To a large extent then, what we see on graphs like this will depend on what mix of economic activities are conducted domestically in each country, and what is imported.

Well, in the US, transportation is 28% of energy consumption, and in Japan it is only 23%, even though Japan make do with half the energy consumption per capita. There are similar figures for residential use, where 68% of US consumption is devoted to lightning or area heating/cooling, and where ditto for commercial is 48%. These consumption patterns and differences are inherently domestic - it is not stuff you import or export where lots of energy has been sunk.

If anything, I think Japan's industry is quite heavy. Ship-building, automobiles, steel... Sure, they do not do a lot of energy extraction domestically, but such extraction's energy consumption hardly seems to show up in a total energy breakdown of US consumption either. (The main item may be oil refining at 16% of industry's 33% of total.) For Canada, though, I think you have a point, as they have unconventional oil and uranium ore and actually export a lot.

Mistermarko,
Japan imports a lot of commodities from Australia, but that hasn't pushed down out GDP/kW. This graph shows that its possible to have a high GDP/capita without being an energy glutton. Europe and Japan have high energy prices and high efficiency standards. Australia, Canada and US have a lot of room for further improvement.
Then again we could try to become more like KSA, Russia, S Africa, by keeping energy prices low and "waste baby waste". Who are those poor sods below S Africa? ( Iraq?).

Japan functions by importing commodities and exporting finished products. In a global economic downturn demand for such produce (which does not include food or energy) decreases, so one countries export gain is necessarily another's export loss.

Mistermarko, the downturn is temporary, whatever you may believe. Think like this instead: When it is too expensive to buy extreme gas guzzlers, what do you do? Well, you probably pimp your small car more instead!

Growth is a function of technical progress and sound economic policies. Energy plays a role, of course, but there is a lot of room to rearrange current energy consumption to allow for added growth. We need not even force it - markets will take care of this by themselves. (Of course, it would help if the US slowly introduced European gas taxes, but I realize this won't happen.)

The Global Footprint Network gives the 2003 global biocapacity per capita at 1.8 hectares, the global footprint per capita at 2.2 hectares (the deficit representing resource depletion) ... Japan's 2003 footprint at 4.4 hectares, and biocapacity at 0.7.

By contrast the US 2003 footprint is estimated at 9.6 hectares, and biocapacity at 4.7 hectares.

So while Japan can't live on the current footprint of Japan's economy without importing most of its commodity or embedded resources per capita, on the GFN estimates (and the caution is needed that footprint estimates are intrinsically rough estimates), the US could do, and have resource to export, unfinished or embedded, on top.

I think very few folks will want to be like Japan once oil scarcity becomes an issue. Unless Japan finds a real way to transport goods by sail that economy is in a horrible position.

The "growth ceiling" was mostly a drought in domestic investment in productive capacity, as Japanese industry shifted from roughly 90% domestic content of production to roughly 60%.

However that shift was largely outsourcing production stages that could be handled well in a labor intensive way in South East Asia and China ... the "outsourcing of material and energy" was the foundation of Japanese heavy industry for its initial post-WWII growth industries of steel and ship building, continuing into the second stage with motor vehicles.