There must be some similar process or behavior at work in order for HL to produce similar outcomes in different oil provinces if that is what it is doing.

Yes, and I'm surprised there has been so little discussion of this so far on this site. On poster on the HL debate left a clue: creaming curves.

It appears from the empirical evidence that the sizes of oil fields in any oil province are distributed so that there are very few large fields and increasing numbers of increasingly smaller fields. Geologists can't demonstrate from physical laws why this must be so, nor can they give you a formula to predict the distribution, but still that's what the creaming curves tell us.

Given this fact, it is easy to see that simple economics will, in part, govern the history of oil production. All other things being equal (and I know they are not), production from a large field should be more profitable than a smaller field because the costs of exploration and development of a field can be amortized over more barrels of oil. That being the case, larger fields will tend to be developed before smaller fields.

Over time, as fields deplete and production declines, that decline must be offset by the development of an ever larger number of smaller fields, which decline more quickly and must be replaced at an increasing rate if production is to be expanded or even just maintained. At some point, the capacity, financial and technical, of the oil industry to add new production will fail to keep up with the required rate of development and production will peak and go into decline.

There is a hypothesis for you all to chew on.

Would there be any signifigant predictive signalling to be gleaned from the already known drastic reduction in EROEI of pumping Petroleum now as opposed to 60 years ago? It may well still be profitable at an 8:1 EnergyROI, but just the fact that it was not too long ago 100:1 or so seems to be a clear indicator that it takes a vast amount more labor and material than it ever did then to get the same product to our tanks, even WITH these much heralded improvements in technology, EOR, etc.. just better spatulas for scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Of course this continued profitability is not about the supply's continued VIABILITY, but the consumer's addiction/dependency such that he has to pay the ferryman to get over that brook every day.

One more bit on that..

Anyone know what the petrol EROEI was gauged at during the 70's oil crisis?

and above, "Clear Indicator" should have been 'Good reminder' or something..

I always seem to post when I'm exhausted.

to paraphrase Luis de Sousa " 1-Q/Qt is the fraction of the total oil left to produce, meaning that the capacity we have to produce oil at a given moment in time is linearly dependent on the amount of oil still available to produce"

or in other words oil production is analogous to radioactive decay. there is your hypothesis