Tag: 1988

Categories
Australia

July 27, 1988 – The greenback effect

Thirty seven years ago, on this day, July 27th, 1988 a highly entertaining and informative article by Australian chemist Ben Selinger is published in the Canberra Times.

Selinger, B. 1988. The greenback affects the greenhouse effect. Canberra Times July 27, p.8

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 351ppm. 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 Australian scientists (and probably especially the chemists!) had been looking at carbon dioxide build-up for at the very least a decade and saying “oh, there will be trouble at some point.”

The specific context was in 1988 the issue had hit the headlines (in part thanks to sterling work by the Commission for the Future and the CSIRO’s division of Atmospheric Physics). By 1989, we were into the blustering and “funding for further research” dodges and wheezes as politicians began to understand quite how disruptive to the status quo that real greenhouse action would be.

What I think we can learn from this is that there is a very identifiable pattern to the recurrent booms in awareness – we live in a kind of Groundhog Day, but without quite realising that. So, a boring tragedy instead of a Buddhist comedy…

What happened next – the counter-attack to climate concern got properly going in late 1989 and then picked up momentum and support. Meanwhile, the emissions kept going up, as did the atmospheric concentrations…

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: 

July 27, 1977 – Pro-nuclear professor cites #climate concerns at Adelaide speech

July 27, 1979 – Thatcher’s Cabinet ponders burying climate report

July 27, 2001 – Minerals Council of Australia versus the Kyoto Protocol

Categories
Canada International processes

June 30, 1988 – Toronto conference on “Our Changing Atmosphere” ends

Thirty six years ago, on this day, June 30th, 1988 

TORONTO conference ends

You can read some reflections on this from 2013 (25 years later) here.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that a scientific conference in Villach in September 1985 had been the starting gun for atmospheric scientists to push every button/pull every lever they could (at least in Australia and the US) on the question of “the greenhouse effect.”

One fruit of this was the “Our Changing Atmosphere” conference in Toronto, from which the “Toronto Target” – a 20 per cent reduction in human emissions by 2005 – was born.

What I think we can learn from this is that we knew almost four decades that there was trouble ahead (really, the awareness goes back to the late 1970s).

What happened next – the Toronto Target was ignored, derided or agreed to with such provisos that it would never be implemented. It did not make it into the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Human emissions have gone up by almost 70% since then. Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide are surging, as are temperatures.  My 2004 decision not to have kids is looking smarter with the fall of each new temperature record. Breeders – wtaf?

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 30, 2008 – Judge stops a coal-burning power plant getting built. – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
United States of America

March 14, 1988 – Reagan mouths pieties about international scientific cooperation

Thirty six years ago, on this day, March 14th, 1988,

In his message to the Congress of March 14, 1988 concerning international activities in science and technology, President Reagan said that “participation in international science and technology activities is vital to U.S. national security in the broadest sense.”

Dept. St. Bull., vol 88 at 53 (June 1988).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2025 it is 427ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the ozone hole had been discovered. There had been a treaty and he protocol in rapid, rapid time. So rapid that the Department of State, etc, and Energy especially, were worried that they’d been bounced into something and decided were going to fight harder against the carbon dioxide treaty. Reagan, obviously, was a lame duck, and neck deep in Iran-Contra. Whoever put the words in his mouth, it’s all boilerplate, motherhood apple pie, who could be against scientific cooperation? (also, with the INF treaty, the Cold War winding down – Gorbachev, Perestroika and Glasnost blah blah blah).

What I think we can learn from this

so you could say these sorts of nonsense statements, no one would bat an eyelid. In fact, they’d bat an eyelid if you didn’t say them, or if you said the opposite. So it’s a communication, but one that’s empty of any meaning.

What happened next

Three months later with the drought in the American midwest, James Hansen’s testimony and “The Changing Atmosphere” conference in Toronto, the carbon dioxide issue burst onto the agenda. 

See also “greenhouse glasnost.” 

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 14, 1997 – Australian senator predicts climate issue will be gone in ten years…

 March 14, 2007 – Top Australian bureaucrat admits “frankly bad” #climate and water policies

 March 14, 2007 – Australian Treasury eyeroll about politicians on #climate, (scoop by Laura Tingle).

Categories
Australia Cultural responses

January 3, 1988 – The Sea and Summer, early Australian cli-fi, is reviewed.

Thirty six years ago, on this day, January 3rd, 1988 the Australian newspaper the Sun Herald, ran a review of The Sea and Summer by George Turner  under the heading “Melbourne is drowning” (possibly gleeful, given the Sydney-Melbourne rivalry).

The book itself? As Ruth Morgan explains

“Over a decade after his novel The Cupboard Under the Stairs won the Miles Franklin Award in 1963, Turner had turned to writing science fiction (Milner, ‘The Sea’ 112). The Sea and Summer, published as Drowning Towers (1988) in the United States, had earlier appeared as a short story, ‘The Fittest’ (1985), and reflected the growing popular awareness of the potential impacts of anthropogenic climate change in Australia. Turner envisioned a Melbourne drowned as a result of rising sea levels in the middle of the twenty-first century, its population cleaved into haves and havenots, the Sweet and the Swill.” (Morgan, 2014).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2025 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that “the Greenhouse Effect” was becoming newsworthy, thanks to a combination of the ozone hole (sensitising people to atmospheric pollution generally) and the post-Villach efforts of scientists, including at the Australian CSIRO.

What I think we can learn from this

When an issue is “hot” (i.e. salient) then journalists will figure out a hook, books that might otherwise not get reviewed, get reviewed.

What happened next

In the second half of 1988 climate change became a public policy issue, that politicians etc had to have opinions about, say warm words about 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.

References

Morgan, Ruth. ‘Imagining a Greenhouse Future: Scientific and Literary Depictions of Climate Change in 1980s Australia.’ Australian Humanities Review 57 (2014): 43-60.

Turner, G. 1987. The Sea, the Summer

Also on this day: 

January 3, 1984 – US report on energy transition to combat climate released.

Jan 3, 1992 – Greenpeace vs POTUS on Climate Change

January 3, 2007 – Smoke, Mirrors and Hot Air, says Union of Concerned Scientists

Categories
Activism Brazil

December 22, 1988 – Chico Mendes murdered

Thirty-six years ago, on this day, December 22nd, 1988, Chico Mendes was murdered

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Chico Mendes had been a bit of a folk hero in the mid 80s, leading the rubber tappers union in the defence of the Amazon. And he had pissed off the wrong people. 

What we learn is that if you piss off the wrong people in many parts of the world, you will end up with a bullet in your head. In the West, they simply de-fund you and invisiblise you and deprive you of livelihood. Far more civilised here. 

What happened next? 

According to Wikipedia –

“In December 1990, Silva, his son Darci, and their employee Jerdeir Pereira were sentenced to 19 years in prison for their part in Mendes’ assassination. In February 1992, they won a retrial, claiming that the prosecution’s primary witness – Mendes’ wife Ilsamar – was biased. The conviction was upheld, and they remained in prison. In 1993, they escaped from jail, along with seven other prisoners, by sawing through the bars of their prison window. All were recaptured, including Darly Jr., who served the remainder of his sentence with the other killers before returning to Xapuri.”

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 22, 1759 – “What have ye done?”

December 22, 1975 – “Scientist Warns of Great Floods if Earth’s Heat Rises” (surely “when”?)

December 22, 1978 – UK Energy Department chief scientist worries about CO2 levels and pressure to reduce them…

Categories
United Kingdom

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

Thirty six years ago, on this day, November 20th, 1988,

“To ask the Prime Minister what response she plans to make to the 30 point plan for environmental improvement in the United Kingdom set out in “The Green Gauntlet” document launched collectively by the Worldwide Fund for Nature, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace on 20 November.” [1988]

“The Green Gauntlet” – Hansard – UK Parliament

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2024 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the green groups in the UK had collaborated! This was not entirely unusual, but the breadth and depth of this collaboration was beyond average. They’d produce a wish list they called the Green Gauntlet that they threw down in front of Margaret Thatcher who had after all, just made a big noise at the Royal Society about the biggest experiment that we were conducting. And so it was a question of “was that all hot air, or would she actually do something about the green gauntlet?” I think we all know the answer.

What we learn: If you’re a politician at a national level at least, and you make big bold pronouncements, don’t be surprised if various green groups try to hold you to your word. And so it came to pass.

What happened next, Thatcher kept on giving nice speeches. She held a Cabinet meeting in April of ‘89, all about CO2. Her government shat on the idea of the Toronto Target. She made another nice empty speech at the United Nations General Assembly in November ‘89. And a year later, she was gone. 

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, 2008 – Green capitalism flexes a (weak) BICEP

Categories
United States of America

September 7, 1988 – media looking for more alarmist scientists…

Thirty six years ago, on this day, September 7th, 1988,

On September 7, 1988, with the Summer of ’88 still fully in American consciousness, the ABC news programme Nightline broadcast a segment dedicated to the greenhouse effect. I was contacted as a possible guest but was later told my views were “too moderate.” Some of the exchange between “Nightline” moderator Ted Koppel and the environmental activist Michael Oppenheimer, of the Environmental Defense Fund, helps to make this dilemma quite explicit.

Koppell: Dr Oppenheimer, I’d love to be able to say to you that I think the American public can get energised over some perceived threat forty years down the road, but I don’t believe it. Do you?

[Hecht was on it to]

(Schneider, 1989: 235-6)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2024 it is 420ishppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the American airwaves were full of greenhouse. Thanks to James Hansen’s June 23 testimony and the severe heatwave summer drought. And we’re getting to that stage in the media cycle where the responsible cautious scientists have had their say. And now in order to keep things “fresh” the bookers for these programmes are needing to jazz it up a bit with more extreme pronouncements. And previously, bookable scientists and advocates like Oppenheimer, for the Environmental Defence Fund are considered passe or too cautious. And then, of course, someone more extreme and perhaps unhinged gets booked. And then it becomes part of the culture war, with the opponents pointing to scare stories and the media can then report that and round and round and round we go. 

What happened next? The climate culture war really kicked off in ‘89 with the George C Marshall Foundation, the Global Climate Coalition [it would be fun to figure out when that was born, when it started making its first pronouncements and interventions.] And this cycle continues down on to this day. 

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 7, 1936 – The Anthropocene does for the Thylacine…

September 7, 1977 – #climate scientist Stephen Schneider on Carson for the last time…

September 7, 2005 – “rule out nuclear” say Aussie green outfits.

Categories
Scientists

August 20, 1988 – Hansen’s model released

Thirty six years ago, on this day, August 20th, 1988,

The most comprehensive greenhouse model to date was prepared by Hansen at the Goddard Institute and published in the August 20, 1988, issue of Journal of Geophysical Research. Hansen’s model predicts an increase of from two to five degrees Fahrenheit in the next thirty years, depending on which of three alternate futures the world’s nations choose: continued expansion of fossil fuel use at the current annual rate of 1.5 percent; a moderate cut-back; or a radical shift away from fossil fuels to alternate sources of energy, such as solar, nuclear, wind, or hydroelectric. https://www.spin.com/2019/09/greenhouse-effect-climate-crisis/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 351ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that everyone was banging on about climate. Now greenhouse, which was not the case when this model had been worked on two months earlier. US climate scientist James Hansen had given his bombshell testimony. This was the first published version of the climate models that he was talking about. 

What we learn is that Hansen has been ahead of the game for a long time and  probably should not be ignored. 

What happened next, Hansen got attacked, the models got attacked. The Global Climate Coalition came along, the George C Marshall Institute pivoted from shilling Reagan’s Star Wars to this crap. And here we are.

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: 

August 20, 1997 – Australian Mining Industry operative misrepresents the #climate science. Obvs.

August 20, 2018 – Greta Thunberg’s first protest

Categories
United States of America

July 15, 1988 – “Racing on Capitol Hill for Title of “Mr Greenhouse”

Thirty six years ago, on this day, July 15th, 1988, the satirical “Grant Swinger” took aim at climate policy in an hilarious article “Racing on Capitol Hill for Title of “Mr Greenhouse” in Science and Government Report. He skewers it, absolutely.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 350ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Daniel Greenberg had been doing the spoof Grant Swinger (get it – someone who can swing grants) satirical columns for quite some time. And let’s look at how big science works. And the scramble and scramble a knife fights for funding for prestige. It’s hilarious. 

The context here was also, of course, that it was that long, hot summer. It was post-Hansen and Toronto but before Bush finally came out and said his thing on the campaign trail. 

What we learn is that good satire is timeless, even if the exact targets are no longer present, because human behaviour doesn’t change (the satyricon and Juvenal, etc.) 

What happened next? Grant Swinger kept swinging for the fences. The climate issue burst onto the scene and has kind of stayed there ever since. 

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: 

July 15, 1968 – first(?) UK government attention to the possibility of climate

July 15, 1977 – “Heavy Use of Coal May Bring Adverse Shift in Climate”

July 15, 2005 – The “Stern Review” into #climate is announced…

Categories
United Kingdom

July 6, 1988 – Piper Alpha blows up

Thirty six years ago, on this day, July 6th,1988, an oil drilling platform in the North Sea blows up.

The Piper Alpha drilling platform in the North Sea is destroyed by explosions and fires. One hundred sixty-seven oil workers are killed, making it the world’s worst offshore oil disaster in terms of direct loss of life.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 350ppm. As of 2024 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Piper Alpha had a bad safety reputation. Workers had been complaining and… boom. 

What we learn is that energy extraction is a dangerous business. Whether it’s coal mines, oil platforms, small coal mines are definitely more dangerous. And accidents happen. Normal accidents in the world words of Charles Perrow.

What happened next? There were the usual prolonged battles over blame and compensation. At this point, in Britain, this was the third big infrastructure horror show after the Kings Cross fire and also The Herald of Free Enterprise. It did feel like things were falling apart. And then of course, the following year, Exxon Valdez. 

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: 

July 6, 1972 – “Workers and the Environment” conference in London…

 July 6, 1993 – Australian bipartisanship on climate? Not really…