The big questions must be why nuclear fell flat and why we meekly acquiesce to the rise and rise of coal. Maybe the model can be salvaged by another but late peaking curve for 'learned conservation'. BTW I just watched the Australian ABC show 'Carbon Cops' which has everybody feeling guilty and they are about to run a story on glacier melt in the Andes mountains. Maybe Joe Suburbia is sitting in front of the TV saying 'I'll drive less when oil runs out, nukes are kinda creepy but coal is already mainstream. I'll just go with the flow'.

Joe Suburbia is in a squirrel cage -- driving an hour or more to a mindless job, stuck in traffic, listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio, feeling hopeless and angry and blaming whoever Rush tells him to blame for his discomfort, which he doesn't even have a name for.

When the gasoline goes up in price, he will forgo almost everything to keep on buying gas, because he doesn't know any other way. And won't learn.

When the gas becomes less available, he blame Congress, and wants a bill passed to produce more gas.

Some day, the gas just won't be there, and Joe will be helpless and unable to adapt --

There is no "substitution" going on in the USA, and no models for adaptive behavior to changed ecology. Only what people teach themselves -- for example, through the Oil Drum posts.

Also -- re above posts. India's nuclear program obviously did not reach the lofty civilian goal -- but they did build a bomb, which has presumably worked to the advantage of the elites who run the country. I think a lot of people are skittish about nuclear -- mainly because it is so easy, apparently, for the leaders to "forget" there is a civilian population that needs energy, and simply devotes reources to military purposes.