[sjn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mastodon', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'T')he refinery inputs, in terms of electricity and natural gas used, and amount of oil refined were from this California government web page. The high end of the ratio assumes the oil is refined w/ 100% efficiency, and the low end assumes the energy from oil's refined products (including non-fuel) that's available after refining, ~83% according to the EPA IIRC.

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mastodon', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'T')he refinery inputs, in terms of electricity and natural gas used, and amount of oil refined were from this California government web page. The high end of the ratio assumes the oil is refined w/ 100% efficiency, and the low end assumes the energy from oil's refined products (including non-fuel) that's available after refining, ~83% according to the EPA IIRC.

[Mastodon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '<')/div>It's the ratio of energy input (NG and electricity) to energy output (refined products), depending on whether or not refinery efficiency and non-fuel products are included.[/quote]

Please show the calculations you used to arrive at the figure

[Mastodon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '
')
Hall’s work is undoubtedly exemplarity, but I think he is a little optimistic here at 5. For a technological society to be maintained, it requires an energy input to continually advance its technology. Technology and the infrastructure it requires, like anything else, becomes obsolete as the resource base it depends on depletes (oil seems to come to mind).

For that reason I would be inclined to put the culture’s needed primary energy source at a minimum EROI of 7-8. This is probably what would be required for its assured continuance.

[dohboi]

If I may, I'd like to go back to the original graph to see if I get it.

Does it mean that, even though we still have half the oil left in the ground at peak, we only have 12% of the usable energy left?

If that is the case, it would be good to be quite explicit about it so even reporters and other semiliterates (like me ) can get it.

When people hear that peak oil means half the oil has been used, it's really hard for them to get why that's much of a problem, since that's obviously a heck of a lot of oil still left in the ground. But if they understood it to mean that there is less than an eighth of the originally availabe energy left, that sounds a bit more sobering.

On the math side, is e=energy, and what do k and m represent in the formula?

[Mastodon]

EROI,

have a browse thru this excerpt from energy and resource quality, should help clear the fogs.

Even better, get the book, tis one of those "oh fork" or "of course" books, as you read it you will find yourself smackin the bonce and saying..

Another very good one is Beyond Oil by Gever etal, similar vintage and very educational. Should be part of every school curriculum but silly me , its all about money and the market, nothing to do with limits...

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mastodon', 'P')lease show the calculations you used to arrive at the figure

[centralstump]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mastodon', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'I')t's the ratio of energy input (NG and electricity) to energy output (refined products), depending on whether or not refinery efficiency and non-fuel products are included.

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('centralstump', 'I') am confused. Earlier you gave us a number for maximum EROEI. Did you do the calculations? Now you seem to be suggesting that you did not and we should do them. I don't mean to offend but this may constitute a credibility problem for me. Please explain.

[Mastodon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('centralstump', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'T')here isn't a whole lot to show, just convert everything to some unit of energy, kWh or BTU, and compare the inputs of natural gas and electricity to the output of refined oil, with the range coming from assuming refinery efficiency is 100% or the 83% (IIRC) used by the EPA. Granted, we could go farther and look at the embodied energy of the refinery and whatnot, but that would only decrease the EROEI.

[yesplease]

I already did. To save you the apparent hardships of reading what I linked, here are the pertinent parts.$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')etroleum refining is the number one consumer of energy in California's manufacturing sector. In 1997, the industry consumed 7,266 million KWh of electricity and 1,061 million Therms of natural gas.

[Mastodon]

Yesplease,

The idea was you present your calcs. Obviously too hard so I've bashed a few together with a result similar to yours. Ripped from excel so some formatting issues

bbl to ltr 159 ltr
therm in mj 105.48 mj
crude inmj/ltr 37 mj/ltr
kwhr to mj 3.6 mj

OUT (ER)
bbl ltr mj
600000000 95400000000 3.5298E+12


IN (EI)
therm mj
1061000000 1.11914E+11

kwhr elec
7266000000 26157600000
1.38072E+11
25.56494487
So we have a "EROI" for the step of 25. Does this sort of match your calcs??

[yesplease]

It's not that it's too hard, it's that if you want to check my results you'll have to do the arithmetic anyway, so there's no reason for me to spend time detailing something you're going to do regardless. Unless of course you didn't care about verifying it, and in that case their wouldn't be a reason for me to detail the calcs in the first place. T3h l0gickz ftw!1 After quite a few posts complaining about stuff, you roughly verified it, and you clearly didn't need my calcs to do so.

Since I can't find precisely how much oil was refined in CA we can roughly double what was extracted, or extrapolate for refined amount in 97 via US oil consumption or CA gasoline consumption, w/ the most accurate coming from CA gasoline consumption IMO. Refining efficiency is also rough, etc...

[Mastodon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'I')t's not that it's too hard, it's that if you want to check my results you'll have to do the arithmetic anyway, so there's no reason for me to spend time detailing something you're going to do regardless. Unless of course you didn't care about verifying it, and in that case their wouldn't be a reason for me to detail the calcs in the first place. T3h l0gickz ftw!1 After quite a few posts complaining about stuff, you roughly verified it, and you clearly didn't need my calcs to do so.

Since I can't find precisely how much oil was refined in CA we can roughly double what was extracted, or extrapolate for refined amount in 97 via US oil consumption or CA gasoline consumption, w/ the most accurate coming from CA gasoline consumption IMO. Refining efficiency is also rough, etc...

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mastodon', 'O')k, so I now assume that your calcs were basically the same as mine even though you dont answer this question (or any other) directly. The errors we have then are as follows
- the e out is actually a calculation of the energy in the crude flow into the system. this is NOT a calculation of the energy coming out of the refinery. To do this properly you would need to track the complete set of products from the refinery and calculate the energy content, think refinery gains etc.
- No corrections for energy quality (IE or EO)
- guesstimate as to total processed in the year 1997

[Mastodon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mastodon', 'O')k, so I now assume that your calcs were basically the same as mine even though you dont answer this question (or any other) directly. The errors we have then are as follows
- the e out is actually a calculation of the energy in the crude flow into the system. this is NOT a calculation of the energy coming out of the refinery. To do this properly you would need to track the complete set of products from the refinery and calculate the energy content, think refinery gains etc.
- No corrections for energy quality (IE or EO)
- guesstimate as to total processed in the year 1997

[shortonoil]

yesplease said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 's')o including those as assumptions would still results in an upper bound for EROEI of far less than 100:1.

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mastodon', 'Q')uestioning is the core of all unique thought, but ignorance is no excuse for vacuous questioning, this seems to be your modus.

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '[')b]yesplease said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 's')o including those as assumptions would still results in an upper bound for EROEI of far less than 100:1.

[Mastodon]

yesplease.

you have produced nothing but noise, your childlike understanding of energy (what is this "quality" you talk of eh!!) is laughable. I would suggest you resort to reading a book or two on the subject before continuing to blather, mind you it would seem all you need is the wiki!