Very soon after learning about Peak Oil, I came to the realization you just summarized. Expensive oil (whether technically peak or not) will put the breaks on the world economy. However, even if demand is reduced, depletion continues, so any equilibrium point will only be temporary until it is eroded by depletion and the decline continues. Any atttempt at recovery will kick up demand, which will kick up prices and strangle the recovery.

I think this will happen to a greater or less extent, even if we're successful at developing alternatives. Alternatives will take time and money, and both are going to be hard to come by. The transition is going to be painful.

We do, however, have a lot of control over how painful it is going to be. I'm just not very optimistic that we will do the right things as a society. I'm pretty sure we'll panic and make the problem worse, maybe a lot worse. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm trying to be prepared for the worst.

This is partly why I have always favoured power-down scenarios (having less children to achieve smaller populations, working towards low energy life-styles, etc (note: that does not mean anti-technology or not using technology as some people seem to get fixated on with power-down talk)).

Every time we try to find alternatives to power and supply raw material for BAU, we will be strangled by the continuing depletion and erosion of the very system upon which we DEPEND for survival. As one article above notes, we are not separate from our environment. The techno-fix ideas always come across as very simplistic, and seem to willfully fail to take into account the complexity of the systems that drive our economies...

I am in favour of many technophile ideas, but only if they are not being touted to keep BAU ticking along in what appears to be an unrealistic and deluded way.