Like many Malthusian beliefs, peak oil theory has been promoted by a motivated group of scientists and laymen who base their conclusions on poor analyses of data and misinterpretations of technical material. But because the news media and prominent figures like James Schlesinger, a former secretary of energy, and the oilman T. Boone Pickens have taken peak oil seriously, the public is understandably alarmed.Worth a read.
A careful examination of the facts shows that most arguments about peak oil are based on anecdotal information, vague references and ignorance of how the oil industry goes about finding fields and extracting petroleum.
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Why peak oil is wrong
In this New York Times Op-Ed, Michael Lynch explains,why the "peak oil" concept is so wrong.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Wish there was a free copy :P
I find it fitting that your blog is called "dismal" because it is close to what I would call Michael Lynch's article
Like I said in a letter sent to NY Times, I am always ready to be convinced we will not face an oil supply crunch, but there are more facts in a single paragraph of an ASPO post than in Mr Lynch's article.
Point-by-point rebuttal arguments, graphs and stats (ie: hard facts!) available here: www.theoildrum.com
Very disappointing from the NY Times. Should better select their op-eds.
So, not sure why you are saying it is worth a read??? Is it ironic?
Thanks for that link, Paul. I've always been skeptical of the peak oil doomsayers, particularly as a lot of them are also peddling the Goracle's AGW propaganda.
Pic Pic: I don't think the op-ed was meant to be a scientific paper, and I'm sure the author could provide facts and figures to support his case. However I will look at the oildrum website too.
Post a Comment