I've heard this theory, and I certainly respect Rubin, but oil prices are now down around 80+$/barrell, having fallen dramatically in recent weeks.
With signs of a global slow down showing up in various data, oil demand will ease a bit more yet, so there could be further falls.
These price levels raise questions about the theory, at least in the short term.
On the other hand gold is also falling which is not normal, so we're in uncharted territory.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Belly,

We may develop some nifty alternative fuels. But there's a rule in nature that dictates that an unrelenting push for progress always leads to breakdown. You may think this epoch of human history will override that rule, but I'm not so sure

Yes Yabby, a lot of people will starve unless they get to work growing their own food.

Belly said;
I strongly think peak oil will, when it comes, be the reason we get alternative fuels.

Well Belly the International Energy Authority said in their 2010 report
that peak crude oil occurred in 2006. That is why we had the 2008 GFC problem.
Alternatives are a real possibility with the best transition fuel being
natural gas. Biofuels have a poor ERoEI and require more land than we
might want to devote to fuel.
Re ships, quite a job to build a fleet of sailing ships to do the job
that the current fleet does and many times the number of ships would be needed.

Anthonyve said:
but oil prices are now down around 80+$/barrell,

and this is exactly what was predicted many many years ago.
The price will rise again with recovery, and then the economy will
slow again because of the higher price and then the price will fall again.
This oscillation will continue for a small number of cycles and then
stop at a low level. For all anyone knows perhaps it has stopped already.

Many experts who study this problem believe that the lifestyle that is
coming has many positive features and will be very satisfactory.

Anyway if this post makes you all look at energy a bit differently
it will have been worthwhile.

Bazz,
Now that's a really interesting idea that I hadn't thought through before; the notion that oil availability will create a feedback mechanism limiting global economic growth which will fall back until the oil price is low enough for growth to kick off again.
It's certainly sounds reasonable and does seem to fit in with what we are seeing.
I have a friend who is the oil drill bit business, and he has been telling me that oil drills are becoming incredibly complicated pieces of engineering due to the difficulty of finding a way to tap remaining oil fields.
That certainly supports your hypothesis.
I'm not too pessimistic though, as I think the world might be better off running out of oil sooner rather than later. I'm confident that alternatives can take up the slack and at doable prices. Economies of scale alone will start to work in renewables' favour.
Also, once the need is dire, I have no doubt that human ingenuity will find solutions.
Hopefully, those solutions will be less polluting than fossil fuels.
In that vein, I admit to mixed feelings about nuclear. On the one hand there's the Japanese experience - pretty scary and not anywhere near played out yet, and on the other hand there's the argument that nuclear power offers a technologically doable interim solution, both to peak oil and to global warming.
But with the problems associated with it, it's tough to see the right answer.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

My previous post spoke of an "unrelenting" push for progress. That's the key word. If humans were as wise as they are smart, they would have resisted the continuous gung-ho approach in utilising their fuel reserves. They would have retained their control and a fairly reasonable lifestyle if they had learned the art of moderation and restraint...like a pot of boiling water slowly simmering will not evaporate as fast as one at full boil.

Anthonyve said;
the notion that oil availability will create a feedback mechanism

Yes, I think it was Colin Campbell and or Kenneth Deffeyes who said
that when peak occurred and the rising cost of oil started to eat into
GDP that the economy would collapse and the price of oil would fall.

This is a classic feedback loop, but I have not seen anyone present
the calculations. To me it looks like a classic three term control
loop with too much gain. I only wish I had the maths to work it out.

To stop it oscillating you have to reduce its sensitivity, eg by
reducing the demand for oil, or increasing the supply, or bringing
into the loop an alternative liquid fuel.
That is what they did with biofuels for a while but they are
overwhelmed by depletion in older oil wells.

The other way of stopping it is to permanently remove one of the inputs.