taught us about the idea of infinite with emphasis on the problems with economic theory when it ignored that most things are not infinite. In the 70s that meant he was talking about oil.
The list here is what really makes it clear that he was right. I saw two problems in the article that really bother me.
When he talks about the need for more regulation to ensure better use of resources and the idea that it would be done for the social good I shudder. He is assuming that good will win out in the end and that corporations will somehow decide to do what is best for the people or the world. I do not see many signs of that in today's world.
Also when he talks about new tech ideas coming to the rescue he limits this to extraction tech and says nothing about safe tech. He also limits resources to natural gas (fracking) and nukes. In doing this he is ignoring the value of the environment to the economy.
I am not familiar with this writer - is he always so centered in on making a dollar regardless of the cost to others?