The claims of some politicians that we are on the brink of an energy

sajjad, can you please help to rate my essay:
The argument states the claim that there are energy crisis is misguided since there is enough reserve in the event of any production shortage, and in ground oil will not be running out of time soon. Hence, there is no need to set aside the technology and infrastructure of oil-based century. Stated in this way, the argument fails to communicate several key facts based on which it can be evaluated. The argument relies on the assumption for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument remains unconvincing and open to debate.
First of all, the argument states without providing supporting evidence that claim about energy crisis is misguided since there is enough reserve, and in ground oil will not be running out soon.
This argument is a stretch since no evidence is provided how much reserve is currently available, what is the average requirement for any production, and finally how significant the supply of oil should be to address the risk of energy crisis in the foreseeable future.
The argument could have been strengthened if it provided relevant information about amount of reserve is currently available, and production requirements. So, the relevant comparison can be made to determine whether there is a sufficient amount of reserve available to meet production shortage.

Secondly, it is claimed that we should expect energy crisis since there is a sufficient reserve available to meet production requirements.
It is a weak and unsupported claim since no evidence is provided about external factors that may impact availability of reserves. For example, if production increases due to a higher consumption, availability of reserve will decrease. As a result, it will lead to energy crisis.
Therefore, to strenghthen this claim, it is essential to discuss external factors that may impact availability of reserve in the future.

Finally, it is stated that there is no need to set aside the technology and infrastructure of oil based energy since there is no evidence of energy crisis in the future. However, answers to the following questions have not been addressed in the argument.
Are there any external factors that may impact availability of reserve and as a result lead to production shortage?
What are the costs of setting the technology vs. the benefits of setting the technology ans as a result addressing the risk of energy crisis in the future?
How it was evaluated, and what criteria was used to determine that there is enough oil reserve to meet production requirements?
Without answering these questions, one is left with the impression that the argument is a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

To conclude, for the above listed reasons, the argument is flawed, unconvincing and open to debate. The argument could have been strengthened if it communicated the following key information. First of all, additional information should be provided to demonstrate how much oil reserve is currently available, what are the production requirements. So, it can be determined whether sufficient oil reserve is available to meet production requirements. Secondly, external factors should be assessed to determine whether availability of oil reserve may be impacted by external factors. In order to assess a merit of a certain situation, it is essential to have a knowledge of all contributing factors. Without this information, the argument remains unconvincing and open to debate.