100 years or so ago, people coped quite well without oil.
They'd have a quarter acre block, grew some veggies and fruit
trees, kept a few chooks, worked and socialised locally.

If and when oil gets too expensive, going back to that kind
of lifestyle makes perfect sense and is not the end of the
world.

Yabby, tell me how you expect the 80% of the world's population who live in cities to do that?

Hi yabby

Nice thought but i dont see it happening so easily. What this really means for us is decades of more war as we attempt to wrest control from the oil nations. US et al has already chosen war over diplomacy and conservation, why expect anything less? Thats whats scary, that the "peak oil? what peak oil?" myth will be perpetuated by 1st world nations as we continue to reign terror upon less militarised nations in the name of "terrorism". True democracy may fix this, but we are mentally so far from wanting to take back our power right now i cant see it happening for a while.

In the (much) longer term it means:

1. smaller engine capacities, say 2-3 cylinder cars, for non-commercial vehicles
2. higher taxes to discourage car ownership and use, such as large up front registration fees where say 10yrs of rego at $5-10kpa are paid... in advance
3. no cars in cbd radius of say 2kms or heavy tolls for access
4. on/off days for drivers, like water restrictions
5. more public transport
6. (much) higher property values for anything in proximity to city and town centres
7. development of satellite type cities, townships, suburbs.
8. and of course alternative fuels (which have their downsides like driving up grain prices in the case of ethanol production).

Ooh, Countryboy, AFAIK most large cities have urban sprawl around
them, where quarter acre plus blocks are pretty common. I certainly
don't believe in the chardonay set mantra that more high density
living, closer to cities, will solve everything. I'll let other
suckers believe that stuff.

You would actually be amazed, what a small bit of dirt can produce,
using such simple technology like permaculture. So methinks that
people with a bit of dirt will be far better off then those
living in the human zoo.

As far as transport goes, if everyone is so concerned about their
future wheels, why don't they build a pipeline for NW Shelf gas
to the East? We are chilling the stuff to -160deg to export it
cheaply. We could use it ourselves in Australia. Convenience
is still why people prefer oil to gas.

I think that the market will solve most of the issues that Sandra
raises. People will learn quick, once they feel a bit of pain.

Getting energy always involves consuming energy. If anyone cares to think of the energy used in looking for oil, drilling for oil, refining the oil, shipping the oil in supertankers and pipelines that, like offshore drilling platforms, have to be built, and then transporting it and selling it, it is a miracle that petrol is so cheap.

Despite assertions to the contrary, hydrogen surely must have a role to play for the future. Australia is surrounded by an electrolyte called the sea, which will bubble off hydrogen when electrolysed. Electricity can be generated in many ways, none of which singly would produce enough but if combined could surely provide plenty. And energy efficiency would release an excess of unused electricity.

Anyway, once again the Australian Democrats have proved that they think ahead of the larger political parties and also the Australian electorate, which is why the Australian Democrats don't get elected. They are too intelligent for this country.