Tag: 2001

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

August 16, 2001 – Rising Tide has plenty of ideas

Twenty five years ago, on this day, August 16th, 2001,

Fifty ideas for actions on climate change

In May and June 2001, the Rising Tide Climate Chaos Tour visited 12 cities in Britain. Some 300 people came to the Tour. In the last session of each gig people broke into small groups and brainstormed ideas for action. This is a list taken from their ideas.

This list proves that no one can argue that there’s nothing we can do about climate change. Our only problem now is choosing what to do- and when has that ever been an excuse for not doing anything?!

https://risingtide.org.uk/resources/factsheets/fiftyideas

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 371ppm. 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 a bunch of mostly UK, but not exclusively climate activists had been trying to get people concerned about climate change, they had been there at the first COP in Berlin, and they had especially been there at the sixth COP at The Hague in the Netherlands, in those innocent pre 911 days when it was possible, given lax security to in fact storm the stage, (compare with XR storming the stage with Burnham in early 2019). And rising tide was trying to build a movement, and they failed, not through lack of effort or intelligence, but just it didn’t quite work out for them, and here we see they had plenty of ideals. 

The specific context was here they (and I was not among them) desperately trying to get enough people involved/interested in 200.

What I think we can learn from this is issue entrepreneurs have to be smart, persistent, and above all lucky, And part of the luck is the times suiting you and the times seem to suit fascist idiots like John Howard (Australian Prime Minister 1996-2007) more than they do the good people of Rising Tide, and so it goes, 

What happened next some people from within Rising Tide were instrumental in the Camp for Climate Action from 2006 onwards.

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: 

August 16, 1971 – “The changing chemistry of the oceans.”

August 16 1984 – “Why are they lying to our children?” – what a 40 year old propaganda campaign can tell us about today (and tomorrow’s) cultural battles. #Climate #CorporatePropaganda

August 16, 2000 – No future for the Sydney Futures Exchange

August 16, 2002 – “Oil Lobby Urges Bush to Keep Climate Change Off the Table at Earth Summit

August 16, 2010 – Polar Bears going through the motions

August 16, 2012 – Tony Windsor calls Tony Abbott an “absolute disgrace” on carbon tax/climate

Categories
Australia

August 10, 2001 – Major Australian parties tell OECD, future generations to get fucked

Twenty five years ago, on this day, August 10th, 2001,

CANBERRA, Aug 9 AAP – An OECD call for Australia to introduce environment taxes was today ruled out by the government and opposition despite support from rural backbenchers.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s latest report showed that Australia’s economy was faring well, and that a carbon tax would be a cost-effective way to benefit the environment.

“Setting up a trading scheme or a carbon tax of broad sectoral coverage is the most cost-effective way to achieve emissions reductions,” the OECD report said.

Environment Minister Robert Hill branded the call Eurocentric, saying the government was instead focused on building economic growth with a low-tax environment.

“We’re not going to impose another tax,” Senator Hill said.

The government wanted strong economic growth built on a low tax environment, low interest rates and low inflation, he said.

A business/environmental roundtable comprising the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), Southcorp, Elders Ltd, ABN Amro, Berri Ltd and CSIRO today called for tax breaks to encourage investment in the environment.

McSweeny, L. 2001. Fed – Major parties reject OECD call for environment tax. Australian Associated Press, 10 August

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 371ppm. 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 Australia had very briefly in 1988 to say 1990 professed to take a positive proactive position as a middle power on environmental issues, including climate. But that was never deep seated, and by 1991 the tune coming out of Canberra and state capitals was changing, because well, Who pays the piper calls the tune, and who pays the piper are the extractive industries.

The specific context was that in 1997 the Australian federal government had extorted a very generous deal at the climate conference in Kyoto. And it was looking like they would still not ratify it, and it was looking like they still wouldn’t have anything approaching an emissions trading scheme or any price on carbon dioxide. There had already been one cabinet proposal in 2000 defeated thanks to the machinations of South Australian Senator Nick Minchin. So the OECD had said, “look, you guys really need a carbon tax to incentivise energy efficiency and technological innovation and so forth” and both the major political parties turned around and said the OECD and future generations can get fucked. In essence that’s what they said, and they meant it, and they still mean it. 

What I think we can learn from this is that democracy only works if you have an educated population that is capable of forming its own groups, which cannot be co-opted, repressed, and exhausted by the state and the corporate sector. And in the absence of an educated populace that can do that, in the absence of a genuinely independent and inexhaustible civil society, you end up with “demonstration elections” and a more or less rapid descent into the maelstrom in the Edgar Allan Poe sense of it, but without the happy ending.

What happened next – Australia got a carbon tax – after astonishingly bloody political battles – for a year and a bit (2012-2013) until the next government that came along axed it.

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: 

August 10, 1974 – Stockholm conference on climate modelling ends

August 10, 1978 – Ford Pinto deaths spark class action lawsuit 

August 10, 1980 – “Energy, Climate and the Future” seminar in Melbourne

August 10, 2000 – States’ greenhouse gas failure 

August 10, 2003 – a UK temperature record tumbles… 

August 10, 2021- climate protest with burning pram… 

Categories
Denial

 July 9, 2001 – Dobriansky and Pearlman meet  

Twenty five years ago, on this day, July  9th, 2001, 

Paula Dobriansky and Donald “will asshole for money” Pearlman meet July 9,  

“In other meetings documented in the papers, Ms Dobriansky meets Don Pearlman, an international anti-Kyoto lobbyist who has been a paid adviser to the Saudi and Kuwaiti governments, both of which have followed the US line against Kyoto.

The purpose of the meeting with Mr Pearlman, who also represents the secretive anti-Kyoto Climate Council, which the administration says “works against most US government efforts to address climate change”, is said to be to “solicit [his] views as part of our dialogue with friends and allies”.”

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/jun/08/usnews.climatechange

2001 State Department Briefing for Don Pearlman, Climate Council Meeting

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 371ppm. 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 the resistance to international climate action in the late 1980s/early 1990s was channelled through the so-called Global Climate Coalition (oil companies, auto companies etc) and the Climate Council, much smaller, less gaudy and probably more effective. Basically, Don Pearlman helped the Middle Eastern dictatorships scupper meaningful climate action.
Right now, I hope the scumbag is rotting in hell. 

The specific context was that by now the Bush Administration had pulled out of Kyoto and was probably looking for ways to be even more evil on the question of climate. 

What I think we can learn from this is that evil exists. It’s often very competent, effective and well-paid. 

What happened next. Pearlman died in 2005. Too late, and not painful enough, but there you are. 

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

Xx

See also

That play, Kyoto.

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: 

July 9, 1962 – rainbow bomb parties as hydrogen bomb explodes

July 9, 1965 – “Spaceship Earth” is launched, trying to get us to see our fragility (didn’t work)

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

July 9, 1990- Green Christians’ 12 commandments 

July 9, 2004 – David Bellamy jumps the shark on climate change

 July 9, 2008 – President Bush operating at his peak intellectual capacity

Categories
Australia

May 28, 2001 – ABC “The World Today” on climate change

Twenty-five years ago, on this day, May 28th, 2001, the ABC reported  on the Kyoto Protocol…

The World Today Archive – Monday, 28 May , 2001

Reporter: David Mark

JOHN HIGHFIELD: And now on The World Today let’s go to the third in our series of stories on the global warming crisis. It’s now been established of course that the greenhouse effect is more than just fanciful scientific theory.

In March, scientists in Britain published the first evidence that global warming is happening as a result of the greenhouse gas pollution of our planet. And the impact could be catastrophic unless remedial measures are taken urgently.

The United Nations Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change has predicted the world’s temperatures could rise by almost six degrees centigrade over the next century leading to the flooding of many island nations, particularly those in the south and western Pacific in our region, as well as climate chaos, including prolonged droughts and violent storms.

Well, two of the world’s worst offenders on a per capita basis when it comes to producing carbon dioxide (CO2) are the United States and Australia of course. And we seem to be stepping away from things and the International Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, which it was hoped to change the world’s attitude.

Well, in this third story, David Mark looks at the green record of our political parties in this federal election year.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 354ppm. As of 2026 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that there had been a big wave of ‘act or we are doomed’ documentaries and programmes in the late 1980s and early 1990s.  (And, to be fair, similar ones in the late 1960s.)

The specific context was that, as per the May 20 post, there are ABC documentaries about climate change, because there is a recent hook i.e. the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report, which has just come out. And also it’s politically salient, because President George W. Bush has pulled out of Kyoto, and people were waiting to see what Australian Prime MinisterJohn Howard would say. Howard is at this point, playing for time, because there is going to be a federal election at some point in late 2001 and Howard can’t afford to piss off and galvanise small g and (large g) Green voters against him.

What I think we can learn from this is, again, the media, or bits of the media, were relatively responsible when they could be, but it didn’t help the wider picture, because the social movements aren’t there to harness the energy, anger, fear, of individuals (because that’s really hard to do).

Everyone understandably wants to vote for the right person and leave it in their hands because they’re busy, because politics is – as per Max Weber – “the slow, boring of hard boards”, and it can be boring and frustrating, and you just want to get on with your life. Unfortunately, while you’re getting on with your life, the emissions are climbing, the atmospheric concentrations are climbing, and then before you know it, the impacts are arriving. And by the time the impacts have arrived, it’s pretty late, too late, I would say, to do much about it. And this dilemma was understood in the late 70s, and it’s throughout William Barbat’s CO2 newsletter. 

What happened next. 

We didn’t do the work, and future generations are stuffed. Also, all the other species. Oh well…

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 28, 1954 – Will we control the weather?!

May 28, 1956 – Time Magazine reports on “One Big Greenhouse”

May 28, 1969 – “Ecology and Politics in America” teach-in, Berkeley

May 28, 1982 – “International Conference on Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Plant Productivity” – All Our Yesterdays

 May 28, 1990 – “Global Warming is really here” (IPCC First Assessment Report) 

Categories
Australia

May 20, 2001 – ABC Doco on Humans, An Endangered Species

Fifteen years ago, on this day, May 20th, 

Humans, An Endangered Species: Global Doomsday Scenarios (repeat)

https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/backgroundbriefing/humans-an-endangered-species-global-doomsday/3484868

May 20 2001,

Many scientists predict that as population increases and we industrialise more we will send the earth’s control mechanisms out of gear. It’s not the end of the world – just the end of us…

Chris Bullock, Producer

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 371ppm. As of 2026 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC had come out this year saying, “look, we’ve really got to reduce emissions much more sharply than we’re contemplating with the Kyoto Protocol. There will be serious trouble ahead.”

The specific context was that the Australian Government was resisting any action, and the Australian national broadcaster had some spine still back then, and was trying to get people to think through the implications. 

What I think we can learn from this is that there are journalists still finding space to raise these questions back then, at least. I’m not sure how it is now.

What happened next? Well, more documentaries, more questions, but very little action. 

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 20, 1959 Times of India letter about Teller and CO2 – All Our Yesterdays

May 20, 1960 – Spengler suggests decline of the … whole shebang

May 20, 1970 – NUC Symposium on Environmental Preservation 

May 20, 1976 – UK World Trends committee chair worries about the weather… – All Our Yesterdays

May 20, 1977 – Australian Prime Minister says “coal, not solar” is the future

May 20, 1990 – “Ironing out the Greenhouse Effect”

May 20, 2010 – climategate keeps delivering for denialist

Categories
Denial

May 11, 2001 – classic delaying tactic of asking for more studies

Twenty five years ago, on this day, May 11th, 2001, the Bush administration does what assholes always do…

“In a letter of 11 May 2001 The White House asked the US NAS for assistance in identifying the areas in the science on climate change where there are greatest certainties and uncertainties. The NAS was also asked for its views on whether there are any substantive differences between the IPCC reports and the IPCC summaries. An answer to the request was expected in early June, i.e., within less than a month. The NAS quickly appointed a special committee under the chairmanship of Dr Ralph Cicerone, chancellor of the University of California, Irving, CA, and a well-known researcher in atmospheric chemistry (and president of the NAS since 2005). Its report was ready in June…”

(Bolin, 2007) Page 179

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 371ppm. As of 2026 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that scientists had been offering detailed warnings about carbon dioxide build up as a threat that must be responded to immediately since, well, really, let’s say 1979 the Charney report. And politicians had been nodding and then doing nothing.

The specific context was that George W. Bush, the son of HW, had on the campaign trail in 2000 said that CO2 would need to be regulated. In March of 2001, shortly after his inauguration, and after the Supreme Court had handed him the 2000 presidential election. Bush had pulled the US out of the Kyoto Protocol negotiations.

So Bush needed to do – or to be seen to do – something on climate change. And here he reverted to the classic tactic of calling “for further research” as a delaying tactic. So it’s not denial which will rile liberals, but it is that sort of soft “ah, we need further research. (We are responsible. We’re not rushing into anything, even though the time for that action has long passed.) It is still, if not catnip, then acceptable as a talking point for lots of centrist pundits who can then talk about sober statesmanship and who should be on the panel and what its terms of reference should be, and all the rest of it. Meanwhile, the planet burns. 

What I think we can learn from this. The old tactics keep working. Because civil society never learns, never pushes.

What happened next. The National Academies of Science came back with the same report that they’d been coming back with since 1989 when Bush’s dad had been a new president. And they had said, it’s real and we really ought to do something about it, and nothing was done. 

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 11, 1971 – U Thant gets The Message

May 11, 1988 – “Greenhouse Glasnost” USA and USSR to co-operate on climate

May 11, 1990 – the Financial Times on good intentions not cutting it 

May 11, 1990 – Money or the Planet. You decide (except you don’t).

Categories
Australia

May 8, 2001 – Overheating Australia needs ‘wake-up call’.

Twenty five years ago, on this day, May 8th, another ignored warning,

Canberra – Pressure mounted on the Australian government on Tuesday to resume international climate change talks after a report by a government agency foreshadowed a dramatic surge in temperatures in the next 70 years.

Australia’s key government research organisation, the Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), predicted a drier and hotter Australia, with average temperatures rising by up to six percent by 2070.

“Rising concentrations of greenhouse gases are the culprit,” head of CSIRO’s atmospheric research group Peter Whetton said in a statement.

 Cox, G. 2001. Overheating Australia needs ‘wake-up call’. IOL 8 May.

http://www.iol.co.za/mercury/world/overheating-australia-needs-wake-up-call-64988

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 371ppm. As of 2026 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that scientists have been warning about carbon dioxide build up for a very long time. There had been warnings and warnings and warnings. There had been the Brian Tucker monograph 1981. In the same year, there had been the secret Office of National Assessments report on fossil fuels and the greenhouse effect. From 1986 the Australian Environment Council, and onward and onward, but none of it had landed.

The specific context was that the Millennium drought is ongoing, and the IPCC Third Assessment Report has come out but none of it is going to really shift the dial, because little Johnnie Howard is a scumbag.

What I think we can learn from this is that we as a species, struggle with the long-term, we struggle with collective cognition, shall we say? And it was more comfortable simply to ignore the truth, especially if everyone else was doing it. 

What happened next. More warnings, more please. Reminds me of this cartoon by the late great John Kudelka – “Is this thing on?” Oh, my Lord. 

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 8, 1972 – “Teach-in for Survival” in London

May 8, 1980 – Nature article “CO2 could increase global tensions.” Exxon discussed underneath. Delicious ironies abound. – All Our Yesterdays

May 8, 1992 – UNFCCC text agreed. World basically doomed.

May 8, 2008 – Carbon Rationing Scrapped

May 8, 2013 – we pass 400 parts per million. Trouble ahead.

May 8, 2015 – denialist denies in delusional denialist newspaper

Categories
Australia

May 3, 2001 – one in ten companies meeting emissions reductions targets 

Twenty five years ago, on this day, May 3rd, 2001,

The executive director of the GCP said in a Senate estimates hearing on May 3, 2001 that only one in 10 companies had met their emission reduction targets. (See also Report of the Senate Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee, “The Heat Is On: Australia’s Greenhouse Future”, chapter 8.)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 371ppm. As of 2026 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that Australian political elites had been made aware of climate change as a threat in the 1970s; you had the Australian Academy for the Advancement of Science, Australian Academy of Science Symposium in September of 1980 you had the monograph that came out of that on the CO2 problem. You had the Office of National Assessments report. And, of course, from 1987 onwards, you had the CSIRO etc, banging the drum. Oh, you’d also had the Australian Environment Council, in 1986  

Business had defeated a couple of proposals to put a price on carbon dioxide, (which is the only language they understand), first during the ESD ecologically sustainable development process, and then in 1994-95 they had defeated the carbon tax, and instead the Keating government had created a worse-than-useless “greenhouse challenge” voluntary scheme.

The specific context was that the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had come out, and George W Bush had pulled the US out of negotiating the Kyoto Protocol. It was pretty clear that if Howard were to win the upcoming election, he would do the same, whereas Labor would ratify. 

What I think we can learn from this. This talk of “waking up” or “being woken up” has been going on for so long, and we prefer to be asleep.. And here we learn that, of the companies that had set emissions reductions targets, which was not all of them, by any means, only one in 10 were hitting those targets. So an adult government that gave a shit about more than its own comfort and power would change course. It would say, “we’ve tried the voluntary approach, it didn’t work,” and would legislate. That is, of course, reader, not what happened, and John Howard and his gang of fuckwits have condemned us all to hell. 

What happened next. The Greenhouse Challenge was rebooted with very similar effects and finally basically ignored. There was a fierce battle over a carbon price between 2006 and 2012 and then in 2014 the carbon price was abolished by Tony Abbott, the thug disguised as a prime minister. 

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 3, 1978 – First and last “Sun Day”

May 3, 1989 “Exploration Access and Political Power” speech by Hugh Morgan – All Our Yesterdays

May 3, 1990 – From Washington to Canberra, the “greenhouse effect” has elites promising…

May 3, 2024 – Friends of the Earth and Client Earth win a court case – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Australia Denial Kyoto Protocol

April 3, 2001 – Kyoto Protocol most serious challenge to Australian sovereignty since Coral Sea

On this day 25 years ago a nutjob wrote…

 Australian government is being applauded by corporate polluters and corporate front groups at home and abroad. The Global Climate Coalition, the major front group for US corporate polluters, features on its web site an article by Alan Wood in the April 3 Australian (<http://www.globalclimate.org>). Wood’s article, titled “Killing Kyoto in Australia’s best interests”, urges Australia to back the US in pulling out of the Kyoto Protocol.

Wood comments favourably on a paper written by climate sceptic Alan Oxley for the Lavoisier Group, an Australian “think tank” which argues that the Kyoto Protocol poses “the most serious challenge to our sovereignty since the Japanese fleet entered the Coral Sea on 3 May, 1942”.

https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/canberra-covers-bush-greenhouse

AND

The US has called Europe’s bluff, LISTEN to the Europeans and you could be forgiven for thinking George W. Bush has just sent the world to the gas chamber – the greenhouse gas chamber, that is. What Bush has really done by rejecting the Kyoto Protocol is shatter a European dream of running the international energy market, or at least a substantial bit of it.

This dream arose from a mix of Europe’s quasi-religious green fundamentalism and cynical calculation of commercial advantage. Jacques Chirac gave the game away at the failed COP6 talks at The Hague last November, when he described the protocol as “a genuine instrument of global governance”.

Wood, A. 2001. Killing Kyoto in Australia’s best interests. The Australian, 3 April, p13.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 371ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that, well, as discussed yesterday, link, the Kyoto Protocol was inadequate, but essential – necessary but wildly insufficient. What you see here is the bat shit, crazy, conspiratorial One World Government crap from someone with an academic background, but no grasp on reality. This language of sovereignty, of “taking back control” is immensely powerful and useful for the nutjobs, and they use pretty much every opportunity they can to deploy it.

So much for one fragile world. The Treaty of Westphalia is a treaty of failure, as was predicted by many observers in the late 1970s who knew that getting nations to agree to emissions cuts would be virtually impossible.

The specific context was that Bush Jnr had followed Dick Cheney’s instructions, and pulled the US out of the Kyoto Protocol.

What I think we can learn from this is that we are doomed.

What happened next:  Howard pulled Australia out the following year, but this was a major factor in his eventual political demise.

Also on this day: 

April 3, 1995 and 2001 – Australia’s international trajectory – from bullshit to batshit delusion (but honest)

April 3, 1980 – US news anchorman Walter Cronkite on the greenhouse effect

April 3, 1991- Does coal have a future?

April 3, 2000 – Australian diplomats spread bullshit about climate. Again

Categories
Australia International processes Kyoto Protocol

April 2, 2001 – Post-”Bush pulling out of Kyoto” joy from various Australian nutjobs 

On this day, 25 years ago, 

A string of federal ministers, led by Prime Minister John Howard, voiced support for the US position following the March 29 announcement by Washington that it would not support the Kyoto Protocol. Federal cabinet decided on April 2 to support the US decision. The government declared that it will not ratify the Kyoto Protocol unless the US does.

https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/canberra-covers-bush-greenhouse

And

The April 2 Age 2001 printed an article by Ray Evans from the Lavoisier Group, in which he stated: “President Bush has shown courage and provided world leadership by announcing that the United States will not support the Kyoto protocol on greenhouse gas emissions. What is baffling, however, is that some senior members of the Australian government do not seem prepared to immediately lend support to Bush. In the interests of good policy and good science, they should do so.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 371ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that the UNFCCC had been signed in 1992. In 1995 rich nations had agreed to turn up to the third Conference of the Parties with plans to reduce their emissions (“the Berlin Mandate”). However, in the United States, fossil fuel lobbies and denialists fought tooth and nail, and reduced ambition. Meanwhile, the Americans forced the Europeans to accept all sorts of carbon trading and so-called “Joint Implementation.” That was a recipe for delay in Australia. The Howard government used all its diplomatic weight to try to carve out a special deal for Australia, resulting in an official de jure, so-called reduction target of 108%, i.e. an increase, but de facto, 130% once you took into account so called land clearing anyway, the 

The specific context was that George W Bush had been handed the 2000 presidential election by his dad’s appointees on the Supreme Court, and although Bush Jr W had said on the campaign trail that carbon dioxide would need to be regulated, once in office, he took orders from Dick Cheney and pulled the US out of Kyoto.

So what you see here is the relief and applause from various Australian assholes because they knew that sooner or later, Howard would make the same announcement, (but not until after the Federal Election of 2001 which, of course, he was looking like he would lose). But then, well, the Tampa and the lies and all of that. 

What I think we can learn from this is that these people applauding Bush pulling out of Kyoto are, frankly, the scum of the earth. This is not to say Kyoto was at all adequate, but they’re still the scum of the earth. 

What happened next:  Kyoto ratification became a weird virtue-signalling fetish in Australia, which suited the Labor politician Kevin Rudd, who used it as a stick to beat John Howard, with Australia, did eventually ratify the Kyoto Protocol, which was a completely futile gesture.

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 2, 1968 – Oz Senate debates Air Pollution Select Committee

April 2, 1979 – AAAS workshop in Anaheim begins…

April 2, 2008 – Senator Barack Obama blathers about coal