Hirsch is confused by his own faulty grasp of economics.

He believes peak oil will cause a depression all by itself. He's been warning recently that a 20% fall in oil production and consumption would cause a 20% fall in GDP, an event on the order of the Great Depression.  This is something which makes no sense, and for which he has no real evidence.

Now he's telling people not to talk about Peak Oil, apparently to protect people from being scared by his own faulty warnings of financial doom.  It makes no sense.

Hiding from this reality is the reason we find ourselves in it in the first place. Yeah sometimes the truth hurts, but the world is not a 5 year old child. We can and must take responsibility for our dependence on fossil fuels. Global oil production has literally been flat since 2005. The yearly production gains and discoveries are now being over shadowed by the yearly declines in 18 of the leading oil producers. This imbalance is further stretched by China and India's rampant growth. China has been growing their demand for oil by 7-10%/annually for the past 5 years. By 2030 the world will require an additional 40 million barrels per day of production (125mbpd). However, when adding in the decline rates of peaked fields, that number may be even larger. Conservatively we need 2 more Saudi Arabia's in the next 20 years to keep up with growth. That's 1,446 barrels per second by 2030. That's up from 983 bps currently. It doesn't take much common sense to realize that this energy intensive way of life cannot continue indefinitely. Luckily, America and the world have an endless stream of ideas to combat our dependence on oil. Unfortunately, the low cost of energy now is hampering alternative energy investments; a paradox that hopefully will be addressed by the new administration in the coming years. Ultimately knowledge and appreciation of energy will help society move in the right direction. However, KEEPING QUIET will only prevent the masses from using energy responsibly.

Matt Coyle oildependency.org ouroiladdiction.com

The drop in oil prices is a perfect example of how lower demand can restore market stability.

Lowering demand is the only effective response to lower supply.  That is the message peak oilers could emphasize now.  They wouldn't lose their audience if they adjusted to this new reality.

Give up the "Mad Max" screaming about the end of cheap oil.  Admit that if demand drops in conjunction with supply, our oily GHG economic war on terror problems would evaporate into thin air.

Climb on the GHG tipping point scream wagon and talk up demand reduction as the only way out.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

There can be one major redeeming factor in the current chaos - an openness to seeing the world as it IS and to move forward in a way that is different than before and which might give us a chance.

That way forward is NOT oil, "clean coal" or any other carbon-polluting climate-toxic dwindling fuel.  

If Peak Oil doesn't get discussed then the way forward will be DOA because using the old carbon energy will not solve the economic woes. They may make it out the gate but they will be sheared off at the knees as the approach the first turn on what will be an epic race down the peak slope.

By choosing the Blue Pill, the problem remains and looms and continues to hurt our present and future.

Unless EVERYONE understands and "gets" Peak Oil as a current concern, then the needed New Fuels New Deal will not happen and vast sums of money will be (are being) wasted on propping up pre-collapse companies, business models, economies, all of which can not survive or thrive as we are all forced to power-down.

To ignore it, as Hirsch suggests, is a miscarriage of our basic responsibility as a rational humane society.

The only reason I'd stay a little guarded and peak oil is because Hubbert has predicted ever since 1970. It hasn't happened in 38 years yet, folks. Many now think peak oil might be somewhere about 2020 - some right now - but if prices shoot back up as expected, deepwater and even polar oil could become more attractive to extract. For all the science, it is still a theory and political tool.

The question is whether using the Hubbert Theory is worth it to persuade people to do something. Here we're in a bit of a catch because while we want people to start implementing alternative kinds of energy, peak oil would do all that work for us (except of lingering doubts we'd ever be able to replace the energy from oil with clean alternatives, another dismal science).

So to me the theory of peak oil is only useful is it can do something for you, such as to help people change their lifestyles. Otherwise it doesn't bother me all that much, and predictions about the hydrocarbon industry have been littered with failures at every fork in the road.  -sam

Onward through the fog

The right solutions address Peak Oil, Global Warming, and the crashing economy at the same time: rapid investment in efficiency and renewable energy sources (solar, wind, and geothermal electricity along with electrified transporation).

This is where Robert Hirsch's proposed wedges (2005 study: Enhanced Oil Recovery, Coal Liquids, Heavy Oil, and Gas To Liquids) only address oil substitutes, not the larger problems.

Far from waiting for the economy to improve to deploy energy solutions, the right solutions will help repair our economy.