[dohboi]

I noticed there is already a thread on this interview. Mods, please feel free to merge.

[TheDude]

Also new from Energy Bulletin: Fatih Birol interview on Youtube for the film "PetroApocalypse Now?"

Nice title. Is Matt Simmons merely a messenger boy, sent by grocery clerks?

[dohboi]

Thanks for the link, Dude, and the image and allusion (I love the smell of PO in the morning).

It seems that these interviews were conducted before the recent report came out, I assume just a bit earlier this year. It's amazing how fast things are moving now, when discussions from just a few weeks ago seem almost out of date now.

Just to keep us all sharp, I'd like to be a devil's advocate for the holidays and propose that all the earlier IEA reports were the accurate ones, while the most recent was was suspiciously altered, probably so some in the IEA could cash in on a new, rumor generated run-up in oil prices.

Just a thought, but how would the bright minds here argue against such a position?

[misterno]

USO is trading around $27.67, sorry for whoever bought USO at a higher price

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=uso

Consider buying CLZ17 december futures which is trading around $71.50

I will buy CLZ17 when it hits $50

[eastbay]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('misterno', 'U')SO is trading around $27.67, sorry for whoever bought USO at a higher price

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=uso

Consider buying CLZ17 december futures which is trading around $71.50

I will buy CLZ17 when it hits $50

[cube]

volt plant mothballed
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '�')��It’s temporarily on hold as we assess our cash situation,” said GM spokeswoman Sharon Basel.

[InToWishin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', ' ')

[MC2]

If we had any sense of reality in our congress, there would be five bills readied before year's end to add a per gallon tax of at least $3.00 to put things into some semblence of rationality.

Of course, the crooks would just steal the money, instead of putting it to work rebuilding infrastructure, a rail system that makes sense, and legitimate alternative energy development.

This buck-forty a gallon shit is ridiculous, and SUV sales are even starting to take off. Amazing that TPTB are able to manipulate this so much. Anyone really believe we've had the kind of "demand destruction" that would bring on this kind of price collapse?? If so, I have some bridges to sell you. This is manipulation, pure and simple, with likely geopolitical economic warfare as its primary cause (think Russia).

[AirlinePilot]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('misterno', 'U')SO is trading around $27.67, sorry for whoever bought USO at a higher price

[InToWishin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MC2', 'T')his buck-forty a gallon crap is ridiculous, and SUV sales are even starting to take off.

[dohboi]

nate over at tod just made a claim that all new oil in aggregate has an EROEI of one--that is no net energy is being produced. Does anyone have a way to confirm or refute such a claim? shortonoil?

[Jotapay]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dohboi', 'n')ate over at tod just made a claim that all new oil in aggregate has an EROEI of one--that is no net energy is being produced. Does anyone have a way to confirm or refute such a claim? shortonoil?

[ROCKMAN]

dohboi,

That's what I thought he said also. All I can imagine he meant was that overall we are at/near zero net energy gain from new exploration efforts. But I'm not sure what parameters he used to get that outcome. There are hundreds of new wells being drilled every day right now. In addition to the fuel costs to drill those wells there are the other expenses: drilling rig rental, leases, pipelines/storage tanks, overhead and don't forget the profit margins of all the service provides involved.

I can tell you that the fuel usage for most wells is less than 15% of the total cost. Perhaps he is estimating the energy component of all the equipment utilized (really undoable IMHO). Perhaps he is including the energy component of all the failed efforts...a fair component IMO. But at the end of the day companies are still drilling even at $40 oil so it's difficult to imagine in what context his statement might be true. The oil patch would not exist very long if they consistently spent more money then they made selling oil/NG. And the energy component is only a small portion of that expense.

[shortonoil]

dohboi said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]nate over at tod just made a claim that all new oil in aggregate has an EROEI of one--that is no net energy is being produced. Does anyone have a way to confirm or refute such a claim? shortonoil?

[dohboi]

Yes, sorry, here it is:

link

It's the first comment after the main post, in the third item listed.

I was working from murky memory when I wrote the above. He says "approaching" EROI of one. I guess you could be quite a ways from it and still be said to be approaching it. Still, it would be nice if he had elaborated a bit. Otherwise, I thought is a quite insightful post.

[dohboi]

Here's the comment in context:

"I think EROI functions more like a 'blunt instrument' as opposed to something with laser-like precision. In an upcoming paper titled "The Limitations of EROI for Energy Policy", my co-authors and I point out 5 shortcomings of EROI (but also discuss how important the concept of (declining) energy surplus is for civilization):

1)The EROI definition can be misleading in situations when chaining is involved. E.g. Brazilian ethanol double counts the bagasse and therefore overestimates true EROI

2)EROI does not account for non-energy limiting inputs (water, soil, GHGs, etc.)

3)There is a major difference between fixed and marginal EROI - one that is right now of critical importance. If EROI for global oil is 16:1 (ish), but most of this is due to the bootstrapping of former built capital, then what we really care about is EROI of NEW oil (which in aggregate I would estimate is approaching energy break even - same goes for North American natural gas). So the timing of the energy inputs/outputs is also important.

4) EROI doesn't account for quality. (e.g. liquid fuels vs electricity vs animate coverters like horses)

5) EROI doesn't inherently account for scale. (E.g. potatoes have 30:1 EROI but we can't run society on potatoes). EROI x Flow Rate = Power ==> which is what we really are trying to measure.

The list of why biophysical perspective is essential is however, much longer than those exceptions above -one hopes that our new Secretary of Energy and other energy policymakers understand this. I look forward to yours and Charlies help in sussing out these and other issues on TOD:EROI.
I'm sure you would agree one of the most relevant questions is what is societies aggregate quality adjusted energy gain, and how much room does that leave us?"


He's responding to an interesting initiative over there on what they call simply EROI.

[shortonoil]

Thanks dohboi

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')Ravenscroft on December 28, 2008 - 7:49pm
Nate:

I am trying to understand here. If EROI for some New Oil is approaching energy break-even then how can you make money on its extraction other than with rising prices.

[dohboi]

Thanks, short. I noticed that, in the thread you linked, you say it will be 17 years before we hit a real energy wall, yet above on this thread you make it sound like it will be ten years or so (if I'm understanding your math).

Is there a discrepency here, or has your thinking changed, or (the most likely posibility) am I misunderstanding something?

By the way, you, nate, and the folks at the SUNY institute mentioned in the thread I linked all seem like astonishingly bright people working along similar lines. Have you considered communicating with any of them and sharing notes?

Also, do you have any thoughts on applying the concepts developed for ERoEI on the procuction side to projects on the conservation side? For example, if insulation is used on X homes that now use Y energy in heating/cooling that would then be saved, and if the energy required to produce and install the insulation is Z, everything else being equal, could we not in principle plug those into a formula and get something like the ERoEI for that effort?

Sorry for all the questions. Great to have you posting regularly again on the forum.

[shortonoil]

dohboi said:


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hanks, short. I noticed that, in the thread you linked, you say it will be 17 years before we hit a real energy wall, yet above on this thread you make it sound like it will be ten years or so (if I'm understanding your math).

Is there a discrepency here, or has your thinking changed, or (the most likely posibility) am I misunderstanding something?

[dohboi]

OK, sorry, you lost me again.

I assume your decline rate of .47 does not mean that we lose forty seven percent of ERoEI every year, but I can't figure out what it does mean then.