274 comments on Ten Fundamental Principles of Net Energy
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
274 comments on Ten Fundamental Principles of Net Energy
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Local
- Streets: Utilitarian Corridors or Livable Public Space
- Summer Streets a Success!
- Plan for Hydro-Fracture Drilling for Unconventional Natural Gas in Upstate New York
TOD:Europe
- Oilwatch Monthly - November 2008
- The 2008 IEA WEO - Production Decline Rates
- The EU Strategic Energy Review: maybe not so depressing after all
TOD:Canada
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
- Oil Megaproject Update (July 2008)
TOD:ANZ
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
“The infrastructure of suburbia can be described as the greatest misallocation of resources in the history of the world.”
—JH Kunstler
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Prof. Goose, Heading Out, Stuart Staniford, Nate Hagens
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Gail the Actuary, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Khebab, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Local: Glenn
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.





GAIA Host Collective
Actually, Prof. Goose, he has a point. I found the IROWI (Information Return on Word Investment) of this article very low. It contained nothing new and very little substance. Since I expected more, I was very dissapointed. Maybe I should have expected less to spare me the feeling that I wasted twenty minutes of time reading it?
Practical also brought it to the point: unless we decide to go hardcore nuclear (breeders and ultimately fusion), our only choice to tap into an energy flow that will last for as long as human civilization will (and a lot longer) is solar energy. Alternatively you can slow the planet's rotation down, de-orbit the moon, drill geothermal to the core, capture asteroids or do a bunch of other wild stuff. Those SciFi solutions will work too... they are just a lot harder technically and more costly by orders of magnitude.
Feel free to discuss the physical details with me.
IP - I am posting Professor Clevelands response to "Practical" up here, because Practicals prominent post merits a prominent response- sorry for the gauche blog behavior
"At the moment no business decisions are made on the basis of net energy or EROEI."
Who ever said day-day business decisions are or should be made according to net energy criteria? No one I know of. EROI is a long run force that has shaped every major technological, economic, social, and environmental transformation we have gone through, and most certainly will drive the next one. It sets broad but immutable constraints on what is and is not possible. Investment undoubtedly will be driven to sources with the higher net energy gain, unless non-market forces interfere, because free market systems probaly try to mazimize power see (H.T. Odum).
"If they were, we would have to shut down the electric utility industry for sure and probably most of the industrial economy"
Did you read and understand the section on enegy quality? We trade 3 BTUs of low quality (coal) for 1 BTU of high quality energy (electricity) because that 1 BTU can do more economic work-produce more GDP-than those 3 BTUS of input fuel. An appropriately done EROI of a utlity reflects this reality.