[slowmover]

We have discussed this previously, and I disagree that the limit has been reached. But (genuine question, not being argumentative) what alternative system would you see being used when/if that happens, or indeed to mitigate for the effects ?


Peak Oil is not about the amounts of oil remianing, but what can be recovered economically. And false ideas of "economy" are bound to fail (no news here; the natural world isn't factored in). The all-around cost is too high (not that it does, or will, matter . . we'll drill till we're dead.)

Instead of your leading question -- and disagreement, Arragonis ("genuine" is disingenous) -- why don't you re-define the problem and re-state what systematic attempts may "work" to clarify things in re this PO thing as you see it? If the question presupposes the answer, then your question is argumentative for it's dependence on definitions (nt provided). Black/white statement made? Line in the sand?

Could you provide those definitions? Or, whom is it you read to assert such? Yergin? Smil? Roubini? Other? From whence have you come? You are genuinely invited to re-state and re-formulate.

.