[Pops]

I like Curt Cobb but I'm not sure I'm gonna go for this:

...using our understanding of net energy, it is possible to see that society will start experiencing problems not when fossil fuel supplies peak, but when the net energy from fossil fuels peaks.

Peak supply is, well, peak supply, after which supply declines and prices rise. It doesn't matter if the eroei is 100/1 or 1/100 at that point. Isn't that right?

That [EROEI] peak logically must come before the peak in gross extractions of fossil fuels because human societies have exploited the easy-to-get fossil fuels first.

In my little brain, the "EROEI" peak (which I guess means the point where 1 barrel of oil equivalent nets you less than one barrel of produced oil) logically can't come long before the extraction peak simply because that level of difficulty to produce means not only is the easy oil gone but the hard and near impossible oil is gone as well!


Read his post and tell me what you think - scitizen

[efarmer]

I think the word "supply" is the issue Pops, with regard to if it means the supply available to the market (as driven by EROEI) or the supply in total deposited on the planet (unknown but of course above the amount limited by needing an energy yield from an energy extraction process).

The driver for petroleum beyond EROEI is of course the fact that it is a feedstock for chemicals, plastics, and pharmaceuticals that will justify pursuing it's substance beyond being able to justify it
as an energy source.

EROEI is for evaluating energy sources, if they are also minerals they can have other intrinsic values
beyond their energy value.

[Plantagenet]

I think Cobb is making a good point....the easy oil (i.e. oil with a very high EROI) is gone and what we've got left is the hard oil (with increasingly lower EROIs) and various alternative energy sources (most with even lower EROIs) all the way down to real stinkeroos like corn ethanol with a negative EROI.

So net global energy EROI peaked before the actual peak in oil production. The net energy peak EROI was somewhere back in the 20th century----I'd put it at the moment when Ghawar was discovered----while the actual "peak" in light crude world production was ca. 50 years later, by some criteria happening in 2005.

[eastbay]

The Chris Martenson video series addresses this issue nicely. Watch Chapters 17 a, b, and c. I believe 17a addresses EROEI.

http://www.chrismartenson.com/

[sparky]

.
The point about declining EROEI occurring before peak oil sound good ,
for a given demand the cheapest energy is the one producing the highest EROEI ,
economics thus dictate that they will be used first as they provide the larger profit for the suppliers
a small proviso ,
it make abundant sense to consume crappy coal locally and export the good stuff to far away places ,
Australia burn brown coal in Victoria while exporting very nice stuff from Queesland to China
the contradiction is solved when transport cost are considered ,
the further the export , the more advantageous it is to carry high density power
if one locate the power plant on top of the mines like in the Latrobe valley , then the transport cost are minimal

The deterioration in the coal quality worldwide is well documented , similarly sweet light crude is in severe decline
It is no coincidence that West Texas intermediate , beloved of wall Street in now a trading fiction
the same apply to London " Brent " , what is traded is in fact a composite mix of other crudes

sadly alternatives are of little use , they are made with present energy based on cheap carbone
and still cost a bucket .
The point is well worth repeating
Present alternatives are manufactured by a cheap carbon economy ,
if they had to be made in an altrernative powered factory ,
their cost would skyrocket and their EROEI would plummet , in the case of a solar panel factory , well below 1
.

[Newfie]

Hasen't "net energy per capita - world wide" been dropping for a while?

In other words; there is less per person this year than last?

[sparky]

.
China has been building Coal and nuclear power stations non stop

look at their energy trends , and the data is two year old at least !!
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/countr ... fm?fips=CH

They are betting big on nuclear
" Mainland China has 11 nuclear power reactors in commercial operation, 23 under construction, and more about to start construction soon.
Additional reactors are planned, including some of the world's most advanced, to give more than a tenfold increase in nuclear capacity to 80 GWe by 2020, 200 GWe by 2030, and 400 GWe by 2050.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf63.html

[Pops]

This is the Olduvai chart (energy per capita) that I updated since Duncan isn''t much into it any more.

This is separated out (not stacked) to show the relative growth in nat gas and good old fashioned coal with oil just keeping up with population growth.