Climate change means we should change; peak oil means we don't have a choice in the matter. The two are intricately linked: it's easy to think that as oil diminishes the climate crisis will be brought under control, but as oil prices increase the temptation will exist to rely on fuels that are even worse for the climate (tar sands, liquefied coal, biodiesels, etc). It's important to factor peak oil into our climate mitigation and adaptation efforts, and it's necessary to factor climate change into our strategies for descending the oil peak. Turning to dirtier fuels flirts too closely with the tipping points beyond which lie climate hell--the only viable way forward for our mutual wellbeing is through a mass mobilization toward conservation and relocalization. And that's what Transition is all about!

As the Transition US folks so aptly put it: "It is important to point out that unless we plan in advance for peak oil, and adopt measures such as the Oil Depletion Protocol, the recession caused by runaway oil prices will blow responses to climate change out of the water. Responding to climate change on an adequate scale requires a lot of money and an unprecedented degree of global co-operation. An economic recession - or worse, collapse - will make keeping the lights on our priority, and tackling climate change will slide rapidly down our list of priorities. Facing runaway climate change with a collapsed economy is the scenario we really want to avoid, and we separate these two issues at our peril."