Hmmm...I am currently a Heinberg fan and dissent will not be tolerated! Just joking...well sort of.
Just because Heinberg may be wary of relying primarily on nuclear energy in the future, doesn't mean he's a complete crackpot and all of his wisdom is rubbish. Nuclear energy is not inherently "clean" and "safe" and I'm skeptical that safety standards would be of primary concern when the peak oil sh*t hits the fan. It will be a key player in a post-peak oil world but I'm not ready to list it as my first option either at this point.
Nuclear plants produce approximately 8% of the U.S. energy demand. Given our country's previous track record and also basic human nature, we will not respond to the peak oil crisis until gas/oil prices have already risen to high level. The manufacturing that goes into producing nuclear plants requires oil inputs, and by the time America gets a clue, the costs of constructing these plants will be much higher and it begs the question whether the ventures will even be economically feasible? Companies aren't going to invest in a project that's not profitable and the government will be bankrupt by that point...but that's a totally different subject.
Heinberg does not think that oil will run out, nor do I. I believe he makes a point to say in the Party's Over that on average, the first half of the world's reserves, the oil that is cheapest and easiest to obtain will have been pumped, and the type that harder to get out and will yield diminishing returns due is it's inferior quality. Maybe the point of contention is that world demand outstripping the supply isn't such a big deal? Or maybe the point of contention is the idea that our economy can handle expensive oil regardless of the price per barrel? All I can say to that is we couldn't handle price spikes in 1973, we can't price spikes after major natural disasters, heck we can't even handle slight price increases at the pump, when we haven't even felt the effect in the prices of consumer goods we buy every day! Somehow I think terms "peak oil crisis" and "no big deal" will continue to remain mutually exclusive in my head.
Nuclear power (even combined with wind power) will not be able to remotely compare to or provide all of the crap we get from oil and how we live our lives. There will be indeed be some energy rationing going on, but it won't be Sally gets 10 watts on Sunday, Peter gets 10 watts on Wednesday, and Dora gets 10 watts on Friday. It'll be more like the military gets 8,000 watts to fight resource wars, agricultural farmlands come next so the majority of Americans don't starve, hospitals and emergency services get 1,000, the local police force comes next, waste and water treatment plants come next, and so on and so forth. And that's an idealic allocation of limited resources based on what's fair to society as a whole. If pre-peak oil politics have given us any kind of indication of what's to come, those without money and political clout are going to get screwed in this whole rationing process.
--------------------
http://kicktheoilhabit.blogspot.com/