Learsy: Peak Oil Agonistes

The New York Times Finally Comes Around to Where HuffPost Never Feared to Tread

This is a day of deep gloom for the McPeaksters, those preaching the gospel of “Peak Oil”. The New York Times, otherwise deeply empathetic to oil patch pseudo science, this day burst one of the most entrenched of the oil patches’ nuggets of disinformation, the theory of “Peak Oil”.

There it was in the Op-ed section of the hallowed pages of the NYTimes, three columns wide, “Peak Oil Is A Waste of Energy,” by Michael Lynch, a former director at the Center for International Studies at M.I.T.

His tone was unequivocal: “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.” He goes on, “most arguments about peak oil are based on anecdotal information, vague references and ignorance on how the oil industry goes about finding fields and extracting petroleum.”

After expanding on these points, he goes on to conclude that “Oil remains abundant and will likely come down closer to the historical level of $30 a barrel as new supplies come forward in the deep waters off West Africa, and Latin America, in East Africa and perhaps the Bakken oil shale fields of Montana and North Dakota”.

Huffington Post