Categories
Australia Denial

February 16, 2007 – Liberals say climate is a “mass panic”

Sixteen  years ago, on this day, February 16, 2007, as the second big wave of climate awareness was kicking off in Australia, a senior Liberal politician was… being himself.

 It SHOULD not be seen as a sin to be cautious about the science of global warming, a senior Federal Government minister has warned.

Finance Minister Nick Minchin says “there remains an ongoing debate about the extent of climate change” and the extent of human activity’s role in global warming.

Murphy, K. 2007. Lib scorns mass ‘panic’ on climate. The Age, February 16 http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/lib-scorns-mass-panic-on-climate/2007/02/16/1171405441792.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 384ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

Nick Minchin had been successful in defeating an emissions trading scheme in the year 2000. And he had remained one of John Howard’s staunch culture warriors on the question of climate. From late 2006 people in Australia started to become reawakened to the climate problem and Minchin was pushing back in the way that old white men so often do. By this I mean pointing the finger at people and calling them hysterical and accusing them of panicking without bothering to think that maybe there is something to panic about. 

What I think we can learn/remember from this

Just a reminder that just because someone is “successful” does not mean they cannot be a harmful dolt.

The sorts of things that Minchin accuses others of doing – cherry picking data, being unscientific – that’s all projection, that’s what he’s doing.

There are always old white men who will come out with this bullshit and of course now they’ve painted themselves into a corner and would have to admit that they had been wrong which would be psychologically devastating for them.

What happened next

Labor won the Federal election at the end of the year and fundamentally bollocksed up the politics and policy.  Well done, Kevin. You’re from Queensland and you’re here to really screw things up.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong?  Do comment on this post.

Categories
anti-reflexivity Australia Science Scientists

 February 13, 2007- Industry is defo allowed to silence scientists…

Sixteen years ago, on this day, February 13 2007, a Canberra Times journalist had a cracking story about the politics of knowledge.

The CSIRO has confirmed coal industry bodies have the power to suppress a new report questioning the cost and efficiency of clean-coal carbon capture technologies because they partly funded the research. Dr David Brockway, chief of CSIRO’s division of energy technology, told a Senate estimates committee hearing yesterday it was ”not necessarily unusual” for private-industry partners investing in research programs – such as Cooperative Research Centres – to request reports be withheld from public release if findings were deemed to be not in their best interests. His comments followed questions by Australian Greens Senator Christine Milne regarding the release of an economic assessment by a senior CSIRO scientist of a new carbon capture technology to reduce greenhouse emissions from coal-fired power stations.

Beeby, R. 2007. Industry can gag research: CSIRO. Canberra Times, 15 February.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 384ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

John Howard and his government had been systematically undermining all other organisations that might keep tabs on them, or forcefully propose alternatives.  Have a look at “Silencing Dissent” by Clive Hamilton and Sarah Maddison for the gory (and they are gory) details.

What I think we can learn from this

Those who want things to stay the same will do whatever it takes to poke out the eyes and stuff up the mouths of anyone with brains and other ideas, while rewarding lackeys and toadies.

What happened next

Nothing good. The demolition of the CSIRO has, basically, continued. Oh well.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong?  Do comment on this post.

Categories
Australia

February 5, 2007 – Australian Prime Minister trolled by senior journalist

Sixteen years ago, on this day, February 5, 2007, Australian Prime Minister John Howard got ridiculed on an ABC television programme.

Howard’s problem was that he had changed his policy but not his political strategy. He refused to genuflect before the icons: Al Gore’s scare, the drought as proof of a climate transformation, and Kyoto sanctification. For the ABC, Howard was now a figure of undisguised ridicule. His Lateline interview of 5 February 2007 began with this mocking question from Tony Jones: ‘Can you recall exactly when it was that you ceased being a climate change sceptic and became, in effect, a true believer?’

(Kelly, 2014:131)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 384ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was

Australian Prime Minister John Howard had a track record of 10 years of successful opposition to any action on climate, using all means fair and foul. He had finally been pushed because of an impending election into appointing one of his mandarins, in this case, Peter Shergold to examine an emissions trading scheme. Therefore journalists were beginning to have fun with Howard’s U-turn. Howard had to do the U-turn beacuse climate concern was being expertly used as a wedge issue by new opposition leader, Kevin Rudd.

What I think we can learn from this

Journalists who don’t really “get it” can still land blows. But the real problem is that the landing of these blows has an emotional release effect on viewers who think “ah, the system is working, the system is correcting, this bad person who I don’t agree with  will be gone soon”. They don’t then think about what they need to do for the long-term. It’s a kind of court jester catharsis thing.

What happened next

Howard was defeated. In the November 2007 election, Kevin Rudd came in with lots of promises, but no real action and poisoned the well, creating cynicism, which is still present.

References

Kelly, P. 2014. Triumph and Demise: The broken promise of a Labor generation. Melbourne University Press.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong?  Do comment on this post.

Categories
Science Scientists Sweden

December 30, 2007 – Bert Bolin dies.

December 30, 2007 – Bert Bolin dies. He was a Swedish scientist, did more than anyone else (I would argue) from the 1950s to the 1980s to get carbon dioxide build-up on the political agenda (he was most certainly not alone in doing this – proper group effort). Find posts about him on this site here.

Bolin’s death was exquisitely well-timed. He had been the first chair of the IPCC, and that organisation had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize a couple of weeks earlier. The COP meeting of the UNFCCC in Bali had agreed – over US objections – a two year plan of negotiations for a big important/solve the post-Kyoto problem meeting to be held in Copenhagen in December 2009.

Bolin, I hope, died believing that, finally, at last, possibly too late, the rich nations were being successfully corralled into doing something serious on the issue he had been so responsible for.

Bolin’s book – A History of the Science and Politics of Climate Change: The Role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change –  is fairly dry, but great if you’re a geek like me

Btw, at that time atmospheric CO2 was 384ppm. It’s roughly 418 now

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage China Coal

December 20, 2007 – UK opposition leader David Cameron gives clean coal speech in Beijing…

On this day, December 20, 2007, then-opposition leader David Cameron gave a speech about clean coal in Beijing

“developing green coal will be a priority for a Conservative Government: we will do what it takes to make Britain a world leader in this crucial field.”

The context was –

Globally, there was an upsurge in concern about climate change. It was apparent that coal usage in the majority world was expanding rapidly.  Don’t worry, carbon capture and storage will save the day…

In the UK, David Cameron was continuing his efforts to “de-toxify” the Conservative Party brand, by making big empty eco-modernisation promises like this one, which was also an attempt to one-up the Labour government of the day – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/mobile/uk_politics/7153139.stm

Why this matters?

The promises, oh,  they are so shiny, so seductive. You’d love to go to sleep to  those dulcet tones, wouldn’t you?

What happened next?

Once in office, Cameron did none of this. Of course.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 384ppm. At time of writing it was 419ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

Categories
Carbon Capture and Storage Uncategorized United Kingdom

November 19, 2007 – Gordon Brown announces first Carbon Capture and Storage competition at WWF event

On this day, November 19, Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced the first CCS competition

Carbon capture Government ministers have been giving speeches about the carbon capture competition for months. Mr Darling talked about it in the Pre-Budget Review. But Gordon Brown’s speech did not hesitate to bring it forward as a completely new idea. ‘I can announce today that we are launching a competition to build […] one of the […] first commercial CCS […] projects’.

He also mentioned the agreement between China and the UK to work together on Near Zero Emission Coal. He said it was the first of its kind. It was not. Australia and China signed a similar deal in September.

CCS had been swirling around for a few years by now. BP had wanted to get it going (with Enhanced Oil Recovery) at a site in Scotland, but Treasury wouldn’t give it the ROCs (renewable obligation certificates) to make the numbers add up….

Why this matters

If you know you’re history, you will know where you’re coming from…

What happened next

First CCS competition fizzles out in 2011. Second one, begun 2012, killed off abruptly in November 2015.  Third time lucky?

Categories
United States of America

Feb 1, 2007- Jeremy Grantham slams Bush on #climate

On this day in 2007 as the IPCC’s 4th assessment report was about to be released, Jeremy Grantham, chairman of a Boston-based fund management company, sent out another of his quarterly letter to clients. It included a commentary on the United States’ policy toward climate change, particularly that of the current administration. 

Its title was “While America Slept, 1982-2006: A Rant on Oil Dependency, Global Warming, and a Love of Feel-Good Data,”

It included the observation that 

Successive US administrations have taken little interest in either oil substitution or climate change and the current one has even seemed to have a vested interest in the idea that the science of climate change is uncertain.”

David Roberts of Grist called this a “four page assault on US energy policy.

Given Cheney/Bush’s enthusiasm for coal and oil, and hatred of all things environmental,, it was a fair cop.

Why this matters.

There’s this idea – carefully cultivated and promulgated – that the only people banging on about climate change are Luddites and “leftists.” As Grantham, and others, show, plenty of capitalists can see the nose on their face (n.b. that doesn’t mean capitalism is sustainable).

What happened next?

Grantham has kept it up. In November 2012 he wrote another piece, in Nature, that is well worth your time – “Be persuasive. Be brave. Be arrested (if necessary)

According to Wikipedia, that source of all reliable information “In August 2019, he dedicated 98% (approximately $1 billion) of his personal wealth to fight climate change. Grantham believes that investing in green technologies, is a profitable investment on the long run, claiming that decarbonizing the economy will be an investing bonanza for those who know it’s coming.[26
Oh, and he thinks the bubble is about to burst.

Categories
Ignored Warnings Scientists

2007, Jan 1: “If we fail to act, we end up with a different planet”

On this day, 15 years ago, the now defunct newspaper the Independent, ran a front page interview with famed climate scientist James Hansen.

This came with climate change already high on the agenda – the previous year had seen the first “Camp for Climate Action” and the release of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. New Conservative Party leader David Cameron had decided environmentalism was a leading way to detoxify the Tory brand, and in April 2006 had travelled to the Arctic to ‘hug a huskie’. More generally, humanity was going through its second big “something must be done” moment on climate (and its third on environmental matters more broadly – see “issue attention cycles” in the concepts page of this site).

In the interview Hansen, famous for his efforts to raise public awareness and concern, predating his iconic June 23 1988 testimony in front of a Senate committee (which we will return to later) said

“If we go another 10 years, by 2015, at the current rate of growth of Co2 emissions, which is about 2 per cent per year, the emissions in 2015 will be 35 per cent larger than they were in 2000. But if we want to get on a scenario that keeps global temperature in the range that it’s been in for the last million years we would need to decrease the emissions by something of the order of 25 per cent by the middle of the century and by something like 75 per cent by the end of the century

Hansen is usually out in front on these matters. Events have overtaken him on this one, and there is now scientific consensus around much much steeper cuts in emissions. There is an alleged political consensus around “zero carbon” by 2050.

So, an ignored warning from the past. So what? This matters because there will still be people who tell you ‘”we’ve only just become aware of the problem, we need to give technology time to work”.

What happened next? We kept burning the fossil fuels – (we’ve burnt more between 1991 and 2019 than we did from 1751 to 1990). Hansen wrote a book (see further reading), and, well, Groundhog Day has kept on coming around again…

References

Connor, J. (2007) ‘If we fail to act, we will end up with a different planet’. The Independent, 01 January, p.1

Further reading

Hansen, J. (2009) The Truth About the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity. Bloomsbury Press

Millman, O. (2018) Ex-Nasa scientist: 30 years on, world is failing ‘miserably’ to address climate change. The Guardian, 19 June.