Tag: 1987

Categories
Commonwealth Sea level rise United Kingdom

October 17, 1987 – CHOGM meeting at which Margaret Thatcher has climate “brought home to her”

Thirty seven years ago, on this day, October 17th, 1987, in Vancouver, a Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting took place, and other leaders (especially the small island states) tried to bend UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s ear on the problem of climate change.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 349ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that since 1985, scientists have been trying to warn politicians. Low lying nations and so forth were paying attention because they could see the writing on the wall or the waves washing over the seawall. And Thatcher by her own account, copped an earful at this Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting. For all the good it did – it would be almost another year before she would give her speech at the Royal Society

What we learn is that you have to tell ideologues the same thing many many times before they’ll pay any attention. And God what a stupid species we are. 

What happened next? Yeah, you’ve got the explosion of interest in 1988.

In 1989, the CHOGM lot received Martin Holdgate’s report, which had been commissioned at Vancouver.

https://thecommonwealth.org/news/archive-holdgate-report-climate-change

Shridath Ramphal, then Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, who commissioned the report from an international expert group at the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit in Vancouver, Canada, in 1987, described the threat of climate change in his foreword as “truly global in its implications”.

He said: “If the Earth is to warm by even the most modest of the various projections, there could be far reaching, long term implications for natural ecological systems, farming, the design of major energy and water projects and for low lying areas that could be affected by rising sea level.”

The Holdgate report called for a “major international initiative” to establish “global responsibilities” for preventing unmanageable rises in the world’s temperature. It also spelt out practical steps which poor and small countries like Guyana, Bangladesh, Maldives, and Pacific islands, could take to monitor their changing environment.

 You’ve got the November 1989 Male declaration about sea level rise. You then have the toothless 1992 UNFCCC (the climate treaty).

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 17, 1973 – the coup at the Australian Conservation Foundation

October 18, 1973 – “how on earth do you stop using fossil fuels?”

October 17, 2009 – Maldives cabinet meets underwater

Categories
United States of America

September 17, 1987 – Policymakers turn from Ozone to Greenhouse, says Wall Street Journal

Thirty seven years ago, on this day, September 17th, 1987,

Policy Makers Spurred by Ozone Treaty, Considering Tackling ‘Greenhouse’

Effect, WALL ST. J., Sept. 17, 1987

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 349ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the ozone treaty had just been signed. Climate scientists were seriously worried about the buildup of CO2. The September 1985 scientific meeting in Villach, Austria, sponsored by WMO UNEPand ICSU had been pivotal. And since then, US Senators had been alerted repeatedly by Carl Sagan, by NGO briefings. Joe Biden had got in on the act in the run up to his first bid for president.

What we learn is that it’s one thing to deal with a chemical that not many companies make and for which there are substitutes. IT’s somewhat more problematic when you have the whole fossil fuel sector arrayed against you and its pals in the automotive industry. 

What happened next was a God Almighty battle for five years and the forces of predatory delay were successful and continued to be successful, and still being successful in 2024… 

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, 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
Academia Canada

August 22, 1987 – “Civilisation and Rapid Climate Change” – a short book…

Thirty seven years ago, on this day, August 22nd, 1987, a conference took place in Canada, with the snappy title

Civilization and Rapid Climate Change, University of Calgary 22 – 24 August 1987. A short book “Thinking the Unthinkable” by Lydia Dotto emerged…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 349ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Canadians had been aware of CO2 build-up for a good 15 years, like everyone else (actually, it goes back to the 1950s, but only spottily). By the early 1970s, it was becoming more of a ‘thing’. By this time, probably the June 1988 Changing Atmosphere conference had been announced.

The person who acted as the rapporteur was Lydia Dotto, who had written a book about ozone. And, you know, the anthropologists and so forth were quite right when they said “don’t expect us to meet the challenge. That’s not who we are.” And so it came to pass…

What we learn is that before Thatcher and Bush, there were plenty of people saying, “watch out.” Not just climate scientists by the mid late 80s. It also had been that Canadian documentary and so forth. And they were keeping an eye on what was happening in the US. Carl Sagan Philip called the rest of it.

What happened next: Thatcher Bush and a generation of bullshit

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

Dotto, L. 1987.

Also on this day: 

August 22, 1988 – scientists say “Australia, expect #climate refugees”

August 22, 1981 – New York Times front page story costs #climate scientists their jobs.

August 22, 2000 – Minchin kills an Australian Emissions Trading Scheme

August 22, 2011 – anti-carbon pricing rally flops

Categories
Australia

September 17, 1987 – report on “The Greenhouse Project” launch

Thirty six years ago, on this day, September 17, 1987, a novel effort between the CSIRO Atmospheric Physics people and the Australian government’s Commission for the Future was reported on (the launch happened on the 16th). Known as “The Greenhouse Project”

The greenhouse effect is not just another disaster story but a real phenomenon that is likely to have far-reaching economic and social impacts within considerably less than a human lifetime, according to a CSIRO scientist.

Dr Graeme Pearman was speaking at a press conference launching the Greenhouse Project, a national campaign organised jointly by the Commission for the Future and the CSIRO to alert Australians and Australian industry to the possible consequences of the effect.

A rapid build-up of “greenhouse gases” could cause sea levels to rise by up to one metre in the next 40 years and global temperatures to rise by up to 4 degrees Celsius.

A one-metre rise in sea level would put the main street of Cairns underwater and result in the disappearance of large areas of beaches around the coast, Dr Pearman warned.

Anon (1987) Launch of Greenhouse Effect plan. Sydney Morning Herald, September 17

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly pp348.9ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures.

 

The context was that CSIRO 1986 realised that climate change was going to be a real problem. This was after 5 years of silence pretty much among the Australian Environment council folks. Science Minister Barry Jones had managed to create a foresight organisation called “The Commission for the Future,” and the greenhouse project was its first effort and very successful one at that.

What I think we can learn from this is that scientists and policymakers were aware of the climate problem and trying to do something about it before the 1988 breakthrough. And the momentum was ultimately lost because the issues are complex, and because business fought back (but everyone knew that business would fight back.)

What happened next – the Greenhouse Project gave us a scientific meeting in December 1987 but then also Greenhouse 88 – a satellite linked up conference in the capital cities of Australia that have passed into a kind of folklore.

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
Cultural responses United States of America

July 23, 1987 – Calvin (and Hobbes) versus climate change!

Thirty six years ago, on this day, July 23, 1987,  Calvin blames his mother, and her generation…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 350.2ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Bill Watterson is a stone cold genius. The cartoon says so much about youthful exuberance and the joys of pointing the finger.

By 1987, yeah, lots of people knew already. You didn’t need to be a particular genius to understand that climate change was coming.

What I think we can learn from this is that proper humour about climate change is really hard to do. Some have managed it.

What happened next

Calvin & Hobbes kept publishing for a few more years but then went out on a high very sensibly. Showbusiness adage about leave them wanting more etc…

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 Kingdom

July 9, 1987 – “Unpleasant surprises in the greenhouse” warns Broecker

Thirty six years ago, on this day, July 9, 1987, oceanographer and all-round smart guy Wally Broecker warned of “Unpleasant surprises in the greenhouse?” in the journal Nature.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 350.2ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

Context

Broecker wrote the first article (ish) – see also 1961 AMS/NYAS solar variation meeting to use the term “global warming”.  He had been trying to educate politicians (including Paul Tsongas) for a long time.

What we learn

The 1988 ‘explosion’ of concern was preceded by lots of patient work.


What next

A year minus two days later,  the editor of Nature, John Maddox, inadvertently revealed that he didn’t read what was published in his own journal. Or if he did, he was incapable of understanding it.

Categories
United Nations

March 20, 1987 – The “sustainable development” Brundtland Report was released

Thirty six years ago, on this day, March 20, 1987, the report that popularised “sustainable development”  was launched.

“Its targets were multilateralism and interdependence of nations in the search for a sustainable development path. The report sought to recapture the spirit of the Stockholm Conference which had introduced environmental concerns to the formal political development sphere. Our Common Future placed environmental issues firmly on the political agenda; it aimed to discuss the environment and development as one single issue.”

Wikipedia

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 340.7ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that everyone had been wringing their hands about the “North-South” divide in the 1970s. The New International Economic Order did not materialise. Then in 1980, Willy Brandt, north south report had been produced to little apparent effect. And I don’t know a cynic might argue that the Brundtland process was set up by well-meaning technocrats in the North, under pressure from people in the South who genuinely wanted a different world, give them opportunities to hold hands and sing Kumbaya and talk about how much change was needed. The question of how this cat would be belled, less evident.

Through the Brundtland process, which culminated in the release of Our Common Future, there had of course been talk about climate, including in a meeting in Norway in 1985, which we will come back to. 

What I think we can learn from this 

We need to remember that the dreams of redemption and sustainability of sustainable development as Brundtland put it, have been around forever. It’s now called Net Zero. When Net Zero dies it’ll be called something else. And it’s interesting that net zero isn’t even about justice. It’s about technocracy. But that’s for another day.

What happened next

The big meeting that was scheduled to talk about the Brundtland report and its implications in 1992 kind of got dominated by the climate treaty negotiations. (Climate change burst onto the agenda, the public agenda in 1988. And then despite the best efforts of the Americans, by 1991 negotiations for a climate treaty, we’re underway.)

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..