Don't be so quick, the talk update was coming:

This article is pure POV.  It assumes that oil depletion matters so much that it drives a search for alternatives to oil.  This is a nonsensical example of economism, in which supply and demand are assumed to be paramount in all decisions.  

The truth is that the dominant scientific view is that climate change requires a shift to other energy sources long before the existing oil reserves run out.  Accordingly, this depletion issue is simply irrelevant.  Before it occurs, all coastal cities will look like New Orleans, and the refugees will be so vast in number that there will be no serious concern with how to get them all gas for their SUVs.

The article now states this, but, framing a POV is not quite the same as getting rid of it entirely.  No talk about implications or alternatives should be permitted from the POV that "supply matters", because, according to a consensus of scientists, it doesn't.