The question is neither, but a simple quest to identify the beliefs of a fellow poster so I might ascertain their true position

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Quinny,
A funny thing happened on the way to the grammarian's annual forum.
We discovered that the English language is full of imprecision and ambiguity.
(Indeed many of Shakespeare's plays are built on such ambiguity.)
You left out from your question the identity of the players involved in the act of "manufacturing" this gallon of diesel.
If the players on your stage are only human beings and no other forces of Nature than the answer is that of course, the gallon of diesel has far more potential energy than that which the human actors invested into possessing this gallon of magic elixir. (EROI >> 1).
On the other hand if your question includes all the energy that Mother Nature invested into the creation of this gallon of diesel, starting with the highly inefficient photosynthesis of prehistoric botany then the answer is the exact opposite, EROI approaches zero.
So which one is your question and what ultimate conclusion are you trying to drive to?