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.
Comments
View as Flat
JohnFH Posted 5:38 pm
23 Aug 2005
Bets like these may serve to generate publicity for an opinion, but in the end they result in a heap of ridicule on environmentalists on account of unrealistic predictions.
A sad and unintended consequence of Simmons' over the top doomsaying.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 1:59 am
24 Aug 2005
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com
Permalink
jdeely Posted 2:34 pm
24 Aug 2005
Although obviously, this is a really stupid bet and shows that Simmons has no concept whatsoever of basic economics.
My guess is that it will take $100+ oil prices to get Americans to substantially reduce demand.
China is already working hard to reduce its demand and $100 barrel oil will accelerate their drive towards more efficiency.
My bet - Oil prices will rise some more of the next couple of years, demand will slow and prices will fall back to $50 range... maybe lower.
Permalink
jdhlax Posted 5:36 pm
25 Aug 2005
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 10:06 pm
28 Aug 2005
Which brings up a conundrum. What is the REAL price of oil? Is it measured by the price that consumers pay for fuel? Where? In europe, the US, Venezuala, Iraq?
Is it measured in the blood spilled over it's control?
Or in the global climate disaster it's combustion is bringing about?
Or in the cost of bringing alternative transportation energy economies to life?
http://amazngdrx.myblogsite.com/blog
Permalink
westcoastdog Posted 2:38 pm
29 Aug 2005
While people may ridicule the Tierney-Simmons bet, they are ignoring the the consequences of $200 barrel oil. How many of you on this thread were around in 1973 and 1978 when the price of oil escalated?
If oil averages $200 in 2010, the world economy will be a basket case with hyperinflation and vast unemployment. Even if oil averaged $100, the world economy will be crippled significantly. Simmons is predicting the end of the world as we know it. Will you have a job if gasoline cost $10 a gallon and if you use heating oil, could you afford to heat your house if fuel oil quadruples? And you folks in the sunbelt, could you afford to run your air conditioners if the price of electricity doubles or triples?
Simmons is not the only knowledgeable voice warning about the impending oil shortage. Those who support his position only differ on the timing of declining oil production; some say the peak was 2004 while others predict within five or ten years. There is a lot of evidence to support Simmons and it is not hard to find. Shell Oil, one of the world's largest oil companies, is using its reserves faster than it can find new oil. If you read the business news, you are aware that both China and India are attempting to buy oil companies and their offers are generous. Indonesia, which used to export oil, is now importing.
Skeptics will argue if the world economy goes into a deep recession, oil price will fall according, such as what occurred with the Asian collapse in the 90s. True, but as the economies recover, the demand will quickly escalate the prices back to the high end, and the price falls may not fall to historical lows. For example, from $100 to $50 barrel instead of to $20. During the past decade, China, India and the former Soviet Bloc countries have had double digit increases in the amount of automobiles annually, and the world demand for oil has increased faster than the supply. Since the demand will continue to escalate, there will be a shortage even if oil production remains unchanged or does not keep pace with the demand. One reason for the recent spikes in prices is that output and demand are almost equal, and any reduction in production, such as happens with a hurricane in the Gulf, will result in panic buying.
It's important to remember that the U.S. economy and culture is based on cheap oil. It will take decades to alter our infrastructure to make it as efficient as Western Europe and the Japanese. Let's hope that Simmons is wrong because if he is right, the following decades will be filled with poverty and misery.
In his book "Collapse," Jared Diamond describes how cultures that ruined their environment committed economic suicide. The U.S. is the most energy profligate nation in the world, and we may have to face the consequences of our irresponsibility, ...soon.
Permalink
jdhlax Posted 4:41 pm
29 Aug 2005
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:01 am
07 Sep 2005
Even less with wind or solar electric.
Electric cars are coming on fast, they will save our economy. Along with heat pumps for home and commercial heating and cooling drawing from the geo heat sink, powered by wind and solar.
Permalink