The new 'Congress of Vienna' reflected Opec's aspiration for a new energy deal to usher in an era of cooperation between producers and consumers.

Participants included Dubliner Dave O'Reilly who runs oil supermajor Chevron, as well as the bosses of Shell, Exxon and state companies. It's easier to meet them there than in their home city. The event was ably MC'd by another Dubliner, Eithne Treanor.

Those with 75% of the world's reserves seem relaxed about a softening oil price. Prices are well above expectations. Moderating prices reduce risk of world recession. They're flush with cash, believe Opec is now better understood, and that there are only collective answers to energy challenges.

Finally, high prices affect demand: the growth in oil demand is about half the level of 2005. Similar slowing is happening for diamonds and many commodities. The growth rate is slowing, but demand is still growing. We are a long way from conservation cutting consumption.

Will higher energy prices cut demand, as after the 1979 Iranian revolution? No one really knows. There has been remarkably little impact in wealthy societies, though poor countries must be hurting. Some trends, like the shift from petrol to diesel, help. Others, like stricter emission standards, hurt.

There are reduced geopolitical tensions following stalemate in Lebanon. The feeling is that the Americans will rattle sabres against Iran but not more . . . until the November elections. All agree that there is a risk premium because there's no safety margin. Though prices have tripled since 2003, volatility is down.

Speculators accelerate trends, but they don't create trends.

Worldwide, there's heightened energy consciousness, with security the key issue. There was talk of building a 600km wall around Saudi Arabia, though to keep militants out, rather than in.

Consumers and producers have similar concerns. The idea that conventional oil output will peak is now mainstream, with the debate shifting to non-conventional substitutes.

There was good will towards renewables, which are considered complementary, rather than competitive.

They believe it will be decades before renewables are commercially viable: even now it's only economic to make ethanol from tropical sugar. But bizarrely there are tariffs and other barriers against importing inexpensive ethanol. We should encourage rather than obstruct efficient suppliers.

The present generation of biodiesel requires too much land and depends on fiscal incentives. No sooner are CAP subsidies shrunk than they return under the guise of biofuels. Biodiesel absorbs more energy than it generates and the carbon balance is poor. But it helps farmers and diversifies sources.

But needs must: the next generation of crops . . . maybe genetically engineered . . . will need less land, water and chemicals.

For all the talk of 'freedom fuel' hydrogen is only a storage system: it is clean only if it stores clean energy.

Hydrogen requires nuclear power generation, but voters remain afraid of nuclear, as they once were of natural gas.

Opec contributors expect that over 90% of transport fuel will remain conventional by 2026.

Major energy producers, including Russia, are reorienting themselves east . . . not to the exclusion of western markets, but a rebalancing nonetheless. Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 ignored the long-standing Saudi policy of being number one supplier to the USA. It wasn't a one-way relationship. Saudi Arabia is still a major oil supplier to the USA, but it is no longer first. Saudi Arabia is, however, now number one supplier to China. A cultural gap is opening: fewer Middle Easterners come west for education and holidays. Fewer westerners travel to Muslim lands.

The Chinese and Japanese were present, stressing cooperative solutions. All agreed we need more energy sources and transport routes, with less environmental impact.

The IMF contribution, delivered by Spain's former finance minister, seemed listless: Rising commodity prices stress the resource-poor. The credibility of conventional solutions such as those recommended by the World Bank is diminished, but without a new theory.

New gurus like Stiglitz . . . as we saw in Dublin last month . . . are stronger on criticism than solutions.

New populists like Venezuela's Hugo Chavez look to the emerging economic superpower, China. But China and India are living examples of the power of free markets and enterprise, lifting 400 million out of poverty in just 15 years.

DUBLIN AIRPORT, EN ROUTE TO WASHINGTON DC, 21 AUGUST
Over decades of travel, I've been treated well by US authorities, even when schoolmates were illegals. Once I arrived on a Mexican flight into a small Texan airport late at night, the only whitey on board. My form said I was 'in transit'. The weary official asked "are you in transit for days or for years?"

Repetitive questions may be reasonable where they're looking for hesitation or didn't understand the first time.

Occasionally there are questions about 'that scar on your arm' (from a road accident). But sometimes their eyes widen when they flick through a passport packed with 'Axis of Evil' stamps. Usually they observe "Y'all must be in the oil industry!"

It was therefore surprising when an immigration official was alarmed not by 'Axis of Evil' stamps but by one from Lebanon . . . supposedly a model democracy since last year's 'Cedar Revolution'. His next question . . . had I "been anywhere else in the Middle East" . . . seemed superfiuous since there was an Iranian visa open.

Then follow-on questions and a referral to his boss, who asked standard questions about height, weight, hair colour etc. But presumably a spy or subversive would memorise such detail.

Eventually the of"cer called me in, apologised for the delay and said he was awaiting a call-back from his stateside superiors. Pointedly, he explained that this might come immediately after the gate closed. He stressed that this was a once-off and if so I would have no trouble on the following flight, through Shannon. It was clear from his tone and body language that he disapproved of game-playing. He thrust out his hand, apologising again profusely. I agreed that he was doing his job and security was a good cause. Instead of being driven apart, the bureaucratic manoeuvre brought us together.

Sure enough, the passport was returned as the door closed. I asked the Continental representative could they reopen it. "No, but we'll have you on the next flight", for which they charged an extra 78. When I asked was all this deliberate, his mouth said 'no' but his tone said 'yes.'

The glamour of international travel!

daithiohargain@excite. com