(I owe you a reply to different comment, but have been away for long weekend) this one is maybe more immediate.
Malthus, writing in the late 1700s could not have foreseen the effect of fossil fuel use. That did not invalidate his forecast, merely throw it out by 200 years or so. we are still in the same situation.
with respect, while your points are valid, you punctuate them with ‘’we must’’ —’’ we need to’’ — ‘’we shall have to’’. etc etc
all well and good, and beyond debate, until you examine the motivation behind those directives.
to put them into action will require central control.
no group needing such control, whether for food/fuel consumption/production, or wasteful business practices will accept such controls from anyone.
our current situation shows that; so any expectation of it in the future, in a voluntary sense, will be a non starter.
the americans will do what is in their own interests, as will the chinese, europeans, and so on. this is tribal — -and catastrophic of course.
we will not act for the common good
if you make ‘individual transport’ costs so high as to eliminate such luxury, you will bring about collapse of a major economic system. You will simultaneously remove any government in office.
If you try to do it by direct authority, that will mean you have installed a dictator, and any dictator will favour his ow n tribe. (The current aspiring dictator’ in USA confirms that)
For this reason catastrophe is certain, because the overall effect will be that nothing will get done (no matter how critical) until it is too late.
We call our current lifestyle ‘’freedom’’ but it is in fact a tightening noose. We cannot accept it for what it is, or surrender all that we (think) we have