Thirty four years ago, on this day, August 1st, 1992,
(NB approximate date – sometime in August 1992, almost certainly not 1st August.)
1992 Peter Kinrade “Review of Recent Carbon Tax Studies” for Australian Conservation Foundation
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 355ppm. 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 Australia had been “woken up” to climate change from the late 1980s onwards, and there had been proposals for a carbon tax. These were met with a flurry of so-called “independent” and “scientific” reports based on economic modelling that a carbon tax would destroy the Australian economy. These reports – as if by magic – found their way to the front pages of newspapers and then into the mouths of politicians and columnists. Gramsci would laugh.
The specific context was that a carbon tax had been defeated as a policy proposal during the Ecologically Sustainable Development policy process. The Rio Earth Summit had happened, Australia had signed, and would inevitably ratify. Here we see the Australian Conservation Foundation, which had pushed for a carbon tax, analysing the recent studies and showing that they were basically bullshit.
What I think we can learn from this is that the economic modelling by so-called independent think tanks and tame academics against progressive policy proposals are indeed usually bullshit. That’s not the point. They are a sophisticated form of propaganda and policing of possibilities, and you can analyse them after you’ve lost the battle, and that’s maybe good if it helps you understand the next battle.
What happened next In 1994 the Australian Conservation Foundation succeeded in getting a proposal for a carbon tax back on the policy agenda, and when then defeated again, partly by economic modelling and partly by tactical innovations on the part of the opponents of carbon pricing.
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:
August 1, 1964 – Popular Mechanics says the air around us is changing
August 1, 1976 – Oak Ridge report on “The Global Carbon Dioxide Problem” released
August 1, 1980 – Wall Street Journal does excellent #climate reporting
August 1, 2015 – World Coal Association tries to say coal is lifting people out of poverty.