Categories
Russia

July 30,  2010 – practically everything is burning

Sixteen years ago, on this day, July 30th, 2010,  

Dimitry Medvedev “practically everything is burning” https://www.americansecurityproject.org/dmitri-medvedev-gets-it-why-dont-we/

…. But what you probably missed, is that the fires have been fed by drought and heat, prompting even Russia’s President Dmitri Medvedev to note the link between climate change and national security.

According to Time

on July 30, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev announced that in 14 regions of the country, “practically everything is burning. The weather is anomalously hot.” Then, as TV cameras zoomed in on the perspiration shining on his forehead, Medvedev announced, “What’s happening with the planet’s climate right now needs to be a wake-up call to all of us, meaning all heads of state, all heads of social organizations, in order to take a more energetic approach to countering the global changes to the climate.”

As Time goes on to note, that’s a far cry from a Russian President who has been skeptical of climate change in the past–but not entirely so.  Readers of this blog know, for example, that Medvedev convened a meeting of his national security council earlier this year to discuss the risks of climate change.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 Soviet scientists were switched on to the possibility of climate change – did some of the early key work on it. It was mentioned in Soviet Weekly (terrible tabloid). Trouble is, there was always the sneaking (and wrong) idea that a warmer world would mean more growing of crops in the tundra etc.

The specific context was in 2010 we were having what now counts as a relatively mild summer.  Now is the key word in that sentence.

What I think we can learn from this – the Fafocene has begun.

What happened next – nobody learned anything and everyone and everything is going to die a quite nasty death. So it goes.

xxx

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
Australia

July 23, 2010 – Gillard proposes ‘Citizens’ Assemblies’

Sixteen years ago, on this day, July  11st, 2010,

On Friday, 23 July 2010, at the end of the first week of the 2010 Australian federal election campaign, Prime Minister Julia Gillard held a press conference to announce her commitments regarding Australian Labor Party (ALP) climate change policy.[1] Central to that announcement was her proposal to convene a “Citizens’ Assembly” (CA)[2] that would involve 150 randomly-selected Australian citizens.

http://apo.org.au/commentary/growing-politically-conducting-national-conversation-climate-change

Growing up politically: conducting a national conversation on climate change Lyn Carson 9 September 2010

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 initially under the Labor government of Bob Hawke, from 1988 to 1990 or so, the Labor party had (under significant social and electoral pressure) pretended to give a damn about the climate issue. From 1991 or so, the mask slipped. Once in opposition, they found it useful to use climate as a stick to beat the government of Liberal John Howard (1996-2007). Once in office, Kevin Rudd had comprehensively bollocksed it all up, because he was desperate to keep the powerful mining and energy companies sweet.  

The specific context was that new Prime Minister Julia Gillard was keen to try to kick the whole issue into the long grass so she could get on with other, more important (sic) issues.

What I think we can learn from this – there is (or might be) time for ‘citizens’ assemblies’, but this wasn’t it.

What happened next – Gillard’s proposal was rightly derided, and rendered irrelevant by the results of the 2010 election, after which, in order to form a government, she had to do a deal with a bunch of independents, and they all insisted on a carbon price, not a citizens’ assembly.

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 23, 1979 – Charney Report people meet – will conclude “yep, global warming is ‘A Thing’.”

July 23, 1979 – Charney Report meeting begins 

July 23, 1987 – Calvin (and Hobbes) versus climate change!

July 23, 1998 – denialists stopping climate action. Again.

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

July 19, 2010 – Stephen Schneider dies

Sixteen years ago, on this day, July  11st, 2010 scientist Stephen Schneider died.

Stephen H. Schneider 1945-2010

Dr. Stephen H. Schneider was the Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies, Professor of Biology, Professor (by courtesy) of Civil and Environ mental Engineering, and a Senior Fellow in the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University. Dr. Schneider received his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering and Plasma Physics from Columbia University in 1971. He studied the role of greenhouse gases and suspended particulate material on climate as a postdoctoral fellow at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. He was awarded a postdoctoral fellowship at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in 1972 and was a member of the scientific staff of NCAR from 1973-1996, where he co-founded the Climate Project.

Internationally recognized for research, policy analysis and outreach in climate change, Dr. Schneider focused on climate change science, integrated assessment of ecological and economic impacts of human-induced climate change, and identifying viable climate policies and technological solutions. He consulted with federal agencies and/or White House staff in the Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, Clinton, G.W. Bush, and Obama administrations.

[continues]

https://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/References/Biography.html

Trenbeth at American Meteorological Jan 2011.  

https://ams.confex.com/ams/91Annual/webprogram/Paper180230.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was xxxppm. 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 Schneider’s first encounter with climate change/media had come in 1971, when he had co-authored a paper which got taken up as “an ice age is coming”. By the mid-1970s he was writing books like The Genesis Strategy and appearing on the Johnny Carson show

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

. By the late 1970s he was giving clips to documentary makers like this –

Schneider was in Australia for the Greenhouse 88 conference(s), fielding media enquiries and generally doing a good job of being a public intellectual.

He was then first (iirc) ‘thinker in residence’ in South Australia.

Anyway, he died too young and there was a lot more he had to contribute.

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

September 9, 1971 – Stephen Schneider’s letter, and a World Model

December 29, 1972 – Schneider meets Sullivan

November 1, 1975 – Stephen Schneider tries to clear up the “Carbon Dioxide Climate Confusion.”

January 28, 1990 –  Stephen Schneider and the dirty crystal ball.

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
Activism Canada

March 3,  2010 – protest about tar sands

Sixteen years ago, on this day, March 3rd, 2010, 

RBS bankrolling tar sands protest

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 390ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that Canada has been looking at exploiting tar sands for a long time. Though they weren’t, largely, economically viable, however they became so for various reasons, technological advances, willingness to pollute the crap out of everything. And therefore protest movements sprung up to try and stop this insanity. There’s not much else to say.

And here is a google search…

Key Impacts on Oil Sands Development

  • Equalization of Tax Treatment: Before 1996, in-situ projects (which use wells) were treated differently than open-pit mines. The 1996 changes aligned them, allowing both to benefit from rapid capital write-offs, which encouraged the development of complex in-situ technologies like Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD).
  • Investment Surge: Combined with Alberta’s 1995 generic royalty regime (which featured a low 1% royalty until costs were recovered), the 1996 federal tax change helped trigger a 300% increase in capital investment in the oil sands after 1997.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&q=what+was+the+impact+on+oilsands+development+of+the+federal+CCA+change+in+1996+to+100%25+rate

The specific context was that we are dumb as a rock.  I am sure there is other specific context, but I can’t be bothered to look, and the key thing is that we are as dumb as a rock.

What I think we can learn from this is that our leaders chase the money and are wholly owned subsidiary Meat Puppets, for the most part. 

What happened next

The protest went ahead. In all probability A few skulls got cracked, a few cops got their jollies, got their rocks off. A few people got charged. Maybe some even got convicted, and the emissions kept climbing. 

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

Also on this day: 

March 3, 1980 – International Workshop on the energy climate Interactions in Germany

March 3, 1990 –  “A greenhouse energy strategy : sustainable energy development for Australia” launched … ignored #auspol

March 3, 1990 – Energy efficiency could save billions a year, Australian government told (says ‘whatevs’).

March 3, 1990 – The Science Show on the “backlash to Greenhouse warnings”

Categories
Denial

February 20, 2010 – Chirstopher Booker being a tit, for once

Sixteen years ago, on this day, February 20, 2010,

In an article which appeared in The Sunday Telegraph on 20 February 2010, Christopher Booker purported to correct the misquotation contained in The Real Global Warming Disaster but this article contained yet further inaccuracies.[30] As a result, Houghton referred the matter to the Press Complaints Commission (PCC Reference 101959). Following the PCC’s involvement, The Sunday Telegraph published on 15 August 2010 a letter of correction by Houghton stating his true position.[31] An article supportive of Houghton also appeared in the edition of 21 May 2010 of New Scientist.[32]

The correct quotation was, “If we want a good environmental policy in the future we’ll have to have a disaster. It’s like safety on public transport. The only way humans will act is if there’s been an accident.”[33]

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 390ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that the journalist Christopher Booker (a founder and first editor of Private Eye) had been writing various idiotic denialist screeds for a while. There was an audience for them among a certain kind of person who doesn’t want to admit that all the nice things that we have come with a price tag, and that people who are enjoying more of the nice things than other people are might have a responsibility to cut back and to help those other people, because that would be, well, that would be, in their eyes, an unfair infringement on their “liberty” and so forth and so forth. Also these people are enraged that it turns out that the dirty hippies who they’d been disparaging by this time for 40 years were right. 

So the way it works is that some awful book gets published, It doesn’t matter that it’s full of inaccuracies, that it has had no real peer review, it’s a book, and in the eyes of journalists, that makes it newsworthy.

And in the eyes of editors with pages to fill, well, they can get op eds and excerpts out of it, “all the adverts fit to print, all the news printed to fit,” and so on. 

And so what you see here is Booker just making shit up and being wrong and back and forth, back and forth, other people like scientist John Houghton having to waste precious time and energy, which Houghton had been having to do since, well, the early 1990s.

The specific context was that Copenhagen had ended in nothing, the “Climategate” bullshit was in full flow and the denialists had the winds at their backs.

What I think we can learn from this is that Christopher Booker may have been a talented journalist early on, but as an assessor of science and as a man of honour, he was a complete failure.

And those who took comfort in his lies, distortions, exaggerations are also frankly, failures. 

And of course, the Telegraph has continued to be a failure, as we see from its repeated apologies and quote clarifications in its ongoing, frankly psychotic campaign against net zero and Ed Miliband.

What happened next: The denial never stopped. It never will. These people painted themselves into a corner. To admit that they’d been wrong would destroy them emotionally, cognitively, so they won’t, but then they’ll pivot to, well, it’s too late to do anything about it, regardless of what the cause might be.

Booker died in 2019

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 20, 1966 – US Senators told about carbon build-up by physicist

February 20, 1970 – South Australian premier sets up an Environment Committee

February 20, 2017 “Clean Coal” money being spent on PR

Categories
Denial United States of America

January 20, 2010 – RFK on the side of the angels. WTAF happened… ?  

Sixteen ago, on this day, January 20th, 2010, 

“It was an event billed as the smackdown between the baddest coal baron around and the environmental heir to the liberal Kennedy legacy, live on stage and in the heart of Appalachia mine country. Stage right, appropriately, was Don Blankenship, chairman of Massey Energy, a meaty impassive presence, his Kentucky drawl never picking up speed or volume. On the left, Robert F Kennedy Jr, who has spent his life defending waterways, making lawyerly argument out of staccato bursts of statistics.

The pairing at the University of Charleston was the perfect personification of America’s deep divides: Republican versus Democrat; old industry v new, global warming denier v impassioned advocate for climate change laws.”

Goldberg, S. 2010.  Kennedy takes on the coal baron in mountain duel. The Guardian, January 22.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 390ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was that his dad RFK Snr was making the “right” noises about conservation and economics a couple of months before he got whacked in 1968.

The specific context was RFK wasn’t bonkers. Or he was, but hiding it better?

What we learn is that people can have some good ideas and then completely off the rails.

What happened next

Yeah, well, read a newspaper. He’s killing millions, helping diseases were were keeping in check stage a comeback.

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: 

January 20, 1992 – Gambling on climate… and losing #auspol

January 20, 2011 – Shell tries to change the subject from its own emissions   

January 20, 2014 – Gummer sledges “green extremists”

Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage

December 27, 2010 – Queensland government withdraws ZeroGen CCS funding

Fifteen years ago, on this day, December 27th, 2010,

Queensland has axed its funding for a cutting-edge 530-MW power plant that was to run on gasified coal and store 90% of its greenhouse gas emissions underground through the use of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, just weeks after the project was short-listed to receive additional support from the Australian federal government, it was revealed at the weekend

Cooper, M. (2010) Queensland government withdraws ZeroGen CCS project funding 27 December Platts International Coal Report

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 as per the post a few days ago, CCS had been an ongoing strand of technophilia in Australia, breaking through into public awareness in 2004.

The specific context was – Copenhagen had fallen over, the numbers weren’t adding up and everyone was pulling the plug.

What I think we can learn from this – these are literally pipe-dreams.

What happened next – the CCS soap opera continued, because our Lords and Masters have no other option. They couldn’t possibly question the hyperconsumerism they have foisted upon us all. We’re so fubarred.

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: 

December 27, 1989 – Greenhouse effect = “socialist hokum”

December 27, 2004 – ACF boss says “cough up” – All Our Yesterdays

December 27, 2009 – Art exhibition in Copenhagen saves the world

Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage

December 23, 2010 – Can Australia afford CCS?

Fifteen years ago, on this day, December 23rd, 2010,

The world needs it, but strict budgets have forced Australia to scale back or cancel plans to advance the technology

BRISBANE, Australia — Environmental groups sounded the alarm when the government of the northeastern state of Queensland announced it would stop funding a zero-emissions power plant.

In those circles, rumors had been floating for weeks before the Dec. 19 decision that Queensland’s budget deficit-conscious premier and the coal companies were ready to pull the plug on the $4 billion ZeroGen plant.

Kirkland, J. 2010. Can Australia Afford Carbon Capture and Storage for Coal? Climatewire, December 23.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 from about 2004 Australian governments (federal and Queensland) had been bringing up CCS as a climate solution (god forbid we reduce emissions by, you know, leaving the coal and oil and gas in the ground and forging ahead with renewables).

The specific context was that for the the hype was hitting fever pitch.

What I think we can learn from this is that hype cycles are a thing.

What happened next – the plug got pulled on “Zerogen” days later. A separate failure of a CCS project, Gorgon, continues (failure at capturing and storing carbon – less of a failure at mitigation deterrence).

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: 

December 23, 1973 – Solar Patent issued

December 23, 2003 – Vestas opens Tasmanian wind turbine factory

December 23, 2009 – Kevin Rudd told to call double-dissolution #climate election… (spoiler – he didn’t)

Categories
Science United States of America

December 22, 2010 – James Hansen and Bill McKibben and the loaded dice…

Fifteen years ago, on this day, December 22nd, 2010,

“What we see happening with new record temperatures, both warm and cold, is in good agreement with what we predicted in the 1980s when I testified to Congress about the expected effect of global warming. I used coloured dice then to emphasize that global warming would cause the climate dice to be ‘loaded’—for risk of more extreme weather.”

James Hansen, Director, Goddard Institute for Space Studies, interview with Bill McKibben, 22 December 2010

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 Hansen has been banging on about carbon dioxide build-up for 50 years. His first foray into the world beyond science on this was in 1981. McKibben wrote a series of essays for the New Yorker that was then published as a book “The End of Nature”

The specific context was – that the UNFCCC conference in Copenhagen had been a farce, and it was clear things were gonna get out of hand.

What I think we can learn from this – being smart and right isn’t enough.

What happened next – Hansen and McKibben have gone on being smart and right.

The emissions have kept climbing. Who knows, maybe solar will reduce our energy emissions markedly. Who knows…

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: 

December 22, 1759 – “What have ye done?”

December 22, 1975 – “Scientist Warns of Great Floods if Earth’s Heat Rises” (surely “when”?)

December 22, 1978 – UK Energy Department chief scientist worries about CO2 levels and pressure to reduce them…

December 22, 1988 – Chico Mendes murdered

December 22, 1999 – Australian population growth and carbon reductions – not so easy… 

Categories
anti-reflexivity Australia Denial

November 25, 2010 – GB Tucker dies

Fifteen years ago, on this day, November 25th, 2010,

2010 GB Tucker dies, after writing a bunch of shite in the IPA Review after retirement (f.ex. November 30, 1994 – Another denialist dolt – “Global warming a clouded issue”)

In 1986, he was singing a different tune.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 Tucker had written the 1981 monograph on C02. (LINK)

The specific context was that upon retiring from the CSIRO’s Atmospheric Physics division Tucker had written a couple of dodgy denialist articles for the Institute of Public Affairs. An ignominious end to what could have been a reasonable career.

What I think we can learn from this – 1) people get Relevance Deprivation Syndrome.  2) Education is no real protection against being spectacularly wrong.

What happened next – denialism continued, obvs.

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 25, 1968 – First atmospheric layers collection of carbon dioxide… – All Our Yesterdays

November 25, 1993 – House of Commons briefing on carbon taxes

November 25, 2000 – CoP meeting ends in official disarray…