Tag: Jule Charney

Categories
United States of America

1979 report warns of warming world (CO2 Newsletter Vol. 1, no. 2)

The carbon dioxide issue attracted more and more attention from scientists through the 1970s. They worried that plans to expand energy production using fossil fuels would lead to catastrophe. They (and some far-sighted politicians) began to lobby President Carter, and in July 1977 Carter’s Science Advisor Frank Press wrote a memo to Carter about it. But Carter as trying to boost the “synfuels” (synthetic fuels, basically turning coal into liquid fuel) as a way of reducing vulnerability to price shocks.

In early 1979 Press asked top scientists to look at whether the CO2 problem was indeed a real issue to worry about. An ad hoc panel, chaired by Jule Charney (a very big fish), met for a couple of weeks in July, and then released its report, under the title Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment. In October 1979 William Barbat released the first issue of his CO2 Newsletter. The lead article on the second issue’s front page was about the Charney report.

Report to president’s adviser: CO2 buildup can change climate

The introduction of the CO2 issue into U.S. energy policy moved a step closer in November as a scientific advisory panel reported “If the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere is indeed doubled… our best estimate is that changes in global average temperature of the order of 3 degrees C will occur and that this will be accompanied by significant changes in regional climatic patterns.”

At the request of Frank Press, science adviser to the President, the National Academy of Sciences had convened this group of experts who had little previous involvement in CO2 studies to make an impartial examination of the validity of CO2 forecasts.

The group stated in its report that the basic model relating CO2 to global warming is correct, so far as they can see. “We have tried but have been unable to find any overlooked or underestimated physical effects that could reduce the currently estimated global warming due to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 to negligible proportions or reverse them altogether.”

The report is summarized in Science 23 November 1979 under the title “CO2 in Climate: Gloomsday Predictions Have No Fault.” The panel was chaired by Jule G. Charney, MIT.

What happened next?

This is the famous Charney Report – interestingly, it didn’t stop Frank Press trying to chide Gus Speth into silence the following year.  April 14, 1980 – Carter’s scientist, Frank Press, pushes back against CEQ report

Citations

Barbat, W. (1979) “Report to President’s adviser: CO2 buildup can change the climate.” CO2 Newsletter, Vol. 1, No 2, p. 1

Wade, N. 1979. CO2 in Climate: Gloomsday Predictions Have No Fault. Science, Nov 23.Vol 206, Issue 4421 pp. 912-913 DOI: 10.1126/science.206.4421.912.b

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

July 23, 1979 – Charney Report meeting begins

Forty six years ago, on this day, July 23rd, 

1979 Ad Hoc Study Group on C02 and Climate at Woods Hole from 23 to 27 “Charney Report”

http://web.atmos.ucla.edu/~brianpm/download/charney_report.pdf

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 337ppm. 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 through the 1970s scientists working on climatology, pollution, energy, food were starting to study carbon dioxide build-ups effects and saying in effect “er, we may have a serious problem on our hands”. This was true especially in (parts of) Europe and the US.

The specific context was that the Carter Administration was rather taken with shale oil as a way of securing “energy independence”. This raised the question of CO2 build-up to serious concern, and Jule Charney was asked to come up with a “definitive” answer to whether it was something to take seriously.

What I think we can learn from this – sometimes an issue will be “entrained” because of another one (in fact, that is surely the norm, but we struggle to understand it). In this case, an “environmental” issue gets a boost because of energy policy debates….

What happened next Charney et al basically said “there’s no reason to believe that a doubling in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide – which are likely by 2050 or so – will do anything other than result in an increase of global average temperatures of somewhere between 1.5 and 3.5 degrees.”

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: 

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

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

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

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

October 12, 1976 – Jule Charney throws (private) shade on fellow climatologists…

On this day, October 12 in 1976, an eminent US scientist was dismissive (in a personal letter) of Stephen Schneider et al.

12 Oct 1976 None of the “speculative ideas of people like … Schneider on future climate change are worth the paper (usually newspaper) they are written on. They mislead the public and they do the field harm,” Charney concluded in a separate letter.

Jule  Charney to Warren Kornberg, 12 October 1976, Box 13 – NSF, 1955-81, Papers of Jule Charney,  MIT Institute Archives, Cambridge, MA. 

(Henderson, 2014 Dilemmas of Reticence)

[The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 328.72ppm. At time of writing it was 421ishppm- but for what it is now,well, see here for the latest.]

The context was this – 

In the mid 1970s there was a flurry of books about climate change and its impacts. Only a very few of them focussed on the importance of carbon dioxide build-up – others saw the problem in dust, or ‘waste heat’. The grand old men of the field – Charney, Landsberg et al, feared that popularisation/tabloid style claims would damage the credibility of the field. 

Why this matters. 

Scientists – justifiably – worry about large claims and whether they are sound, since if the claims and predictions turn out to be wrong, all scientists suffer.

What happened next?

Charney changed his tune in 1979, agreeing that unless something very odd indeed happened, then a doubling of atmospheric CO2 would lead to serious warming…

Schneider went on to do much more great work.

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

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

On this day, 23 July 1979, the  “Ad Hoc Study Group on C02 and Climate” begins at Woods Hole, giving us the  “Charney Report.”

Short version – a scientist (Gordon MacDonald) and a Friends of the Earth activist (Rafe Pomerance) had managed to get President Jimmy Carter’s science advisor (Frank Press) to get Carter to request a study on whether this “greenhouse effect” thing was gonna actually be the problem some were saying.

So folks met, under the leadership of one of the big original beasts of atmospheric science, Jule Charney.

And they came up with the view, “yes”.

See this excellent summary, written by Neville Nicholls, an Australian scientist

Here’s a flowery (but good) bit from Nathaniel Rich’s “Losing Earth”–

The scientists summoned by Jule Charney to judge the fate of civilization arrived on July 23, 1979, with their wives, children and weekend bags at a three-story mansion in Woods Hole, on the southwestern spur of Cape Cod. They would review all the available science and decide whether the White House should take seriously Gordon MacDonald’s prediction of a climate apocalypse. The Jasons had predicted a warming of two or three degrees Celsius by the middle of the 21st century, but like Roger Revelle before them, they emphasized their reasons for uncertainty. Charney’s scientists were asked to quantify that uncertainty. They had to get it right: Their conclusion would be delivered to the president. But first they would hold a clambake.

They gathered with their families on a bluff overlooking Quissett Harbor and took turns tossing mesh produce bags stuffed with lobster, clams and corn into a bubbling caldron. While the children scrambled across the rolling lawn, the scientists mingled with a claque of visiting dignitaries, whose status lay somewhere between chaperone and client — men from the Departments of State, Energy, Defense and Agriculture; the E.P.A.; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. They exchanged pleasantries and took in the sunset. It was a hot day, high 80s, but the harbor breeze was salty and cool. It didn’t look like the dawning of an apocalypse.

Why this matters. 

“We” really knew enough by the late 70s. Everything since then has been footnotes.

What happened next?

Carter lost the 1980 election, handsomely. It would be another 8 years before the simulacrum of international action began.

Categories
Science Scientists

March 5, 1950 – first computer simulation of the weather…

On this day in March 5 1950, Jule Charney and Jonny von Neumann produced the first computer simulation of the weather. Who were these people? Jules Charney was, according to Wikipedia considered “the father of modern dynamical meteorology, Charney is credited with having “guided the postwar evolution of modern meteorology more than any other living figure.” 

And in 1979, he helmed what’s now known as the Charney report, which told the politicians that yes, there was no reason to doubt that a doubling of the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would lead to a three degree temperature rise. 

Jonny von Neumann was Hungarian, possibly the smartest person who’s ever lived. And in 1955 he would warn Fortune magazine of the buildup of carbon dioxide shortly before his death in early 1957.

Why this matters. 

The work Neumann and Charney did was foundational for the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, set up in 1963 under NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) to model the atmosphere.

Computer simulations, computer models of the climate have been extremely important for creating the understanding (and global awareness) of weather and climate. And there is a book by Paul Edwards called A Vast Machine which will tell you a lot more. 

What happened next?

It would be another five or six years before the buildup of carbon dioxide started to impinge properly on people’s consciousness.