It's easy to start thinking of our current situation as normal instead of a temporary "energy splurge." I think it's fair to say that everyone, certainly all first-worlders, use more energy than they produce. (Produce is actually a misnomer..."capture" is perhaps a better word. The sun produces energy by sacrificing mass. Everything else is exactly a zero sum game.) Even our collective efforts to capture wind energy fall short of supplying our needs. The difference between what we use and what we capture is supplied by stored energy which has accumulated for millions of years. As you note, exploiting this stored energy is so convenient now because we collectively spent an entire century building out infrastructure to make fossil fuels convenient.
There are really only two things we know for sure:
1. This stored energy source is finite and will run out eventually--sooner if we deplete it faster.
2. There is no such thing as "credit": When fossil fuels stop making up the difference between what we use and what we capture, we will use less energy than we capture.
A corollary is that in a post-fossil-fueled world we will need to own the entire process of capturing, storing, transporting/distributing, and using energy.
To successfully transition to whatever follows fossil fuels, we need to identify, prototype, standardize, manufacture, and build out a replacement for conveniently prepackaged energy. To avoid disruption to critical services like food delivery to grocery stores, power to hospitals, and transportation fuel for police and fire services, this process needs to be complete by the time access to fossil fuels becomes an issue. Ideally, all of society will have transitioned to whatever follows. This implies that at the time of depletion, the replacement will have been in place for long enough that there is a robust selection of used vehicles, and few if any people still rely on the energy subsidy that fossil fuels provide for any life sustaining purpose.
The prevailing attitude seems to be that we can wait to start this process until access to fossil fuels becomes a problem. This would seem to invite apocalypse into our homes and offer it a cup of tea.
Perhaps I have wandered a bit. The point is that a transition from an established system (where we are trust fund babies spending down a very large "energy bank account") to a system in its infancy (where we get a frigging job and pay our own way) is coming. Inconvenience relative to what we have now will be part of that equation, particularly in the early days. Things will get less inconvenient as the replacement system matures and as people get used to the new way of doing things.
Accepting the inconvenience of a transition avoids the much greater inconvenience of not having something to transition to when the time comes.
That's Plan A. Plan B involves a lot of shooting...one might even call it a culling. Plan B makes inconvenience look like a best case scenario.