A significant percentage of today's resource use is based upon lifestyle choice rather than unalterable human needs. The United States has 5% of world's population and accounts for 24.8% of global oil consumption by using 20.52 million barrels of oil per day, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Europe, not including Russia, accounts for an additional 19.9% of the world's oil consumption at 16.45 million barrels of oil daily. The voluntary simplicity movement advocates a shift from consumerism to a reduced use of natural resources and energy. Regardless of choice, a period of decreasing fossil fuel reserves is likely to lead to a decrease of demand for goods and services. However, environmentally friendly, low-energy replacements for many current activities are increasingly or already available. Examples include working from home by telecommuting, using a computer and internet connection, commuting by bicycle, mass transit, and eating home-cooked, locally grown, organic meals instead of highly-packaged convenience foods from restaurants and grocery stores. Jobs that are nearer to home with shorter commuting distance may become increasingly desirable.

Changes in lifestyle choices have other important practical advantages. First, under extreme conditions, social change can proceed much more rapidly than large-scale infrastructure change. Second, the other alternatives assume the results are technologically feasible, whereas decreased energy availability can be planned for and potentially mitigated by increased efficiency and less demand. Finally, living simply can reduce one's reliance on the well-being of the global economy. Even so, a serious shift from a high-energy lifestyle could lead to increased unemployment, and bankrupt many businesses and markets.

Others are pessimistic about the lifestyle changes needed to reduce energy demand. If society doesn't proactively reduce energy use and consumption remains high as supplies run out, this reduction may be imposed by a reducing energy supply. Many of these lifestyle changes are seen as unpleasant to many. Electricity may be needed to be produced with nuclear power instead of fossil fuels despite protests. People may be forced to work more to replace the work previously done by machines. Airplanes and cars may be replaced by railroads, ships, mass transport and working from home. People may travel much less, for example, staying at home during holidays, seeing the doctor via a computer link-up, computer based home education systems, etc. Foods and commodities like chocolate, coffee, tea, and dairy products may be replaced by locally produced meat, fish, cereals and vegetables. Air conditioning may disappear. People may move to smaller houses that cost less to build and heat. Housing and even consumer goods may become more standardized with less variety than today in order to maximize efficiency. There would be far more use of small solar power projects (e.g. to heat or cool houses). In general, there would be less material consumption because higher power cost affects all stages of transportation fuel and heating, and possibly even electricity. Transportation fuel may be made available to the supermarkets in order to home delivery but not to individuals, or else the price may be so high that access to oil mostly remains in the hands of government bodies and businesses, with individual car use becoming outdated. In such a society people are much more likely to work, play and communicate through computer and internet, with society overall becoming much less mobile. Moonshining will see a sharp increase, but not for alcoholic beverages; rather people will begin to produce ethanol from any fermentable carbohydrates and use it as motor fuel.

Bookmark/Search this post with:
delicious | digg | reddit | magnoliacom | newsvine | furl | google | yahoo