Great thread idea! Kudos!

When I encounter a young, working adult stranger [I'm 53], I need only seconds before moving along: Thus, I prefer the full-frontal, 2X4 approach.

Basically, I tell them, "that their generation is going to have to kill my generation if they don't get going on wholesale Peak Everything mitigation. The future belongs to the young, always has, always will."---> Then, when they start breathing again, I give them a card listing Dieoff.com, TOD, EB, LATOC, Thermo/Gene Collision, and Olduvai. I tell them this info is totally free, but they need to put down their videogames, start studying, then making changes.

I am gone before the shock wears off! ;)

Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?

I recently had the privelege of sitting in an audience wherer Professor Peter Newman gave a presentation on building resilient cities. Within that was a mini presentation of Peak Oil with many familiar TOD slides and graphs. While I could follow it all, I got the impression that it went over the heads of most of the audience and they didn't really understand it. My suspicion was confirmed later in the day when one group came up with the idea of building an international air freight terminal just outside our regional Victorian city! (They were the real estate agents and developers of course). I think what I learned about presenting Peak Oil is that you do need some clear air, i.e. not mixed in with other issues like greenhouse gas etc.

I think it depends on the audience but I would like to see a presenter talk about the technical definitions of peak oil and examples of peak oil in various regions, the issues surrounding uncertainty of reserves, production data and graphs especially the last five years corelating to the price rise and a look inot the future of oil production from tar-sands, heavy oil etc. I also think for an Australian audience it wouldn't hurt to clarify where the petrol comes from that ends up in your car. I wouldn't get into making the conclusions forthe audience. Everyone needs to have their own personal "Oh Shit" moment and you do need the opportunity to look smart answering all the stupid questions that inevitably flow from a group a newly inducted Peak Oil virgins.

I haven't done presentations on peak oil, but I have had the conversation at least a hundred times. I generally start the conversation with gas and oil prices. What works for me is always to speak in the 3rd person. I am not a Doomer. I am not a cornucopian. But I know people who are from both sides, and here is why they believe what they believe. Then I spend some time debunking some of the promising solution, while explaining clearly why "those doomers" believe the things they do.

This has the impact that I don't immediately get written off as a crackpot, and people tend to listen to the message. They may not agree, but I give them something to think about.

Ralph

Yes a lot to cover in a short time, In explaining PO I find it best to dispel myths first, like
"The oil companies control how much of the worlds oil? (A:15%)" or "How much of the Worlds oil does Shell produce (A:3%)", once you engage an audience in this way you can build on their knowledge, like the person than told me that Canadian Oil sands had more oil than Saudi Arabia, my reply "Yes the do but to get it out they have to strip mine and area the size of Great Britain" and yes I know they are working on in-situ extraction but the point was pithily made

A LOT of people are still in the mindset that this is all a rip-off by the oil companies, and our current govt are using them as a scapegoat to cover their own incompetence NZ Government-ordered inquiry

Neven (NZ)

Adelaide is a particularly tough gig since the whole town is in denial or Micawberism 'something will turn up'. After all their River Murray irrigation industry has just collapsed after 100 years thanks to climate change. The State has 40% of the world's uranium but they don't want nuclear power. Perhaps Peak Oil cuts too close to the bone. All is not lost though since I think those people will go home and discuss it with others. Rather than agreeing with work colleagues about fuel tax cuts they may argue the peakist line. If so these talks could be achieving a lot more than first appears.

The best advice I can give is:

1. Know the audience you're talking to. I've given a few talks to various small organizations, but then also taught a course on "energy and our future" (my energy policy course) to undergraduates at my university.

What "matters" to each potential constituency is what you need to pay attention to in order to connect. With some groups, it was a bunch of relatively wealthy white guys--others a diverse set of mostly women; with the undergraduates, it was a diverse group of people who were worried about getting a job. I modified the talk accordingly and tried to provide germane examples.

2. If you have 30 minutes scheduled, I usually plan to talk for 10--and by that I mean the 10 minute presentation that you give in the mirror that takes 7 minutes.

That is not a lot of time. If you have 60 minutes, plan to talk for 20 tops--which means 15 minutes into your mirror. You will always go longer than you think.

Have materials ready to structure the time after you have finished the formal talk...sometimes you will be bombarded with questions, sometimes you will get crickets. It depends on your comfort level, dynamism, and how you have related to the audience. It could also be that the audience is hungry and hasn't heard a word you've said.

You also must learn that speaking about peak oil is not about you, it's about your words and your ability to convey them. People are not there to see you, so try to check your ego at the door. It makes you better, trust me.

If this is a group of folks who are new to the concept, inevitably they will respond viscerally to peak oil, usually with anger or denial if they are new to the argument. Be prepared for this, and do not egg it on. Remain calm and de-fuse the situation as best you can. Jokes are good. Facts can work when presented non-confrontationally. Personal stories work too. Your job is to expose them to the logic and facts, you can't digest it for them too.

If this is a group of folks who are relatively well-versed, then you can get wonky. However, even then, you can lose people with term-laden jargony crap. Use your words and your time wisely either way.

For most, more learning occurs in the interactions between speaker and audience, and audience members to each other, than in a direct lecture; therefore the direct lecture has to be "setting the table" for future learning and interaction...not the dispensation of "The Truth." Not in the world we live in. If you have learned anything from here at TOD, I hope you have learned that.

3. You cannot convey or know everything. Don't try. Keep your logic and facts simple and straightforward. Don't cuff it either. If you don't know--SAY YOU DON'T KNOW and that you will find out the answer. Have your card there and offer an email address to folks for questions afterwards.

4. Learn from your time with the audience. Critique yourself when you get home--I have a written journal of every lecture or talk I have ever given. What didn't you remember? What could you have done better? What didn't "flow?" That's how you improve and become better...

This is not an easy thing to do. It's even harder to do it well.

I spoke to my Rotary a few years ago and about half loved it and the other half was shocked and confused. I didn't hold back. Went right after our societies belief systems of being "exempt" from laws of nature and that technology and progress are inevitable. Basically said we are about to discover how dependent we are on a functioning planet and local ecosystem services...the bright side was a reversal of the diabetes and obesity epidemics.

I still show up at Rotary meetings sometimes and they generally know and like me. More probably have "gotten" it since then as the prices have gone up and the media is beginning to reinforce my position.

Many times, however, I have been frustrated by the way development interests latch on to any message as an opportunity to push their pet project that will make them lots of money, even if it means more roads, paving of farm land, etc.

I highly recommend the site www.PresentationZen.com for how to create an engaging presentation that connects with your audience. Suggested starting point is the "Popular Posts" section on the right hand side.

I've never given a presentation but had a few talks to my friends and acquaintances. If I was convincing enough to get the message through their reasoning would then follow these general steps:

1. Oh damn, this is really bad
2. I can’t do much about it
3. There are people more capable and competent than myself to deal with this (government?)
4. Move onto the next subject

I find it difficult to influence someone as to change their thinking let alone way of life.
I also see most people being more concerned about their own current affairs than the fate of our civilisation which is probably fair enough. So I tend to formulate my pitch along this premise. But how can I end it on a positive note? I though people would be more attentive if I could do that.

What seems to help get their attention is when you mention that all that money that is being yanked out of their wallets will soon be coming right back at them buying up their companies, technology and land. Within a few years those trillions of equity investment will create an enormous flow of dividends out of the country which will further weaken the balance of payments and currency.

But the real stinker is the realization that the grand solution that we have all being blasted with on TV, radio and magazines by our government, big companies and the green guys may not play out. All we have to do is shift billions to solar and wind and we will have a nice, neat, clean, sustainable future for all. The problem, minor as it may seem to many, is for every MW produced by solar and wind another MW of NG, diesel or coal fueled power generation must be kept on standby. Another equally small problem is it takes about ten years just to payback the energy invested in solar. Remember Net Energy? I know the "great minds" will solve these problems. But what if they don't?

I have never spoken to an audience on PO, but I have tried to tell lots of people over the years. I find generally they fall into 3 camps. The first is those who already know about PO in which case a circular dicussion is doing little more than "preaching to the converted".

The second group are people you know quite well; and who are therefore prepared to listen to me, but whose actions therafter indicate they haven't taken in anything I have said.

The third group is everyone else. I was taught as a kid never to talk about politics, religion, or money in "polite society", whatever that is. PO seems to comprise at least one of those topics and the general reaction is to regard me as a nutter. That is true even today with $130 oil.

I do not think all my efforts over the last 3 years have contributed to one extra person understanding PO, or understanding it better at all. Now I stay quiet for the most part, unless sorely tempted. I do not use the term "Peak Oil", but instead talk about oil production not increasing. Sometimes the discussion then moves on to tar sands, shale or biofuels and it runs into a bog of detail. I try and stop it then by saying that oil is important for its energy contribution to society; and that none of these options contribute energy; and therefore are less valuable. They are lost at that point.

The worst group are economists from the Austrian school. Their arrogance is astounding. They have no regard for the knowledge or learning of anybody else and believe in their theory as zealots. They will not be persuaded, at any point, that oil is anything else than another commodity. Society WILL respond, as it always does, to the prices signal (if only there weren't any taxes and governments would stay out of the way).

At a local PostCarbon group meeting (Toronto) we had a consultant come by and discuss this issue. I'm a numbskull and forgot his name, but he was very very good. He had a great deal of experience as a community activist for various environmental groups in Ontario.

It was very interesting to hear him speak, as environmental groups have had greater success in getting and keeping public attention. He worked with us like so, and I am wildly paraphrasing:

"OK - so you go to a group and give a presentation. What I want to list on the white board are their reactions, so talk to me."

(we list a lot of common reactions - rejection, "technology will fix it", outrage, contradiction, flat/no affect, depressed affect, etc.)

"OK - now, tell me how their reaction MAKES YOU FEEL."

(we list our feelings - frustration, anger, disgust, resignation, weak hope, etc etc.)

"OK - now, tell me how you think THEY FEEL that caused the reaction they gave."

(we list what we think they feel - anger, fear, frustration, doubt, etc.)

"OK - so now: The conversation you think you had, between your presentation and their reaction, is NOT THE CONVERSATION THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE. What needs to take place is the conversation between your feelings about the subject. People will be informed by facts, but they make decisions from their emotional centre. If you don't have their emotions, you won't have them."

---

What I took away fro mthis was basically, he was telling us everything that the major media have already figured out for the past 100 years since Bernays invented PR: people are emotional and they make emotional decisions - decisions that make them "feel good" about what they're doing. Even if they are motivated by pure unadulterated white knuckle TERROR, or green vomit disgust, they will respond in a positive manner if given a positive direction in order to deal with the fear / disgust / anger / etc.

If you don't give them that out, they're not going to buy into it, and you will fail in getting your message across.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So, basically totoneila's 2x4 approach is a recipe for failure in mobilising society. It won't and can't work. All it will do is succeed in scaring people and demobilising them - the classic effect of the doomer approach, where, if we're all screwed - why bother?

I was at the Peak Oil, Climate change, and sustainability conference in Michigan a few weeks back, and the conversations I was having went basically like this:

Geology is going to force the issue, so you don't need to force Peak Oil - it's here. what will happen is this: people get meaning from narratives, and they need narratives to make sense of the work and various phenomena. So, as the phenomenon of Peak Oil inserts itself courtesy of Geology "doing its thing", we have to insert the peak oil meme into the general energy discussion as things continue to deplete.

This will give people the narrative they need to understand what is happening, and then we can give them the directions they need in order to cope with the crisis. And deal with it they will. Some better than others.

The Peak Oil Awareness community needs to become PLAYERS in the game. This is hard, because many PO people are engineer-types who are convinced by facts, and don't need persuasion. If the rest of the world was so rational... The fact is, THEY'RE NOT, and when times start tightening, they're going to be looking for answers, so it is important that the Geological and Scientific answers ARE THE DOMINANT NARRATIVE, and not the energy faery BS from the political and technocratic classes, or the "invade some poor sucker for their resources but call it The War on Terror or Free Trade" neocon/neoliberal narratives.

So, presentations need to reflect this, and i would suggest PRESENTATIONS FOR MEDIA COMPANIES. Not as a media stunt, but more as a way for the company, AS A CORPORATION, is aware of what it is facing. When the Media people realise "Oh Shit - this company needs to change EVERYTHING" you can be damn sure the Geological and Scientific narratives will dominate the energy discussion, and not the economic / technocratic. You see, they GET economic / technocratic narratives 24/7. It's on constant tap for them. But, as we all know here, the economic / technocratic narratives have significant and critical blindspots, and if they continue to dominate the discussion, the conversation will only get increasingly dire.

We need to connect with our audience in a wholistic and emotional manner - this doesn't mean reducing or cutting facts - it means honouring people's legitimate concerns and fears, sharing them, and showing how these fears can be conquered by developing a new decentralised networked and sustainable society that uses a FRACTION of the energy we now use, but is vastly healthier in every concievable way: physically, mentally, socially, and culturally.

We gotta get this going. NOW.

Storytelling works best as a timeline from past to present to future. Explore the history of the subject - from the Lower 48 peak to 1970s oil crisis; then the North Sea discovery and peak; and finally the present-day in Saudi Arabia.

If you're dealing with an older audience then they will have memories of the 70s oil crisis; keep their interest by saying "the 1970s was a walk in the park compared to what we're about to face".

Explain that oil isn't just transport, it's in everything we buy. If you're feeling particularly gloomy then mention the natural gas & fertilizer connection. Discuss airlines going bankrupt, truckers going out of business, everyday supermarket costs rising as a result. Keep it local - maybe there's a new airport, a new highway, or a proposed new light rail system in your area. If local businesses are struggling to compete with the mega-mall, give them hope.

Finally focus on practical solutions. No matter how pessimistic you may be, it's vital to give people something to take away, something they can do to help. Relate it to the audience's age group - retired folk need to think about keeping warm ("should I insulate my house?"); college students need to think about career choices ("should I train to become a pilot?"). People of all ages should think about transport choices ("do I really need an SUV?") since this is easiest single thing to change. Last of all, encourage people to spread the word. This is particularly important if there are any elections coming up or votes on local transport issues.

In the Q&A session you'll always get the following:
- Hydrogen will save us
- Canada will save us
- It won't affect me, I earn more than $100,000 a year
- The free market will find a way
Prepare your answers well!

In my time, I've written for about three dozen magazines covering industries ranging from energy to banking, pulp and paper to IT, feed grains to advertising & PR --and I've never seen a harder sell than peak oil. I'm well known enough to be able to have long conversations with my publishers.

If I propose an article demonstrating how peak oil and peak food will affect globalisation, or the links between peaking natural gas, fertilizer and feed, the eyes just gloss over. Equally or less interesting topics usually get attention but one sees in the body language a certain defensiveness towards the whole PO topic that makes it deeply personal.

A lot of these guys also run up huge fossil fuel bills via frequent flying or car trips, complain about their rising cost. But when peak oil is gently introduced, the blame is always deflected to speculators, countries refusing to open up to western oil majors, etc.

What I've concluded is that peak oil is eliciting an emotional reaction similar to that of grieving over a loved one: First comes denial, later comes anger, finally a cold acceptance. We've been in denial for about 5 years but as the wave of strikes and demonstrations implies that we are now transitioning into the socially dangerous phase of anger. Expect the next five years to be rocky. With anger on the rise, your peak oil arguments will run into emotional roadblocks. When nature's cruelty forces acceptance of the fact, people will finally 'get it' without much help from us.

Ive heard several folks make the comment about audience members who are convinced that some sort of technology miracle will occur, and we will barely feel a thing. Or some other cornicopian view about the stone age not ending due to lack of stones.

Whats the correct response to someone who blows off the whole idea because market forces will magically create a solution?

It seems to me that once we get across the idea of peak oil, we can talk all we want about solutions, ideas, vision, and forward thinking about a post peak world. But if folks still believe that the status quo is safe due to these unseen forces rescuing us any day now - then it would appear that the effort would be in vain?

I know I shouldn’t touch this with a 10 meter pole, but somehow I just CAN’T resist. So apology beforehand…

I came to the peak oil discussion in a real way in 2002, and came to TOD US over two years ago.

This was after being absolutely convinced by what could pass for research in the 1970’s of the “energy crisis” of those days that we were facing the final fuel crisis then, and having to abandon that theory in the 1980’s. Thus like so many baby boomers who recall history going back to the 1970’s. So I am familiar with much of the terminology and forms of rhetoric that appears in discussion of peak oil per se, and energy depletion issues in general.

Some thoughts on discussing or presenting peak oil to others:

1. Do not come across as condescending. This is imperative. So much discussion of peak oil is based on the idea that the bulk of humanity is ignorant. We hear this all the time: “They just don’t get it”, “they don’t understand”, “you don’t understand the magnitude and implications of this problem, etc. This may or may not be true, but telling your audience they are ignorant is no way to win friends and influence people. On a similar note, DO NOT accuse people of being in denial simply because they question your assumptions. The audience or listener has every right to ask questions and want to know how you know what you say you know.

2.On a related topic to the last sentence of point one, how do you know what you know? One of the things that is most galling about both the peak oil camp and the cornucopian camp is what comes across as an absolute CERTAINTY in their own assumptions and projections. I can give you a set of sample assumptions: (a) “Oil production will continue to rise” (how do you know?) (b) “Oil production will continue to fall” (how do you know?) (c)”We are half through the world’s reserves of oil” (How do you know that?) (d)”There are trillions of barrels of oil left, we are not even a quarter of the way through world reserves” (how do you know that?) (e)”The shortage of liquid fuel will lead to world catastrophe” (how do you know that?) (f) “We will adjust and everything will be fine? (How do you know that?)

Notice that the above are opposing sentences, but can any of them be proven? If you give the audience an assumption, make sure that it is given an assumption, unless you can prove it as a fact. And very few things in the realm of energy can be proven.

3. Now let me put forth an assumption that cannot be proven, but that my experience with most people has caused me to accept: If you begin to talk about “Ulduvai Gorge”, “mass dieoff”, “Collapse of Civilization”, the return to feudalism, etc, you will be perceived as just another variety of an end of the world kook. Sorry, but that’s just the way it is. Equally suspicious is discussion of “peak everything”. It just seems completely unlikely that every commodity peaked at once (including those that can be recycled and metals that have only come onto the market in a big way in the last few decades). Most of the boomer audience will be familiar with commodity investment cycles and be more prone to believe that when prices on everything goes up all at once, it is a financial cycle, not a “we’re running out of everything at once” event.

4. Charts. When you use them, make sure you know where the line divides the historical record from the “projections”. I know that sort of returns to a prior point about projections, but do not make the assumption that just because the charts project something that it will be accepted by the audience. Also expect the audience to ask about prior periods of decline in oil production, and why that did not prove peak oil. They will. I do.

5. Do not completely dismiss technical advances. Your audience has lived to see repeated technical advances completely alter everything from their workplace to their family life. If you begin with the assumption that “nothing can be done” and that technical changes will have no effect on the future of the energy situation, you will lose credibility. Pointing up the difficulties involved in technical advance is acceptable but do not dismiss technology completely.

6. DO NOT use the peak oil issue to go on an attack against capitalism, modern economics and “fiat” money. Your audience likes money. Money has been good to them if they can get it. Leave the political and philosophical discussions aside, unless you want to be seen as having an agenda that you are using peak oil to push.

7. Speaking of an agenda, assume the audience assumes you have one, because you do. We all do. Many major voices in the peak oil movement had well known agendas (anti suburbanism-James Howard Kunstler, anti modernism-Robert Heinberg) before peak oil came along, and that’s o.k., but there is no point in trying to deny it. If you have an agenda your best to face it and admit it. (I am well known on TOD US for having a pro technology and pro solar agenda, and believe that peak or no peak, oil has become more troublesome than it is worth. Thus, I would endorse a move away from oil even if I had never heard of peak, on the basis of national security, national economic destiny , carbon release issues and freedom from the oil producing monopolies {national or private}. Peak oil only adds to my concern about the U.S. energy future, but is not my only motivation. I am best to admit that up front)

8. Lastly, show humanity. Be VERY, VERY careful about recommending plans that sound like social engineering (I.e., forced migrations, forcing people back to the cities, forcing them back to the farms, taking their property, dismissing their concerns for their children and health care, etc. Some in the peak oil movement have made the error of promoting what sound like inhumane programs to assure that “some” will survive at the expense of others. This comes across as elitist and frankly fascist.

Now you have a right to ask, “how do I know these things”, or at least, “why do I assume them to be true?” I am blessed in having many very bright and alert friends. I also have friends in both the consumer and media research industries and in the financial community. They are tough. They are curious. They do not accept things at face value and are not easily convinced unless they can see facts to prove a case. However, they are willing to change their mind once the evidence proves it is time to do so. They are a tough audience to sell, but once they buy in, they are valuable allies. That is the audience we MUST sell on the need for change. If we hope to sell them, we better have our facts straight.

Oh, and one more thing, DON'T make predictions with absolute dates. This has been done before. They have often been dead wrong. If you make a prediction and give a date, you have made yourself a prophet. Then you ABSOLUTELY must be right or your credibility is finished.

RC

I am a qualified public speaker and expert regarding Peak Oil.

I can assure you - people don't WANT to hear about our PROBLEMS. They want to see CASE STUDIES of solutions that WORK. I was a member of Portland's Peak Oil Task Force and helped craft their Peak Oil plan.

I am presently working with eleven neighborhoods in Portland to deploy a new community solutions tool that helps relieve the pain of high transportation and food costs. Bright Neighbor helps neighbors safely congregate and effectively build community.

Portland's value system is based on community connectedness, diversity, responsibility to the environment, sustainability and equity for all.

The problem is, there is not equity for all. Peak Oil reveals the money system as an unfair advantage for the rich while hard working people can't keep up with energy price increases. We, as a society, literally can't afford to live they way we have been living.

Peak Oil is here, now, and immediate local community building and food/water security solutions need to be deployed. Now.

So, I've given plenty of talks, but none about peak oil. The secret to a really successful talk is connecting with your audience, framing, analogies, and keeping cognitive load to a minimum.

I think talking about P.O. in a meaningful way to a lay-audience is almost impossible (which is why I never do it) and here's why: As I mentioned above, the key is "framing." If you utter the words "peak oil" you're already in the wrong frame because those who've heard the word before will all activate their "crazy kooky tinfoil hat" schema - you've already lost your audience. Secondly, I think "peak oil" is a "red-herring" because the key issues are eroei and flow rates - the point of actual peak is irrelevant. If you start talking about the "peak" you're in the wrong frame because every Tom, Dick and Harry will immediately think "we can always drill more." Geology is overcome with technology. Why can't we increase recovery factor to 50%? (Answer, you probably could, but I'm betting the eroei would be so bad as to render the idea useless.) The frame we WANT to be in is "eroei and flow rates" which are a function of geology AND politics.

So what's the problem? The problem is that humans are notoriously bad at conceptualizing rates and ratios. We just suck at it and I wish I knew why (because that's one of the things I study in my research). The point is, the talk is going to get really sophisticated really quickly and nobody is going to follow you. So we're back in the wrong frame talking about the "finiteness of our resources," to which anybody can reply: "we still have the Canadian tar sands, whose reserves are bigger than those of Saudi Arabia."

Sorry to sound such a negative note, but I will never give a PO or "limits of growth" presentation for the reasons outlined above.

I intentionally try not to prepare too much beforehand. All I have are a bunch of graphs and maps on either transparencies (if there's an overhead) or powerpoint (if there's a computer and projector). I arrange the graphs and maps in some semblance of order (usually natural gas, then oil, then a short bit on home retrofits). However, I could almost shuffle them like a deck of cards and wing it that way, too.

Most of the graphs and maps, by the way, are from downloads via TOD.

I feel that my non-preparedness helps me to allay some of my nervousness--though I do know thoroughly what the graphs and maps are intended to convey beforehand. The other advantage to relying on outside sources is that if anyone accuses me of being an idiot (I don't have a background in the fossil fuel industry), I can defer their wrath to the sources (clearly labelled) of the graphs. Actually, this hasn't happened yet, but I could simply ask the accuser how they would prefer to interpret the graphs.

I guess I am a bad man, but I wouldn't do a presentation which argued the case - I would appeal to their instincts and let them argue the case.
So I would ask questions - if oil is so high, what happened to the GM electric car - how come we are not driving them?
Do you think the Governments of oil producing counties are going to be honest with you about how much oil they can pump, or would they fib if it suited them and get every last dollar whilst the going is good?
Paranoia is your friend! ;-)

People don't like to be lectured to, they do like to think that they are slightly cynical and knowing, so all you do is put things so that they can 'see through' what is happening - but don't go off into some rap on your take on the capitalist system or something, define your objectives, in this case to get some acceptance that oil is not infinite in supply, and that we are maybe not doing what we should about it, and that the country is going to hell in a handcart - I'd be stunned if you couldn't get 99% of people on board with that, Republican, Democrat, whatever.

To sell a green agenda if you are talking to Republican, conservative voters you just have to ask if they feel we have lost some of the values that made this country great - you will soon be listening to tales of what their grandparents did to economise and struggle through, and how we don't need all this fancy stuff.

You just have to work with the values people have instead of challenging them.

I have one word for you: Graphics.

I've given a couple of talks to university audiences. Put up the charts.

After going through the charts of fields / countries that have peaked, I show the chart of world oil production, and ask: "What does this look like to you?" (Pause.) "It looks like the left side of a bell shaped distribution, right?"

I put up some more graphics and don't say anything -- just let them look at it.

I also put up some quotes from leaders they know (or, who are VPs of oil companies, etc.).

Anyway, for some graphics, see my website (and the PowerPoint linked there -- most linked from TheOilDrum):

http://drmillslmu.com/peakoil.htm

Cheers, Mike

The worst catch in conveying the point, I think, is when you come across an audience that thinks it already knows what peak oil is. I've several times seen people dismiss the entire concept over a subtlety of definition, then class the non-peak supporters as automatically the more reasonable authority based on having labeled peak oil as crackpottery based on *the wrong definition*. It's ugly.

PEAK OIL RESISTANCE OR...AVOIDING A DATE WITH THE FUTURE, MANILA STYLE...

Graphics or no graphics, the anti-peak oil defense mechanisms are strong for the following reason: buy in.

No matter how clear, graphical or even-minded you are, your average audience member drives an SUV for 45 minutes on the highway to get to work, depends on it to bring kids to school, groceries home and get to the neighbourhood park. His or her house is probably a suburban McMansion with a hungry gas furnace. Lately, the heating, air conditioning and transportation bills have been killing him. All family members, work colleagues, etc. are in just as deeply as he is. A few more doubling of oil, gas, food and fuel prices and the entire world of such people crashes.

They will be immobilized in their homes, be confronted with the fact their neighbourhoods are unworkable now that family can barely afford one car. At work, the dividing line between haves and have-nots is those who can drive or helicopter to work and those who are cramped into SUVs converted into private shutte buses --a two hour journey both ways. I've seen this in the Philippines, where the vast majority of workers must make such commutes to and from work every day. ---And under peak oil, this grim sort of car pooling will come to suburbia...

Whatever one thinks of James Kunstler anti-suburbanism, it's unsustainability cannot be undone. The inability to convey the peak oil message is up against a human subconscious furiously avoiding its date with the future.

I've been contemplating this post all day and have already added some comments up thread.

What I would like to hear from people is how do you avaoid being lableed a nutter or a doomer when you are in a job that comes with a certain social position that assumes you to be welded to BAU. It is easy to be politically active behind the TOD veil of anonymity but standing up at your Rotary or Church group and telling your friends and associates that basically the lives we have been creating for ourselves is completley bogus and about to end, is setting yourself up for social and community ostracism which will make it even harder.

I spoke with a client today who is fully expecting jet services to increase out of our regional airport which he can get more business from. I mumbled something about higher oil prices but really coul'dnt launch into a full scale discussion with this bloke as I am still pitching for his business ( haven't got my permculture backyard CSA going yet and still have mouths to feed).

I do my bit for PO awarenes by leaving cards all over the place with a peak oil message and sterring people to TOD but at some point his is going to catch up with me and I will be "outed". That is still a big career risk and I'm not sure what I can do about it. Does anyone else have these issues and how do you deal with them?

and the Germans ran out of gasoline - no wehrmacht without that.

the Allies didn't have that problem.

war is all about cutting off supplies. example:

Operation Tidal Wave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Tidal_Wave

but you don't know enough to know that you are omitting 80% of the economy, like the construction industry, the damage that shortages will cause to our just-in-time manufacturing systems, the havoc caused by broken supply chains when bankruptcies occur, the fallout of the failure of the entire airline industry and more.

business are a lot of times even more adaptable because often they have more incentive.

just in time manufacturing will simply adjust. ships are slowing down and using SAIL POWER. how about that as a blast from the past? big rigs are slowing down to save fuel. the construction industry works on you being able to afford the costs going into building a home. if you can't afford their costs is doesn't get built and we save all that energy. the construction industry turned on a dime. I don't know what you mean by the failure of the entire airline industry because that didn't happen and most likely won't. let's look at the airline industry. new planes with high fuel efficiency are coveted. airlines are trying to make everything lighter. they are putting in light seats. they are charging more for baggage. they are redesigning food carts because having them lighter literally saves tens of millions of dollars a year in fuel costs. these costs savings are happening at all levels of society. I used commuters as an example because getting to work accounts for 40% of our oil usage.

1) I second memills' comment about charts [and that site indeed has great material]. Graphics is so much better than words alone.

2) I've done more than 1000 sales pitches and 500 public lectures to wild varieties of audiences, although not on this topic, so the rest of this are general ideas from experience in delivering sometimes-very-technical talks to varying audiences under time constraints.

a) I don't know if you read your script live, but if you did, don't do it again, ever. You're way better off showing charts or even bullet items and talking from them (but not reading them). Of course, beware dumb PowerPoint, as per Gettysburg Address in Powerpoint, or in Tufte's "Beautiful Evidence".

b) If you have a chance, practice the speech to a video camera. If you haven't done this, the first time is excruciatingly painful, but it is well worth it.

If you want use a script, go ahead, but practice until you don't need it.

c) "Know the audience" has been mentioned, and is really important.

d) But then, even if you know the audience ice-cold, ask the audience a few questions at the beginning, and periodically during the talk, even if you know what to expect as a result. Do this even with 1000-person audiences.

For starter questions, ideal are ones that ask people to raise hands, establish a *distribution* of knowledge, and get everyone to raise a hand at least once.

Possible sorts of questions might be:

"Think about the number of years you've been driving. Stick your hand up if you've been driving more than 40? 20? 10? [i.e., keep going down until all hands are up].

"What's the lowest gas price you remember?" (small group, can even let them call out).

"How much did the last tank of gas cost you? more than $100? more than $50?" (i.e., adjust for local).

"OK, how many have heard of Peak Oil?"
(hands up)
"OK, peak oil to some people means that we're out of oil, for others, it means that the maximum production is reached and slowly descends. If you believe the second, leave your hand up, else take it down."

You may be able to work in a joke or wry comment about the results of the survey, integral to the topic (never tell a standalone joke).

Then, now and then during the talk, ask the audience to respond.

e) WHY?
If someone is reading a script, they're probably not looking at the audience as much as they should be.

Audiences react very differently to being lectured at and being interactively engaged. When you start with a few questions, you set unconscious expectations that you're having a discussion with them, and they're more likely to be sitting forward in their seats and engaged. Any time it looks like they're starting to get disengaged, ask another question, even if it's "Did that make sense?"

Audiences vary widely in:
- Their responsiveness
- Willingness to ask questions during a talk, even you suggest they do
- Willingness to ask questions during a question period
- Willingness to come up afterward and ask a question directly, as opposed to in front of an audience.

Some of the variability is circumstances, and some is cultural.
[One time in Stockholm, I felt like I must have been having an off-day, as I wasn't getting much reaction. I expressed this to my host later, who reacted with surprise saying "You must be kidding. That was the most excited audience I've ever seen for this sort of talk." Oh.]

Nobody wants to ask a dumb question. Sometimes it's good to arrange a shill to ask a specified first question or two during a question period to get things started. [And if you're in an audience, it's kind to lob a softball to a speaker.]

At the other extreme, in a group small enough for people to ask questions during a talk, and you're willing to have them do it, it is invaluable to have a whiteboard or flip-chart to scribble on. Tell them you'll be glad to answer questions during the talk, but if it's hard to answer it right away, or you're going to cover it (with charts) later, you'll write it on the board so you don't forget, and if you haven't covered it by the end, you'll come back to it. This is especially important to keep your talk on track while being clearly responsive. It is *really* important when speaking to an audience whose knowledge varies hugely, as somebody who knows more than average (or thinks they do) can totally derail a talk if you let them. [I sometimes used to talk to small audiences of senior managers who'd bring a couple technical experts with them, eager to show their skills in front of several levels of management. You can guess what that's like.]

Anyway, when trying to convey complex topics to mixed audiences in limited time, every bit of graphics, and every little trick helps, as time is precious.

Good luck!

Some people have mentioned this (particularly JohnMashey) but I'll underline it:

It's important to be with the audience and not with your notes or searching your memory for the next line.

It's easy to forget this when trying to remember all the tips and tricks you might have committed to memory. (Was the joke here or here? Did I remember to make eye contact with all four corners of the room? Did I stare too long at that person? Was I supposed to sit them on toilets to feel less nervous? etc. etc.)

All those things are useful but when I train business people to speak I work on what I consider to be the most important element first, which is this:

Can the person be present in front of a group of people?

By present I mean this. Think of having a conversation with just one other person.

On one side of the spectrum are those people who barely look at you and are essentially waiting for you to stop speaking so they can speak.

On the other side of the spectrum are those people who make you feel really listened to and that everything you say is gold.

The second situation is uncommon enough when speaking one on one but it's really really difficult to be present in front of groups because most people are essentially scared of groups. (It's probably due to some experience we all have had in the past when we were ridiculed in front of a group, or something similar, like raising our hand and saying the wrong answer causing the other kids to laugh.)

The best speakers are all present. Some people call it "connecting" with the audience. If you've seen Gore in An Inconvenient Truth, watch how he is in front of the audience. Very confident, very present. (He wasn't this way during his campaigning.) Bill Clinton was exceptionally present during his speeches and was famous for his oratory skills. Most of that, I say, is his capacity to be present with the audience. Everything else flowed from that (his empathy, his timing, his tone, etc.).

The best actors are present, too. It's the only way we will buy into their character.

There are many ways to practice being present, one of the easiest is to do mirror work, which simply means saying the speech/talk to yourself in the mirror. Soon you'll be able to tell when you're present and when you're not. Or gather one or two people and bribe them with dinner to allow you to practice. Ask them to tell you when "you've left the room." When you stop being present, just back up, get yourself present again and continue. It's a skill and like all others it can be learned.

For any method to work, though, you must know the words cold so that you can concentrate on being with the audience rather than wondering which words come next. Knowing the words cold will allow you to practice connecting with the audience.

It is, after all is said and done, just a conversation with people.

-André

I recommend spending the first 1/3 of the alloted time to present focusing on the history of petroleum discoveries, differentials in field size and location, and the geophysical constraints on petroleum evolution and structural capture. Much of this can be done with maps and schematics. For example, where are the largest proven reserves -- this could be done with a Mercator Projection of the world. As a side-bar show original oil in place, history of extractions by nation, as referenced on the map, and production trend based on past performance. This should suffice to show that most of the remaining known large reserves are in producing nations "hostile" to western intrusion, and that producing nations "friendly" to the west are in a state of decline. On the geologic side a series of cartoons beginning with massive accumulations of algae in epicontential sea undergoing burial and evolution to petroleum, then the "durn stuff" migrating into a trap for discovery and production. A few charts reflecting demand through time in industrial and industrializing nations should work nicely to show the increase demand is the driver, the reality of global production plateau and the likely upper limit to global production, then a disharmonious decline.

Plenty of fodder to make people sit up and pay attention. If you wake people up early in your talk, you will have a captive audience, sitting upright with all ears open. By way of analogy, Franz Joseph Haydn's 94th symphony is called the "Surprise" because Haydn included a little ditty in the first movement that is loud and dissonant -- his way of getting people to sit up and pay attention.

I am in the so-called hearth industry, a term that refers to companies that sell wood and gas stoves and fireplaces. A year ago I gave a peak oil presentation to two industry gatherings. The response was surprisingly positive. Everyone commented on how much they enjoyed the presentation. Go figure.

This year I was invited back by a colleague to give a presentation to her dealers at their annual dealer meeting. This time my theme was Personal and Professional Planning in an Uncertain world: What if the future isn't business as usual?

To deal with resistance, I adapted the five stages of grief, developed in 1969 by Elizabeth Kubler-Ross in her famous book On Death and Dying.

The Five Stages of Peak Oil
1.Anger: "You #&!%ing people are crazy!"
2.Bargaining: “Technology will save us"
3.Denial: “I don’t believe our society could fall apart like that”
4.Depression: "It’s hopeless. I’m giving up"
5.Acceptance: "I’ll be a survivor, not a victim"

The core of the presentation was this list of things that can be done. Again, despite the blunt message, the talk was well-received.

1. Get out of debt now. That is, unless you are very in debt now in which case inflation might reduce your indebtedness in the future, but this is a high-risk strategy.
2. If your house is bigger than about 750 square feet per person, sell it and get a smaller one. It will use less energy, be less costly to maintain and remove one more source of stress: the need to impress. In looking for a new house, think in terms of modest living arrangements, a lot big enough to grow a garden and within walking access to stores and services.
3. If you now have to commute to work, make other arrangements. Ideally arrange things so you can walk or bike to work.
4. Cut energy consumption at work and at home. You are not just cutting to save money, but to learn to live with less. Be ruthless. Your conservation efforts will go on forever. Rely on renewable energy.
5. Replace large, heavy, overpowered vehicles with lighter, underpowered vehicles. Don’t expect luxury while driving. Expect a future of ‘unhappy motoring’. Drive less.
6. Shorten your supply lines if possible. Distance travelled will become a much bigger part of price than before, so local products will become more competitive. Buying locally helps to support your community and is also good Karma for a retailer.
7. Stop looking for bargains in your personal shopping. It is increasingly apparent that there are none. Don’t shop at Wallmart, for example, because it is a betrayal of all other specialty retailers.
8. Try fossil fuel-free recreation. Some examples:
a. hike instead of four wheeling
b. canoe instead of jet ski or water skiing
c. bicycle instead of motorcycling
d. holiday locally rather than internationally
e. cross country ski instead of downhill or snowmobile
f. play croquette instead of golf
9. Expect and plan for no growth or contraction in the economy and your business. Part of your income has been based on the froth of rampant consumerism. Visualize your company without it.
10. You can probably lead a happy, successful and productive life on less than half of your current income. A good start in protecting your business and household is to begin now to cut expenses. Frugality is a noble virtue, one worth practicing.
11. Build your social network. Cheap energy allowed the nuclear family to isolate itself. Relationships with friends, neighbours and relatives will become more important. Besides, this is where human happiness is to be found.

Take Action
Because action breeds optimism

It was a risky presentation to give to a business audience, but again, the response was positive. I have no idea what I could follow this up with.
J

This is about the best thread I have read at TOD. Everybody at their best giving tonnes of good advice and real life experience with "outsiders". I have never given a presentation to anybody, do not mention this at work, only in context generally (we sell auto parts for God`s sake).

My wife is convinced(hey she went through hell on earht in st. Petersburg in early 90s total collapse) and sells the idea to other Russian speakers on the net in chat rooms from what I have told her. It is viral there too, the American Russian emigres read LATOC now and discuss among themselves so my wife thinks "mission accomplished".

I talked to my brothers for last couple of years occasionally by phone (they are in Alaska) and only now in the eyes of one of them the shit has hit the fan has made plans to reduce some energy use and go to protest march. He likes my ideas he said. Joe blow knows the pump price but not why it is happening (ELM from Mexico,etc.) and could really care less until it really hurts. That is what I learned from my brother. Now he is pretty well converted but no fanatic. If I say "what if driving gets too expensive" he can't think that far, as how is he gonna move and to where. There is no way to bike or whatever. Pretty much people are stuck. Housing and transport investment is major decades long stuff and discarding it ain't gonna happen "'cause my wonky freaked out kid brother said it's the end of the world".

I remember I was converted to one of these pentecostal churches in the mid 70s as a preteen to teen and one of the things was to go around leaving pamphlets and try to convert people on the streets. "Hey dude, Jesus loves you, you are going to hell, if you don't get yourself right with the lord". I mean no wonder I am not into PO presentations and damn cyncial about the whole preaching thing.

In the Hindu / Yoga thing they say that the disciple will come to the Guru when they are ready.

This all PO lecture stuff seems to me more like the Noah story, preaching perfunctorily to an audience of people who could care less out of duty and trying to save oneself while you still can.

Anyway I am a born comic, though shy. I was thinking maybe of a mime/clown performance would be good. Get the people rolling on the floor about their own wasteful behavior or lifestyle, totally viscerally accepting about the total stupidity of it all and maybe you can get the wonky stuff over later.

Mime/clown with barrel of oil on stage or car and bike, trying to heat house or running out of electricity, going to empty supermarket or trying to grow own food. This could be pretty funny. I hate preaching like poison and I think if people sense a preachy message they will turn off. Funny is true. Humour hits down deep only if it is really true to people. They have to cry laughing it is so true.

Why hasn't anybody suggested the 40 year factor. Hubbert looked at how various minerals had a 40 year lag between peak discovery and peak production. In the 1930s oil discovery peaked in the USA. Not including Alaska since it wasn't a state when he made his prediction Hubbert said oil production in the USA would peak in the 1970s. It did. Oil discovery worldwide peaked in the 1960s or 40 years ago. Let your audience think about that for as long as possible before you say another word.

I have given 4 formal presentations on Peak Oil, and there were very high tech people in 2 of the audiences. A Peak Oil group (CREF in Albany, NY) sponsored 3 of the 4 last week, with radio and TV interviews and newspaper coverage. The problem is that most people get that Peak Oil is here now, but few of them and many on this site persist in thinking that we have significant alternatives to oil, natural gas, and coal. We do not, and that is what the best scientific and government studies show, and global collapse is sooner than most realize. Tis all reviewed in a report on my website at Peak Oil Associates. With little oil, it will not be possible to maintain the Interstate highways and the power grid. And when they go out, that's it. Nothing coming in on the Interstate and no communications. That is why I got out of Dodge quickly. Anyone want to retire in a quiet safe sustainable place in Mexico? Call 603-668-4207 my old NH phone number, and here with Vongage telly, or clifford dot wirth at yahoo dot com

Graphs, pictures and more graphs. My husband just gave a peak oil talk to two groups of teachers in Texas, sponsored by Texas utilities (now under another name...bought up by some international group). What got their attention was when he showed them the human population growth curve and asked them what had caused it. One woman said "global warming". In all, he was not impressed with their knowledge. But they seemed receptive. Only one teacher knew about peak oil.

At my local "oil awareness" meetup a couple years ago I suggested we organize a "public outreach", and coming from Toastmasters, I thought it sounded like a fun challenge, but never got any takers, basic doomer response "It's too late, anyone who doesn't get it, won't" conclusion. I wouldn't disagree, although certainly $4 gasoline (poor undertaxed U.S.) is a good wake up call now to see if anyone new wants to get it.

Last night I was at an (Minnesota Independence Party) meetup for candidates for Senate, and 3 for 3 candidates seemed reasonably informed about Peak Oil, and accepted that a long term energy crisis is looming. BUT talking afterwards, I found plenty of party members convinced the standard delusions the "shortage fear" was manufactured for fun and profit, and that the Environmentalists of course were preventing the necessary drilling to make the U.S. energy independent again. Well, at least I could politely state their facts were wrong and ended the unwinnable discussion.

I must admit "abstract facts" either bore me or depress me. Myself I just look at trends and say "things can't last", and what can I do about it?

REALLY I've never found a single satisfying conversation about PO. There's two serious-minded responses that come out: (1) You're right, we're fucked. (2) It can't be that bad, but it'll work out.

Both answers are identical, an implicit "Nothing I can do about it." The first comes from people like me who are willing to admit there's a problem. The second are unwilling to depress themselves with reality. I suppose I can imagine myself in both responses AND I'm just trying to make myself serious about it.

Probably my "doomer" mentality is a road-block. My only personal response is defensive - minimize my personal risks of getting caught standing when the music stops. It's not a bad response - get out of debt - get rid of my car and ride a bike - reduce consumption - invest in efficiency - grow a little food, compost and recycle... It all works for me, and it's one of those "anyway" responses, things that help my life seem more sane.

Perhaps "doomers" are the wrong messengers? Doomers like me look at "trends" and can't see the 100,000,000 little things that can combine together that will change the trends by the time we get there.

Here's my favorite "doomer" graphic: (Clever and powerless)

I MOST get pissed off by the optimists who try to sell crisis as "opportunity", neglecting to admit the fact that the opportunities and expectations of the past must ALL be up for renegociation for a chance that the future will be a place we'll want to live.

So anyway, I guess that's why I've mostly given up talking. There's no solutions until after the shit hits the fan. The momentum of the ship towards the falls is greater than all resistance to it. The question is only when to jump ship.

I think a risk assesment approach that couples impact with probability is a best way to get people acting on the issue:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kWaMPBe7KQ

For the average level of comprehension of peak oil, see the comments on this blog 'High oil prices here to stay'
http://business.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/17/high-oil-prices-here-to-stay/#c...

They are very depressing reading, with most blaming anything but the lack of increased supply to match increased demand.