Tag: 1993

Categories
United States of America

October 19, 1993 – Clinton handwringing

Thirty two years ago, on this day, October 19th, 1993, 

“We simply must halt global warming. It is a threat to our health, to our ecology and to our economy. The problem frankly affects every sector of the economy.” Clinton, William J. 1993. Remarks at the White House Conference on Climate Change, October 19

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 357ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 425ppm. 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 US had gutted the UNFCCC (insisting that targets and timetables for emissions reductions by rich nations be removed or else) and then ratified it quite swiftly in December 1992. Al Gore, Clinton’s veep had published “Earth in the Balance” the previous year. Ah, such sweet and innocent times.

The specific context was that Clinton had already by this time had his ass handed to him over the BTU tax, so all this was compensatory bollocks.

What I think we can learn from this is that a lot of what comes out of politicians mouths is just PR blandishments designed to distract you while your pocket is picked and your future is looted. 

What happened next – Clinton’s emissions got him into trouble a few years later (i.e. he abused his position of power, for the umpteenth time). Nothing meaningful was done about US emissions. And the future continued to be looted, and the present started to catch up with the future, until we entered the Fafocene.

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 19, 2002 – Doctors for the Environment Australia, becomes a thing.

October 19, 2010 – Greenpeace trolls ANZ Bank 

October 19, 2011 – First UK CCS competition fizzles out

Categories
Austria

September 28, 1992 – IIASA again

Thirty three years ago, on this day, September 28th, 1992,

Costs, Impacts, and Benefits of CO2 Mitigation.

Proceedings of a Workshop Held on 28–30 Sept. 1992 at IIASA

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 356ppm. 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 IIASA had been established in the early 1970s as a way for scientists on either side of the “Iron Curtain” to meet and share notes.  IIASA was one of the key places where discussions about energy and climate were happening in the mid-1970s – it’s where, for example, the idea of CCS was broached.

The specific context was that the conference was planned and announced before the Earth Summit, so will have been one of the first opportunities for scientists and some policy-makers to take stock, and look at the implications of what had been agreed.

What I think we can learn from this is that the “smartest” people in the room haven’t been able to prevent civilisational failure – maybe they aren’t all that smart, and/or have been looking at it all wrong…

What happened next – the workshops kept happening.  The conference class like their privileges.

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: 

September 28, 1997 – Australian denialist spouting tosh to his US mates.

September 28, 2000 – Liberal MP goes full cooker on Kyoto as threat to sovereignty.

September 28, 2007 – Bush invokes “technology” to fix climate. Like morons everywhere.

September 28, 2008 – “Wake Up Freak Out” posted online

Categories
Australia Business Responses

September 7, 1993 – Business Council of Australia meets to get its resistance-to-climate-policy ducks in a row

Thirty two years ago, on this day, September 7th, 1993, Business meets to get ducks in a row…

From Business Council of Australia Bulletin 102, October 1993

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 357ppm. 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 business had made sure that the Australian government didn’t get carried away with the idea that Australia should pull its weight in the whole “saving the planet” thing that the commie-greenies were wanging on about. In this they’d been very successful, with help from senior ALP Federal ministers. 

The specific context was that the UNFCCC had been signed in June 1992. The ratification process was proceeding faster than might have been expected (usually these things drag on for years) so meeting in September 1993 was a good idea, from their perspective – make sure they had the ability to be ready with arguments, allies and actions when the greenie lunatics tried to push for action.

What I think we can learn from this is that – as per Adam Smith – “‘People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publick, or in some contrivance to raise prices’.” Or, if he were writing now “trash the future for present profit and convenience. And to own the libs.”

What happened next – a carbon tax was defeated in late 1994-early 1995, and that was really game over for any response to climate change in Australia. To be clear, the carbon tax on its own would NOT have been enough. But without a price signal, and more money for research and development of wind and solar, you can just kiss the planet goodbye. And we did. 

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, 1927 – television, the drug of a nation, first cultivated – All Our Yesterdays

September 7, 1936 – The Anthropocene does for the Thylacine…

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

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

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

Categories
France

June 14, 1993 – International Conference on the Economics of Climate Change

Thirty two  years ago, on this day, June 14th, 1993, the OECD and IEA talk climate.

International Conference on the Economics Of Climate Change

OECD/IEA Paris 

14-16 June 1993

[en] An international Conference on the Economics of Climate Change was convened by the OECD and the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, in June 1993. Participants included many of the world’s foremost experts in the field, as well as representatives from business, labour, and other non-governmental organisations. The Conference sought to examine points of consensus and divergence among existing studies on the economics of climate change. Participants also focused on how economic analysis could contribute to meeting the obligations of OECD countries under the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change. Discussions centered on such topics as the economic costs and benefits of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies, the potential role of carbon taxes and other economic instruments in the policy mix, possibilities for technological change and diffusion, especially in the energy sector, and joint abatement action between industrialized and developing countries. This volume contains the papers presented at the Conference, as well as summaries of the subsequent discussions. It provides an overview of the ‘state of the art’ in the economics of climate change and several suggestions for future research. (author)

The economics of climate change|INIS

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 360ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that the OECD had been set up in the early 1960s as “the rich men’s club”. The IEA as a kind of offshoot of it in 1974, to cope with the consequences of the quadrupling of energy prices after the Arab Oil Embargo.  Both groups had been doing some thinking/co-ordinating about climate change from the late 1970s onwards

The specific context was that the Rio Earth Summit had given the world a relatively toothless “United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change” – with no targets or timetables for emissions reductions by rich nations (thanks, Uncle Sam!).  It hadn’t been ratified but everyone knew it probably would be.  And so, a meeting to discuss economic implications, technological and policy options etc.

What I think we can learn from this

As human beings that the “smartest” among us are not that smart. Homo “sapiens” my fat arse.

As “active citizens” – that expensively indoctrina…sorry “educated” people with the “right” credentials have been summitting and conferencing for decades, and here we are.

Academics might like to ponder the above two sentences, while looking in the mirror.

What happened next

xxx

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.

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: 

June 14, 1979 – the messy inclusion of climate change in energy politics – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Swtizerland

April 30, 1993 – HTML

Thirty two years ago, on this day, April 30th, 1993, British scientist Tim Berners-Lee, then at CERN, publishes the protocols for what would become the “World Wide Web.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 357ppm. As of 2025 it is 427ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that ARPANET and Darpanet were already “a thing”, but getting computer to speak to computer was not necessarily that easy. Berners-Lee’s genius was in the codification but also in refusing to patent it.

What I think we can learn from this is that there is such a thing as an intellectual commons, but that commons requires rules and governance. This is possible, despite what actual racist scumbags like Garrett Hardin may have though. Having said that, the AI slop and the broligarchs are making Hardin’s view plausible.

What happened next

1995-96 the internet for public consumption begins to kick in. You have email, then you have Hotmail, web based email. You have websites, internet cafes, Hollywood making websites for things like the movie Independence Day and so on, and I was relatively young back then. I’m very glad that I hit my adulthood, if you can call it that, before the internet and certainly before social media, and certainly, certainly before smartphones. Because those things are like the blood in Alien they are acid, and they will burn through any container you care to mention.

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 30, 2007 – Rudd hires Garnaut – All Our Yesterdays

April 30, 1985 – New York Times reports C02 not the only greenhouse problem

April 30, 2001 – Dick Cheney predicts 1000 new power plants

Categories
Australia

 February 23, 1993 – Peter Walsh spouting his tosh again

Thirty two years ago, on this day, February 23rd, 1993, Peter Walsh’s brain vomit confronted readers.

The substance of O’Brien’s paper was that greenhouse scaremongering – embraced and promoted by the chattering classes – was wildly speculative, potentially dangerous and, to the extent that it had any scientific basis, was based on dated estimates of temperature and sea level rises which in most cases the original authors had revised downwards. Moreover, the scientific findings of the 1990 International Panel on Climate Change had been widely misrepresented.

Walsh, P. (1993) PUTTING GREENHOUSE IN ORDER The Australian Financial Review, February 23, page 17

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 357ppm. As of 2025 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Peter Walsh had stopped being an MP at the 1990 Federal election. The former Treasurer, perhaps suffering Relevance Deprivation Syndrome, had thrown himself into various causes, including greenhouse denial. This particular column was a gloating attack on the ACF’s Mark Diesendorf.

What I think we can learn from this

Old White Men who’ve had all the power they’ll have but still breathe: what are you gonna do?

What happened next

Walsh went on to be a leading light in the Laughable Group Sorry “Lavoisier” Group.

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
Russia

 February 5, 1993 – Space Based Energy experiment takes place

Thirty two years ago, on this day, February 5th, 1993,

If you happened to be looking at the sky in Europe on a cold night on February 5 1993, there is a chance you could have seen a dim flash of light. That flash came from a Russian space mirror experiment called Znamya-2. Znamya-2 was a 20-metre reflective structure much like aluminium foil (Znamya means “banner” in Russian), unfurled from a spacecraft which had just undocked from the Russian Mir space station. Its goal was to demonstrate solar energy could be reflected from space to Earth. https://theconversation.com/reflectors-in-space-could-make-solar-farms-on-earth-work-for-longer-every-day-220554#:~:text=Each%20time%20a%20reflector%20passes,its%20hours%20of%20electricity%20generation.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 357ppm. As of 2025 it is 426ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that there had been various proposals about using space based satellites to capture the enormous amounts of the sun’s energy and redirect it to specific points on Earth, space based mirrors, etc, not as weapons for that too, but for limitless, reliable energy generation and space based energy satellites are a fascinating thing. 

See also the novels The Dynostar Menace (1975) and also Quatermass by Nigel Kneale that came out in 1979 [interesting looking podcast here] and the Children of the Pylons.” 

What I think we can learn from this We dream of limitless “free” energy, but there are some upfront charges

What happened next 

Ripped from last month’s headlines…

“China plans to build enormous solar array in space — and it could collect more energy in a year than ‘all the oil on Earth’”

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
Austria Economics of mitigation Energy Science

October 13, 1993 – IIASA and the IAMs – Gaia help us all

Thirty one years ago, on this day, October 13th, 1993,

Nebojša Nakićenović, William Nordhaus, Richard Richels and Ferenc Toth, Integrative Assessment of Mitigation, Impacts, and Adaptation to Climate Change, Proceedings of a Workshop Held on 13–15 Oct. 1993 (Laxenburg: IIASA, 1993)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 357ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was tha the cold war -scientist shall talk unto scientist’ outfit the International Institute for Advanced Science Analysis (IIASA) was about 20 years old. It had a surprisingly long history of banging on about climate change and energy, back to 1975, with William Nordhaus and then Hafele’s energy studies. And they put together some workshops. And they were big fans of all their fancy computer models: really in love with them. 

What we learn.  And here we are 30 years later. And they just keep redrawing lines and magic shit into existence. Making heroic assumptions about the speed of development and deployment of offshore wind and hydrogen and so forth, bearing no resemblance to the real world. But how are you gonna make the numbers add up? 

So we’re trapped in these ridiculous mental models and computer models, because we don’t tell the truth to ourselves about ourselves. That we screwed the pooch and is it no one’s short-term career interest to be the one who says “hey guys, I think we screwed the pooch.” You are not going to get promoted – in fact, you’re not going to keep your bloody job full stop if you do that…

What happened next so I’m sure that in 1993 there were people with misgivings. They didn’t speak up. I’m sure that there were other people who had misgivings in 2003, didn’t speak up. 2013 didn’t speak up. 2023 didn’t speak up. Why would you? 

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 13, 1990/97 – Ros Kelly defends the Interim Planning Target vs Australia does nothing

October 13, 2005 – “Climate Change: Turning up the Heat” published

Categories
Coal Fossil fuels Industry Associations technosalvationism United Kingdom

October 4, 1993 – Coal chief wringing his hands about “greenhouse,” promises new tech

Thirty one years ago, on this day, October 4th, 1993,

London, Sunday It was difficult to see how global carbon dioxide emissions could be stabilised by 2000 unless governments implemented politically unacceptable decisions, the new chief executive of the World Coal Institute said last week.

But Dr Alex Toohey, a former director of Shell Coal International who took over as head of the WCI on Friday, said the move toward clean coal technologies would be stepped up in the next five years.

Noack, K. 1993. Emission Cuts A Hard Choice, Says Coal Chief. The Age, 4 October.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 357ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the fossil fuel lobbyists had managed to defeat a strong deal at the Rio Earth Summit in June 1992. But the issue clearly wasn’t going to go away because already a bunch of nations had ratified the treaty. And it was clear there was going to be a series of meetings about what to do. The coal industry was still largely helpless because none of the technological options was convincing to them, let alone to anyone else. And so, we see here some hand wringing and some indication of technology as a magic fix. Sprinkle the word “innovation”, bish bosh and you’re done.

What we learn is that the fossil fuel industry was helpless, and naked. The reason it’s fighting so hard now with CCS is because it doesn’t have anything else. 

What happened next? The World Coal Institute changed its name more than once. But you can’t really put that much lipstick on a pig and the emissions kept climbing

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 4, 1969 – “If we melt the Antarctic, our problems are solved because all of the ports of the world would vanish and the ocean will rise 200 feet.”

October 4, 1978 – the Interdepartmental group on Climatology meets for the first time…

Categories
Cultural responses United States of America

September 24, 1993 – A museum exhibition travels to Pittsburgh

Thirty-one years ago, on this day, September 24th, 1993 Pittsburgh hosts a touring museum exhibition about climate change and what needs to be done (spoiler: we didn’t do it).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 357ppm. As of 2024 it is 422ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that when global warming became a thing in 1988/89 cultural institutions like museums started thinking, “well, what can we do? How do we respond?” These things take time to put together, schedules booked. So it was 1991/92 by the time a lot of these big displays were in place. And then of course, they have to tour to different parts of their country. And so hello, it’s late 1993 by the time he gets to Pittsburgh, by which time Rio is over a year old and Clinton has lost his BTU tax. So it all probably felt a little bit yesterday’s news.

What we learn There’s a time lag.

What happened next We shrugged our shoulders and the emissions kept climbing.

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

Revkin, A. 1994. Global Warming: Understanding the Forecast

Also on this day: 

 September 24, 1989 – Petra Kelly disses the Australian Prime Minister

September 24, 1991 – Australian denialist gives “Greenhouse Myths” seminar.

September 24, 2006 – “Plane Stupid” holds first action, with “Sermon on the Taxiway” at East Midlands Airport