Thanks for this
Great article, Chris. You cover well the factual data problems that lead to the horribly inadequate energy reporting that exists in the MSM. I wrote my Master's thesis on this very topic, and I give you high marks for the piece of it that you tackle. There's also the "political editorial agendas" and related problems, but I won't go into those here. I just want to point out one additional detail on data interpretation that actually manifests itself in your article. I refer to changes in units. In your early paragraphs, you talk about the confusion over global supply projections using the convention of millions of barrels per day or MBD. Then in the graph of US historical production, the units are in thousands of barrels per year, which is more often expressed as billions of barrels per year. So even I, as one who is well versed in this issue, had to study the graph a bit to figure out why it wasn't showing the 9.5 MBD peak I'm used to seeing. There seems to be little hope that on top of all the other problems of ignorance and bias in energy reporting that we'll ever get a plurality of journalists to note and clarify such unit differences. They are all too happy to report x billion barrels discovered as a panacea, with no thought to how that fits into the overall context of current & future supply/demand equations. Again, kudos for a great treatment of this.
