When it comes to going easier on the environment, there’s a disconnect between what people say they want to do and what they actually do. John Rilett says that’s what makes current trends so significant.

He’s director of Energy Efficiency and Conservation at Climate Change Central, an Alberta not-for-profit organization formed in 1999 to find solutions to climate change challenges. "Whether it is because of cost, time, the desire to get some fresh air and exercise or awareness of the impact running our vehicles is having on the environment, we're seeing a 20 to 30 per cent increase in cycling trips.” he says.

The shift is also apparent on Edmonton’s LRT platforms. During peak periods, cars are often jammed to capacity, and passengers sometimes have to wait two or three trains for space to become available.

The Alberta Motor Association’s fuel Price impact study, conducted in November 2007 by Insightrix Research, shows that 50 per cent of Albertans drive seven days a week, 15 per cent drive five days a week and 12 per cent drive six days a week. Within these groups, 25 per cent drive less than 10 km daily, 21 per cent drive between 11 and 20 km daily and 18 per cent drive more than 50 km a day.

As for how much these households spend on fuel each month, 26 per cent reported spending between $251 and $500 per month, 17 per cent between $51 and $100 per month and 11 per cent more than $500 a month. Traffic volumes haven’t declined much in the last year, signalling that the recent increase in fuel prices has not significantly altered driving behaviour.

That may be about to change, as awareness about the cost of fuel triggers a paradigm shift in how people think about it. Of the 800 respondents in the Insightrix study, 58 per cent reported that the price of gas was unlikely to affect how often they drive. When asked if they would reduce their driving when gasoline reached a certain price, however, most cited a threshold of $1.45 a litre. Only 22 per cent reported that gasoline prices would not affect their driving habits.

Change is coming, pushed by increasing demand on dwindling oil reserves. Driven primarily by emerging powerhouse economies, including China and India, the International Energy Agency projects global oil demand will reach 116 million barrels per day in 2030 – up 32 million barrels a day from 2006.

The number of cars on the world's roads is forecast to increase from 900 million to more than 2.1 billion by 2030. All that demand will, in turn, push prices up, and analysts say we should brace ourselves for some big increases. They caution that the recent reductions may be only temporary, driven down by falling commodity prices and global economic turmoil.

Concerns about the cost of fuel is also driving motorists to buy smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles, and sales of big SUVs and trucks have fallen flat over the past year. But are the prices changing the way we drive? Visit a local drive-through, loading zone or parking lot and witness money just pouring out of tailpipes thanks to excessive idling and the wizardry of remote car starters.

Idling the average four-cylinder gas engine consumes about one litre of fuel per hour, and the average eight-cylinder burns about two litres per hour, reports Dr. Dave Checkel, a mechanical engineering professor at the University of Alberta. "It makes more sense to buy heated seats than it does to buy a $700 remote car starter that then costs a lot more money to operate," he says. "It is far more efficient to get in the car and drive it than it is to idle it until it warms up."

After all, an idling vehicle is getting exactly zero kilometres per litre.

The City of Edmonton is working on an excessive-idling bylaw and has launched an awareness campaign called "You hold the key, be idle free." Its focus: educating drivers on the benefits of reduced vehicle idling times when not in routine traffic situations.

At the campaign launch in April, a survey of 400 motorists found that 73 per cent of respondents reported warming up their vehicles and 62 per cent idle their vehicles while waiting in a drive-through. The survey also found that Edmontonians who warm up their vehicles do so for nearly six minutes.

Where we choose to live and work also affects our transportation costs, says Rilett, who sees reducing long commutes as a big part of the formula to keep mobility affordable for more of us. And that's where smart growth, more compact neighbourhoods and more transportation choices have a role to play, he says. "The reliance on automobiles in cities is where we need to focus on making an improvement – to provide motorists with more choices."

Of course, the most logical of these alternatives is public transit. Though as more Albertans choose – or are forced due to cost – to travel by bus or LRT, the demands on the systems will increase. Which means, "government needs to step up and follow the leadership that its citizens have started to show," Rilett says.

He observes that the lowest-cost transportation options for today aren't necessarily the best options for the long term, and that means government has a role to play connecting policy and regulation. “Short-term development costs of well-planned communities that reduce the need to drive and support transit and bike paths tend to be marginally higher than traditional transportation options, but the rewards down the road are substantial. It's by opting for those long-term solutions that we're going to have communities in 2030 and 2050 that are great places to live, work and play."