i'm confussed. "in current capitalist economics we have crisis of demand that exceed crisis of production." wouldn't this cause prices to rise based on basic economics of demand > supply? How does "crisis" change economics.

Any reason for confusion? I mean that current capitalism has crisis of demand for oil caused by multiple issues one of them is huge debt. But it also have crisis of production caused not only by nature (it is main cause), but as we discussed here - also by financial issues.

Capitalists used their universal weapon to mitigate previous crisis times, to fix overproduction crisis with printing money and adding new debt. Unfortunately now it does not work, due to natural limits and also due to huge debt.

Yes, but fortunately, there was just a chart up on the site about the low fuel densities of batteries, flywheels, and old vine bottles, so I figured they were safe to omit. :-)

@Vitaliy_Kiselev - I've been reading your posts about peak oil for several years now. I'm very interested in that topic though not yet entirely convinced. One of the reasons I keep checking in on PV is for this point of view that is very different from what I typically get. (I thoroughly read four papers and news services each day, plus copious other reading.) From my other posts, you may have noticed that I seek out multiple sources and try to apply critical thinking. So my main point on this low is simply that I don't think one can extrapolate a useful trend from it simply because of the unusual circumstances of the low oil price last year. To me that neither supports nor refutes the idea of a peak oil scenario -- it simply is a useless data point.

If you look at the Bloomberg chart you cite ( http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-29/oil-discoveries-at-a-70-year-low-signal-a-supply-shortfall-ahead ), the past few years definitely drop off precipitously, but then, you can also see a cyclical pattern with a fairly flat trendline since 1980. (Note, 2016 is only showing figures through August, not all year.) If you look at the next chart in the Bloomberg report, it shows a precipitous drop in spending on exploration.

I was curious how these charts corresponded, so I overlaid one on the other with the same year scale (attached). A couple of things seem clear from the chart. First, there is a very clear reduction of new reserves discovered compared to the number of exploration wells sunk -- in other words, we're getting much less oil from each exploration well dig (which supports your peak oil theory to a degree. I do recall the charts you've shared about diminishing returns of energy extraction costs versus energy received, which is frightening.) Also, there is some mild correlation between number of wells sunk and new reserves discovered. But the huge drop in new exploration since 2014 can't help but play a significant role here.

One thing that's missing from the discussion though is that these new discoveries shown in the chart are only conventional drilling -- the chart does not include Canadian tar sands or fracking, so it doesn't tell the whole story.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev - Of course decreased investment is a major factor in why so little new oil was discovered last year. There may be other factors involved, but you can't discount the record low investment in exploration for new reserves. ("It was a terrible year for mushrooms--I didn't find a single one." "How much time did you spend hunting them?" "None at all, but that's not a factor.")

If those numbers came in during a year of US$70-100/b prices, they would be extremely sobering, however, as it is, the low exploration is a real outlier from previous years and makes it difficult to extrapolate any real trend in new proven reserves out of these numbers. (In my opinion.)

There certainly is a glut of pumped oil right now, compared to current demand and storage capacity. It's a little upsetting to see so many oil nations open the pumps to maximum in an attempt to make up for revenue lost due to the low oil price. They're undermining their own efforts and increasing wasteful consumption at the same time.

Don't hold your breath waiting for a fusion reactor. They still have no clue how to contain the reaction.

There's a reason it is so low. There is an energy glut at the moment. There are serious people in Houston, the energy business capital of the world, who do not believe oil will ever go above $60 again. With both Thorium fission reactors and Lithium-Tritium fusion reactors coming on line in the next 20 years, oil and gas as energy sources will disappear, except for jet fuel. Even that might go away with the advent of new engine technologies.