In the distribution to the public of the products of industry, the failure of the present system is the direct result of the faulty premise upon which it is based. This is: that somehow a man is able by his personal services to render to society the equivalent of what he receives, from which it follows that the distribution to each shall be in accordance with the services rendered and that those who do not work must not eat. This is what our propagandists call 'the impossibility of getting something for nothing.' Aside from the fact that only by means of the sophistries of lawyers and economists can it be explained how, on this basis, those who do nothing at all frequently receive the largest shares of the national income, the simple fact is that it is impossible for any man to contribute to the social system the physical equivalent of what it costs the system to maintain him form birth till death--and the higher the physical standard of living the greater is this discrepancy.

Since also the energy-cost of maintaining a human being exceeds by a large amount his ability to repay, we can abandon the fiction that what one is to receive is in payment for what one has done, and recognize that what we are really doing is utilizing the bounty that nature has provided us. Under these circumstances we recognize that we all are getting something for nothing, and the simplest way of effecting distribution is on a basis of equality, especially so when it is considered that production can be set equal to the limit of our capacity to consume, commensurate with adequate conservation of our physical resources.

Under these circumstances we recognize that we all are getting something for nothing, and the simplest way of effecting distribution is on a basis of equality, especially so when it is considered that production can be set equal to the limit of our capacity to consume, commensurate with adequate conservation of our physical resources.

It is well known that M. K. Hubbert successfully predicted the timing of peak US oil production. Since then, Hubbert’s model has been used extensively to predict peak oil production elsewhere, and the derived bell-shaped curve to describe production has appeared in many publications. However, forecasts of world and regional peak oil and natural gas production using this methodology have usually failed, leading to the implicit belief that such predictions will always fail and that we need not worry about finite resources.

The questions that must be asked are why the model succeeded for the US and what this can teach us about petroleum production modeling. A careful examination of Hubbert’s approach indicates that the most important reasons for his success in the US were stable markets, the high growth rate of demand, ready availability of low-cost imports, and a reasonable estimate of easily extractable reserves. This analysis also shows that his model cannot predict ultimate oil reserves and that it should be considered an econometric model.

Building on Hubbert’s vital insight, that cheap fossil fuel reserves are knowable and finite, one can state that for peak world oil production, political constraints should be much more important than resource constraints.

OGJ did a fair few articles on peak oil in 2004 and 2003. There was some chatter about the issue on the OGJ forums here: link
Editor Bob Williams appears to think PO is not imminent.

I haven't read all of his comments on the OGJ forums yet, but already, he is criticizing Campbell for underestimating reserves like the oil sands in Alberta. However, by the very people running the oil sands production, who have every reason to be optimistic, claim 5 mbpd output after 2020 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... MUPL60.DTL. If "Hubbertian" models of oil production dropoff rates post peak are correct with regards to conventional oil (or even worse due to M.R.E.), we will see millions of barrels-per-day loss in production every year. 5 mpbd starts to sound like a drop in the bucket. The descripotion that peak oil may be the exact midpoint of oil-type hydrocarbon extraction may be not quite true. Even if the oil sands and other similar things have vast amounts of recoverable oil compared to conventional reserves, what is the rate at which they can realistically be recovered? Peak oil, in its real world effect, is the peak rate of oil production. Only if the rate of non-conventional oil production can be ramped up to not only meet new demand, but make up for the yearly decline in conventional oil also, would it truly mitigate the peak oil problem. This doesn't seem likely even by the optimistic outlook from the very people who would benefit the most. Any thoughts on this?

I haven't read all of his comments on the OGJ forums yet, but already, he is criticizing Campbell for underestimating reserves like the oil sands in Alberta. However, by the very people running the oil sands production, who have every reason to be optimistic, claim 5 mbpd output after 2020 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... MUPL60.DTL. If "Hubbertian" models of oil production dropoff rates post peak are correct with regards to conventional oil (or even worse due to M.R.E.), we will see millions of barrels-per-day loss in production every year. 5 mpbd starts to sound like a drop in the bucket. The description that peak oil may be the exact midpoint of oil-type hydrocarbon extraction may be not quite true. Even if the oil sands and other similar things have vast amounts of recoverable oil compared to conventional reserves, what is the rate at which they can realistically be recovered? Peak oil, in its real world effect, is the peak rate of oil production. Only if the rate of non-conventional oil production can be ramped up to not only meet new demand, but make up for the yearly decline in conventional oil also, would it truly mitigate the peak oil problem. This doesn't seem likely even by the optimistic outlook from the very people who would benefit the most. Any thoughts on this?

Heck, I was just reading about some of this in another post, and I had momentarily forgotten the huge amounts of natural gas needed for processing of the tar sands.