Sorry it took so long to get back to you on this post.
Last I checked, Scientific American was also not a referred journal. Nor does the article cite any referred publication. Feel free to do a literature search of Energy Economics or some such publication if you want something referred. Right now I don't have time to do so just for the sake of making the point that the world is not ending. Thus, I will just make a couple of points. Your link seems to be concerned primarily with conventional reserves which are not the same as total reserves. Moreover, if they overestimate reserves now, there is no reason to think that they did not in 1980. As we have used up over 80% of those estimated reserves, we should find out very shortly if you are right.Asterix said:
You seem very concerned with new discoveries. I have tried to make the point that what are and what are not reserves are also a function of technology and prices. To use a mining analogy, the difference between moose pasture and an ore body has as much to do with price as anything else. Tar sands were not reserves until the oil crises of the 1970s. Yet, they were not "new discoveries".Asterix said:
