The Matt Ridley prize for exposing environmental pseudoscience was inspired by Matt’s discovery that a Ridley family trust was making money from a wind farm company. All too often, hysterical groupthink, based on bad science, creates a climate in which politicians intone ‘something must be done’ and throw millions at pointless schemes. So the Ridley prize is awarded each year to the essay that best exposes the pseudoscience behind the government’s pet eco-projects.
Examples of pseudoscience include, says Matt, ‘the idea that wind power is good for the climate, or that biofuels are good for the rain forest or that organic farming is good for the planet or that climate change is a bigger extinction threat than invasive species’.
It was awarded for the first time last year to Pippa Cuckson who wrote about the environmental damage caused by hydroelectric power.
This year’s prize is for £5,000, reflecting the post-tax sum Matt’s trust receives. The prize is for an essay of 1,000 to 2,000 words and is open to writers of any age and residents of any country. Essays that have previously been published elsewhere can be submitted. The competition closes this year on 25 August.
Entries should be sent to: ridleyprize@spectator.co.uk
This morning’s Wall Street Journal carries a Mind & Matter article by Matt Ridley:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323936404578579753341239688.html
“Science Is About Evidence, Not Consensus”
Mr. Ridley closes by describing the UEA removing the hockey stick from its temperature record and “…quietly conceding that Mr. McIntyre was right about that, too.”
Mr. Ridley closes by stating that this Mind & Matter column is his last. The torch will be carried by others.
Janice
I did not say it was a GOOD article, merely that she had a point in our situation!
Perhaps it illustrates that there were not that many submissions that fitted all the criteria. I might enter in the vague hope of winning as £5000 to compensate me for my time and expense in writing climate articles might go some way to mitigate the baffling failure of Big Oil to send me those large cheques I keep hearing about.
Yes, it would take a very short time to fly from one side of our country to the other. Mind you, going by boat would be far better, one could traverse the River Thames from London in the East, past the Houses of Parliament following the route rowed by ‘three men in a boat’, past Windsor castle, Past the riverside meadows beloved by Ratty and Moley, turn off at Reading onto the Kennet and Avon Canal and spend five days travelling across the heart of England enjoying the tranquil sights on the way, via Bath and Bristol, before emerging in the East at Bristol Docks where Brunel’s Great ship is moored, having followed his wonderful railway for much of the journey.
BTW, here is my handy cut out and keep guide to the climate that the players in our long history would have enjoyed or endured each decade over the last 500 years.
http://judithcurry.com/2013/06/26/noticeable-climate-change/
All the best
Tonyb
Folks. I think some of you were nit-picking on this essay. It was a simple essay that pointed out,in a short space, that hydro-power in lowland areas eg Windsor, are not as efficient as those in highland areas eg Lochnagar. That they ONLY make sense with taxpayers’ subsidies, and that the authorities giving permission to these lowland projects, Canal and River Trust, has a vested interest in allowing such projects – ie, they have a holding stake in The Small Hydro Company Ltd
I don’t know much about water turbines but I know a little about Gunthorpe (the name showing that this was an old Viking settlement) and the scheme (this is the first time I’ve heard of it) puzzles me.
Firstly there is very little fall on the river. Is it supposed to have one or is this just my wrong headed romanticism?
Secondly there is quite a wide floodplain here, stretching back on the Gunthorpe side of the river for a mile or more. Won’t this affect the turbines?
The Trent is comparatively not very wide at this point and the authorities have been trying to encourage the use of barges and pleasure craft. How do they get through the barrage? Can you use a system of locks here? Wouldn’t this be expensive?
How much power would they get anyway?
Sorry about the schoolboy level of the questions.
You can see the river here by Googling Gunthorpe Bridge or Gunthorpe Bridge Nottingham
You can get some idea of the area from this slideshow
or see the river in flood here
Dear Tony B,
Thanks for sharing your SUPER-EXCELLENT research. Sigh. You deserve many thousands of pounds for all that fine research and scholarship. I guess “the check is in the mail” — and always will be.
Ah, what a lovely boat trip down the river that would be, where “life is but a dream.” Well, you and I live on separate continents, but, back when the CET records were just beginning to be kept (and for awhile after, too), my people were within a day’s horseride (or so) of yours. Perhaps, they even knew each other. Perhaps, they got into arguments. I think they would have been friends.
Since this thread is not busy, I’ll go off topic for a bit more. What do you think of this phenomenon? When I watched Prince William’s and Catherine’s wedding in TV, as I gazed at those venerable, old, London buildings and saw the joy on the faces of all the British people, I felt nostalgia — ABOUT A PLACE I HAVE NEVER BEEN! Or, is England simply so inherently charming that EVERYONE seeing it feels a longing to visit? All that reading of Dickens, I suppose… But, hm, I don’t know. All the Norwegians I know (Americans of Norwegian descent, I mean) absolutely LOVE Norway as if they were born there… .
Enjoy your Sunday. I’m going to bed!
Janice
thanks for your very insightful comments.
I guess everyone knows Britain through Royalty, our traditions. our pop music, language and literature.
I once wrote an only half joking piece querying whether Charles Dickens had fostered this notion of a perpetual deep freeze until modern times through his book ‘A Christmas Carol.’ Has this book embedded itself in the minds of the Anglosphere climate scientists?
I feel the need for a large public grant coming on….
tonyb
Just looking a bit more at this. The turbines have to be shut down if they kill more than 10 salmon or sea trout in a day.
It’s not going to be too difficult for them. The Trent travels though industrial areas and the pollution wiped out the salmon population many years ago (as in more than a century). Even with attempts to re-establish the fish catching a salmon in Nottingham is so unusual it gets you a major article in the newspaper. It’s not the right conditions for sea trout either so there would be few of them about to be killed.
I think Matt is asking for an “essay”. This is not a finely researched scientific paper, or a dissertation, or a research document. It is an “essay”. There is a huge difference.
“At Gunthorpe, most of the river’s flow will be directed through the turbines, slowing it from 45 cubic metres per second to under 12 at the exit.”.
Any thought of Gunthorpe having a barrage is silly. No engineer would or could consider it. Most of the Trent is over flood plain giving rich soils so high farming value. The UK only has 60M arable acres for well over 65M people as it is!
Facts speak for themselves when some one considers water to be either compressible or land there to be so cheap to be constantly flooded… Imagine when the real floods come!
I’d ignore such proponents for what they are.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323936404578579753341239688.html
Science Is About Evidence, Not Consensus
Wayne Delbeke says: @ur momisugly July 6, 2013 at 7:32 pm
….There used to be a site that had some very interesting comments from the public and interest groups. It was incredibly interesting but it has been disappeared – now get a “Not Found” error on the site…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you are using Google try Bing or DuckDuckGo instead. I just found a classic article on Monoculture farming got ‘Disappeared’ by Google but was available on Bing. It had been available on Google up to a month or so ago. (I search the title)
Gail Combs says:
July 7, 2013 at 6:01 am
“Wayne Delbeke says: @ur momisugly July 6, 2013 at 7:32 pm
….There used to be a site that had some very interesting comments from the public and interest groups. It was incredibly interesting but it has been disappeared – now get a “Not Found” error on the site…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you are using Google try Bing or DuckDuckGo instead. I just found a classic article on Monoculture farming got ‘Disappeared’ by Google but was available on Bing. It had been available on Google up to a month or so ago. (I search the title)”
Sounds like he says the server is gone, not that google doesn’t find it anymore.
Wayne, try the wayback machine at http://www.archive.org
I vote for the Willis post:
“How Environmental Organizations Are Destroying The Environment” I don’t know if it can be shortened to 2000 words though:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/25/how-environmental-organizations-are-destroying-the-environment/
Thank you Dirk H. The WayBack Machine found the article within seconds just typing in the old http address. And yes, the server says it is gone – but not forgotten. I will copy it to my computer for future reference. I often use Bing, Yahoo, and Dogpile but for some reason when I upgrade my Max software, Google comes back. So interesting how different engines give different results. I hate how Google tries to think of context for me and banned it from my computer for some time. Anyhow, thank you and Janice for the suggestions. I must try the wayback machine more often.
I have a good outline for an essay.
The GM industry and its version of “science” makes Climate change science (™) look legit. 🙂
Genetic Modification of plants and animals by gene insertion.
Let the proponents finally show..
1/All the published papers showing gm foods are safe for human consumption
2/All the evidence which shows you NET income of GM crops for farmers is greater than non GM crops.
Net income is after tax for those who are confused.
Cue hysterical responses by people that dont know the difference between plant breeding and gene insertion.
Cue all the hand waving with “hundreds of studies show its harmless”..yup..there are about 15…wonder why..
Cue all the hand waving with “show us papers showing its bad”..look up Genetic Roulette by Smith which has hundreds of papers.
Cue more hand waving with “if it was bad for you we would already know it”..see above..and..name a govt agency anywhere in the world testing that hypothesis..cricket sounds..thought so.
So I would win if it submitted..er..nope.
There is more chance that the Golden Rice foundation..remember them..???would produce that final paper proving it did what they claimed it could do..than me winning this prize.
Ridley loves the GM meme..
So…its not going to happen.
It seems we are all going to drown, but at the same rate as everywhere else … http://www.sciencewa.net.au/topics/environment-a-conservation/item/2246-north-sea-level-rising-at-global-rate.html more funding please.