Re: Hubbert's Trough

[Michael Perelman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Prediction is a very difficult business, so a debate between the 1st & 2nd articles
seems legitimate.  The third is irrelevant & adds nothing to the discussion.

Someone pointed out the problem here.  Hubbert has become a symbol for the ultimate
[economic] scarcity of resources.  Sidetracking onto here person or pointing to
extreme statements by ultra-Malthusians does nothing constructive.

I don't see much evidence of much new discovery.  We can use Alberta's shale oil or
coal, but both these have some unattractive aspects.

Then, as Doug noted, we may just choke on the bad air ringing the bell on the bell
curve prematurely.

We economists have not settled on the cause of the Great Depression yet, we certainly
have a less enviable record in predicting the future.


On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 10:56:36PM -0700, sartesian wrote:
> Cool as a cucumber..
>
> The Good:
>
> http://www.gasresources.net/Lynch(Hubbert-Deffeyes).htm
>
>
> The Bad:
> http://www.technocracy.org/articles/hub-gro.html
> Hubbert as Malthus
>
>
> The Downright Ugly:
> http://dieoff.org/page224.htm
> "The earth's immune system, so to speak, has recognized the presence of the human species and is starting to kick in. The earth is attempting to rid itself of an infection by the human parasite."
> Richard Preston, 1994

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu