170 comments on DrumBeat: October 18, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
170 comments on DrumBeat: October 18, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
- What "Lower Consumption" Means
- Tricking and Treating the Future
- Meeting Energy Decline Part-Way - Potatoes?
TOD:Europe
- EROWI - energy return of water invested
- An interview with Stoneleigh - the case for deflation
- The Future of European Transport: iTREN-2030
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Saturday 7th November 2009
- The Bullroarer - Friday 30th October 2009
- Details of Solar Flagships Released
TOD:Net Energy
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
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“So one may almost say that the theory of universal suffrage assumes that the Average Citizen is an active, instructed, intelligent ruler of his country. The facts contradict this assumption.”
—James Bryce (1909, 35)
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- 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
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
Net energy and export land get really complicated but fascinating at the same time.
Consider a factory in china that exports to the US most of the oil imports are actually used for goods and services destined for exports. Do you split this energy use between China and the US ? The point is when you add in the value add product flows on top of the net energy flows between countries it gets a lot more interesting. Looking at the oil exporters that are growing their internal economies one sees they are also increasing imports of all sorts of value add products that have significant embedded energy with a lot of that resulting from oil consumption.
The US obviously sucks in far more energy then is normally assumed via the net inflow of imports. Again looking at the middle east you can look at the food imports and see a large net flow of oil energy back into the region. Mexico also imports a lot of food from the US. So maybe its not so obvious we are actually trading food for goods.
If you combine these concepts the situation is grimmer than assuming they are unrelated. The amount of real excess energy thats available to support our debt economy seems close to zero once you include the movement of value added goods and their embedded energy.
Mexico could already not be a net energy exporter for example consuming as much energy or more then its producing in the form of imports.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3723/is_1_16/ai_114328146
The import export web is exceedingly complex and difficult to figure out but it seems to me that by including the embedded energy that returned back to oil producers in the form of goods and services makes a lot of sense in the full EROEI/export land model.
This also explains to some extent how China could continue to grow even as oil supplies remained flat the energy was put into export goods that where then sent to other markets. In these markets local production of these goods and services declined using less energy so on the energy flow side we see that eventually everything balanced out and its just a changing of the flow pattern so one nations growth has resulted in declines elsewhere.
Once you include the embedded energy value added goods and services that are flowing back into the oil exporting nations and calculate net energy exported the result looks interesting. For wheat and corn for example we have a pretty good idea about the net embedded oil used in their manufacture. ( I don't consider modern farming a natural process ).
I've got no idea what the real numbers are but just looking at the situation indicates that the total energy available for real growth might be quite small inline with the fact that we have seen no significant increases in oil. What seems to have happened is a good bit of the economy is now stuck in a cycle of extracting oil and converting it to value added goods with a net flow of energy back into the original producers leaving close to zero total value add.
A stab at figuring out how much energy we actually send back to Mexico in the form of corn.
This
http://newfarm.rodaleinstitute.org/news/2005/0705/070705/ethanol.shtml
Give .87 gallons to a bushel lets make it 1 gallon for this exercise this would include transport drying packing etc.
http://www.truthabouttrade.org/content/view/1063/51/
Give Mexican corn imports at 10.2 MMT or 10.2*36.74 = 374 million bushels.
Assume 20 gallons of gasoline to a barrel and 1 gallon =1 bushel 374/20 = 18 million barrels
18 million barrels /365 = 0.05 mbd or 50kbd removed from the net energy.
I'd guess wheat is similar so maybe 100kbd per day for food ?
Anyway its not unimportant as Mexico's oil exports decline this is like 10%