[MonteQuest]

A reminder:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he following post content is subject to edit/deletion:

Graphic content: Images which depict graphic violence or illness should not be used. Graphic detail in text is also discouraged. Do not post linked in graphics/photos more than 450 pixels wide or long URL’s that cause the page view to widen and necessitates the reader to scroll. Do not include images and graphs when quoting posts.

[turmoil]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'T')he Martians drop 1 barrel of oil on your head

[RattlesnakeJake]

I found this quote in Ethanol: Myths and Realities
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here's no absolute consensus in the scientific community, but that argument is losing strength. Michael Wang, a scientist at the Energy Dept.-funded Argonne National Laboratory for Transportation Research, says "The energy used for each unit of ethanol produced has been reduced by about half (since 1980)." Now, Wang says, the delivery of 1 million British thermal units (BTUs) of ethanol uses 0.74 million BTUs of fossil fuels. (That does not include the solar energy -- the sun shining -- used in growing corn.) By contrast, he finds that the delivery of 1 million BTUs of gasoline requires 1.23 million BTU of fossil fuels.

[MacG]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RattlesnakeJake', 'I') found this quote in Ethanol: Myths and Realities
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here's no absolute consensus in the scientific community, but that argument is losing strength. Michael Wang, a scientist at the Energy Dept.-funded Argonne National Laboratory for Transportation Research, says "The energy used for each unit of ethanol produced has been reduced by about half (since 1980)." Now, Wang says, the delivery of 1 million British thermal units (BTUs) of ethanol uses 0.74 million BTUs of fossil fuels. (That does not include the solar energy -- the sun shining -- used in growing corn.) By contrast, he finds that the delivery of 1 million BTUs of gasoline requires 1.23 million BTU of fossil fuels.

[RattlesnakeJake]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MacG', 'I') would guess that of the 1.23 million BTU's, one million is the one delivered and 230 000 is consumed in the process.

[roadcage]

I just can't let this nonsense go unanswered.

Several people claim

100 units of energy invested in pumping yields 190 units

so far so good

190 units of energy invested in pumping produces 361 units

reality check time

The only reason you can get the 190 units out with the pump is because it flowed to the wellbore.

If you try to invest all 190 units of energy into pumping, chances are very good that soon (and absolutely certain that eventually) your pump will cavitate, or pump water or some other non energy quantity.

If you want to invest those 190 units in pumping, you need to invest a few million units into another well.

[emailking]

How can you possibly make such a claim when we haven't even specified the amount of energy??

Why wouldn't the chances be good that the pump would cave soon if you try to pump your first 100?

We could be talking about 100 joules for all you know. Yes, you probably can't pump any oil at all on 100 joules, but they could be part of a larger energy influx.

[grabby]

Since we are uncertain of quantity underground, EROI and totals,
the logic above is sound.
But to know where we are we look at two things.

Actual production
Need
Cost

we will have passed peak when price starts to climb WHILE PRODUCTION IS STILL INCREASING, because the useful oil is actually decresaisng.

BUT we must add one more factor.
If we pump 84 million gallons a day for eternity,
the increasing demand at some NEAR POINT in the future will cause an economic collapse.

this is RELATIVE PEAK OIL

In fact you could be increasing production while short supplies increase exponentially causing a collapse of the economy.

how?
Nations all increasing demand.
excluding a war, it would behave exactly as sliding down the peak.

so we should call that NET AFTER TAX oil.
in other worlds peak says we have 20 years until we are dry, dry, dry.
lets say 10 for net
I say half for net after taxes.

and before that is the new Amrican foreign policy...
First strike, accepted as new military doctrine now.

which will really decrease production quickly.

[NEOPO]

I certainly hope you guys figure it all out and yeah thanks for the initial post

I think it is more interesting looking at the "waste" side of the eroei equation.

Eroei:
20-1 = 4.7% waste
16-1 = 5.88% waste = current mideast oil Eroei
10-1 = 9% waste = current north american oil Eroei
8-1 = 11% waste
6-1 = 14% waste
5-1 = 16% waste
4-1 = 20% waste
3-1 = 25% waste
2-1 = 33% waste
1.9-1 = 34% waste
1.5-1 = 40% waste
1.0-1 = 50% waste
0.0-1 = 100% waste

Where petroleum extraction is concerned - We waste approximately 8% of our GROSS energy to get our NET energy.

Some questions:

If the U.S. currently has an Oil eroei 10-1 when did this occur and what was the Eroei 5 - 10 - 20 - 40 years ago?

That data should be charted/graphed.

The same could be done for the world, opec and all oil.
We would then have a nice curve to play with - hint hint

[emailking]

I have reread this entire thread and still think you are completely wrong that time is up when EROEI falls below 2.

So you only netted 4700 units out of the 10,000 theoretically possible. That's still 4700 more than you had to start with. This is only a issue if you literally did not have 5300 units to start with.

Break out those solar panels and get your 5300 units.

Now pump the well.

You spend your 5300 solar units doing this.

In the process you deplete the 10,000 URR units.

You get back your 5300 units. (so far we've broken even)

You get back an additional 4700 in "net oil" by the definition of net oil.

So now we've got 10,000 units of energy. Effectively, 5300 came from the sun. 4700 came from the well.

So oil did not stop being pumped simply beause the EROEI fell below 2. As soon as the 5300 units of solar energy has been obtained, we go right to work getting another 4700 out of the deal by pumping the well. Because that energy can be obtained much faster than waiting for and storing solar energy.

Of course in reality one wouldn't wait until the entire amount requisite energy was obtained, (just like you don't wait till you have the full amount for your new house before moving to your new job) but you see the point...I hope!

Please debunk this argument if you truly believe well pumping stops when EROEI < 2.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Novus', 'F')or those who disbelieve the corollary to net oil you seem to be tripping over semantics.

I am not saying EROEI = EROEI - 1

That does not make any sence. I am talking about compond EROEI which is something I have not really defined. You must remember that these fields are finite in size. What I mean by compond EROEI really talking about a concept of Net URR where URR is Utimately Recoverable Reserves.

The formula for Net URR = (EROEI -1)/EROEI

So if well 'A' has a URR of 10,000 units of energy and EROEI is 1.9 I will still be able to recover all 10,000 units of energy. However, only 4700 units of that URR will be Net Oil. The other 5300 units of energy will be spent recovering that energy from well 'A'.

That is the corollary to Net Oil and I know it is correct. The graph from before only woks in terms Net URR which is the real heart of the Net Oil theory.