Roger Rabbit on forced consumption (and so on to #climate apocalypse) – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
United States of America

May 26, 1978 – “Advisory Group on Climate” meeting

Forty eight years ago, on this day, May 26th, 1978,

ADVISORY GROUP ON CLIMATE MEETING, MAY 26, 1978 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

Well, to quote from Joshua Howe

“In the mid-1970s, the largest and most inclusive of America’s science advocacy organizations, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), included climate change as a potential subject of focus as it began to consider new directions for the coming decade. In 1978, the AAAS convened an Advisory Group on Climate. The committee comprised researchers from a variety of disciplines associated with climate questions, including, among others, Roger Revelle, leading agronomist and later critic of consensus views on global warming Sylvan Wittwer, Robert White of the National Academy of Sciences Climate Research Board, Science editor-in-chief Philip Abelson, and California…”

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE, and PAUL S. SUTTER. “ADVISORY GROUP ON CLIMATE MEETING, MAY 26, 1978.” Making Climate Change History: Documents from Global Warming’s Past, edited by JOSHUA P. HOWE, University of Washington Press, 2017, pp. 128–31. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvcwnkd5.25. Accessed 15 May 2025.

What I think we can learn from this

It is almost fifty years since we had smart people sitting around nutting out the implications of this issue. That may give you pause to consider how that strategy has worked out, as strategies go…

What happened next

They produced their report. Other committees of Learned Gentlemen (and less frequently Gentlewomen)  produced reports. The reports piled up.

As per this article from The Onion.

The Time To Act Is Now,’ Says Yellowing Climate Change …

The Onion

https://theonion.com › Latest

1 Apr 2016 — ‘The Time To Act Is Now,’ Says Yellowing Climate Change Report Sitting In University Archive … The Onion. Privacy Polic

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 26, 1990 – Times front page about Thatcher going for stabilisation target – All Our Yesterdays

May 26, 1993 – more “green jobs” mush

May 26, 1994 – Australian #climate stance “will become increasingly devoid of substance” says Liberal politician. Oh yes

Categories
Predatory delay Renewable energy

April 21, 1978  – solar power is unfeasible (cartoon)

Forty seven years ago, on this day, April 21st, 1978, a cartoon with a long afterlife appeared.,

See Snopes.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2025 it is 427ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that there were fierce debates within America about what “paths” should be taken, nuclear, coal, solar, etc. And this is just a cracking cartoon that does a really useful piece of work in explaining what’s going on. 

See also solar socialism, by Ronald Reagan as per this corking letter of August 20, 1981 in the New York Times.

What I think we can learn from this is that  cartoons can really cut through.

What happened next

Solar continued to be starved of funding and attacked until despite the fossil lobby,  it was mature enough to make nice fat profits.

see also “The Sun Betrayed”  “Review here) 

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: 

April 21, 1977 – Australian Parliament debate on Uranium – C02 build up mentioned

April 21, 1992 – President Bush again threatens to boycott Earth Summit

April 21, 1993 – Bill Clinton says US will tackle carbon emissions.

Categories
Australia

April 4, 1978 – the Australian Financial Review boosts the neoliberal nonsense.

47 years ago today, The Fin published an article, by economics commentator Paddy McGuinness which helped the Center for Independent Studies gain popularity. 

“Where Friedman is a pinko.”

Further, there is this myth that shucks, grassroots battlers built the Centre for Independent Studies by the sweat of their brows. Er, no

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2025 it is 427ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the post-war Keynesian consensus was crumbling thanks to oil shocks, stagflation, worker militancy, etc, and the goons who had been keeping their powder dry and forming networks – especially The Atlas network – were hoping to get a serious toe hold in Australia. The Institute of Public Affairs was not really fit for purpose, as far as they were concerned back then. So the Center for Independent Studies looked like a potential prospect, And so it came to pass with Anthony Fisher visiting twice etc etc (see above). 

What we learn is that neoliberal ideas of selfishness, stupidity, short-sightedness, disdain for any talk of limits need to be nurtured. Because they’re so batshit crazy that turning them into “common sense” requires a hell of a lot of effort. This effort was being undertaken in the United States, especially, it had never gone away. 

There is the recent book The Big Myth by Oreskes and Conway, and there are many others, including by Wendy Brown, Philip Mirkowski.

And Australia became “neoliberal” in 1983 with the arrival of the Hawke-Keating government and the intellectual capture of Paul Keating. We called it at that time, economic rationalism, Australia became a vastly more unequal, fearful and desperate society over the following 45 years. 

Also on this day

April 4, 1964 – Revelle’s PSAC Working Group Five

April 4, 1957 – New Scientist runs story on carbon dioxide build-up

April 4, 1964 – President Johnson’s Domestic Council on climate…

April 4, 1978 – UK Chief Scientific Advisor worries about atmospheric C02 build-up

April 4 – Interview with Ro Randal about “Living With Climate Crisis

Categories
Australia

March 8, 1978 – Minister for Science speaks proudly of Australia’s carbon dioxide monitoring…

Forty seven years ago, on this day, March 8th, 1978,

Senator WEBSTER (VICTORIA) (Minister for Science) – The baseline air pollution station at Cape Grim in Tasmania is viewed by the Government as being a particularly important installation. I have visited the base on one or two occasions and noted when I was there recently that there have been some results from the monitoring that has taken place. The honourable senator will know that monitoring has been in progress at Cape Grim since 1976 only. The tests which are currently being carried out there are particularly important so far as environmental conditions are concerned. Indeed, they might have much wider implications than just the effect of the environment. For instance, the surface ozone levels are being tested, as are the carbon dioxide levels, concentrations of carbon tetrachloride and fluoro carbons- that is, Freon-ll, which is discussed regularly as being an important constituent to monitor. 

The period of measurement has been very short and I understand that no firm conclusion can be drawn on any trends which might be occurring within these programs. The results which have been obtained at Cape Grim to date suggest that carbon dioxide and Freon-ll are increasing as constituents in the atmosphere coming to Cape Grim. That is fairly important. Further data is required before it can be established whether these increased concentrations are part of a cyclical variation over a longer period or whether they are in actual fact indicative of a very definite trend in the atmosphere. That is the reason for the establishment of this baseline air pollution station, which is one of a group of stations placed around the world to monitor the atmosphere and to attempt to establish a baseline. 

The Government intends in the future to establish the station permanently. Its management is under the control of the Department of Science, with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation playing an important role. We have put additional facilities and equipment down there within the last year. It is my wish that in the near future we shall see some move towards the establishment of a permanent station there. 

8 March 1978 – Wednesday, 8 March 1978

http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22hansard80%2Fhansards80%2F1978-03-08%2F0054%22

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 335ppm. As of 2025 it is 427ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that a few months earlier, the National Academy of Science in the US had released a report on energy and climate, and this had made front page news in the Canberra Times on sea level rise, etc. 

Cape Grim as a measuring facility had been open for a couple of years. The CSIRO had an interest in CO2 build up, and was involved in some of the early work, especially Barrie Pittock and Graham Pearman ,and some politicians were aware of what was going on.  

What I think we can learn from this is that we’ve been able to measure our doom for a long time, watching it unfold. The ultimate “press” disturbance. 

What happened next

CO2, build-up kept bubbling under, bubbling through, an issue finally, finally broke through into public awareness in 1988. 

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: 

March 8 – International Women’s Day – what is feminist archival practice? 

March 8, 1999 – Direct Air Capture of C02 mooted for the first time