Quote from: RE on Dec 26, 2025, 11:19 PMThere's certainly quite a bit of variability implicit here, not the least of which is there was no way to predict some of the tricks played by the central banks to issue credit and maintain liquidity through the system.

You and I might discuss variability, but certainty is what analysts claim to do...if only because the instant you quantify the variability and present the answer? Normies counter the precise measure of uncertainty with "oh...so you don't really KNOW then". Seen that one a thousand times. After all, Hubbert's curve required no expression of uncertainty, right? In the moment, and for 30 years afterwards, it was GREAT! As opposed to what folks know now, that it was an incomplete expression of US economically recoverable oil resources.

It is quite rare, even in the scientific community, for someone to appreciate the precision of a properly constructed  expression of uncertainty over a point estimate picked (sometimes at near random) from within it. People just naturally crave certainty and that faux precision....even if it is a load of bullshit. 

Quote from: RESteve never claimed perfection in his modeling.

Yet the instant you put a line on a graph and move into the future, that is exactly what you are doing. Even if you caveat it with words. Seen this one a million times as well. And again, it is done because it needs to be done, the words being a CYA because whomever kicked out the graph can't even begin to express it correctly in a visual way.

Quote from: REThe point though is that most of the folks making peak oil claims focused far too much of the supply side without taking into account credit flow to the demand side of the equation.

Maybe. Financing is as much a part of O&G development as anything, but as I mentioned before, O&G companies don't usually have problems with credit when they've got liquid and gaseous gold flowing out of the ground. Credit is nearly a given within the process. Harder to get in low prices maybe, but even in low prices if you can demonstrate the IRR to people with brains and money, it will be there.

Quote from: REOver the long term this has had the result that oil never could climb to the stratospheric prices of $200-300 bbl many of the pundits predicted.

Credit in this scenario is nothing more than a component of the supply/demand/price curve. No need to explicitly pull it out, it is like arguing over the cost of steel when drilling. It is just a variable in the ultimate IRR equation and nothing more. Cost of credit runs 30% per annum? Fine....my IRR needs to be higher to cover it is all.

Quote from: REWith a range bound commodity, there's no incentive to search for or pump the really expensive oil.

Prudhoe Bay was really expensive oil. And far, far away. And guess what? There was incentive to produce it regardless of its RELATIVE high cost of credit (we're talking late 70 into early 80's and high interest rates, American malaise, the entire smack) to ANYTHING in the Permian. Yet they did it anyway. Because the IRR worked.