It may be in fact the meaning of live for humans to dissipate energy (Got this idea here: https://www.amazon.com/What-Your-Dangerous-Idea-Unthinkable/... )
It could also be an argument for bitcoin if criticized for too high energy consumption.
How sustainable the production of non conventional oil is, has to be seen, taking into account: costs of production and ROEI.
"And predictions from the Peak Oil crowd from 15 years ago about what would happen in 15 years were mostly wrong."
I am not sure about this either. The limits of growth projected the problems into the 1st half of the 21th century. This would end 2050, in 30 years. The questions is: Are the roller coaster oil prices and negative interest rates we are seeing the pre-curser of problems ahead or just a funny coincidence?
"My personal take: after the 1960s, people basically stopped inventing more energy-intensive goods and services that could achieve mass market adoption."
This is wrong. Most people would like a flying car or a trip to the moon. Bitcoin consumes energy too.
This may be an overstatement:
By 2040, computers will need more electricity than the world can generate
Please also consider jevons Paradox. A more efficient use of resources leads to faster depletion:
"We are encountering the per capita "limits to growth" in highly developed nations but the limits showed up on the demand side before the supply side"
I doubt that either. In this book scientists explain there most dangerous ideas:
One idea was: Purpose of live is energy dissipation. Consequently, I remember a scientist saying, in what to look for in extraterrestrial live: Look for an entropy source.
Here's previous edge question compilations:
What Is Your Dangerous Idea: http://amzn.to/fTgjYk
And others: http://amzn.to/fkoFdv
(yes, affiliate links) I have essys in two of them. :-)
Fresh book recommendations delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday.