I think the best solutions would play to the free market, and pick losers, not winners.

We know there are problems with oil, thus tax it. We know coal produces too many emissions, although it remains an abundant domestic resource: tax the emissions.

Houses are getting excessively inefficient. Perhaps a law that forces developpers to foot part of the elecricity/heating bill (for a limited period time) would work?

The growth of suburbs could potentially be stopped simply through smarter zoning and minimal highway/road development (coupled with more mass transit).

Massive infrastructure upgrades, like a hydrogen network, could also be in order, but not until the solution is proven. Nuclear power's already pretty proven, so a gov. encouraged building bilge there could be timely.

Tax subsidies can be a powerful tool to speed things up, but again, should not be so specifically oriented toward electric bikes or wind power. Instead, for instance, drop property taxes (for a limited period), for land holding (near) 0-emission, 0 consumption power generating facilities.

There's also a major advantage to getting the solutions first, albeit at some great government cost. You can then sell those solutions (and enjoy their benefits), whilst the rest of the world struggles to catch up.

These are just a few ideas, please critique and add.

We (USA) have been fairly sucessful with an assult weapons ban and I'm sure we could figure out a way to ban old light bulbs. I think most people agree that using little heaters that make light as a by product are pretty much worthless. Great back in the day, but its time to move on. I'd probably word it something like 'no single light bulb posssessed can consume more than 25 watts of power with out lighting permit zqsrx-235' and the then we'd have to come up with terms for accuriring said permit. They've gotten so good with LED lighting that a 5 watt light can provide a great deal of light. I'd also be nice to see cars start using LED's for lights. You'd be able to reduce engine drag from the altenator significantly, thus making electric and even internal combustion much more efficent.

Not making houses out of wood would be a great start to making them more efficent and better insulated. Brick and concrete is much more efficent and has way less maintanice. They cool better in the summer, and maintain their heat in the winter as well as stand up to the elements better. Clay/adobe(sp?) is also very good and last's a long time. Cost's a little more to construct, but in the long haul it pays off many times over I'm sure. I'd say hire a group to do surveys of efficency in differnt areas, and design building codes that reflec what would be most energy efficent in that area.

You have a good point about cars, especially enviromentaly when it comes to their batterys. It'd be neat to see someone bring to market and car, say a 4 passenger vehicle, that was  enclosed, but also pedal powered (and single person vehicles like this, i'd ride by bike all winter, but the cold gets to me too much). I'd think you could get a pretty light carbon fiber frame that could seat 4, have pedals, and could do 35 miles per hour with 3 or 4 peole pedaling. Electric for lazy people, or people who simply can't pedal or even to back up the pedaling, but mostly pedal for us folk that actually enjoy working out while getting from point A to B.

I think a high rise appartment/condo that was constructed well would be an awesome place to live. I know some of the college dorms in Ames, IA are completly constructed with concrete (the floors and the walls) and then you can't hear your neighbors and it gives you real privacy. I think a nice big tall high rise that was basicly set in a the middle of a field w/ a nice park where the tennants worked the garden would be fabulous. You could take an area of an entire suburb, have light rail train out to the skirts of the fields for people to work and i think that would be a great way to use land. Have the buildings all connected with light rail also, have the buildings say about every 2 miles appart.

I just think localized power seems to make sense, you wouldn't have 50 million people all lose power at once.

Subsidize the creation of wind farms. i live in the midwest, and it blows my mind (pun intended) that wind is not used more. Hydrogen storage could use the excess power to make hydrogen for peak times and for days its not so windy. I think the hydrogen storage should be local also. I think it'd be neat if power basicly worked like the internet, have node stations that all feed and work together to provide fault tolerance.

ofcourse, I have no idea how we go about tearing everything down and re-building, but in my 'post peak positive dream', this is how i'd like to see it.