Uh, no, we haven’t. Peak oil is the point of global rate of oil production, literally the all-time maximum supply. In terms of defining the date of peak oil, a much narrower view than we should be taking, obviously, supply not meeting demand isn’t an issue.

And besides, Chris Skrebowski is right–the actual production peak will come in 2011 +/- 1 year.

The first scenario, “Scramble”, envisages a mad dash by nations to secure resources. With policymakers viewing energy as “a zero-sum game,” use of domestic coal and biofuels accelerates.

It is a world, said the Shell chief, where “policymakers pay little attention to energy consumption - until supplies run short.” [Sound familiar?]

The alternative scenario, “Blue-prints”, envisages a world of political cooperation between governments on efficiency standards and taxes, a convergence of policies on emissions trading and local initiatives to improve environmental performance of buildings.

Shell has not committed to either scenario. The oil company regularly uses scenario-planning to test the likely impact of widely divergent economic and political scenarios on its long-term strategy.

Unsurprisingly, Mr van der Veer indicated that Shell preferred the Blueprints scenario but he expressed caution over the likelihood of it coming to pass without a global approach to emissions trading.

[So basically if we don’t come up with a global approach to emissions trading (like, say…Kyoto) then everything is going to fall apart? Gee, it seems like “Scramble” would be a costly scenario that might hurt our economy. Yet it is clear that Bush prefers “Scramble.” Sigh. People should have learned long ago that Bush doesn’t give his real reasons for doing things. If he says “because it will hurt our economy” he means “because it will cost my friends, and who cares about the rest of you.”]

Best,

D

Of course, I think the followers of Shell have already been exposed to some of this, i.e., back when Lord Ron Oxburgh was parachuted in as Chairman to clean up the earlier mess, and said things like: “I’m really very worried for the planet”.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/ environment/ 2004/ jun/ 17/ scienceinterviews.oilandpetrol

and later:
http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/ about/ greenpeace-business-lecture-series
In whih he warns about the “angry beast” of climate change.

Google: ron oxburgh climate change yields many hits

Joe is right in one way - unchecked Global Warming is ultimately much more dangerous than oil scarcity, but oil scarcity will cause a panic much sooner and much more dramatically than GW.

We need to begin speaking of both issues together - two catastrophes with one single solution, building a new clean energy economy and doing so with great urgency. Otherwise the result of the oil crisis will be a desperate switch to dirtier fuels exacerbating the climate problem and missing the one opportunity we have to effect sweeping change and progress in carbon emissions.