Econ101 wrote:Im sorry ralfy but your responses are disjointed and your logic fails.
Yeah, keep dreaming.
We will have all the oil we need. We have always had all the oil we need. Statistics used to project shortages into the future are all flawed or worse yet misrepresented for political purposes.
Indeed, they are flawed, as they use reserves (thus, "we have all the oil we need") and not production rate, etc. That's where the misrepresentation takes place. What else can agencies working for businesses and governments do except tell them that everything's fine. That's where your "political purposes" come in.
Eroei for example is a manipulative idea used to support the propaganda of peak oil. 25:1 is a better estimate of the ratio of BS to facts concerning our energy future. It in no way can be considered a measure of anything meaningful. That is why it is rejected by the mainstream and only mentioned within political contexts like this forum. It is a political tool like global warming. Its used to secure the base, like ralfy, by stiring up their emotions not their minds.
Actually, it's not rejected by the mainstream, together with anything else you claim is propaganda. The proof is the OP's message, which argues that shale will replace conventional production. If your melodramatic BS is true, then there'd be no need to use shale at all. That's why the threat title is actually wrong: peak oil was not debunked, as the OP actually confirmed peak by arguing that shale will be used when conventional production drops or cannot meet demand.
What the mainstream rejects is the absence of solutions. That's because most want to have a middle class lifestyle while corporations want to profit from that. With that, the mainstream is supposed to be fed with propaganda that peak oil is "debunked," that global warming is a "political tool," etc. The pattern is very obvious: the goal is to stir up the emotions of people by making them happy with the conclusion that businesses and governments will take care of any problem (or that there is none at all).
Unfortunately, some things one cannot hide, and the OP ironically demonstrates that in the chart presented in his message.
Peak oil is the refuge of crack-pots. It was created by a person that in retrospect knew little or nothing about the future of oil production in the USA or the world. He made a prediction based on his own limited, and now known to be ignorant, point of view. But facts arent important to people that have dogma on their side and are continually reinforced through a mass media propaganda effort being employed by political forces to secure a base.
But the graph shared by the OP, and which he didn't contradict, shows peak production per capita. Even you did not counter that.