David; of course you are right about sodium density! Currently, we get about 300 kilometres range, out of a half ton of lithium. Denser sodium ion crystals might hold 3-4 times more stored energy in smaller half/quarter ton battery packages?
That is why they may enable increased range? Denser heavier but much smaller very long life packages, might be conveniently contained inside a tubular carbon fibre chassis, where the weight is positioned to assist a significantly enhanced lower centre of gravity and better handling characteristics.
Sodium is much more common than lithium; albeit, we have quite a lot of the latter and a virtually captive market?
Capacitor/battery combinations already trialled; demonstrate, that a three quarter charge is possible in just five minutes. Enough to allow reasonably placed recharging stations to serve our future long distance needs? Albeit, much of our intercity travel needs will be replaced by the optic fibre highway and very rapid rail options?
I agree with the other posters who say that our globe is already over populated and further growth is unsustainable?
As is turning food crops into alternative fuel! A process which always accompanied by an energy debt. Cheers, Rhrosty.

Not 'Cheers!' Rhostry, 'Glooms!' as the original author of this article is wont to say...

It's the same problem that we had here in NSW when the dams started to run dry, not so long ago.

It suddenly occurred to the citizenry that no-one had actually articulated a plan for the State's water for more than fifty years, meanwhile, the population grew a tad. The government eventually cobbled together a plan to keep the State's thirsts quenched, and spent a cool couple of billion on a desalination plant.

The dams are now 100% full, and the government faces a difficult choice: run the water from the plant back out to sea at a cost of $80-$100 million a year. Or close the whole thing down and write off the investment.

This is a purely economic problem, and the writer is fully justified in asking the question - why is the government not listening to Treasury. The presence or absence of oil itself is less of an issue - neither Sweden nor Switzerland produce a single drop of the stuff, and their population is not starving last time I looked. But if we are about to run out, and require replacement sources, these need to be planned for, I would think.

Doomsday scenarios are fun, of course, but not the most relevant issue.

What is a point to sell gas and coal in enormous amounts to pay for oil imported?

Electrical cars and nuke mini-engines could do without contributing to overseas-based monopolies.

@ myforum - peak oil is not jut about transport - hydrocarbons in their various guises form the backbone of the global economy. Our love affair with the motor car inhibits politicians from doing anything that will deny access although if we were being practical we would stop burning the stuff for private transport and restrict its use to the manufacture of plastics and the like - this at least would buy us some time.
Electric cars are a possible solution - most all electric vehicles have an effective range of 300kms between charges but would only constitute progress if they were recharged using solar panels

The situation that the world finds itself in is really simple.

We now use 5 to 6 times the amount of oil we discover in each year.
There is only one possible conclusion to such a parameter.
Any oil found now is more expensive to extract or is in more expensive
areas in which to operate. They are not drilling kms below the sea bed
just for fun. As these more expensive sources get mixed with the older
oil sources the ratio changes and the price per barrel goes up & up.

The only end to this is that the oil gets too expensive to sell and
its cost leaves nothing to buy food. At that point production stops.
It is at this point that we hope "someone" has found the magic bullet
that can keep us in business as usual.
Natural gas can extend the time to when we reach cutoff.
If we are silly enough to sell off all our natural gas then all we do
is reduce the time margin to get the energy transformation done.

It is the politician's job to manage that transition, as after all
surely their main job is to manage the country to adapt to changing
conditions. That must be the most fundamental political job !