Mhaze,
so you're not going to substantively address a single point I've said?

"I showed you the data earlier which showed that our reserves are increasing not decreasing. QED."

Derp! Gee, when the oil price shoots up is amazing how uneconomical expensive oil can suddenly be produced.

Derp - why is this oil so expensive?

Derp - why are we only finding it out in the oceans and not nice formations we can drill a simple hole in?

Derp - why does it cost so much to drill out in the deep oceans?

Derp - what's a resource? What's a reserve?

Derp Derp - we're FINDING SO MUCH OIL!

(Dorothy you Derp, just remember to click your ruby slippers together 3 times as wish that.)

Come off it Max. We have well over 100 years of known oil in Oz, & probably much more if the extent was investigated.

That with over 300 years of gas, particularly if that protester shooter down there would let them start harvesting theirs, rather than demanding cheap gas from other states.

For crying out loud Max. Its been said many times over by many people over the past 50 years that as the price of oil rises then uneconomic wells become economic. Its at least part of the reason why the realists knew the peak oil rubbish was, ahem, rubbish.

I've said it here in threads going back a decade.

Yet here you are proclaiming it like you've made some major logic break-through. It suggests you really haven't been all that immersed in the issue.

Of coarse this doesn't just go for oil. As the supply vis a vis demand of any resource or product rises, so does the price. And as the price rises the incentive to create or find more of that resource or a viable substitute also rises. Its why we've never run out of any resource.

“For crying out loud Max. Its been said many times over by many people over the past 50 years that as the price of oil rises then uneconomic wells become economic.”

Which kind of falls under the umbrella of the economic behaviour of RESERVES - doesn’t it? A principle I’ve never disagreed with. What I DID disagree with was this:-
“…the fact remains, as you've already admitted, we are discovering more than we're using.” http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9984#340823

DERP!

As to the rest of your post - are you saying there’s a price incentive? Who’da thunk it?

“Its why we've never run out of any resource” Absolute crap!

When a species is over hunted and goes extinct, we’ve lost a resource.

When a beautiful isolated beach becomes a tourist hotspot and gets overcrowded and awful, we’ve lost a resource. Not because it’s GONE - but because it’s over used and no longer as enjoyable. In the same way as oil will peak in individual oil nations, their domestic consumption will quickly overtake their ability to export. The INTERNATIONAL oil market dries up long before global peak oil even arrives. Oil becomes too expensive to buy - or is just not sold to your country. “They” need it.

I don’t want to be a slave to anything - communist overlords or neolib ‘free market’ ideology. We’re homo-sapiens. Let’s *think* and plan ahead - and get off the oil before it’s too late. We currently rely on oil for food and transport of goods and services. Our military relies on it as well. There are renewable alternatives. It’s time to live up to our name, Homo Sapiens Sapiens, and not become Homo Marketus Ideologicus Dumbarses.

"are you saying there’s a price incentive? Who’da thunk it?"

Well, it seems, not you, until I raised it.

But the price incentive isn't the point. The point is that the price incentive is the reason more resources become available and why, therefore we don't run out of said resources.

"When a species is over hunted and goes extinct, we’ve lost a resource."

Well I was think about the resources we dig up or pump up since that's what the thread's been about. That you had to go with game to try to refute it, rather makes my point.

But the point also works for game. Why was it being hunted?

Fur? Well have we run out of fur?
Food? Well have we run out of food?

The loss of a sub-section of a resource isn't the loss of that resource.

Mhaze,
I grant the economic principle of supply and demand on prices, and this incentivising further exploration, extraction, and even R&D into cheaper more abundant alternatives. While "Resource" refers to oil in the ground and "Reserves" refers to the probability of certainty of the oil being there - it also refers to the price-point in the market bell curve. All good. You've repeated that time and again, and I've written about it time and again. I've read papers by experts on this price-point stuff, as it's not just geology, not just market, but that energy-economist who specialises in the middle.

But you know what I hear every time you mention it? Diversion. You're trying to pull the wool over this forum's eyes that you EVER said the following - and just move on to claim you were talking about economics!

“…the fact remains, as you've already admitted, we are discovering more than we're using.” http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9984#340823

Diversion isn't going to work. So here's the deal. You can man up and admit you didn't know our highest decade of discovery was actually 60 years ago back in the 1960's! You can be honest and admit what you wrote about discovery is wrong by SIX DECADES. Do that, and I'll respect that you made a mistake and we'll move on to other things. I'll even respect you enough to stop saying Derp! How's that? (wink - like you care.)

Or just lie and repeat your lies that you were ONLY talking about demand incentives. It's up to you.