Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Is EROEI important?

Yes
56
76%
No
18
24%
 
Total votes : 74

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby Darian S » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 12:04:20

marmico wrote:
Point is EROEI drops basically mean less oil produced per energy spent taking it out. Assuming similar oil type given similar energy content.


So what. If there is less net level energy per unit of gross energy, then extract more gross energy to achieve the same net level of energy. The level of net energy is what matters at the gasoline pump or the natural gas meter. And through conservation, efficiency and substitution the gross level of energy per unit of standard of living relentlessly declines.

Image


Suppose we get 100 barrels of oil per 1 barrel energy equivalent spent. This can drop and say we get 10 per 1. All of a sudden rather than getting 99% of the energy for use outside oil production it dropped to 90%. If we get 5 per 1 then we have 80% free and have to put in 20% back.

But if I'm hearing thing right the idea is that the EROEI at the well of 5 to 1 doesnt reflect the true EROEI of the energy cost for example of manufacturing all the precise components. It takes energy to manufacture all the components, to transport the workers, to transport the fuel(tankers and trucks consume energy during transport and take energy to build and maintain), to produce their food, for making the roads to transport the fuel, to process the fuels. Its a very big long chain, and a portion or percent of energy of each step is devoted to oil production. All in all True EROEI at such a moment may be as low as 2 to 1, with 50% of energy being fed back into the oil production system.

Right now U.S. infrastructure is rapidly decaying and they say bridges are becoming a danger. The navy which is needed to secure maritime transport from pirates, and part of its energy must be attributed to oil production, has a rapidly decaying fleet with many ancient ships some not receiving adequate maintenance.

Is the tanker fleet receiving proper maintenance or have costs been cut there too?

Already not enough energy is being spent on things like maintenance of infrastructure, at least in U.S.
Darian S
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon 29 Feb 2016, 15:47:02

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby marmico » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 12:45:32

Blah, blah, blah. Why did it cost US households 8% of their after tax incomes to buy energy in 1980 at EROI 30, yet it costs them 4% in 2017 at EROI 15? It's the EROI Guys that say EROI declined from 30 to 15* in the same time frame that Jane Chardonnay reports that her energy spending relative to her income was cut in half.

Do you get it? The EROI decline is positively correlated with the spending decline. Plot the EROI with after tax spending and show the regression. That's why EROI is bull shit.

* Back of the envelope it means that the EROI Guys say that the energy efficiency of the energy system that they are measuring has declined from 97% to 93%.
marmico
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon 28 Jul 2014, 13:46:35

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 13:31:30

marmico wrote:
Point is EROEI drops basically mean less oil produced per energy spent taking it out. Assuming similar oil type given similar energy content.


So what. If there is less net level energy per unit of gross energy, then extract more gross energy to achieve the same net level of energy. The level of net energy is what matters at the gasoline pump or the natural gas meter. And through conservation, efficiency and substitution the gross level of energy per unit of standard of living relentlessly declines.

Image

Right. The data underlying that chart, and the fact that those trends are set to continue for decades decimates all the hand waving EROEI arguments, simply and elegently. Not that the purveyors of constant doom would ever admit it.

(Red font, mine, to highlight the core, obvious, salient point.)
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4616
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby onlooker » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 13:52:26

what a bunch of hogwash. It has been shown through time that greater efficiency just enables greater consumption. Which then segways nicely to conservation and how that is pure fantasy. People seek to consume where consumption is possible. And finally substitution. No adequate substitution exists for FF if we wish to keep any resemblence to Modern Industrial Civilization. Look at this link which well summarizes the bogus claims of efficiency cheerleaders like you guys. Jevons Paradox ring any bells.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10 ... -work.html
The Big Economic Plunge is approaching
User avatar
onlooker
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8674
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby GHung » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 14:54:27

onlooker wrote:what a bunch of hogwash. It has been shown through time that greater efficiency just enables greater consumption. Which then segways nicely to conservation and how that is pure fantasy. People seek to consume where consumption is possible. And finally substitution. No adequate substitution exists for FF if we wish to keep any resemblence to Modern Industrial Civilization. Look at this link which well summarizes the bogus claims of efficiency cheerleaders like you guys. Jevons Paradox ring any bells.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10 ... -work.html



... and in typical Marm style; ("and through conservation, efficiency and substitution the gross level of energy per unit of standard of living relentlessly declines") he and scared folks like O_S hope we won't point out that overall consumption, and resulting waste streams, continue to relentlessly increase in almost all metrics. Certainly aren't declining in any way that will reduce the overall impacts to our biosphere. All-the-while, finite resources per capita decline over time. It's a mathematical certainty they expect no one will call them on.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2169
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby Darian S » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 15:43:20

World energy consumption cant possibly decline any hint of that can only occur if more and more energy went into energy production giving an illusion of a drop in energy. Or u can use inflation to paint a misleading picture.

No way you can continue increasing consumption, reducing poverty and increasing the global middle class with decreasing energy.

The middle class takes multiple long distance vacations a year. Buys lots of complex elaborate gadgets may substitute phones and cars for brand new ones each year. Has large climate controlled houses.

Not to mention climate change related disasters and changes require massive resources. Look at the reconstructions and say the levee systems at places like new orleans, etc.
Darian S
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon 29 Feb 2016, 15:47:02

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 15:53:24

Darian S wrote:World energy consumption cant possibly decline any hint of that can only occur if more and more energy went into energy production giving an illusion of a drop in energy. Or u can use inflation to paint a misleading picture.

No way you can continue increasing consumption, reducing poverty and increasing the global middle class with decreasing energy.

You seem to either lack basic reading comprehension or math skills, based on the topic at hand. No one said anything about decreasing overall energy usage. The graph and the conversation are about decreasing energy per dollar of GDP (or unit of standard of living).

Now, of course, the doomers deny that's been happening for decades pretty steadily, and credibly forecast to continue happening for decades because if it is, their fast crash doom fear mongering looks about as credible as it is.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4616
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 15:57:46

GHung wrote:
onlooker wrote:what a bunch of hogwash. It has been shown through time that greater efficiency just enables greater consumption. Which then segways nicely to conservation and how that is pure fantasy. People seek to consume where consumption is possible. And finally substitution. No adequate substitution exists for FF if we wish to keep any resemblence to Modern Industrial Civilization. Look at this link which well summarizes the bogus claims of efficiency cheerleaders like you guys. Jevons Paradox ring any bells.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10 ... -work.html



... and in typical Marm style; ("and through conservation, efficiency and substitution the gross level of energy per unit of standard of living relentlessly declines") he and scared folks like O_S hope we won't point out that overall consumption, and resulting waste streams, continue to relentlessly increase in almost all metrics. Certainly aren't declining in any way that will reduce the overall impacts to our biosphere. All-the-while, finite resources per capita decline over time. It's a mathematical certainty they expect no one will call them on.

Every time you claim I'm scared you show you're as clueless in psychology as economics. Congrats! :roll:

Be sure and get back to us when the ACTUAL trend of energy intensity is increasing for a several years globally, and thus actually looks to be a possible problem. (Hint: FUD and zombie horde dreams don't count, since their track record for several decades is zero out of many thousands of correct predictions).
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4616
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 16:05:31

Darian S wrote:The middle class takes multiple long distance vacations a year. Buys lots of complex elaborate gadgets may substitute phones and cars for brand new ones each year. Has large climate controlled houses.

First, they're doing that because on their US household median income of about $60,000 a year and rising, they can well afford it despite the claims people can't afford gasoline.

Second, you're talking about AGW issues here -- EROEI is irrelevant until energy intensity is increasing alarmingly for long enough to establish a meaningful trend.

I'd like to fix AGW too. However, I can't fine ANYONE but me willing to have anywhere near the level of carbon taxes (replacing much of the income taxes if needed) to actually make a dent in CO2 production. I'd like to see $20 a pound (not ton, pound) of CO2 taxes within a decade.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4616
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby marmico » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 16:10:14

The middle class takes multiple long distance vacations a year. Buys lots of complex elaborate gadgets may substitute phones and cars for brand new ones each year. Has large climate controlled houses.


And in the US they do all of that and everything else in their lives for 12%* less gross energy per capita than they did 10 years ago.

*4% less gross energy + 8% population growth.
marmico
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon 28 Jul 2014, 13:46:35

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby GHung » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 16:15:02

I don't know anyone, who spends as much time attacking reality as you do, who isn't scared of reality. Like a little dog barking at everything he can't control.

Calling people "doomers" says nothing at all about the obvious overall downward path of the human collective relative to the carrying capacity of their planet and environment, or their clear cluelessness regarding their growing predicaments.

Shunting those who stand fast in accepting these realities into a fast-doom cadre of reactionaries, and constantly insulting those folks, changes nothing. It only reveals your complete lack of courage to face said realities.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2169
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby onlooker » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 16:23:09

figure_1-1.png
figure_1-1.png (30.88 KiB) Viewed 581 times
Again, you seem to not want to understand OS. TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION CONTINUES GROWING. It is NOT about energy intensity or per capita energy use even. Population keeps growing. What levels of efficiency or conservation the Western countries have achieved to reduce energy consumption have been offset and then some by the Eastern countries. Again, consumption and energy reduced only allowing it to increase in other places and in other ways. That is the facts of the matter as this graph depicts. You can insult us as much as you want but it will not change this runaway unsustainable trajectory that will not be stopped by us because WE are the problem.
The Big Economic Plunge is approaching
User avatar
onlooker
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8674
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Is EROEI Important? Pt. 2

Unread postby Darian S » Thu 08 Feb 2018, 16:38:42

Outcast_Searcher wrote:
Darian S wrote:World energy consumption cant possibly decline any hint of that can only occur if more and more energy went into energy production giving an illusion of a drop in energy. Or u can use inflation to paint a misleading picture.

No way you can continue increasing consumption, reducing poverty and increasing the global middle class with decreasing energy.

You seem to either lack basic reading comprehension or math skills, based on the topic at hand. No one said anything about decreasing overall energy usage. The graph and the conversation are about decreasing energy per dollar of GDP (or unit of standard of living).

Now, of course, the doomers deny that's been happening for decades pretty steadily, and credibly forecast to continue happening for decades because if it is, their fast crash doom fear mongering looks about as credible as it is.



Given that each dollar is worth less and less overtime due to inflation how can you honestly believe that?

There are physical limits to possible efficiency gains and the possible gains are not that big.

Ud imagine that requires deflation. Or trickery if u start taking financial products and virtual products as counting towards gdp u can inflate gdp with fictional virtual goods and mislead to generate such graphs.

I can sell you a trillion dollars of digital goods, that merely require a minuscule amount of energy to copy paste, I can print debt out of thin air to buy it. Thats not real economic activity, not real goods and services. Thats fictional addition.
Darian S
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon 29 Feb 2016, 15:47:02

Previous

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests