Which just goes to show that you are congenitally deficient when it comes to understanding what peak oil is about.

You can’t make those observations with the little information we know, Trinifar. I have mentioned this to you a few times and it doesn’t seem to sink in.

Additionally it’s laughable to be placing a linear fit to new discoveries as they may well come in statistical clusters.

Having superficially surveyed 3% of the earth my confidence level that we are exhausting supplies is less that 1%.

The global in-place oil endowment is very large, but the recoverable resource and the rate at which it can be produced are subject to considerable uncertainty. Forecasted oil production rates vary widely: some rely heavily on OPEC to meet rising demand; others on contributions from unconventional oil and alternative liquids; a third set of forecasts project a production plateau or peak.

Forecasts for declining production are based on various above- and below-ground factors, including: declines in volumes discovered; conventional oil production peaks and subsequent declines in countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom; and anticipated oil production plateaus in countries such as Russia and China.

What I do think is widely accepted is that yearly global production of light sweet crude has been declining for a long time and lower grades of oil are supplementing, all the way down to tar sands. That increases costs. Also not controversial is that the volume of new discoveries has been decreasing since about 1964. In the world of coal anthracite is a declining resource. When we talk of the vast coal reserves we mean the lower grades.

It makes obvious sense that the extractive industries go after the high-grade resources first whether it’s oil, coal, copper, or even water. And the technology to find and extract resources is highly developed.

As the world grows more affluent and demand continues to rise for goods of all kinds, the extractive businesses respond but nearly always having to do more with less. So costs increase and prices rise. Since these industries require a good deal of energy, as energy costs rises they are directly impacted, a positive feedback loop. That portion of price inflation is quite different than the part that’s due to central bankers.

On the demand side, from a 2007 US government report led by the former Chair & CEO of ExxonMobile:

“It’s a hard truth that the global supply of oil and natural gas from the conventional sources relied upon historically is unlikely to meet projected 50 to 60 percent growth in demand over the next 25 years,” says the report.

http://www.npchardtruthsreport.org/

oil is still historically very cheap

the annual rate of compound growth of the CRB if we use the trendline on your chart has been 1.9%. If we use actual prices it’s around 2.8%.

The rate of growth for Dow for the same period has been (175 to 11,600) 7.5%. If we add in dividends it’s even higher possibly around 8.5% as I am assume 1% annual div. per year. So, yes commodities are a rotten long term investment over the long term.

oil in 1860 was US550 a barrel in 2008. It was pretty rare commodity. Thanks to Rockefeller that changed.

And what Mark and Terje said.

the outcome would have been very different had the interval been 1998 to 2008.

Simons was a smart dude. He wouldn’t have made the bet then.