<DrumBeat: June 17, 2008 The Oil Drum Senate blocks debate of clean energy tax credits>
<EU Commission's Energy Strategy for Europe The Oil Drum: Europe UK Inflation: the only way is up, baby>

86 comments on Oilwatch Monthly - June 2008

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

shargash on June 17, 2008 - 10:35am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Net exports captures some of the energy used in production, in that energy consumed to produce the oil never makes it to the export market. However, it doesn't capture non-oil energy inputs (e.g. natural gas used synthesize oil from tar sands), and it doesn't capture oil that is indirectly imported and used to produce oil, as when Brazil leases a deep-water drilling rig (i.e. the country that built the rig most likely used imported oil to build it).

Net energy decline is a huge issue, and it is going to be very difficult to quantify. IMO, the somewhat bloated numbers coming from the IEA actually represent a net energy decline, even as production records were being set. Analysis based solely on gross production is faulty analysis. To paraphrase what Euan wrote yesterday, any analysis that doesn't talk about net energy can be dismissed out of hand.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
souperman2 on June 17, 2008 - 11:28am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

"Net energy decline is a huge issue, and it is going to be very difficult to quantify."

Just for kicks & giggles wouldn't' t it be possible to plug in the rate of net energy decline from 100 - 1 to 10 - 1 (picking some arbitrary date of when the bulk of this decline began, say 1990?) into the standard production graph which would obviously turn the line south?

Sorry I am not much of a wiggly line guy or I would try it myself.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

86 comments on Oilwatch Monthly - June 2008

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version