Originally Posted by
JDNSW
That is not saying "the opposite". What that is, is simply ignoring the reality that there is nobody going to spend money even doing a literature search, let alone geophysics or drilling, to locate additional reserves when there is a reserve of 365 years. If usage increases so as to reduce reserves to 17 years, there will be a lot more interest in spending real money to locate and prove reserves, although even this will depend on projections of price rises.
Reserves are, in mining terminology, closely defined, and effectively are the mineral resources that a mining company can reasonably expect a bank to lend them money against. They do not, in any sense represent the total amount of the mineral that exists in mineable locations in the earth's crust. Reserves are usually only defined at the stage where a mining company needs to raise money from either lenders or investors.
Using published reserve figures to extrapolate that there will be a shortage is simply incorrect, and shows that the source either does not understand the meaning of the word, or is deliberately trying to mislead.
John