Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

The Etp Model, Q & A

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.

Moderator: Pops

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby shortonoil » Thu 19 Jan 2017, 21:02:08

Using oil as a proxy, our efficiency is 14,000 BTU out of 140,000. 10%. But of that 140,000, 40,600 BTU is given up as waste heat, and there is nothing that can be done about it. Thermodynamics tells us that is best that can be done in this universe. Converting energy into work is not easy.

In other words, I don't have a clue as to how Arnoux came up with 14%, its 10.
User avatar
shortonoil
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: VA USA

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby ralfy » Thu 19 Jan 2017, 21:36:31

pstarr wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:
BahamasEd wrote:
And yet not one freeway is without it's full compliment of traffic or one plane grounded for lack of fuel.


Yes, as long as you're one of the 1.5 billion that can afford it, not so much for the other 6 billion

They sold twenty million cars in China last year to the USA 7.5 million.

Bought by remaining 20 million wealthy. Pity the other 5.980 billion


One problem is that the remaining 20 million essentially earn from increased sales of goods and services (including cars) to expanding consumer markets. That means they have to count on more from the other 6 billion to buy more goods and services.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4182
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby Physicsnerd » Thu 19 Jan 2017, 22:53:22

"In other words, I don't have a clue as to how Arnoux came up with 14%, its 10."

What are the standard deviations? And time-line of percent estimates?
User avatar
Physicsnerd
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun 31 Jul 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Rogue River, Oregon

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby Yoshua » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 02:24:13

Fossil fuels comes as solids (coal), liquids (oil) and gases (nat gas). If the breakeven price for a barrel of oil is $50 and the producer receives $50 per barrel, then the oil producer might not even produce any net energy at all, the oil producer might just convert solids and gases into liquids. Even if the net energy from oil production drops to zero, we could still have a lot of oil to burn, as long as we can use coal and nat gas to produce oil.

BP claims that they use 10% of the energy in a barrel of oil to produce a barrel of oil in their upstream and downstream operations, but that number is just for the energy needed to run the machines. To produce the machines (drill rigs, pumps, pines, refineries, tankers, trucks, gas stations) coal might have been used primarily.

And still the infrastructure is needed for BP to run their operations... and doesn't build that... but someone has to.

And then BP also needs an educated workforce, who needs housing and food... and coffee... and it goes on...
Yoshua
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat 28 May 2016, 05:45:42

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby Babydoomer » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 03:24:00

shortonoil wrote:Using oil as a proxy, our efficiency is 14,000 BTU out of 140,000. 10%. But of that 140,000, 40,600 BTU is given up as waste heat, and there is nothing that can be done about it. Thermodynamics tells us that is best that can be done in this universe. Converting energy into work is not easy.

In other words, I don't have a clue as to how Arnoux came up with 14%, its 10.

14,000/(140,000-40,600) x 100 = 14.08%
Babydoomer
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue 10 Mar 2015, 17:57:51

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby Physicsnerd » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 05:01:15

"14,000/(140,000-40,600) x 100 = 14.08%"

Thanks Babydoomer.
User avatar
Physicsnerd
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun 31 Jul 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Rogue River, Oregon

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby shortonoil » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 08:01:02

"Thanks Babydoomer"

Probably, but you have to pay for the waste heat just like everything else. It is part of the unavoidable operational cost. If there was such a thing as free waste heat we would be "Fat City".
User avatar
shortonoil
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: VA USA

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby Babydoomer » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 08:37:57

shortonoil wrote:"Thanks Babydoomer"

Probably, but you have to pay for the waste heat just like everything else. It is part of the unavoidable operational cost. If there was such a thing as free waste heat we would be "Fat City".

Indeed. I was just suggesting where the figure of 14% might have come from.
Babydoomer
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue 10 Mar 2015, 17:57:51

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 08:42:05

Yoshua wrote:Fossil fuels comes as solids (coal), liquids (oil) and gases (nat gas). If the breakeven price for a barrel of oil is $50 and the producer receives $50 per barrel, then the oil producer might not even produce any net energy at all, the oil producer might just convert solids and gases into liquids. Even if the net energy from oil production drops to zero, we could still have a lot of oil to burn, as long as we can use coal and nat gas to produce oil.

BP claims that they use 10% of the energy in a barrel of oil to produce a barrel of oil in their upstream and downstream operations, but that number is just for the energy needed to run the machines. To produce the machines (drill rigs, pumps, pines, refineries, tankers, trucks, gas stations) coal might have been used primarily.

And still the infrastructure is needed for BP to run their operations... and doesn't build that... but someone has to.

And then BP also needs an educated workforce, who needs housing and food... and coffee... and it goes on...

If BP says they use ten percent that is the most accurate figure you are going to get. The supporting infrastructure around their operations is multi use so the share to be paid by oil operations is quite small and as you imply the energy in the steel used in the drill rigs maybe coal sourced.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 6734
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby shortonoil » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 08:44:44

"Even if the net energy from oil production drops to zero, we could still have a lot of oil to burn, as long as we can use coal and nat gas to produce oil."

That assumes that you still have an economy to buy the oil? Is enough coal and NG available to substitute for the lost energy from the oil, and is the EROI of coal and NG high enough to run a modern civilization like the present one. A lot of "IFs"

Presently it takes 3.36 million BTU to extract, process, and distribute a barrel of oil; the economy gets 2.52 million BTU from that barrel. If the economy had to pay for the full 5.88 million BTU with no return it would be a pretty sick economy! Presently that 2.52 million BTU is powering $18.4 trillion of the world’s $73.5 trillion GDP. The question is: can modern civilization be held together with a world GDP of $55.1 trillion? It is reasonable to assume that with $200 trillion in debt, the monetary financial system would completely fail. No sophisticated monetary system, no trade, no economy to buy the oil!
User avatar
shortonoil
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: VA USA

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby donstewart » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 09:53:08

Chuck Marohn; Why is Lafayette, LA bankrupt?
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2017- ... -no-money/

I recommend this article because it shows you with numbers how the city of Lafayette has bankrupted itself with maintenance of streets. Streets, of course, are the foundation of the oil transportation system.

So the threats exposed by the ETP model extend down to the very fundamental aspects of how the oil products are used.

Don Stewart
donstewart
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri 16 Sep 2016, 03:37:24

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby tagio » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 10:04:40

vtsnowedin said:

And yet not one freeway is without it's full compliment of traffic or one plane grounded for lack of fuel.


"Not one" is a little too broad, don't you think? Do you mean the freeways in Venezuela, and the ones in Mexico, where the people are now rioting over fuel tax increases? It's a little dangerous summarizing by just looking out the window in these United States. I think the vista should be broadened past the local roads and tarmac, and at a minimum include the world's shipping lanes, which are definitely less crowded these days and the trend is decidedly not hunky-dory.

http://wolfstreet.com/2015/07/22/global ... e-monitor/
tagio
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu 19 May 2016, 18:09:58

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby onlooker » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 11:29:31

So true "The global shipping slowdown hints at a recession around the corner"
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/ec ... und-corner
China slowdown and drop in commodity prices are to put it mildly worrying signs. I have been hearing now of decrease of Caterpillar revenue which is cited in this article as a slowdown in mining orders. So, telltale signs of a slowing and stagnating world Economy are there for any keen observer to see. And yes, it is important to see the poorer countries for that is where you would expect to see first the signs of slowdown. That is what we are seeing now. But even more so the Titans China and US have and are showing considerable weakness.
" Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear."
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 5915
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby shortonoil » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 11:39:06

"Not one" is a little too broad, don't you think?'

That is like saying the Real Estate business is booming in EastButtFck, Alabama while the high end condo sector in Manhattan has collapsed. Oil affects everything from the shoe lace industry to the DBI. We are like a ship sinking slowly straight down into the depths that no one is going to notice until the waters start washing over the deck.

IBM has seen its sales drop for almost 3 consecutive years; CAT almost 4. When the world's Bell Weathers begin to ring its time to take a look at the water line of the good ship Civilization!
User avatar
shortonoil
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: VA USA

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby Yoshua » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 12:02:28

"That assumes that you still have an economy to buy the oil? Is enough coal and NG available to substitute for the lost energy from the oil, and is the EROI of coal and NG high enough to run a modern civilization?"

I just read that chinas coal production is down 10% y.o.y and US coal production was down 17% y.o.y 2016.

You want it darker ?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v0nmHymgM7Y
Yoshua
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 232
Joined: Sat 28 May 2016, 05:45:42

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby Babydoomer » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 15:04:24

For a sense of how the global interdepencies work, and how lost we will be without them, read this wonderful short essay about how to make a pencil, or rather how we won't even be able to make one....
http://energyskeptic.com/2012/even-a-pe ... he-future/
Though it might seem off-topic I think it gives an eloquent flavour of what goes on beyond the well-head - but is inseperable from it - that consumes so much energy to produce and deliver us the energy we use so blithely.
Babydoomer
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue 10 Mar 2015, 17:57:51

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby donstewart » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 15:20:08

@BabyDoomer
For a very current example of thinking which is misplaced, in my opinion:
https://www.upworthy.com/this-science-f ... 0dae8fba37

So this high school student wins a prize from Google for developing an industrial product which helps soil retain more water. To make the industrial product requires that waste materials be gathered by trucks and hauled to a central location where they are heated and extracted and so forth and so on and then distributed through retail channels to people who dig them into the soil using, I suppose, machinery driven by petroleum.

The alternative is to cultivate (as one would cultivate a friendship...not cultivating with a plow) soil microbes so that they make sticky substances such as glomalin which are the primary way we can sequester carbon in the soil, and which help soil structure and retain moisture in the soil. If we cultivate the microbes and don't destroy the glomalin, then the glomalin is formed as a result of photosynthesis and root exudates and stays right in the root zone where it is needed.

Which strategy do you think will succeed in the coming decades?...Don Stewart
donstewart
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri 16 Sep 2016, 03:37:24

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby Physicsnerd » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 18:23:53

I'd be more apt to try Dr. Elaine Ingham's method for correctly composting. According to Dr. Ingham, if you correctly compost your soil, you won't need to supply additional nutrients, which are already present in soil (NPK, CalMag, Fe, Mn, Co, etc.). And the soil will require much less water.

I have not tried Dr. Ingham's methods as of yet.

Nor am I trying to keep the complex, interdependent, bohemeth from imploding.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... ine+ingham
User avatar
Physicsnerd
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun 31 Jul 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Rogue River, Oregon

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby shortonoil » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 19:23:06

"You want it darker ?"

As one NSA employee screams to the other, "The Red Button, The Red Button you fool"

You know that someone is going to blame it on the Russians?
User avatar
shortonoil
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: VA USA

Re: The Etp Model, Q & A

Unread postby donstewart » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 20:20:22

@physicsnerd
Elaine Ingham was definitely ahead of the curve 30 years ago. Now...I'm not so sure. The latest science seems to suggest that it is the symbiosis of living plants and their roots with the fungi which is responsible for a lot of the good stuff. Christine Jones, an Australian soil scientist, began to talk about the 'liquid carbon pathway' about a decade ago. Christine talked about the plants directing carbohydrates they make during photosynthesis into the soil to feed the microbes. The microbes, in turn, provide the plants with nutrients and water and are a communications path toward other plants dispersed across the landscape. Glomalin was, I believe, discovered in the 1990s. Glomalin is the sticky substance made by fungi which is a major source of carbon sequestration in the soil.

From my limited perspective, what sets the current understanding apart from the science of 30 years ago is the recognition that a living plant root and a living fungi must come together simultaneously and make an exchange of carbon for water and nutrients. One cannot just add dead compost to the soil and expect to accomplish the same tasks. This is not to argue against compost. If you have waste organic matter, then by all means compost it. Just don't expect it to accomplish exactly the same tasks as the liquid carbon pathway.

Don Stewart
donstewart
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri 16 Sep 2016, 03:37:24

Next

Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests