Wolfgang:

Perhaps I misunderstand you...I'm not sure why the opinion of the geologist I cite (Deffeyes of Princeton, author of a book favorably reviewed in Scientific American) is "propaganda", and the opinion of the one you cite (Laherrere of unspecified affiliation, author of a proposed - and not yet reviewed? - submission to the Canadian Oil and Gas Journal) is "more than propaganda". Not saying yours is wrong - he or she makes good points - just puzzled about your criteria for "propaganda".

And, yes, that there will be a peak in oil production is "trivial" in the mathematical sense of the word, but it is not "obvious" to the uninformed (namely politicians) and it is far from "inconsequential".

The exact time is quite open to debate, but I (and many geologists) believe that "soon" is a fair characterization.

Like you, I welcome the end of oil, but I also fear it at the same time. If our leaders would acknowledge that the end of oil is coming, and foster a smooth transition to alternative energy, the world would benefit greatly. However, if, as they appear to be doing now, they ignore the inevitable, and grasp and claw and invade and kill for the last drops of oil, the world will greatly suffer.

I am afraid that it is no accident that the current US administration - composed largely of oil people, and awash in oil money - has done nothing to promote alternative energy. Instead they invaded oil-rich Iraq for reasons that better suit oil-less North Korea.