The following is an excerpt from Jan Lundberg's excellent critique of Peak Oilists, economists, and the public's misunderstanding of the problem of oil and other resource depletion:

"People don't seem to suspect they have a dire need to understand crucial aspects of energy, although we all can’t be technical experts. Truths are staring us in the face regarding the function of the oil market and the hard realities of supply and demand. Both the economist and many a peak oilist seem to make up their own rules -- something I've tried to address in publications, media interviews and speeches.

Peak oilists do understand that the feasibility of alternative fuels for powering industrial society is in question. The inability to produce petrochemicals from solar panels and other “renewables” is a key point. Sadly, yet to be explored and hashed out with the public is the role of petroleum in our modern industrial culture. Growing social vulnerabilities demand organizational as well as culture-change solutions. However, there is no solution or simple answer; there is just a resolution awaiting us when we must face the “overshoot” society has accomplished with our natural bounty we're spending. At the same time, there do exist options for survival, even if we cannot just solve our problem with some fix.

It helps to keep in mind that the real alternative to our fossil-fuel hell, and the energy crisis known as peak oil and petrocollapse, is the local-community approach to living that respects the fragile Earth and its shrinking biological and cultural diversity. But we are not on our way to sustainability as long as we're not dealing with our serious oil addiction. Ideally, dealing with it will involve increased understanding of oil and the oil industry.

A basic understanding of the workings of the oil industry is lacking among experts and novices alike in peak oil, to be expected when non-industry types are the ones inclined to question the lucrative business of the fraternity of oil. The role of the oil market as it interplays with geological-based shortage is critical, but neglected. In ignoring or forgetting the supreme importance of the distribution system for all oil products readily available, and how it is controlled by buyers and sellers rather than how much crude oil may be left in the ground, many peak oilists assume there will be a gradual decline of oil extraction. They also assume the oil industry is set up for orderly contraction.

I discussed why this isn't the case at the Ecocity World Summit last April in San Francisco:

I disagree with Dr. Colin Campbell, peak oil geologist, that we are entering with peak the “Second Half of the Age of Oil.” My view involves my donning my oil-industry analyst hat and discussing the oil market. I formerly ran Lundberg Survey which predicted the Second Oil Shock in 1979.

Assumptions about oil's mirror-image demise (patterned after its graphic ascendancy) come largely from the “Hubbert Curve” and its arbitrary bell shape that implies extraction of oil gradually dwindling. As these thinkers and analysts with their non-industry background tout a milder effect of peak oil than collapse, a “doom and gloom” label tends to be put on anyone who does not see how substitute energy and materials (for our huge, growing population) can “save us.”

Socioeconomic collapse will come when global trade is hamstrung by the end of abundant oil -- possibly suddenly, in the form of a fatal interruption of supply due to world events. However, as bad as the disruption will be, a positive outcome from the loss of global corporate products will result, probably unevenly and with delay. In the main, the chain of events will mean the inevitable abandonment of unsustainable practices, institutions, and obsolete cultural values."

The article is best understood and enjoyed by reading it in its entirety. See url for link to original.