Excellent speech, even though he is criticized in the comments for making some typo-type mistakes. Interesting map that he presented:

The map shows the areas of the countries in proportion to their oil reserves.
If you think about it, the areas of the countries should be equal to the areas under the Hubbert (bell) curve of each country. Compare Saudi Arabia and Russia - SA is about 4 times bigger than Russia. Both countries are now pumping at about 10m barrels per day. Assuming that both countries are at peak, this means that they are both at the top of their Hubbert curves.
Try to visualize this: if SA's and Russia's peaks coincide, then the only way for SA to have the area of their Hubbert curve 4 times as large as Russia's is to have a much "fatter" curve (much wider inflection points, in maths terms). This means that throughout the upside of the curve, i.e. throughout the past history SA must have consistently produced times more oil than Russia, and only at the top the production curves would have crossed. Do not think that this has been the case, Russia and the Soviet Union have mostly topped the oil production charts in the past.
SA claim that they have spare capacity to raise production instantly by as much as 25%. Assuming this is the case, the area of SA's bell curve would be greater by roughly 25%, as long as, again, their bell curve is not much "fatter". Meaning that SA have 25% more reserves than Russia, rather than 4 times (400%) as much.
A plausible explanation could be that SA has not reached peak and is still on the move over the curve's upside slope. But then at their peak they should be able to reach no less than 50% more than their current production (again, intuitively, trying to visualize the bell curves - strictly speaking, number crunching would be needed). How realistic?
Another possible explanation is that Hubbert's theory does not hold true.