Peak Oil: Using Energy To Get Energy # 2

[W]e must realize that all resources are inextricably interconnected, and also require energy to produce. We can’t overlook the reality that drilling apparatus and infrastructure needed to extract oil from shale also demand large quantities of steel, derived from iron ore, whose production and refinery in turn require energy.
Huge energy costs are also inherent in the transport of water, chemicals and other materials essential to fracking. Tar sands likewise require mining equipment whose manufacture and transport consume still more energy. Mining tar sands, moreover, also uses natural gas.
Clearly the more money and resources needed to maintain adequate production of oil and gas, the less money and resources available for other endeavors….
Less energy translates into less mobility, less shopping, and in general fewer consumer expenditures. Fewer consumer expenditures mean less demand and more pressure on corporations, which are also squeezed by higher resource costs. Wages in turn get squeezed, but resource prices remain high, and the vicious circle is completed….
Things may be even worse than that, however. EROI refers to how much energy is needed to produce more energy. The concept leaves out a lot of linkages among resources. Resource-intensive production of oil and gas increases the scarcity and costs of other resources such as water and therefore of food, which depends on water as well. Other resources such as copper and iron ore that use lots of water and energy are also squeezed, and you have another vicious, potentially catastrophic, cycle. [1]

Now there’s a cheery thought to start the day!

Not wanting to deal with any of this is perfectly understandable whether it’s the government, corporations, or individuals. But pretending these issues are not issues, however, is a sure-fire strategy for failings at multiple levels of society.

The fossil fuel industry cheerleaders (aided and abetted by certain other public figures and media shills) continue to insist that there are “vast,” “massive” resources which have us “awash” in supply for decades and decades to come. There’s no question that that is the “better” and more appealing story.

If it weren’t for facts such as those nicely summarized by Stephen Leeb above, I’d be on board, too!

But since those and other, related facts are part of the story, relying on that Happy Talk will only get us all so far. Reality continues to mess with the narratives offered by those few with a vested interest in maintaining the highest possible levels of effort in producing costlier and less efficient oil supply as conventional crude reserves continue to deplete. Finite resources are no friends of happy narratives, either.

Those highest possible levels of production also require high prices, the same high prices we’re paying every day. So when we decide we’re not going to keep paying higher prices, oil and gas companies are going to stop exploring and producing. Less supply, less for us. The more energy required to locate, extract, and produce our energy supply—whether it’s derived from the energy-intensive processes required by deep-sea reserves, the tar sands of Alberta, fracking the shale reserves here in the U.S., or biofuels/renewables—the less energy we have for everything else. What we have to invest to get (EROI: the energy return on investment] is a critical measure. Happy Talkers don’t discuss this because it immediately bursts their “no worries” bubble.

We are losing the race between oil depletion and the pursuit of substitutes and better extraction technology. Drilling technology cannot overcome depletion, because depletion is giving us declining EROI and intolerably high prices for substitutes. The researchers* conclude that a smooth transition away from oil is unlikely without a deliberate policy effort to steer us toward alternative energy sources and manage the economic effects of depletion.
None of these insights should be particularly startling, yet most observers and policymakers continue to miss them entirely. Bedazzled by the sheer magnitude of unconventional resources—trillions of barrels of oil equivalent!— they cannot see how the low energy return of some (not all) of those resources will ultimately force us to leave them in the ground as their cost of production proves intolerable. [2]

* (discussed in Chris Nelder’s article, with links to the works cited)

Information is a good thing, and making plans based on more information is a much better strategy than relying on stories that make us all feel good … today.

Peak Oil Matters