So there is a new National Academy of Sciences report on the idea of 'geo-engineering.' That's a soothing sounding term for "doing technical stuff at a global scale to escape/lessen the consequences of having ignored the climate scientists' generation of warnings to cut back on the carbs". For instance there's - mirrors in space to reduce... Continue Reading →
From “All Our Yesterdays” – Jan 28, 1987 – a warning from history
I have a side project - a website on which I blog something that happened "that day" in "climate" (that's a loose term) history. Today there's two posts - here's the second... An extra "All Our Yesterdays" post today, in honour of two excellent scientists, Professor Veerabhadran Ramanathan and Professor Wally Broecker. It was Ramanathan's work... Continue Reading →
Stepper: “Energy Flow in #Australia” -1978 article, depressing prescience…
On stepper this morning I also read some Financial Times, natch. But here is the short version: in Australia there was a small, well-connected and highly intelligent “epistemic community” (h/t Peter Haas) around energy/climate from the mid-1970s onwards. People like Mark Diesendorf, Hugh Saddler, Roger Gifford, Graeme Pearman. Many of them are still alive... And... Continue Reading →
How to scupper international negotiations #425; remove the “too competent” diplomat
How do you slow down international negotiations that you aren't keen on without being Too Obvious about it? One way is talent-control. Make sure that someone who just might succeed where you want the process to fail is removed... Here's a fascinating interview that I stumbled upon that speaks to just that. It's Professor Jason... Continue Reading →
On the Stepper: 13th January: Climate reports, Stockholm syndrome and Green Bans
On an "Australian science/politics in the 70s and onwards" binge at mo' (trying to be more systematic in my PhD reading). Garratt, JR, Webb, EK and McCarthy, S. (2011) Charles Henry Brian Priestley. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society 57, 349-278. Didn't read all of this, but the bits that relate to his... Continue Reading →
On the stepper 11th January 2015: Wind power romance, past warnings, science hacks, climate histories
Trying to form a new habit – typing up what I read “as I go”. And connected to that, giving an account of what I read while on the stepper for 90ish minutes a day (mostly). The habit is not “fully bedded in” as a habit yet, but I refuse to use that as an... Continue Reading →
Book Review: “The politics of global atmospheric change” (1995)
Book Review: Rowlands, I. (1995) The politics of global atmospheric change Manchester: Manchester University Press This is one for the geeks only. If you’re interested in the vicious fights in the 1980s an early 1990s about whether and how “we” would do something about ozone depletion and carbon dioxide build-up, then grab with both ands;... Continue Reading →
Australian #climate wrecking is a bi-partisan, long-term thing. Or “Abbott is not unique”
Here's what the excellent books by Guy Pearse and Clive Hamilton about the Australian government's climate policy under John Howard miss(1); during the premiership of Paul Keating, much loved for his views on Aboriginal reconciliation, Labor was also a "blocker" on climate change, both domestically and internationally. The reason is pretty simple. It's four letters.... Continue Reading →
Stepping up 14 December 2014: innovation, coal, the AGGG
Gonna see if insta-commenting helps me retain factoids post-reading-on-the-stepper... Finished off "Emerging challenges for science, technology and innovation policy research: a reflexive overview" (Research Policy 38,: 571-582. Brain stretching stuff – this, among others, was gold - "For example, Weick (1995) recounts a story told by the Hungarian Nobel Laureate, Albert Szent-Gyorti, about a small... Continue Reading →
Book Review: Bert Bolin’s “A History of the Science and Politics of Climate Change”
Bolin, B. (2007) A History of the Science and Politics of Climate Change: The Role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 277 pages Climate scientists, despite what you read thanks to the well-funded denialist lobby, are cautious souls. Probably none has been more reluctant to succumb to the apocalyptic language... Continue Reading →
marchudson.net 