Tag: Greenpeace Australia

Categories
On This Day

On this Day: January 3rd –  transitions, Greenpeace, smoke and mirrors

Forty one years ago today, in the context of increasing alarm among scientists, a report about what you’d need to do to US energy systems (a LOT) was published.

January 3, 1984 – US report on energy transition to combat climate released.

Thirty eight years ago today a brilliant early “cli-fi” novel was reviewed. You should read this novel – it is astonishing.

January 3, 1988 – The Sea, The Summer, early Australian cli-fi, is reviewed.

Greenpeace try to shame George HW Bush into action, ahead of the Rio Earth Summit, as he visits Australia.  Didn’t work, but what else could they do?

Jan 3, 1992 – Greenpeace vs POTUS on Climate Change

Scientists again highlighting the bullshit of George HW Bush’s son, Dubya, who had won the crucial 2000 election… 5-4 in the Supreme Court…

January 3, 2007 – Smoke, Mirrors and Hot Air, says Union of Concerned Scientists

Are there other climate-related events that happened on this day that you think deserve a shout out? If so, let me know.

As ever, invite me on your podcast, etc etc.

Categories
Activism Australia Coal

December 5, 1994 – direct action against Yallourn coal power station, in Victoria

Thirty one years ago, on this day, December 5th, 1994,

“Conservation groups yesterday stepped up pressure on the Federal Government to adopt tougher measures to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. Federal Cabinet will consider the issue tomorrow.

In Yallourn, Greenpeace activists chained themselves across railway tracks used by coal trains which feed the Yallourn W power station.

They also unfurled a huge banner down the side of one of the station’s smoke stacks.”

 Birnbauer, B. 1994. Greenies Mount Campaign For Greenhouse Tax. The Age, December 6, p.3.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 359ppm. 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 Greenpeace Australia had had a boom and bust cycle in the late 1980s early 1990s, and had almost gone bankrupt. But it survived, and people wanted to take action…

The specific context was there were plans afoot to expand coal burning (and even exports of brown coal – I mean, wtaf?). Meanwhile, there was a carbon tax debate underway in Canberra.

What I think we can learn from this – direct action (albeit symbolic) against fossil fuel infrastructure has been going on for a generation.

What happened next – Greenpeace kept doing blockades, occupations etc. There was also a trend to protests in Melbourne (LINK).

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 5, 1952 & 2009 London sees climatic pollution events

December 5, 1994 – Taxing times for Australia, maybe… – All Our Yesterdays

December 5, 2002 – Australian Government CCS support begins…

Categories
Australia

August 28, 1977 – First  Australian“Greenpeace” action, against whaling 

Forty seven years ago, on this day, August 28th, 1977, the  first under-a-Greenpeace-banner action took place. It was against the last whaling in the English speaking world, Albany Western Australia 

On 28th August 1977, activists in inflatable zodiacs took on a whaling ship in Albany, Western Australia. And they won. Known back then as the ‘The Whale and Dolphin Coalition,’ they blockaded the Cheynes Beach whaling station for three weeks, drawing global media attention to the issue of commercial whaling.

In November 1978, Australia harpooned its last whale. This long blockade was the first-ever Greenpeace action in Australia – and it was the beginning of the end of our country’s whaling industry.

Source – https://media.greenpeace.org/archive/Greenpeace-Australia-Pacific-40th-Anniversary-27MZIFJXDAG7U.html

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 334ppm. As of 2024 it is 424ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that Australia was still permitting whaling, having perpetrated awful crimes for a couple of hundred years so that we could have lighting and so forth. You all should read Moby Dick. And this was the first Greenpeace Australia action. Greenpeace was then a very new beast, having been set up to protest nuclear testing. 

What we learn is Greenpeace got a foothold and then more in the Australian political scene. And then in 1985, I think the Rainbow Warrior got scuttled by French secret agents. Because France, because states and terrorism. 

What happened next. Greenpeace has kept going, with various peaks and troughs…

Whaling still happens – carried out by Iceland and Japan for “research”. We humans are a relentlessly barbaric species. And no, I’m not vegan. I’m a hypocrite like everyone else. 

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 28, 1971 – snarky opinion piece in New York Times. Stephen Schneider rebuts days later.

August 28, 2003 – EPA says Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant

Categories
Australia

November 12, 2012 – Greenpeace smeared by Queensland extractors, of course

Eleven years ago, on this day, November 12, 2012, the Queensland Resources Council got their retaliation in first…

Greenpeace hysteria threatens communities

Nov 12 2012

An internationally-funded campaign to shut down Queensland’s export coal industry was relying on exaggeration and misrepresentation in a bid to undermine regional communities, the Queensland Resources Council (QRC) told a conference in Brisbane today.

https://www.qrc.org.au/01_cms/details.asp?ID=3185

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 394ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Queensland Resources Council members knew that there was lots of money to be made in digging up and exporting stuff. And they didn’t like Greenpeace getting between them and their profits. And rather than argue the facts or talk about what the economy of the 21st century would need to be they decided – inevitably – to smear Greenpeace and use the lovely code word “hysterical,” which is always very gendered. Men don’t get called hysterical or possibly only homosexual men. And what they’re trying to do here is say that extractivism is man’s work. 

What I think we can learn from this

The gender aspect of this stuff (framing opponents as ‘hysterical) is worth considering (Cara Daggett etc).

What happened next

The attacks on environmentalists continued and escalated. Even WWF was in the firing line soon enough. And of course, the Queensland Government sat there and facilitated evermore mining. Of course it did. 

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.

Categories
Australia

October 20, 1997 – Greenpeace tries to give John Howard solar panels…

On this day, October 20  in 1997, Greenpeace activists found that they couldn’t GIVE away solar panels. Even to the Australian Prime Minister

1997 – Greenpeace activists install solar panels On Monday October 20, Greenpeace members occupied John Howard’s Sydney residence and installed some photovoltaic panels. It got front page coverage on most papers, and national TV. The ABC’s coverage included an interview with one of the police. He said ‘ Every thinking person should install solar panels on their house’

Source – Australian Views on Renewable Energy Caroline Le Couteur

See also here

SYDNEY, Australia (AP) _ More than 15 Greenpeace environmental activists on Monday stormed the gates of the prime minister’s official Sydney residence and scaled the house to set up six solar energy-collection panels.

They scaled the gates of Kirribilli House, on the north shore of Sydney Harbor right across from the Opera House, using ladders and climbed onto the second floor of the house to install solar panels to protest what they says is Australia’s neglect of solar energy technology.

Greenpeace climate campaigner Pat Keith Tarlo said they wanted to draw attention to the current global race to develop solar energy technology and to reduce the use of non-renewable fossil fuels.

“Australia is nowhere to be seen in this race,″ Tarlo said.

“It is a fantastic opportunity for Australian jobs and for Australian industry in solar technology, but at the moment the government is ignoring the possibilities.″

The activists placed banners on the roof which read: “Stop Climate Change Greenpeace″ and “Go Solar Greenpeace.″

Prime Minister John Howard was in Canberra to attend the opening of a session of Parliament, and there only appeared to be two security guards on the grounds who were unable to stop the protesters.

Police were deciding how to remove the protesters, who were still at the residence late Monday morning.

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 360.98ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

John Howard was trying to in full court press mode trying to avoid Australia having to adopt any emissions reductions at the upcoming Kyoto conference. Something he succeeded at admirably.

Why this matters. 

Fun stunts, what’s not to love?

What happened next?

Australia got a sweet sweet deal at Kyoto. And still did not ratify until 2007 (when Kevin Rud became Prime Minister).

But on Kyoto, see here (Veil of Kyoto article).

Categories
Australia

October 19, 2010 – Greenpeace trolls ANZ Bank

On this day, October 19 in 2010, Greenpeace Australia did another of their media-friendly stunts – this time a projection onto a bank, to combat greenwashing.

ANZ We Pollute Your World. On 19 October 2010 Greenpeace displayed a projection on the side of Yallourn W power station, in Moe, Victoria, as part of the campaign targeting the financing of Australia’s coal industry.[57]

Source

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 387.43ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – Australia was wrestling with a price on carbon (emissions trading? Great Big Tax on Everything?)

Why this matters. 

Greenwash is insidious, invidious, and needs to be challenged.

What happened next?

Greenpeace kept going, the greenwash kept going, the emissions and atmospheric concentrations kept climbing. Ooops.

See tomorrow’s post for a far more entertaining Greenpeace stunt!

Categories
Activism Australia UNFCCC United States of America

1992, Jan 3: Greenpeace vs POTUS on Climate Change

On this day, 30 years ago, to coincide with the visit of President George HW Bush to Australia, Greenpeace Australia took out newspaper adverts of the Statue of Liberty with smoke billowing from her torch, calling on the United States to drastically reduce its carbon emissions. 

The context for this was that negotiations for the climate treaty to be signed in Rio later that year were well underway. And all the signs were that the US would play a spoiling role. 

This matters, because that’s exactly what Uncle Sam did. The French said rightly, that targets and timetables for emissions reductions by wealthy countries should be included in the text of the treaty. The Americans replied, “if you put those in, we’re not coming.” The French blinked, reasoning that timetables and targets could be inserted later. They were at Kyoto, vastly inadequate, but there. And then the Americans didn’t ratify and withdrew from the process.

We are still living with the consequences of this. And our children, other people’s children, other people’s children will all also live with those. Not to mention all the other species we “share” this planet with. 

It’s always worth remembering that these agreements that we live with now were the result of previous proposals, compromises and in this case -as in many others – naked veto power.