Tag: 2022

Categories
United Nations

March 31, 2002 – UN Secretary General again

Four years ago, on this day, March 31st, 2022,


The United Nations Secretary-General, António Guterres, on 31 March 2022, established a High-Level Expert Group on the Net-Zero Emissions Commitments of Non-State Entities to develop stronger and clearer standards for net-zero emissions pledges by non-State entities – including businesses, investors, cities, and regions – and speed up their implementation. 

With the launch of the report “Integrity Matters: Net Zero commitments by Businesses, Financial Institutions, Cities and Regions” at the UN Climate Conference (COP27) in Sharm-el Sheikh, Egypt, the Group has successfully finalized its work and delivered on its mandate.

“We must have zero tolerance for net-zero greenwashing,” said the Secretary-General at the launch event that took place on 8 November 2022. The report provides clarity in four key areas – environmental integrity, credibility, accountability, and the role of governments.   https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/high-level-expert-group#:~:text=%E2%80%9CWe%20must%20have%20zero%20tolerance,and%20the%20role%20of%20governments.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 373ppm. As of 2026 it is 428ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The broader context was the United Nations had been wanging on about the environment since sort of 1968-69. A previous Secretary General, U Thant, had even mentioned carbon dioxide build up as a problem in early 1969 and here we are, 33 years after that, and the Warnings Keep Coming. The Warnings Keep Coming.

The specific context   President George W Bush of the United States had pulled the US out of negotiating the Kyoto Protocol, which was the mechanism by which industrialised nations were supposed to commit to reducing their carbon dioxide emissions. So it was pretty obvious that the wheels on the bandwagon were, if not off, then wobbling on their axles and needed alignment.

What I think we can learn from this is that the UN is basically the League of Nations only. It’s gone on for a lot longer. 

What happened next. More Secretaries General, more shit fuckery from the United States under Obama and Biden and Trump. But of course, it’s not like the United States is the only villain here. We all are on a beautiful planet that we are basically destroying. And I look at the swans and the ducks and the moorhens, a moorhen giving itself a good bath here. And I. I can’t say I’m a huge fan of the greed and stupidity and selfishness that is a significant part of our species.

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: 

 March 31, 1973 – Protest in Piccadilly Circus

March 31, 1998 – another report about #climate and business in the UK

March 31, 1998 – two business-friendly climate events in UK and Australia

March 31, 2007 – Earth Hour (the most putrid kind of virtue signalling)

Categories
Greenwash Incumbent strategies

September 23, 2022 – Ad company says no to fossil fuels (spoilers -no, it doesn’t)

On this day in 2022 the the CEO of the ad agency (well, behemoth) IPG announced it was revising its policy on fossil fuels.

In what the company said is a first for the industry, Interpublic Group and its agencies are now proactively reviewing the climate impacts of prospective clients that operate in the oil, energy and utility sectors before accepting new work.

IPG said it was working with climate change consultant Planet + Purpose Solutions to develop a set of questions that the company expects prospective clients to affirm before agreeing to partner with them.

The questions include:  

Have these potential clients set specific emission reduction goals that are aligned with 1.5°C ambition to achieve net-zero GHG emissions by 2050 or sooner with no greater than 10% off-setting?

Are these companies publishing clear climate reporting, including scope, baseline, timeline, and the tracking of Scopes 1, 2 and 3 emissions?

https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/378288/ipg-revises-policy-on-energy-utility-clients.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 418ppm. 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 white colour people with educations and eyes were beginning to see the webs of complicity, and not liking it so much. And were trying to change the system from within (as per Leonard Cohen).

The specific context was that “creatives” etc within the agency were pressuring for a pledge.

What I think we can learn from this. You can – with effort and luck – get some promises of action from our Lords and Masters.

What happened next – yeah, you should read this. 

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: 

September 23, 1986 -Joe Biden suggests urgent #climate action…

September 23, 2013 – Media Watch versus climate denialists …

September 23, 2014 – Obama gives a wonderful speech about climate change. We are saved. – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Carbon Dioxide Removal technosalvationism United States of America

April 12, 2022 – Big beasts put money into carbon removal

Three years ago, on this day, April 12th, 2022,

“an alliance of prominent Silicon Valley companies—including Google, Meta, Shopify, and the payment company Stripe—announced that it is purchasing $925 million in carbon removal over the next eight years. In a world awash in overhyped corporate climate commitments, this is actually a big deal”  https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/04/big-tech-investment-carbon-removal/629545/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 418ppm. As of 2025 it is 427ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was having actively opposed any carbon mitigation, or sat around while the fossil interests opposed it (amounts to the same thing) for thirty plus years, now “good” corporates were realising that it was very late in the day for everything, including their reputations. So, promising to invest in unicorn technologies like carbon removals was a think.

What I think we can learn from this

Only unicorn technologies can save us.

What happened next

MARC TO CHECK OUT WHERE THESE ARE UP TO

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 12, 1955 – Coventry Evening Telegraph – “Melting Ice Could Menace the World” – All Our Yesterdays

April 12, 1992 – seminar asks “How sustainable is Australian Energy?” (proposes switch to gas)

April 12, 1993 – “environmental economics” gets a puff piece

Categories
Antarctica

March 18, 2022 – Antarctic has a day 38.5 degrees above seasonal average.

Three years ago, on this day, March 18th, 2022,

On 18 March, 2022, scientists at the Concordia research station on the east Antarctic plateau documented a remarkable event. They recorded the largest jump in temperature ever measured at a meteorological centre on Earth. According to their instruments, the region that day experienced a rise of 38.5C above its seasonal average: a world record. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/06/simply-mind-boggling-world-record-temperature-jump-in-antarctic-raises-fears-of-catastrophe

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 418ppm. As of 2025 it is 427ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that we’re starting to see, we have been seeing for 20 or 30 years, not just weather events that people thought wouldn’t happen, but that couldn’t happen. In some cases, perhaps many cases, that’s based on our overconfidence in our models and our intellects and our inability to see ramifications at a distance without going or mystic woo- woo New Age.

What I think we can learn from this is that we don’t know nearly as much as we think we do about these absurdly complex and I mean complex. Not complicated. I mean complex systems and systems of systems. 

But against that backdrop, we do know that if you pour billions and billions of tons of carbon dioxide, accumulating into more than 2 trillion of tons into the atmosphere,in a geological eye blink, there are going to be some interesting consequences. 

What happened next Antarctica continues to warm. The planet continues to warm. We seem to be off the leash. 

coNTExt – John Mercer article in Nature 1978

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 18, 1958 – Military man spots carbon dioxide problem

March 18, 1968 – Bobby Kennedy vs Gross National Product

 March 18, 1971 – “Weather modification took a macro-pathological turn”

March 18, 2010 – “Solar” by Ian McEwan released.

Categories
Activism United Kingdom

December 31, 2022 – We Quit, says some group everyone has forgotten about.

Two years ago, on this day, December 31st, 2022,

We Quit statement by Extinction Rebellion

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 419ppm. As of 2024 it is 425ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that XR had been in the usual death spiral of diminishing returns. That happens to all overblown and overambitious social movement organisations who don’t understand that they’re a symptom rather than a cause. And so in order to grab a little bit more attention and try and stitch together a wider coalition or be part of a wider coalition, they made this clickbaity announcement that they were “quitting.” All they were quitting was the disruptive stuff, which was being taken on by Just Stop Oil anyway. 

What we learn is, well, have a look at this article I wrote in the Conversation, then tell me I’m wrong. 

What happened next? They didn’t get 100,000 people on a day or anywhere near it. And the main thing in my inbox from Extinction Rebellion is stuff I already knew and emails pleading for more money.

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: 

December 31, 1997 – Government slags off Australian Conservation Foundation

December 31, 2012 – Murdoch employee throws predictable inaccurate shite at Greens…

December 31, 2022 – FT publishes letter about Thatcher and Just Stop Oil

Categories
Activism

November 7, 2022 – journalist covering JSO protest arrested 

One year ago, on this day, November 7, 2022, Hertfordshire Police arrest a journo covering a Just Stop Oil protest.

On 21 Dec the police have to admit they breached his human rights…

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 416ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that various police forces had clearly got the message from various Home Secretaries that it was open season on protesters and journalists. “Who will rid us of this troublesome priest/freelance journalist.” 

What was interesting was that there was still outrage and fear and even a backing down by the Hertfordshire police. Whether that lasts or whether the forces of darkness have successfully chipped away at another of the hard-won protections remains to be seen. 

What I think we can learn from this even if it’s a game and we’re cynical, you need to defend laws protecting people.

What happened next

More JSO protests, now with added violence from bystanders. The government wanting to use the word “extremist” against anyone it doesn’t like… The usual slide into authoritarianism…

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.