In John Brätland’s article “Resource Exhaustibility: A Myth Refuted by Entrepreneurial Capital Maintenance” he claims to refute the idea that natural resources are exhaustible:
One such myth is the idea that extractive resources are exhaustible in an economic sense. In this article, I examine extractive resource availability as it is affected by what is commonly referred to as “resource exhaustion.” In part, the myth has been manifested in the long-held notion that all extractive resources are subject to eventual exhaustion and that this prospect should be cause for public alarm.
But it seems to me that he never actually refutes this idea. As I understand it, his argument is that entrepreneurs seeking to maintain their income will maintain their capital (including resources) by means of six strategies (p.16), which basically amount to 1- buy/discover more resources, and 2- extract more resources. Finally, he blames government for holding resources off the market and screwing with property rights.
But is this enough to refute the myth of exhaustibility? Could not an objector simply respond that these strategies will only postpone exhaustion, and that the fundamental problem remains? It seems to me that any attempt to refute exhaustibility must discuss the role of technology in increasing the supply of resources (e.g. fiber optics increased the supply of copper by allowing cables to be made out of sand.)
Has anyone read this article and/or have any brilliant insights?