258 comments on The Slavery of Oil
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
258 comments on The Slavery of Oil
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Blogroll
- ASPO The official site of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas.
- Energy Bulletin Clearing house for news regarding the peak in global energy supply.
- PowerSwitch Dedicated to raising awareness & discussion of the impending & permanent decline of cheap oil & gas supply.
- ODAC Oil Depletion Analysis Centre working to raise awareness and promote better understanding of the world's oil-depletion problem.
- Global Public Media Public service broadcasting for a post carbon world.
- Post Carbon Institute Learning to live in a low energy world.
- PeakOil.com US site and forum to educate and promote awareness of global hydrocarbon depletion.
- FEASTA The Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability
- Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) This website describes an effective and fair response both to climate change and oil/gas depletion
- Aleklett's Energy Mix Global Energy Systems, Peak Oil, etc
- www.SamassaVeneessä.info Finnish peak oil site
Other Blogs
User login
Personnel
Editors
Contributors
Peak Oil Primers
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Vital Trivia
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.




GAIA Host Collective
You bring up a valid point: gray energy.
If a country has an extensive heavy industry producing goods for export, this will show up in my statistics as additional energy spent by that country on goods that are in fact being consumed elsewhere on the planet. Switzerland is a net importer of gray energy. We import about 30% of our energy in the form of gray energy, which doesn't show up in my statistics. If I understand you correctly, you claim that Norway is a net exporter of gray energy, in which case, there may indeed be an understandable reason for spending so much more energy per capita.
Norway is a net exporter of aluminum and some other energy intensive products from the electrochemical and petrochemical industry.
In this way you may view Norway as a net exporter of hydroelectric energy (though this energy is embedded in aluminum or other products). One of the reasons for establishment of aluminum plants in Norway (which also goes for Canada and Iceland, just to name a few others) was the availability to cheap and plenty hydroelectric power.
Nat gas consumption in Norway is primarily within the petroleum industry generating electricity for (amongst others) pumping the oil either to onshore facilities or onboard tankers.
Nat gas is extensively used offshore also in the separation process of oil, water and nat gas and to recompress the nat gas for pipeline transport or for reinjection into reservoirs to increase recovery.
To explore for oil and nat gas also requires energy which is accounted for in the total Norwegian energy consumption.
Refineries, petrochemical plants and gas processing plants also uses electricity from hydropower.
Norway presently also have a strict building code for insulating houses.
For Ormen Lange (the second largest gas field in operation in Norway), the high pressure needed to deliver the nat gas to customers is generated by compressors running on hydroelectric power.
As of now Norway is a net exporter of;
- Oil
- NGL's
- Nat gas
- Coal (though small amounts)
- Hydroelectric power (in some years directly), but also embedded in exported products (what some refer to as "grey" energy).
To be a net energy exporter requires some energy.
Yep. This damn EROEI once again.
The BP statistics don't include the oil that Norway exports in the consumption statistics, but it does include the oil that is needed to produce the oil that Norway exports.
I quickly looked at EIA data. It seems that Norway exports about 10 times as much oil and gas as it consumes locally. Assuming an EROEI of 20, which is a reasonable guess, Norway spends about 5% of the exported energy to produce energy. This would then be almost 50% of what it consumes locally, which would almost explain the 60% higher energy consumption in comparison with Sweden.
The numbers aren't easily comparable, so I may be off by a few percentage points. I would need a complete Sankey diagram for Norway to do a better job. However, the EROEI of exported oil together with other types of gray energy (such as the energy spent in producing aluminum for export) may indeed account for the higher energy consumption.
It's a similar story for Canada, which is a large, cold country with a sparse population and relatively large transportation costs for goods. Canada exports about 55% of natural gas production (NRCan data) and about 75% of its oil production (BP workbook).
An excellent post. Thank you.
Perhaps the next step in this analysis would be to adjust energy usage based on import/export. That is, if a country is a net importer, such as the US, that country should, logically, be assigned the energy used to produce and transport those imports. Likewise, countries that are net exporters should receive an adjustment downward to reflect that the fact that some portion of their energy use is going to goods and services that they are not actually using.
I have seen this done for carbon emissions and, personally, I think it presents a more accurate picture of usage based on actual demand. It doesn't allow the industrial net importers to offload their impact/demand/consumption when they offshore their work force, etc. In short, it generates a consumption-based distribution... "costs" are assigned to the consumer of whatever.
Not sure what the best way to do this would be because I haven't thought about it at all. A simple method would probably be to adjust energy use by the percentage of import/export relative to GDP. If country X is running a 5% trade deficit relative to its GDP, you would increase its energy use by 5%. While not terribly accurate, this would tend towards reasonably scaled adjustment.
A more accurate (and much more complicated) method would be to determine imports/exports on a per-source country basis, and then calculate energy used based upon the relative value of that trade to the exporting country. For example, if the US imports $X of goods from China, determine what % of China's GDP is represented by X, then take that % of China's energy use and shift it to the US. Note that this works both ways. Even though the US is a net importer from China, its own energy use does need to be decreased by the amount of energy used to generate exports to China. This same exercise would be done for every country relative to every trading partner. Obviously, this is much more complex as it requires tracking import/export breakdowns on a per-country per-partner basis. But it would be more accurate. Probably. ;-)
I'm sure their are other better ideas, but those are what came to mind reading the above comments.
Brian
Yes! We should include the gray energy in the energy statistics. This would be more honest. However, BP has no interest in doing that. They are only interested in accounting the energy as it gets paid. They don't care about local energy (e.g. your photo-voltaic panels on your own roof that never passes through any energy counter), and they don't care what happens with the energy after it has been paid.
This may not work very well. For example, Switzerland has a trade surplus, i.e., we make more money on our exports than we pay for our imports. Yet we import about 25% of our overall energy in the form of gray energy.