This is true, but whatever the future is, it will be shaped by the impact the oil age has had, both good and bad. Actually, the fact that oil has a limited future is one reason such a monument makes sense. In that, as the source of energy is phased out by whatever forces, the need to remind people of its impact and the interest in the attraction as a novelty grows. Kind of like railroad museums (sort of bad example as railroad's are still important, but the magnitude of their impact on the world economy is often forgotten).

That's one reason was I was kind of serious when I suggested a museum... an energy museum. It would be kind of interesting, imo, to see how the abundance of energy from fossil fuels created this culture dependant on that energy and how that dependancy will be met in the future. There is no escaping that our world is the way it is today because of oil and that even a future without oil will be the way it is because oil literally fueled a rapid expansion and dependancy on technology that will need to be met by some other energy source. People of the future will no doubt lament many aspects of the oil legacy that they will inherit, but they will also owe a lot of the technology they'll enjoy to oil and there will be no escaping that oil will be very much a part of their heritage.

Ultimately, it's up to us today to provide the context for such a monument. Sure, if we continue to ignore the imminent pitfalls of oil dependancy, then it will simply be viewed as a monument to a reckless and irresponsible society who disregarded all of the readily apparent warnings because it was simply too inconvenient and uncomfortable to make the short term sacrifices neccessary to avoid destruction (we wouldn't be the first). However, it could as just as easily be viewed as a novel and significant icon to man's succsessful ability to adapt through reason and common experience to avoid a disaster of its own making... we still have a choice.