6) EROI has political elements. One example: in strip mining, how do you categorize tasks such as putting overburden back into the hole, compacting dirt, landscaping etc.? The energy inputs needed for such processes are not a physical requirement of mining the coal and harvesting its energy. They're a political requirement. They aren't strictly *necessary*, except within the context of certain political arrangements.
This is just one example of a broad phenomenon. It comes into high relief when you look at EROEI from a perspective of strict necessity. All kinds of interesting questions arise. Do the office staff of a drilling company actually *need* to drive to the office to produce the oil? Is the energy spent filing tax returns actually necessary to produce the oil? etc. etc. You really need to get a handle on the concept of "necessary". Otherwise, you're doing poli sci., not physics.

I agree with this. There is also the problem of social tastes impacting EROI (which is also a non-physical impact). For example, if we were all vegetarians, the EROI of corn ethanol would drop meaningfully towards 1:1, because the 'co-product credit' for the Dried Distiller Grains fed to cattle (intead of soybean meal or something else) would go away. No demand for meat, lower EROI for ethanol - there are numerous similar examples.

But again, the ultimate message of net energy is to determine what it is we have to spend. It should be clear (by Iceland and other places), that denominating things solely in dollars is a fools game. Energy is what we have to spend. Money is just who has the energy, for now.