Tag: 2009

Categories
Activism Coal Science United Kingdom

February 15, 2009 – James Hansen writes “Coal-fired power stations are death factories. Close them”

Seventeen years ago, on this day, February 15, 2009, American climate scientist James Hansen is telling it like it is.

A year ago, I wrote to Gordon Brown asking him to place a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants in Britain. I have asked the same of Angela Merkel, Barack Obama, Kevin Rudd and other leaders. The reason is this – coal is the single greatest threat to civilisation and all life on our planet.

The climate is nearing tipping points. Changes are beginning to appear and there is a potential for explosive changes, effects that would be irreversible, if we do not rapidly slow fossil-fuel emissions over the next few decades. As Arctic sea ice melts, the darker ocean absorbs more sunlight and speeds melting. As the tundra melts, methane, a strong greenhouse gas, is released, causing more warming. As species are exterminated by shifting climate zones, ecosystems can collapse, destroying more species.

Hansen, J. 2009. Coal-fired power stations are death factories. Close them. Guardian, 15 February.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/feb/15/james-hansen-power-plants-coal

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 387ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that we have known since the fifties that putting enormous quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere was going to have consequences. We didn’t know how big, how soon, but by the late 1970s, that was becoming clear…

The specific context was that the UK government was busy bullshitting about allowing the building of new “carbon-capture-ready” coal-fired power stations. For fuck’s sake.

What I think we can learn from this is that scientists can tell the truth all they like. The truth, on its own, will not – in fact – set you free, no matter what St John wants you to believe.

What happened next: Hansen kept writing and sciencing. The politicians kept ignoring him and thousands of other scientists. So did, for the most part, the publics of the Western democracies.

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 15, 1995 – Australian Financial Review editorial, gloating in the aftermath of the defeat of a small carbon tax proposal, groks Jevons Paradox

February 15, 2011 – Lenore Taylor’s truth bombs

February 15, 2013 – the carbon bubble, will it burst?

Categories
Australia

November 26, 2009 – Abbott challenges Turnbull

Sixteen years ago, on this day, November 26th, 2009,

On 26 November 2009, Liberal frontbencher Tony Abbott, reluctant yet determined, confronted his party leader Malcolm Turnbull in his office and instigated an upheaval that would shape Australian politics for years. Abbott asked Turnbull to abandon his support for carbon-pricing. He was accompanied by Senate leader Nick Minchin, the ideological spearhead of the campaign against Turnbull and the engineer of this encounter. This meeting would unleash unpredictable winds that would ruin Turnbull’s leadership, catapult Abbott into the office of Opposition leader and eventually destroy both Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard.

(Kelly, 2014:18)

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 388ppm. 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 after a very brief attempt to court environmentally-concerned voters in the run-up to the 1990 Federal election (LINK), the Liberals and Nationals decided to hate on the greenies.

The specific context was that Malcolm Turnbull had tried to get his party to go along with Rudd’s dire emissions trading scheme, and had said the fateful phrase “I will not lead a party… LINK.

Now, after having announced that the climate change science was “absolute crap” Tony Abbott was making his move.

What I think we can learn from this – they are all terrible people.

What happened next – Abbott toppled Turnbull, by a single vote. He was then a wrecking ball as an Opposition leader (tremendously effective) and a catastrophically inept 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: 

November 26, 1979 – CCS first glimmerings, by Albanese and Steinberg 

November 26, 1966 – Conservation Society first meeting 

November 26, 1996 – Australian climate modelling is ridiculed

November 26, 1998 – “National Greenhouse Strategy” (re)-launched

November 26, 2008 – pre-CPRS meeting (yawn)

November 26, 2008 – Climate Change Act becomes law

Categories
UNFCCC United Kingdom

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

Sixteen years ago, on this day, November 19th, 2009, 

‘If we are to tackle climate change in the years after Copenhagen, it is clear we will need to secure change of an unprecedented scale. The change needs to be very big….  In the United Kingdom we have pledged in law to cut our emissions by 80 per cent. That means we need our electricity and transport systems and homes to be near zero carbon. So we need a dramatic increase in renewable energy – we are planning for a six-fold increase by 2020.’

Ralph Miliband Lecture, 19 November 2009,

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 the British state had started making all the right noises about climate change from about 2005 (Gleneagles declarations etc etc). There had been the bipartisan “Climate Change Act” of 2008. 

The specific context was – Ed was about to go off to Copenhagen, where we were all going to save the world.

What I think we can learn from this – what was that Hamlet said? “Words words words”.

And the success stories, like offshore wind? They happen by accident. Then, the stuff that might reduce energy emissions, i.e. free solar, that happens because Chinese manufacturing capacity is overbuilt. Oh, the ironies.

What happened next- Copenhagen failed. Ed beat his brother David to the leadership of the Labour Party, by the narrowest of margins. Ed then lost the 2015 election, but is now Starmer’s energy guy. Points for tenacity, I guess.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

November 19, 1943 – FIDO used for the first time

November 19, 1958 – doctor warns of long-term problem of carbon dioxide build-up

November 19, 1960 – Guy Callendar gives advice on unpopularity of C02 theory

November 19, 1990 – “The US should agree to stabilising CO2 levels”

November 19, 1998 – John Howard trolls Australia by appointing Mr Coal as Environment Ambassador – All Our Yesterdays

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

Categories
Science Scientists United Kingdom

November 17,  2009 – “Climategate” hack

Sixteen years ago, on this day, November 17th,  ,2009 email hack at the Climatic Research Unit of University of East Anglia.

“Early on the morning of November 17, Gavin Schmidt sat down at his computer and entered his password. It didn’t work. Strange, he thought. He tried a few other accounts and none of them worked, either. Now he was alarmed. As a leading climatologist with NASA’s Goddard Institute in Manhattan, he’d been hacked before. He was used to e-mails from people who disapproved of his work, 

wikipedia

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 scientists doing “impact science” work on climate had been attacked, smeared and intimidated since 1989 (e.g. hatchet jobs on James Hansen).  It had hit an early peak in 1994-5 when the IPCC’s second assessment report was underway. It had continued against Michael Mann for the “hockey stick”. 

The specific context was the Copenhagen climate sumit was about to start – and those opposed to action were going to do absolutely anything they could to reduce the chances of progress (the chances were vanishingly low, btw).

What I  think we can learn from this – we should see this attack as part of a longer trend.

What happened next – there were various investigations and it was deemed a “nothing burger” – except the denialists, obvs, cried ‘cover-up’.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

November 17, 1869 – Suez Canal opens – All Our Yesterdays

November 17, 1968 -The Observer covers carbon dioxide pollution… – All Our Yesterdays

November 17, 1968 – UK national newspaper flags carbon dioxide danger…

November 17, 1978 – British Wind Energy Association launches – 

November 17, 1980 – International meeting about carbon dioxide build up.

November 17, 1994 – “When consumption is no longer sustainable”… – 

November 17, 2018 – XR occupy five bridges in London

 November 17, 2023 – two degrees warmer, for the first time… – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage

November 16, 2009 – who is going to PAY for CCS? Well, you, obvs.

Sixteen years ago, on this day, November 16th, 2009,

A recently-released report by the World Coal Institute (WCI) on how to finance the experimental Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology for power stations, reminded me of a cartoon from years ago by the Australian cartoonist, Patrick Cook. In the cartoon, a huge bloated budgie (parakeet) with the letters “BHP” emblazoned on its chest, was holding a gun to its own head while proclaiming to a cowering politician, “Hand over the loot or the budgie gets it.” (At the time, BHP — which owned iron ore mines and steel mills — was haggling for government support for its ailing steel operations).

Burton. B. 2009. The Coal Industry Wants Your Cash to Save Them. PR Watch, 16 November.

http://www.prwatch.org/news/2009/11/8696/coal-industry-wants-your-cash-save-them

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 there had been a brief flurry of interest in CCS in 1989-1990, but then people had realised how much it would cost and moved on to other schemes.  By 2000 the bandwagon was rolling again, not quickly, but rolling. 

The specific context was 2009 is kind of peak-CCS, because the Global Financial Crisis then wrecked the EU’s proposed funding model for it.

What I think we can learn from this – the rich are not going to dip into their own pockets. They’re gonna use the state to do the R&D…

What happened next – CCS fell in a heap. Has since been propped up, a bit like “Weekend at Bernie’s”, frankly.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

November 16, 1982 – development aid and the greenhouse effect… – All Our Yesterdays

November 16, 1994 – Industry lobbyists trot out “sky will fall” argument against emissions cuts. Again. Of course. As ever.

November 16, 1995 – another skirmish in the IPCC war

November 16, 2021 – Chancellor cuddles up to oil bosses, of course.

Categories
Australia Business Responses Carbon Capture and Storage

October 30, 2009 – QRC bullshit about CCS – “first commercial scale CCS electricity generator by about 2015”

Sixteen years ago, on this day, October 30th, 2009 QRC hype report on Carbon Capture and Storage

“Queensland Resources Council chief executive Michael Roche told brisbanetimes.com.au he believed government and industry support would ensure the technology was put in place much sooner.

“I’m confident we will have our first commercial-scale carbon capture and storage electricity generator by about 2014 or 2015,” he said in a report that was published yesterday.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 401ppm. 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 the coal industry had decided that CCS was a card to play while increasing exports. As long as the taxpayer picked up the tab for research and development, of course. 

The specific context was that 2009 was peak CCS hype around the world. 

What I think we can learn from this – gangs of rich people (“Resource Coucils”) are going to say whatever is convenient for other people to believe. There are plenty of tame stenographers willing to report it dutifully and accurately. 

What happened next – CCS collapsed in a heap, of course.

Meanwhile, getting renewables projects going in Queensland just got much harder…

Queensland’s latest wind farm kill sends shockwaves through renewables industry | RenewEconomy

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 30, 2006 – Stern Review publlshed.

Categories
Activism Australia Carbon Pricing Economics of mitigation

Oct 15, 2009 – The Australian Conservation Foundation models back

On this day sixteen years ago the ACF tried to stop Kevin Rudd from giving away more and more “compensation” (i.e. taxpayers’ money) to polluters.

http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/13467/20120118-0823/www.acfonline.org.au/uploads/res/Financial_Impact_CPRS_151009.pdf

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 ACF had pushed as hard as it could for carbon pricing in 1994-5, and been defeated. Various carbon pricing schemes had been defeated in the subsequent decade and a half. What a horrible settler colony, with such contempt for everything.

The specific context was that business had been fighting hard, and winning all the time. The CPRS had already failed to get through parliament once, and a second go was coming up.

What I think we can learn from this – you can – and have to – try using your opponents’ tools, but don’t expect to get that much traction.

What happened next – Abbott toppled Turnbull as Leader of the Liberal Party/Opposition. Rudd’s dreadful scheme fell, but he lacked the spine to call a double dissolution election and Julia Gillard had to clean up his mess.

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 15, 1971 – “Man’s Impact on the Climate” published

October 15, 1985 – Villach meeting supercharges greenhouse concerns…

October 15, 1999- Australian economy headed for trouble because of carbon dioxide emissions, admits government through gritted teeth. – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Australia Carbon Pricing

 August 13, 2009 – Senate kibboshes “CPRS”

Sixteen years ago, on this day, August 13th, 2009, Kevin Rudd’s car crash of a climate “policy” began to collide with, well, everything…

Endeavoring to keep its commitment to enact the CPRS into law prior to the meetings in Copenhagen in December 2009, the CPRS Bill was introduced to Parliament on May 14, 2009, and was passed by the House of Representatives on June 4th. It was defeated, however, in the Australian Senate on August 13, 2009, by a 42 to 30 vote where the Opposition, the Greens, and two independent Senators hold the balance of power. Carbon Capture and Storage:

Wishful Thinking or a Meaningful Part of the Climate Change Solution MICHAEL I. JEFFERY, Q.C.*

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd had used climate change as one of his ways of attacking John Howard (Prime Minister from 1996 to 2007). Once in office he avoided doing simple powerful good things and instead went for a complex  “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme” that was, by this time very clearly, a give-away to the most powerful industries – the carbon intensive manufacturing, fossil fuel export and energy production sectors.

The specific context was that Rudd and his supporters were not bothered about the legislation the first time – they expected it and enjoyed watching the Liberals and Nationals tear each other apart.

What I think we can learn from this is that Rudd was terrible on many things. Most consequentially, climate.

What happened next  The CPRS was re-introduced in November, and defeated. It brought down Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull, who was replaced by Tony Abbott.  Rudd was delighted, thinking that Copenhagen would be a success and he could come back and defeat Abbott… tumbleweed…. Funny how life turns out, isn’t it?

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

August 13, 1882 – William “Coal Question” Jevons dies

August 13, 1991 – clouds and silver linings 

August 13, 2007 – Newsweek nails denialists

Categories
United States of America

August 6, 2009 – Governor Paterson versus the Greenhouse Effect

Sixteen years ago, on this day, August 6th, 2009, 

New York Governor Paterson Sets Greenhouse Gas Targets, Planning Requirements

Executive Order Sets Goal of Reducing Emissions 80 Percent by 2050 and Requires Comprehensive Climate Action Plan

On August 6th, Governor David A. Paterson signed Executive Order No. 24 setting a goal to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This target is consistent with President Obama’s GHG reduction goals and the targets established in the Waxman-Markey bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on June 29, 2009, as well as bills currently being debated in the U.S. Senate. It is also consistent with long-term recommendations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 387ppm. 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 governors had been pushing climate action during the “Dubya” Bush administrations, when the Federal government was doing less than nothing. And there were executive announcements and so forth stretching back to the late 1980s – see this one from New Jersey’s governor in 1989.

The specific context was that the Copenhagen “last chance to save the earth” conference was coming up in December.

What I think we can learn from this is that talk is cheap.

What happened next. I don’t know if New York a) produced a plan and then b) did anything to make it happen. I have my doubts about it…

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

Salkin, P. E. (2014). The Executive and the Environment: A Look at the Last Five Governors in New York. Pace Envtl. L. Rev., 31, 705.

Also on this day: 

August 6, 1945 – Hiroshima

August 6, 1990 – another climate documentary shown…

August 6, 1992 – Australian environmentalists and businesses united… in disgust at Federal bureaucrats #auspol #climate

Categories
Cartoons

June 26, 2009 – Impact on cartoonists

Sixteen years ago, on this day, June 26th, 2009,

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 387ppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Copenhagen climate conference was coming, and cartoonists had scope to tackle the implications of climate change.  But it’s always hard to find a new angle. Bizarro succeeded.

What I think we can learn from this – gallows humour is allowed.

What happened next. The emissions climbed. The concentrations climbed. The consequences climbed. The seas rose.

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 26, 1991 “environment is not flavor of the month any more” – All Our Yesterdays