There are maybe 60 years worth of proven reserves if we don't increase demand, at least according to BP in 2009. If that is end of story for the future of energy, then it is a fairly bleak story.
All mineral reserves are basically 20-60 years into the future. That's because there is no incentive for a company to go out and find more reserves than it needs.
I'm not arguing against you, but using company reserves to predict the future is like using the length of a current employment contract to work out the future of your own employment. If you have a contract for 2 years worth of work, you're not necessarily going to be unemployed in 2 years. There's just no need for you to arrange more work just yet.
The same principle is at work with company hydrocarbon reserves.
The other curve-ball is changing technology. Many fields that are producing now were considered uneconomic in the past, but improvements in technology change that.
All in all, they are a very poor way of judging how much 'stuff' is in the ground. Which is why people, when looking at proven reserves 10, 20, 50 years ago would have concluded that things would have run out by now.
All mineral reserves are basically 20-60 years into the future.
Not true, proven bauxite reserves are in the hundreds of years range.
But when it comes to the acceleration of technology argument, I just think that when compared to solar/storage, fossil hydrocarbons will become uneconomic as a fuel source long before they run out.
