Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada wrote:Actually most forms of Fission power station have a better than 50:1 EROEI. Molten salt are great because they make reprocessing easiest, but they are not the single possible solution.
Tikib wrote:Tanada wrote:Actually most forms of Fission power station have a better than 50:1 EROEI. Molten salt are great because they make reprocessing easiest, but they are not the single possible solution.
Sadly this simply isn't true. If it were we would all be using nuclear power. PWR's need a huge amount of there theorectical EROEI spent on safety.
Whereas MSR designs are walk away safe and use most of the energy in the fuel. MSR designs have predicted energy costs of about a quarter of that of current reactor designs.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
ROCKMAN wrote:"...need an EROEI of over 50 to transition...". Sorry...can't follow that logic. If a transition method has an EROEI of 70 and it's not economical it won't be pursued. But one with an EROEI of 10 will be readily utilized if the ROR is sufficient. Again, just like fossil fuel development, I haven't seen one alt project done or rejected based upon EROEI. Those are economic decisions.
Additionally I haven't noticed much chatter about solar/wind being used to move away from oil.
ROCKMAN wrote:"...need an EROEI of over 50 to transition...". Sorry...can't follow that logic. If a transition method has an EROEI of 70 and it's not economical it won't be pursued. But one with an EROEI of 10 will be readily utilized if the ROR is sufficient.
Tikib wrote:Rockman EROEI and ROR should be close to equivalent if they are calculated correctly, thats kind of the point.
But however you define it, we need energy substantially cheaper than is possible with wind and solar. Because it then has to be converted into transportation fuel.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:Tikib wrote:Rockman EROEI and ROR should be close to equivalent if they are calculated correctly, thats kind of the point.
But however you define it, we need energy substantially cheaper than is possible with wind and solar. Because it then has to be converted into transportation fuel.
So you're going to ignore what is happening with BEV's and PHEV's?
Outcast_Searcher wrote:The thing the "green is magic that will eliminate oil real soon now" folks seem unable to grasp is that the process will take decades, probably like 3 to 5 decades
ROCKMAN wrote:"But if we can't find an economic way to produce a source that yields an ERoEI over 50, we are screwed. It still will not be sufficient to transition away from oil." And again why? If someone comes up with a scalable biofuel that has an EROEI of 10 and sells for less the oil sourced motor fuel why couldn't it be used to transition?
SumYunGai wrote:50 years is *WAY* too long. We need a replacement faster than that. You are ignoring the fact that oil will run out long before your replacement is theoretically ready. Too little, too late.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:SumYunGai wrote:50 years is *WAY* too long. We need a replacement faster than that. You are ignoring the fact that oil will run out long before your replacement is theoretically ready. Too little, too late.
Says you. You might want to try that line when we're not awash in a global oil glut so big it's threatening to bankrupt many oil producers due to low prices.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:I'm not finding anything substantive in your argument here. Merely unsubstantiated opinions, not reflected in respected mainstream organizations which use science and math to make their projections, such as the EIA and the IEA.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:And if that weren't enough, natural gas, coal, etc. are super-abundant in a pinch.
ROCKMAN wrote:SYG - "So an ERoEI of 10 is just too low to do the job. Why doesn't that make sense to you?"
Makes no sense at all. Your saying that some substitute for oil that takes 1 unit of energy to produce 10 units of energy and sells for less then the then current price of oil won't allow a transition frtom oil? No, what you're saying makes no sense at all.
SumYunGai wrote:ROCKMAN wrote:SYG - "So an ERoEI of 10 is just too low to do the job. Why doesn't that make sense to you?"
Makes no sense at all. Your saying that some substitute for oil that takes 1 unit of energy to produce 10 units of energy and sells for less then the then current price of oil won't allow a transition frtom oil? No, what you're saying makes no sense at all.
I never said anything about some substitute for oil. According to Tikib, it would take an energy source with an ERoEI of 50 to be able to generate enough liquid fuel to replace oil. An energy source with an ERoEI of 10 would not be sufficient to do this. Do you understand?
vtsnowedin wrote:SumYunGai wrote:ROCKMAN wrote:SYG - "So an ERoEI of 10 is just too low to do the job. Why doesn't that make sense to you?"
Makes no sense at all. Your saying that some substitute for oil that takes 1 unit of energy to produce 10 units of energy and sells for less then the then current price of oil won't allow a transition frtom oil? No, what you're saying makes no sense at all.
I never said anything about some substitute for oil. According to Tikib, it would take an energy source with an ERoEI of 50 to be able to generate enough liquid fuel to replace oil. An energy source with an ERoEI of 10 would not be sufficient to do this. Do you understand?
Your the one that is not making any sense.
Take your example of 50:1 oil. To deliver a million barrels of oil you will have to produce 1,020,000 barrels at the well head. Not hard to do and each of the net 1,000,000 has all the BTUs per barrel they ever had. Now go to 10:1 oil. To Deliver1,000,000 barrels the oil company has to produce 1,100,000 barrels which is less profitable but certainly possible if the price of oil goes up a bit and the 1,000,000 barrels delivered STILL have every BTU they ever had.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest