I've been a car-nut my entire life. I remember in the early-to-mid 70's as emission regulations tightened nearly every year. Eventually unleaded gas was the next "solution" pushed onto the public. I read article after article by engineers and scientists that the emission controls were not need and/or had gone too far and/or that unleaded gas would make the whole situation worse. Given the chance, I would argue their points with my environmentist-friends at that time.
But something interesting has happened: Time has proven me dead-wrong. I nearly get sick when I follow an old car too closely now... even if it is running perfectly. I am SO GLAD that modern cars were required to polute less.
And unleaded gas? I was most wrong about that: Without unleaded gas, modern closed-loop emissions-systems (where the computer sniffs the exhaust and tunes the engine in real-time) would not be possible. We would have worse pollution problems, more health problems (especially city-dwellers), lower-performance engines, and increased fuel consumption.
I think this time the professor is wrong.
Perhaps the author is right. Perhaps it is just a conspiracy/hoax. Perhaps we are wasting our money developing all this new technology that will allow us to consume less fuel. But if he are right, and I am wrong, all we will have done is spent a lot of money to develop technologies that will save resourses... and many will get rich in the process.
But if I am right, and he is wrong, if we DO NOT develop the technologies NOW and instead wait until disaster strikes... we will have dug a very deep hole and it will take a LONG time to fill it back in. I personally don't want to risk bestowing such a future to my son, or to your kids either.