I want a world where people are motivated by the beautiful things they love.

At the same time, I’m not blind to the fact that many people are driven by their fears. Hopes and fears.

Some people, like economist Robert Hirsh, take a hopeful approach to fearful problems. Last year’s Hirsh Report (PDF) is a comprehensive study of the phenomenon of “peak oil”. Martin Tobias’ blog provides links to the Hirsh Report, AND a great interview (MP3) with Hirsh that highlights the lessons he’s uncovered.

In the interview Hirsh states:

“I was asked recently about some of the environmental effects associated with these activities, and particularly global warming, and I said that, in my opinion, the biggest pollution problem that people would worry about is people out of work, losing their homes, losing their cars, losing their possessions, because economies are going into recession, or worse. Under those conditions people are going to worry much less about the environment, and worry much more about getting economies back on a reasonably even keel.”

We don’t benefit by framing this issue in terms of environmental preservation. Environmental considerations would take a deep back seat in the event of global economic collapse. Hirsh does a good job illustrating the point. It’s hard enough to muster environmental political capital in good times, and I’d argue it’ll be potentially impossible if we’re confronted with a major energy crisis.

“This problem is truly frightening. This problem is like nothing I’ve ever seen in my lifetime. And the more you think about it, and the more you look at the numbers, the more uneasy any observer gets.”

“Its so easy to sound alarmist, and I fear that part of what I’m saying may sound alarmist. But there simply is no question that the risks here are beyond anything that any of us have ever dealt with. And the risks to our economies and our civilization are enormous. And people don’t want to hear that. I don’t want to think about that. That’s a very uncomfortable thing to think about. And I will tell you that it took some time after that realization set in to be able to emerge and try to be positive and constructive about this problem.”

“This is really an incredibly difficult and incredibly severe problem.”

At this point in the interview I almost thought Hirsh was going to begin to cry. This guy doesn’t strike me as a limp wristed liberal either. He’s a futurist, a game theorist, and a scenario planner — a pragmatic intellectual. His models are based in commonly accepted principles of finance, logistics, and most importantly, political economy. I’ve known more than one futurist to succumb to serious depression and angst over the human condition. Hirsh, on the other hand, is braving the consequences, and delivering a courageous message.

Yes, it would be nice if he also had an easy answer. There is no easy answer. There are plenty of answers; they exist although some of them have been ignored or nearly forgotten. These answers will resurface through a process of shared commitment, well funded research and massive mobilization of capital (financial capital, intellectual capital, social capital… all of it). And it will happen now. And North Americans can help lead the way.

Interviewer: “With respect to starting mitigation, how does the cost of starting too soon compare to the cost of starting too late?”

Hirsh: “If the peaking of world oil production occurs any time in the next 20 years, which I think is, uh, quite likely, then there is no such thing as starting too soon. And if we start too late, uh, then we’re in for dire economic changes, certainly recession, and it could be much worse than that.”

There is no such thing as starting too soon.