Tag: 2006

Categories
United States of America

July 30,  2006 – Murray Bookchin dies

Twenty years ago, on this day, July  30th, 2006,

Murray Bookchin died

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 381ppm. 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 Bookchin was a very big deal in anarchist circles.

Murray Bookchin (/ˈbʊktʃɪn/; January 14, 1921 – July 30, 2006[1]) was an American social theorist, author, orator, historian, and political philosopher. Influenced by the works of G. W. F. Hegel, Karl Marx, and Peter Kropotkin,[2] he was a pioneer in the environmental movement.[3] Bookchin formulated and developed the theory of social ecology and urban planning within anarchist, libertarian socialist, and ecological thought. He was the author of two dozen books covering topics in politics, philosophy, history, urban affairs, and social ecology. Among the most important were Our Synthetic Environment (1962), Post-Scarcity Anarchism (1971), The Ecology of Freedom (1982), and Urbanization Without Cities (1987). In the late 1990s, he became disenchanted with what he saw as an increasingly apolitical “lifestylism” of the contemporary anarchist movement, stopped referring to himself as an anarchist, and founded his own libertarian socialist ideology called “communalism“, which seeks to reconcile and expand Marxist, syndicalist, and anarchist thought.[4][5]

The specific context (around climate) is that his 1965 book Crisis in Our Cities is one of the first warnings about carbon dioxide build-up to appear in mainstream American non-fiction.

On page 187 we have this – 

And this –  “Meteorologists believe that the immediate effect of increased heat leads to violent air circulation and increasingly destructive storms….  theoretically, after several centuries of fossil-fuel combustion, the increased heat of the atmosphere could even melt the polar ice caps of the earth and lead to the inundation of the continents with sea water.”

(warnings would become more stark soon, with shrunken timescales).

What I think we can learn from this- vale Murray.

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: 

July 30, 1968 – the UN says yes to an environment conference 

July 30, 1979 – scientists warn US Senators about synfuels and carbon dioxide build-up 

July 30, 1979 – synfuels would be sinful…

July 30, 1989 – UK Conservative politician warns “we have at most 25 years to take action.” 

July 30, 2005 – John Howard versus the climate 

Categories
United Kingdom

 July 19, 2006 – David Miliband gives a speech

Twenty years ago, on this day, July  11st, 2006, newly-appointed Climate minister David Miliband gives a speech

“Furthermore, if we wait until the problem is at crisis point, it will be too late to put right.“

D. Miliband, The Great Stink: Towards an Environmental Contract, Audit Commission Annual Lecture, Wednesday, 19 July

https://www.darkoptimism.org/DavidMiliband.pdf

2006, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20061209022624/http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/ministers/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 382ppm. 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 after a flurry of announcements and pronouncements from 1988 to 1992 or so, the climate issue had slipped down the agenda, wheeled out for election point-scoring (swing voters etc etc).  However, from about 2005, with the EUETS, the ratification of Kyoto and Blair’s desperation that the G7 meeting he was hosting not be about the Iraq War, climate moved back centre(ish) stage. Much as Kevin Rudd in Australia would use climate as a stick to wield, so young David Cameron, new leader of the Conservatives, would do.

The specific context was some of us were neck-deep in making Climate Camp happen. What fools.

What I think we can learn from this Talk is cheap.

What happened next.  Oh, lots of stuff, including a possible carbon rationing scheme. Then Miliband lost the leadership contest to his brother Ed, and the rest is history.

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

 November 19, 2009 – Ed Miliband on “The Politics of Climate Change”

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: 

July 19, 1968 – “man has already rendered the temperature equilibrium of the globe more unstable.” 

July 19, 1976 – , Scientist warns “ “If we’re still rolling along on fossil fuels by the end of the century, then we’ve had it.” 

July 19, 1977 – American public hears from a climate scientist 

July 19, 1979 – “a political view on C02” 

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage United Kingdom

June 7, 2006 – TUC fanboys CCS

Twenty years ago, on this day, June 7th,  2006, the Trades Union Council was fanboying ‘carbon capture and storage’ because it would help create ‘Clean Coal Britain’.

www.tuc.org.uk/research-analysis/reports/framework-clean-coal-britain

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 382ppm.  As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 432ppm. 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 for this was that carbon capture and storage had been dreamt up as a potential techno fix solution for carbon dioxide build up in the mid 70s by an Italian physicist called Cesar Marchetti, and a certain amount of speculative work had been done in the late 70s and again in the early 90s, but the costs were prohibitive, and the technological challenges, shall we say, significant. The specific context is that after the signing of the Kyoto Protocol and finally its ratification, it became clear that technological fixes were going to be the favoured rhetorical device, if not literal device, of political and economic elites. And so you’d had things like the carbon sequestration Leadership Forum, which was just another international talking shop with a logo and press conferences. Meanwhile, in the UK, support for CCS was coalescing. 

The specific context was that the Trades Union Council and especially the miners unions and friends of miners desperately trying to interest politicians. This is under Blair, still in the mindset that carbon capture and storage can ensure that domestic coal mining can continue, and the burning of coal for electricity can continue. 

What I think we can learn is this:  there are all sorts of constituencies for a technology, and that technologies bat about for a long time before they become quote plausible, unquote or implausible, but still implemented. 

What happened next: Well, the lobbying effort worked in that in late 2007 the first CCS competition was announced by Gordon Brown, Prime Minister, at an event in London, hosted by the WWF. That competition fell apart. Another competition was launched with confidence that lessons had been learned, and then at the last minute, in 2015 Treasurer George Osborne pulled the plug ; not because he was an opponent of CCS, he just didn’t think it was important, and he wanted to be able to boast about having put more bobbies on the beat. It was that banal. And then a third competition was launched in 2018 or ‘19 or whenever. And you can read all about it in my first and last book.

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

References

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 7, 1959 – another letter about carbon dioxide build up in the Times of India

June 7, 1971 – Australians warned, on television, about ecological breakdown. #ABC

June 7, 1984 – UK diplomat pushes for more environmental action

June 7, 1989 – Money to be made from the Greenhouse, says the Fin

June 7, 1990 – Tasman Institute and a Nature letter about weathering

Categories
Activism Australia Coal

June 5, 2006 – Rising Tide boat blockade

Nineteen years ago, on this day, June 5th, 2006, 70 brave people put their bodies on the line…

June 5, 2006, and Nov. 3, 2007: Rising Tide boat blockades of Newcastle port

On June 5, 2006, in a Rising Tide Australia action, 70 people used small boats to blockade the port of Newcastle, Australia, which exports 80 million tons of coal each year. The protest aimed to call attention to a planned expansion that would allow the port to export twice that amount.[1] The action was repeated by 100 people on Nov. 3, 2007: at this second action, participants attempted to block ships from entering the port for four hours, but police boats managed to escort three ships into the port. At one point, a police jetski rammed one woman’s kayak, resulting in her hospitalization.[2][3]

Citizen action and protests against coal in Australia – Global Energy Monitor

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2026 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that all the petitions, marches and begging of politicians had not worked. Emissions climbed, fossil intensive infrastructure projects kept getting approved (and still get approved).

The specific context was that the Howard government (like the Keating and Hawke governments before it) had mouthed occasional platitudes about “the environment” but were hell-bent on saying yes to whatever fossil extraction and export was proposed. 

What I think we can learn from this is that brave people have had the foresight and clarity – it hasn’t been enough. What was needed was broad-based movements. Oh well…

What happened next was that the exports and burning went on, the emissions and concentrations went up and up. The mainstream politicians have mostly given up pretending to give a shit.

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 5, 1963  – JFK says yes to SST – All Our Yesterdays

June 5, 1967 –  Working Group on Atmospheric Pollution and Atmospheric Chemistry – All Our Yesterdays

June 5, 1993 and 2011- let’s have a march for #climate… It will make us feel good. – All Our Yesterdays

June 5, 1994 – that referendum idea is back again… – All Our Yesterdays

June 5, 2000 – Liberals pushback against Kyoto, a UN conspiracy… – All Our Yesterdays

June 5, 2001 – NSW Premier Bob Carr promises a climate advertising blitz – All Our Yesterdays

June 5, 2006 – IPA sets up astroturf outfit – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Australia

May 25, 2006 – Ian Campbell versus sanity

Twenty years ago, on this day, May 25th, 

“If you genuinely tell people that building a wind farm here will save the planet from climate change you are doing a massive disservice to the environment. It is an atrocious misleading of the Australian community.”

Ian Campbell, Senate Estimates ECITA Committee, 25 May 2006, p.116.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 3xxppm. As of 2026 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that by this time, the Howard Government was beginning to look clapped out and tired. The first couple of environment ministers who had been intelligent and slick had been replaced by someone who was maybe not in their league, and he was starting to look idiotic, as was the government. 

The specific context was that by this time, the Australian Conservation Foundation and Westpac and other organisations had released their “business case for early (sic) action on climate change.” The Millennium drought was ongoing. There was going to be an UNFCCC negotiations to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which Australia still hadn’t ratified. Mostly though, Prime Minister John Howard was just beginning to look like he wasn’t quite on top of things. There was a technology deal with the United States and Korea, the AP6, but it wasn’t really convincing people, and there was clearly going to be trouble ahead on climate and environment generally.  

What I think we can learn from this. Governments get tired, and the good ministers burn out, or flame out, and they are replaced by second or third rate is and then you go into a death spiral. 

What happened next. Howard lost the 2007 election, and incoming Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd deployed all of his considerable skill, humility and tact to usher Australia into a wonderful climate politics where sharp emissions reductions were combined with a realistic adaptation policy and… oh, come on. You know what happened.

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 25, 1953 – “I read about them in Time Magazine” (Gilbert Plass’s greenhouse warning

May 25, 1962- JFK speaks to a Conservation conference 

May 25, 1990 – Thatcher opens Hadley Centre

May 25, 1992 Keating Cabinet discusses Rio – All Our Yesterdays

May 25 – Interview with Ben King – of #climate, education and the need for tubas

May 25, 2011 – Aussie #climate scientist smeared rather than engaged. Plus ca change…

Categories
United States of America

May 2, 2006 – “While Washington Slept” by Mark Hertsgaard…

Twenty years ago, on this day, 

While Washington Slept article by Hertsgaard

The Queen of England is afraid. International C.E.O.’s are nervous. And the scientific establishment is loud and clear. If global warming isn’t halted, devastating sea-level rises will be inevitable by 2100. So how did this virtual certainty get labeled a “liberal hoax” in the U.S.? Try the same tactics Big Tobacco used to deny the dangers of smoking.

“http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/05/warming200605

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2026 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that American journalists had been writing about carbon dioxide build-up as a potential problem for a very long time. One of my favourites is from the Chicago Tribune front page in March of 1982, but there are others.

And here we see Mark Hertsgaard, author of Earth Odyssey, among others, doing a magazine feature at a time when the Kyoto Protocol has finally been ratified, and there was clearly going to be an international process to replace it with something “better”, and at a time when the Bush regime had lost all credibility because of both international factors such as the resistance to the occupation of Iraq, and its useless response to Hurricane Katrina. It was at this point, nine months since New Orleans…

What I think we can learn from this. that there have been think-pieces in chin-stroking liberal magazines for a long time. but the question is always, “who’s going to make something happen?”, which is then a question of “who is going to mobilise what resources and find new resources and intervene how in ‘the system’ (man)?”

What happened next.  Everyone kept writing chin-stroking pieces. One of my favourites is the one about Australia in Rolling Stone by Jeff Goodell.

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: 

May 2, 1989 – a DC forum about “Our Common Future” – All Our Yesterdays

May 2, 1990 – Nairobi Declaration on Climatic Change – All Our Yesterdays

May 2, 2009 – Australian Liberals warned of wipe-out if seen as “anti-climate action” #auspol

May 2, 2012 – CCS is gonna save us all. Oh yes.

May 2, 2019 – Committee on Climate change report on net zero by 2050

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage United Kingdom

April 24, 2006 – CCS is gonna save us (again) (meeting of the parliamentary and scientific committee)

On this day, 20 years ago,  

OUR ENERGY FUTURES FOR SECURE AND SUSTAINABLE POWER: FROM CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY WITH CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE, MICROGENERATION, TIDAL, WIND AND NUCLEAR

MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENTARY AND SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON MONDAY 24TH APRIL 2006- Science in Parliament newsletter

scienceinparliament.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/sip63-3.pdf

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that CCS had been talked about briefly in the late 1970s, and a bit more in the early 1990s, but nobody took it seriously because, you know, behaviour change and carbon trading was all that was needed.

The specific context was that from the early 2000s it was obvious that behaviour change and carbon trading were grotesquely inadequate. Ooh, let’s pull “CCS” out of the garbage can (Cohen’s garbage can).

What I think we can learn from this is that if you really want an idea to grab a minister’s attention, get the policy wonks on board (they’ll influence the civil servants) and also the minister’s colleagues (loved or loathed) in parliament.  

What happened next:  CCS got more support. A “competition” was announced in late 2007. Fell over. Was picked up, dusted off and started again. Kneecapped with the body thrown in a dumpster in 2015.  Resurrected again between 2016 and 2018.  And is currently having enormous sums of public money thrown at it.  Somebody should write a book.

Also on this day

April 24, 1980 – the climate models are sound…

April 24, 1994 – a carbon tax for Australia?

Categories
Australia

April 7, 2006 – Howard versus moths and cockatoos …

Twenty years ago today, governments make their usual big empty promises…

On 7 April, two days after the Bald Hills decision, Neil Mitchell of 3AW put the Prime Minister on the spot in relation to a housing project west of Melbourne at Melton, saying ‘there’s a $400 million development out there at risk’ because of the elusive and endangered grassland-dwelling Golden Sun Moth. The Prime Minister was unaware of the moth. Still he promised ‘I will investigate that’. Other stories queried whether the endangered red-tailed black cockatoo would ‘sink a $650 million pulpmill’ in SA, and whether the little known flatback turtle would continue to raise an issue for Chevron’s $11 billion Gorgon gas project off the northwest coast of Western Australia.

(Prest, 2007: 253)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that the Liberal Party had gone to the 1990 election with a more ambitious emissions reduction target than Labor, but this had not won them for the election. Small-g greens had come out for Labor, and the Liberals decided they had been “stabbed in the back” and that all of this was all climate change stuff was a socialist hokum. John Howard, who had become prime minister 10 years before the events described here, had done everything in his power to protect the fossil fuel industry and to quash the growth in renewables and to prevent international action. 

The specific context was that Howard was beginning to look old, beginning to lose his grip. Kyoto had, in fact, finally been ratified by enough nations to come into force, and negotiations for a success and protocol were underway. 

Also, the Australian Conservation Foundation had teamed up with various banks, for example, including Westpac, and released a study with the laughable title “early action on climate change”  that was a couple of days before this. And Howard’s environment minister was maybe not quite as sharp as either of them thought and had managed to create opportunities for people to poke fun. This latest one was the apparent John Howard beginning to not quite be on top of things. We now know that late 2006 was the year that the dam broke and that Howard stopped being invincible and started to look very, very beatable for the 2007 election.

What I think we can learn from this is that there are usually cracks in the dam. Sometimes these cracks just stay there. Other times, with hindsight, you can see that floods about to begin. 

What happened next:  Howard not only lost the 2007 election, but he also lost his own seat.

 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 7, 1980 – C02 problem is most important issue… “another decade will slip by” warns Wally Broecker to Senator Tsongas

April 7, 1995 – First “COP” meeting ends with industrialised nations making promises…

April 7, 2010 – Ziggie tries to sprinkle Stardust – 50 nuclear reactors by 2050 – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Australia Science

February 11, 2006 – Nice report on CSIRO (Australian science body) getting gutted by idiots.

Twenty years ago, on this day, February 11, 2006,

FRED Prata was flicking through some satellite pictures one day when he saw a “funny looking cloud”. It got him thinking. A few years later, that train of thought produced a piece of technology worth tens of millions of dollars — possibly hundreds of millions — every year to the international airline industry.

Chandler, J. 2006. Discarded scientists fail to grasp CSIRO logic. The Age, 11 February.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/02/10/1139542406240.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that since the permanent invasion in 1788 Australia has always been a set of settler colonies keen to exploit natural resources for short term gain. Great god development and all that… this required knowledge, science (production and, inevitably, impact science). The CSIRO was born.

The specific context was that CSIRO scientists had been at the forefront of investigating climate change impacts, from the early 1970s onwards. By the 2000s, they were under the cosh.

What I think we can learn from this is that the distinction between production science and impact science is crucial, and under-understood. And that our lords and masters are basically morons who kill the goose that lays golden eggs.

What happened next: The attacks on scientists producing inconvenient truths have continued, regardless of the party in charge. Because the parties are there to keep the “show” (or relentless extraction and accumulation) on the road.

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: 

February 11, 1970 – Prince Phillip, Prince Charles and the Shell/BP “Environment in the Balance” film…
Feb 11, 1970 – Prince Charles attends “Environment in the Balance” film premiere
February 11, 1993 – Liberal Party plans would not meet climate goals, says expert
Categories
Denial Science Scientists United States of America

February 10, 2006 – James Hansen on science, politics and tropical storms…

Twenty years ago, on this day, February 10, 2006

“On February 10, 2006, the Friday of the week that George Deutsch resigned, Jim spoke at a conference on politics and science, sponsored by the New School for Social Research in Manhattan. (He was added at the last minute on account of his recent notoriety.) IN a talk derived from the Keeling talk, which was now about two months old, he decided to add a brief discussion of tropical storms, because the topic was “especially relevant to this conference.”

See these two pages from Mark Bowen’s Censoring Science: Inside the Political Attack on Dr. James Hansen and the Truth of Global Warming.

2006 Hansen at conference on science and politics at New School for Social Research (Bowen Censoring Science page 143)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 382ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that Hansen had been abused, ignored, sidelined in 1989 by the George HW Bush administration, and had basically gone back to the lab (that’s no criticism of the man, btw).

The specific context was that by 2006 the climate issue was heating up again – the Kyoto Protocol had been ratified (thanks, Russia) – so the international negotiations were “back on”, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme was underway, and Al Gore’s film was about to come out.
Last summer (2005) Hurricane Katrina had hit New Orleans, with thousands dead.

What I think we can learn from this is that the Bush regime was full of assholes.

What happened next: Hansen started getting arrested at protests about coal plants and pipelines, and has kept on with the science.

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.

See this from 2008

James Hansen and Mark Bowen on Censored Science : NPR

Also on this day: 

February 10, 1995 – Faulkner folds on carbon tax – doesn’t have the numbers in Cabinet

February 10, 2006 – The Australian Conservation Foundation tries to get governments to take climate seriously… – All Our Yesterdays