Rebutting Peak Oil  

For some balance, here are two articles that attempt to rebut peak oil theories.

"Oil: Who's Really Over a Barrel" - this one explains oil price rises based on a number of factors, mostly economic. There are some interesting statistics in here - for example, the number of oil refineries in the US has fallen from 315 to 155 over the past 20 years. Peak oilers would say this is because no one wants to invest in infrastructure that won't be needed as available oil declines. I'm not sure what the skeptic theory is - maybe oil industry consolidation that is trying to push prices back up by restricting supply ? Towards the end its sounding distinctly like Bush administration propaganda.

http://www.meforum.org/article/527

"Debunking the Hubbert Model" - this one attempts to scientifically debunk peak oil theories, mostly in a rather abstract way. It focusses on the curve shape, which shouldn't really matter - its the fact that you can't produce more oil than you discover, and that depletion will inevitably follow some sort of curve that is important. The shape of the curve is affected by shifts in available supply of oil and demand for oil, which change due to all sorts of real world factors.

It also seems to ignore that the Hubbert curve accurately predicted US oil production 50 years ago, along with the fact that if oil reserves really are finite, then it must be logical that the only aspect of peak oil that is debateable is when the peak arrives and how long it takes to travel the down-slope of the curve.

http://www.gasresources.net/Lynch(Hubbert-Deffeyes).htm