I didn't like the article, either, it raises many issues but doesn't seem to deal with any of them in a sufficient way. But calling for energy efficiency is hardly neo-malthusian, it's just common sense. Every strategy towards a sustainable energy economy I'm aware of requires significant improvements in energy efficiency. The good thing is that there are still lots of low hanging fruit when it comes to improving efficiency: huge amounts of energy used to heat up or cool down housing can be saved by improving isolation, for example. Or just think of the transportation sector, both bulk as well as personal transportation.
If it were just up to the western world, reducing the overall energy consumption should be incredibly easy. I'm pretty sure it's already stagnated in Europe; for Germany, it has remained constant at around 14000 PJ since the 90s. Unfortunately, that's where his point about sharing finite resources equitably among nations comes in -- we need to reduce our consumption while simultaneously allowing for an increase in developing countries, while desperately trying to prevent their per-capita energy consumption from coming anywhere close to our (soon: historic) extremes.
Also, the Bulletin isn't a pro-nuclear shill publication. While I can't rule out that they have an overall pro-nuclear energy bias, they're most famous for covering issues of nuclear armament and proliferation (the clock thing). I briefly looked at the nuclear energy articles and they didn't strike me as particularly partisan; they have a moderately optimistic article about the recent German commitment to phase out nuclear energy, which I'm pretty sure marks them as anti-nuclear fringe in US terms.