[TheDude]

Link.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he data used by King Hubbert and the majority of subsequent investigators to forecast future oil supply is essentially historical field-size data with a touch of “growth to known.” While suffering from the usual inconsistencies of such data, the Hubbert method provided a prediction of “peak” oil in the US correct in time but somewhat off in volume.8 The extrapolation to the future using symmetry to predict decline, however, was not nearly as close in time or volume. What the Hubbert model does not accommodate well is the impact of variables such as oil price and the pace of development, which results in a wide range of uncertainty, making it inadequate as a tool to plan the transition from oil.

Complicating the picture is the necessity of dealing with a nonunique number for future production volumes rather than “snapshot” quantities related to a specific date and economic conditions existing at that time. The only time a reserves value is a unique number is when the field is abandoned and the wells are plugged. And, even then, it can return to life with advances in technology and improvements in economics.

[Plantagenet]

This is what Matt Simmons has been saying all along. His book "Twilight in the Desert" is one long explanation of why this should be done.

Simmons also has been saying for more then a decade that the entire US offshore zone should be re-surveyed using modern instruments so we know exactly what the real potential for additional oil is in these areas.

[mos6507]

Wow we actually have a Peak Oil Studies & Energy Reports forum? Who knew?