Why is the focus always, "How can we continue business as usual (or some close facsimile)?"

So, we are running out of global-warming poison in our neck of the woods. Hmmm. Let's see if we can jimmy up some imports to keep the planet's destruction on schedule.

Now, I know that many here will say they are only speculating on what the powers that be will likely do to keep the entropy machine going, but that only smacks of the current media's obsession with "fair and balanced" treatment of the news. Put simply, the media feels they cannot challenge the logic of anyone and will merely allow any ole insane person put forth their views without commentary from the program's "journalist" hosts. Thus, lunatics like Robertson, Rove, Frist and the entire neocon circus can come onto the Sunday pundit pulpits and blather their idiocy without fear of a run-in with contradictory facts. We don't have to do that here. We can call it like it is.

Any continuation of the existing paradigm will result in increased suffering a little further down the road, increased war just around the corner, increased mortality for the human species in twenty years instead of lesser suffering in ten. Those who advocate technical solutions involving the release of more carbon into the atmosphere are simply allowing more people to overpopulate the planet and thus are increasing the number of people who will die unnecessarily. It is tantamount to murder. Murder in the name of consumer greed. Murder just so the current generation can continue their consumer orgy, so they can buy more plastic crap that ends up in the upstairs closet in two weeks, so they can overeat incredibly bad food from their local Mickey Dees.

Obviously we deserve our fate. We cannot seem to look beyond our two hundred function graphing calculators to the ultimate reality; it HAS to end no matter what we do to keep the party going. Physics is not the energy glutton's friend.

I can now see that this has to play out in the worst way possible. We are just like the monkeys at the zoo. A keeper tosses a treat into the enclosure and one of the smaller females grabs it and runs. A small male runs her down and takes it by force. Finally, the bull male slaps the small male around and eats it himself. Ahhh, America, bull monkey in the enclosure of life. Here we are a bunch of selfish monkeys all fighting for the scraps of the industrial revolution. Will we act in a reasoned manner? Of course not. The monkeys have tribes and the tribes are about to face off over the oil. One day the keeper will not have enough treats and then the monkeys will kill each other. Many will die of starvation. If this is the only way to kill off the energy monkeys, so be it.

Ecofascism anyone?
Aw Man! You just reminded me how good a quarter-pounder with cheese would taste right now.
Exactly! Thank you Cherenkov! Old thinking will not get us out of the old problems. Our current world is already "fossilized", literally.

To address your question, though, I think we have to consider who's running the show. It's not you or me, or any of us who have a new vision for the future based upon renewable resources and much less available energy. It's the current global energy behemoths and their attendant global media subsidiaries (to brainwash the global public). In reality, most of the discussion here--which we know is ridiculous because it won't solve the underlying problems--is likely to be some form of how it really plays out. Those who are "large and in charge" are greedy bastards and they will make out like bandits as the world collapses around the heads of the rest of us. The don't need to replace all the gas (or oil, or electricity) that we currently use, just enough for them 'til the end of their lives. Remember, this world economy and the old white men who run it only think in the short, short term.

You are asking the right questions, but you are being drowned out by a media empire that's impossible to compete with.

Call me naive, but brainwashing isn't the right word. Nobody is putting a gun to John & Jane Doe's heads and forcing them to watch moronic television shows rather than read TOD. If only it could all be blamed on those "greedy bastards." I fear the truth is a tad more depressing. Consumer society with all its attendant advertising, PR and other "brainwashing" only exists because lots of people like it. Didn't somebody here quote Kunstler the other day to the effect that we will only change when we are forced to?
I think you have it there...

But the implication of this Kunstler's statement is that a supply shortfall relative to projected demand of any kind resets the conditions for calculating projected demand.  I'd wager that few consumers will maintain their gas consumption levels while prices soar in hopes that someday they'll get price relief via LNG.  The EIA assumes a particular price range when calculating this figure that is, perhaps, optimistically low.  Demand destruction will happen in any number of ways.  We know because we've experienced at least once before.  I wonder if there's potential for a new boom and bust cycle in gas prices (at a higher range) that will undermine investment and development in LNG?...

Regarding Cherenkov's (understandable) frustration, I'd draw attention to the title of the blog.  This is a supply side forum.  While demand side issues are relevant their regular inclusion may make these threads a tad daunting to navigate.    I view TOD as a part of the whole equation - whatever that might be.

Thanks for the post!  This is very well timed for me as I'm preparing a presentation on post "peak gas" strategic opportunities in housing.  Keep 'em coming.