HL is a theory without a hypothesis. OK, oil production is never a square wave and it rises then falls, and the area under the curve will equal URR at the limit but so what!

OK, let's see.. I think you have sort of answered your own question there, Alan. The hypothesis goes something like this: many natural phenomena follow a bell-shaped curve. I think there's a formal statement of this in the discipline of statistics.

So, what Hubbert was saying, is that oil production will follow this trend regardless of political / economic / etc. issues. Basically we're gonna pump it out and use it as fast as we can in the end. Some of the TOD filk will superciliously say it's a "logistic curve", but they're both just blobs on a graph, near as I can tell. It looks to me like the bell is just the first derivative of the logistic WRT time.

I was trying to explain this in a recent thread, and was duly corrected: Hubbert did not originate "Linearization"; it had been my impression that he did. Anyhoo, the linearization is a clever way of graphing the production curve so that the points (theoretically) fall along a straight line. Furthermore, as time passes and production continues, the estimate gets better (because there is more history [larger Q] in the later points on the graph).

The beauty of linearization is that it allows you to place a ruler on the graph, strike a line, and get an estimate of the URR for the stuff you're trying to predict.

But in the end, it's all just statistics and the actual URR will only be known in hindsight. Many of us have looked at the graphs put together by SS, Khebab, westexas, and others and concluded that peak is probably about now. Since it is a century-long bell curve, there may be as much as 5 - 10 years of uncertainty as to the actual location of the peak — check back in 2025 and we'll know for sure.

The hypothesis goes something like this: many natural phenomena follow a bell-shaped curve. I think there's a formal statement of this in the discipline of statistics.

It's hard to get a Normal distribution (i.e. Gaussian/Bell-shaped) from temporal causal phenomena such as oil discovery and production. Bell-shaped curves extend to infinity in both directions, and our minus infinity is not very long ago. I wish we could, but you can't really hand-wave this stuff away unless you consider the problem from first principles.

Of the things wrong with the HL/Gaussian approach, the fact that it erroneously predicts that the Romans would have used 1.5 molecules of hydrocarbon is the least of its problems :-)

1858 is the start as far as I am concerned. Up to that point, there was little active progress in oil exploration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum#History

Petroleum, in some form or other, is not a substance new in the world's history. More than four thousand years ago, according to Herodotus and confirmed by Diodorus Siculus, asphalt was employed in the construction of the walls and towers of Babylon; there were oil pits near Ardericca (near Babylon), and a pitch spring on Zacynthus.[10] Great quantities of it were found on the banks of the river Issus, one of the tributaries of the Euphrates. Ancient Persian tablets indicate the medicinal and lighting uses of petroleum in the upper levels of their society.

The first oil wells were drilled in China in the 4th century or earlier.[citation needed] They had depths of up to 243 meters and were drilled using bits attached to bamboo poles.[citation needed] The oil was burned to evaporate brine and produce salt. By the 10th century, extensive bamboo pipelines connected oil wells with salt springs. The ancient records of China and Japan are said to contain many allusions to the use of natural gas for lighting and heating. Petroleum was known as burning water in Japan in the 7th century.

It kinda suprised me.

Perhaps surprising history but oil (and NG) didn't become a displacing technology until later in the 19th century. Until then whale oil was used predominately for commercial use,