I do think that oil doesn't have its future scarcity sufficiently priced in today's numbers because for most people and especially oil companies and oil-based e

I do think that oil doesn't have its future scarcity sufficiently priced in today's numbers because for most people and especially oil companies and oil-based economies it would be too scary to think about it. The root of the problem itself is not at all related to capitalism or other economic models. Capitalist countries are no better off with regard to this than other economies. The problem is related to the fact that in the coming decades the energy needed to pump a barrel of oil will increase, up until the threshold in the far future where it costs a barrel of oil to pump a barrel of oil. And because modern economies are based on the availability of cheap oil, this change will transform or shatter these economies. It's an universal cost. If it's not about the price of pumping and buying oil in dollars, it will be the time, effort, and availability of oil. Like you said, serious work on alternatives is only as serious as dictated by the lack of availability of cheap oil. I call exactly that wearing blindfolds because it is about betting entires nations on the possibility that we'll find an alternative energy store or energy source, in time, that allows us to maintain roughly today's standard of living. I would like to see it happen, too, but from the viewpoint of a contemporary man we'll be just totally and ultimately screwed if it doesn't. What I suggested is that we should take this into account already and not after 50 years when it might not be possible to do really serious work on alternatives. It's really about taking the hit slowly and adaptively or getting it slammed on your face at once.