The Outcomes Statement of the Symposium was unambiguous:

"... our present path is leading us into potentially serious economic. social and environmental problems ..."

and called for

"... development of greater understanding and awareness of these crucial issues and their consideration in all policy formulation and decision making relative to the future of transport and fuel in Australia ..."

The Keynote Paper ("Climaxing Oil : How Will Transport Adapt ?" was delivered by Brian Fleay of Murdoch University (WA), author of the book "The Decline of the Age of Oil".

This is a lengthy paper and should be read in full. Note especially :

• the implications of the "Energy Profit Ratio" (EPR) concept
• the exceptional characteristics (EPR and economic effectiveness in transport) of oil from the giant oilfields
• the summary of probable reserves, discovery rates and depletion rates
• the peak of world production estimated as 2015, but now (2000) for all sources other than the Gulf
• the similar trajectory for gas and other hydrocarbon sources
• total world hydrocarbon production estimated to be 25% higher than 2000 in 15 years time, but 25% lower in 30 years time

Brian Fleay's conclusions are many. The following seem especially noteworthy:

• the high future dependence on resources located in the Gulf and in Russia will bring geo-political instability
• the present trend to replace labour with energy will be reversed
• there will be an increasing focus on sustainability and local self-sufficiency
• co-operation rather than competition must prevail
• the most daunting task is feeding the world during the transition period as the Age of Oil ends, because the world cannot produce enough food for its present and future human population without using fertiliser (whose manufacture is a huge fuel consumer)
• agricultural requirements will take priority over transport
• essential commercial traffic will be the highest transport priority
• urban car travel will bear the brunt of the decline
• urban road projects are therefore "disastrous investments"
• metabolistic economic models are needed, not the present mechanistic models
• there are hard decisions to be made
• change can be managed constructively or destructively
• if the destructive path is taken, scarce resources that are needed for the transformation process will be squandered

Further Keynote Speakers

• Barry Jones, of the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association, disputed Fleay's thesis. He argued that it relied on many implicit assumptions about stability in the way the wider world works. He suggested that a similar review of the future course of the world, if undertaken in 1900, would not have got much right beyond the death of Queen Victoria - it would not even have foreseen the First World War, less than a decade and a half away. The future is inherently uncertain.
• Mark Diesendorf, of the Institute for Sustainable Futures, showed that the way we use energy now is not well understood and would not be considered anywhere near optimal if it was. He reviewed the true costs of the various modes of transport found in urban areas.
• Ewen McPherson, of the Australian Institute of Petroleum, considered that liquid fossil fuels would remain competitive for a long time (possibly fifty years), and that evolutionary change would come about through market forces and changing consumer choice.
• Ian Lowe, of Griffith University, reviewed sustainability imperatives with particular reference to Greenhouse Gases and Australia's position vis-a-vis the targets agreed at Kyoto. "We are not passengers on Spaceship Earth - we are the crew and it is time we started taking our responsibilities seriously".

Pieces of the Jigsaw

A series of speakers then highlighted various possible aspects of a more energy-responsible transport system.

• Craig Marschall, of the Australian Natural Gas Vehicle Council, described the environmental advantages of gas-powered vehicles
• David Kilsby, then of Sinclair Knight Merz and now Kilsby Australia, looked at the potential for human-powered transport (walking and cycling)
• Bob Cotgrove, of the University of Tasmania, considered that cars are clearly here to stay but better application of technology could make them more civilised - smarter, lighter, cleaner
• Louis Fouvy, of Fouvy Consulting, presented a substantial analysis which concluded that wholesale reform was called for - electric vehicles, better land use/transport integration, a stronger role for urban public transport, more freight moved by rail not road, and similar directions
• Ken Ogden, of the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria, reminded the Symposium that future outcomes would be the aggregation of choices made by individual consumers
• Simon Ginn, of the Queensland Department of Local Government, having just returned from a study tour of European and North American light rail systems, shared his enthusiasm for this mode
• Phillip Laird, of the University of Wollongong, compared road and rail freight efficiencies (in energy terms) and argued that, since the grades and alignments of present long-distance rail routes in Australia are a major constraining factor on further energy improvements, their upgrading is a high strategic priority

Modal Views

Specialists in road, rail, sea and air transport then presented the energy view as it affected their own mode of interest.

• Peter Evans, of Toyota Australia, highlighted the huge investment in energy R&D made by Toyota ($US 1.5 billion per year) and other car manufacturers. The "holy grail" of commercially viable hydrogen fuel cell technology was probably about fifteen years away. In the meantime, highly efficient vehicles such as Toyota's hybrid petrol/electric Prius (3.5 litres per 100 km) would be added increasingly to the nation's vehicle fleet
• Suzy Wizeman, of the Swinburne University of Technology, reviewed alternatives to fossil fuel for aviation. With liquid hydrogen - despite safety implications - probably the best alternative, air transport will continue to be highly dependent on fossil fuel. Aviation presently consumes about 11% of transport fuel in Australia.
• Mark Rosner, of Tasrail, was optimistic about the future for rail transport of freight. A railway locomotive is basically a power plant on wheels, and could employ whatever energy source was most economical at the time. In any future times of constrained energy supply, rail would anyway have an advantage over other land modes because of its inherent relative efficiency, irrespective of energy source
• Tim Roberts, of Incat, spoke of the high-speed catamaran ferries being built in Tasmania. Incat are a world leader in such high speed vessels, which naturally exhibit high fuel consumption.

Conclusions

The Symposium summarised its general conclusions in an Outcomes Statement.

The supplementary conclusions that follow are those of David Kilsby alone.

modes

• aviation is the mode most vulnerable to future energy problems
• rail transport and sea transport are the least vulnerable
• for road transport, we can expect to see vehicles different to today's but more of them

energy sources

• tightening supply and rising prices will probably hit Australia's diesel fuel first - the country exports its own light oil but imports the heavy oil needed for diesel, bitumen etc
• hydrogen fuel technology will be very prominent in future
• renewable sources will figure increasingly prominently
• nuclear power was not raised by anyone at the Symposium as an option and will probably remain out of contention until there is an acceptable solution to disposal issues

planning processes

• there is no call for panic - yet
• the government's reliance on fuel taxation as a revenue source, and its taxation policy in general, has huge potential to influence outcomes - for better or worse
• energy issues cannot be overlooked in long term planning
• energy flows must be modelled
• strategic risk assessments will become more important
• sustainability issues will come to dominate planning processes