Uncategorized

Tierney puts up $5,000

"I know next to nothing about oil production [in Saudi Arabia] or anywhere else."

But John Tierney is still willing to put up $5,000 to say that the price of oil will stay low.

He's found a taker in Matt Simmons, the peak oil Cassandra featured in Sunday's New York Times Magazine cover story. The terms are:

Both parties put $5,000 into a joint account. If the average price for a barrel of oil for 2010 is above $200 in current dollars, Simmons wins. If it's under, Tierney wins. Winner takes the contents of the account, which will include interest by then. Rita Simon, widow of Julian Simon, the winner of a similar bet with Paul Ehrlich, has gone in with Tierney.

If I had to put up some money on this, I would side with Tierney. 2010 is a little too soon. And 200 (2005) dollars is a little high. But, then again, there's a reason that I'm not the one putting money on this.

The Onion on biofuels

Amusing, as always.  

The pendulum swings back on ecosystem services

In a developing field like ecosystem services, there's bound to be a lot of competing paradigms out there, some of which may even argue that the entire field isn't all it's made out to be.

A four-year long study [PDF] done by the UK-based Forestry Research Program might be seen as one such setback for proponents of ecosystem services. The study's "main finding" was that the method of planting trees in the upstream areas of watersheds does not have the desired effect of increasing the water yields downstream. I might be misunderstanding this, but I could have guessed that more trees upstream means less water downstream, and without the four year study.

Setting that aside, however, the report cites other hurdles to ecosystem valuation.

Local biophysical relationships are too complex to be translated into direct economic trading relationships and, because of the difficulty in providing absolute proof, could be challenged legally.

However, John Palmer, manager of the Forestry Research Program, is not convinced that the whole idea is finished. "The key message," says Palmer, "is there are no blanket recommendations." The report does come close to a blanket recommendation, though, when it advises that a regional scale may be more appropriate because it will solve some problems of unreliability in individual watersheds.

Via the Ecosystem Marketplace Newsletter.

Stumped

Amanda Lumry, children’s book author, answers questions

Amanda Lumry. What work do you do? I am an author and photographer for the Adventures of Riley children’s book series, which educates children about the environment and entertains them […]

Fang, Fang, Fang on the Door, Baby

Judge orders feds to restore Northeastern gray wolves The U.S. government must intensify efforts to restore gray wolves to the Northeast, a federal court ruled on Friday. U.S. District Court […]

Light, Fruity, With a Hint of Smog

Winemakers in San Joaquin Valley will soon have to curb emissions The 109 wineries in California’s San Joaquin Valley — home to the worst smog in the U.S. — emit […]

All The Ooze That’s Fit to Print

The Gray Lady discovers peak oil The peak-oil phenomenon made a mainstream-media splash this weekend in an extensive New York Times Magazine cover story. Devotees of this once-obscure issue won’t […]

The NY Times does peak oil

Peak oil made what might be described as its MSM debut today, and in dramatic fashion, as the cover story in the New York Times Magazine. Weighing in at just about 9,000 words, the article by Peter Maass qualifies as a quick read just about as much as it qualifies as uplifting.

After describing some of the effects of peak oil on life as we know it, Maass then asks: "But will such a situation really come to pass?" (Collective sigh.)

Like it or not, Maass says, Saudi Arabia is the key to the if and when of peak oil. It's difficult to read the article and not be, among other things, a little miffed about the practices of Saudi Arabia and the rest of OPEC, between the vague numbers about output and reserves and the outright refusal to be audited. Matt Simmons, the peak oil "Cassandra" of the article, is frustrated as well -- if the Saudis issued the necessary data, he says:

It would then take anybody less than a week to say, "Gosh, Matt is totally wrong," or "Matt actually might be too optimistic."

For better or worse, Maass presents both sides of the story throughout the article, leading off the final section with, "So whom to believe?" After citing a US DOE report [PDF] that claims peak oil will be "abrupt and revolutionary," the article states (in the very next sentence) that "most experts do not share Simmons's concerns about the imminence of peak oil." Maass does, however, conclude by saying:

When a crisis comes -- whether in a year or 2 or 10 -- it will be all the more painful because we will have done little or nothing to prepare for it.

For more on "PO," check out Dave's post handicapping the Hamilton v. Kaufmann, free-market v. intervention discussion.

Mooney and Pielke

The internet has been described as a conversation. I have never seen a better example.

Featuring Chris Mooney and Robert Pielke Jr., with cameo appearances from Jamais Cascio and Jonathan H. Adler.

Gentlemen, start your laptops. The prompt is: "Science = Liberalism?" ... go!