I voted 2. That is, I think there is a strong possibility of a 5-10 year, substantial recession, a lot of people have to spend money they were going to spend elsewhere on renewables, alternative cars, etc. But I don't really know if that scenario is covered by "2".

I've finally resolved it within myself.

I'm a full out Doomer. You're all going to die!

The little devil icon makes it seem less ominous. I voted for 6 and I sure do hope I'm wrong. I want to be a cornucopian! Let everything work out fine, let my kids marry and give me grandkids. Let's see carbon nanofibers used to make light and strong structures so we can cut our energy needs way down. Let the populations stabilize and let us build a sustainable economy. Let us find ways to eliminate carbon dioxide emissions (how about we get our carbon from the air?). Let us get our act together work out our problems go on to progress into a bright and splendid future. Amen

Such a economy CANNOT grow. Are you comfortable with that?
No pun intended ... I'm a steady statician myself

Well sure, a steady state economy where our progress is measured in spiritual ways instead of more, bigger, faster, etc. We are clearly headed for a major change. Maybe it can be a change for the better. If we have no choice and finally everybody knows it, who knows what we might accomplish. (this may be another one of those denial-type states, but I can't sustain a doom and gloom attitude and need to hope.)

Material goods, economy, technology are FACILITATORS. They enable the human to exist in a state of perpetual inquiry about Self and The World.
I have written it before somewhere here.
Latin/Greek word for "Man"
Homo Sapiens = Earth that thinks
Anthropos = The being staring up (at the Stars)
The faster we disengage from viewing the faciliators as the penultimate goal in life (we consume to live and not vice versa) the faster we can do what the Latins and the Greeks had in mind (I apologise to other cultures, I'm a Westerner )
Unless someone has a nucler fuckfest along the way, the future will be much better than the past.

I'm thinking of asking the unthinkable:
1)how is the doomerosity level affected by the perception of owing and operating a car as a necessity or prerequisite to life
2) how is the doomerosity level affected by considering waste and disposable plastic containers as the definition of civilization
3)the doomerosity level as a function of someone's actual as opposed to self-perceived culture.
4) how is the doomerosity level affected by the views towards humanity (as vermin) and technology (as evil 666 stuff from hell)

I was definitely a doomer due to (3); now my culture (defined solely on scientific/mathematical/phisophical/technological) is receiving a lot of attention. Even if I end up eating hotdogs made of dogs I will be a better man ... that's why I'm a a level 3 doomer

We have too many extra people.

Massive dieoff.

Become useful or arm yourselves.

Too many extra people is a matter of two things:

1) Opinion
2) Distribution of necessities like food and water

Apparently, we produce enough food to feed everyone, but those starving simply can't afford it! Of course, one could argue this is buffered by cheap oil, and they are right to a large extent, on the otherhand cutting consumption of meat would be able to free up more land for more people and even then may be capable of providing, under the conditions we ween ourselves from oil use.

But given politics today, in government and the oil industry, and how both want to keep the populace under their control with money flowing in, averting that dieoff is not bloody likely.

I'm a doomer, but also of the opinion tragedy could be prevented with proper allocation of resources, public outcry, and an end to this economic system that relies on an unstainable growth level. Unfortunately, that's not likely to happen before the worst of peak oil hits society.

I concur. It's not that we can't do anything to avert disaster, it's that we won't do anything to avert disaster (probably). By "disaster" I mean the rapid death of many people. No matter what, the population we currently have is not sustainable, and needs to fall. How fast it will fall is the question. Currently, I'm feeling doomeristic and see it falling quite quickly, because it doesn't look like we'll do anything to prevent this.

But from 4 to 5 it is the difference between die off and no die off ("most of us will survive")

I think most of us would agree that the basic difference between a pessimist and and optimist is shown in the die off question?

I didn't check this thread out before, because I thought "What kind of word is doomerosity"
But apparently I'm a 3 on the doomerosity index.
I voted 3, but would hope for a 2 or better, even after reading all your replies.
Here's the breakdown after I voted.

0) ... 0% [ 1 ]
1) ... 2% [ 3 ]
2) ... 10% [ 16 ]
3) ... 18% [ 27 ]
4) ... 30% [ 45 ]
5) .. 33% [ 49 ]
6) ... 3% [ 5 ]

Oil shortages will significantly affect all economies, from America to Zimbabwe, mostly in the transportation sector. This means that in the West, people will revert to pre-WWII habits; much less travel, more by bus or train. Many industries related to automobile use will wither away, causing widespread unemployment, people will tend to move closer to, or commute on a weekly basis to their jobs, and stay in boarding houses (converted McMansions or some such, owned by others just trying to get by). Vegetable gardens will no longer be a thing of the past, and recycling and conservation will become the priority that they should have been all along. We certainly won't be hopping in the car and driving to the ice-cream drivein every other night.
In the 3rd World, people are much more pedestrian than here, and small farming is still a mainstay in many countries, so I think they are not so far along the oil-use deadend that Europe and America are on, and can walk back out. With hard work and co-operation (and luck), the West can pull a U-turn as well.
Peak oil will be the last wake-up call for all of us to make a sustainable civilization.

***BUMP***

It's been almost two months since the last post and I was just curious if any new people had something to add.

If the bold sentence is correct, but me in the unemployed category.

I put myself at a 4 to a 4.5

The dieoff will happen regardless of Peak Oil.

The world just can't handle 6 billion humans controlling 50% of the biosphere.

I don't think we will try to stop the worst effects of PO until it's too late. We don't think far enough in advance to manage a soft landing. At this point, anything better than a 3 is impossible given our current societal inertia.

A 3 would be possible given wipespread international cooperation. But based on our current mindset.

So I'm in the moderate doomer camp, but not in the "5 years to 0 oil camp".

Well if it isn't Raphael, the Official Peak Oil Philosopher.

I agree with your basic premise here. We have taken too much, for too long, and have destroyed so much of our environment that a dieoff in many areas is inevitable.

But I believe that international cooperation would help to minimize the suffering.

Unfortunately I don't think we will consider that as an option until hundreds of millions are already dead.