4 ms·

Peak oil is not about cash profits, it's about EROEI [1]. At some point all of the oil still in the ground will become useless because it'll take more energy to

Peak oil is not about cash profits, it's about EROEI [1]. At some point all of the oil still in the ground will become useless because it'll take more energy to extract than you get out of it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_invested https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_inve...

kortilla 7y ago
That stupidly assumes all energy sources are equal. Oil has an extremely high energy density that makes it useful for travel where battery isn’t even close (heavy industry, air travel, long distance trucking/travel). There is an article on the front page about solar companies in Australia shutting down every other day because of negative energy prices. Burning 100MW for 10MW of oil makes perfect sense under these conditions. Here’s a thought experiment for you: why do you think we have batteries given they take more energy to create than they will produce?
- chongli 7y ago
  Looks like you didn’t read the link. Quote: When the EROEI of a source of energy is less than or equal to one, that energy source becomes a net "energy sink", and can no longer be used as a source of energy, but depending on the system might be useful for energy storage (for example a battery). If oil is made to compete against batteries then it will lose. It may have higher energy density but it’s also non-rechargeable, requires a heavy and complicated and high maintenance (compared to a very simple electric motor) internal combustion engine, and produces large amounts of greenhouse gases. About the only thing it would still be cost effective for with a negative EROEI is aviation fuel, but even that application is facing competition from batteries [1]. [1] https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/electric-aircraft/index.html https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/electric-aircraft/index.h...
  - kortilla 7y ago
    Aviation fuel is facing absolutely no competition from batteries. Neither is gas for long-haul trucking, bunker fuel for container ships, etc, etc, etc. EROEI will come and go with nary a shit given. The entire value prop of oil at this point already is it’s portability, density, and refuel time. Electric cars are already cheaper per mile when it comes to fuel, yet tons of people don’t bother because of charging logistics. Energy into extraction is just part of the cost like anything else. There is nothing magic or even meaningful about it. That whole theory is based on the stupid notion that energy is fungible.

kortilla 7y ago

That stupidly assumes all energy sources are equal. Oil has an extremely high energy density that makes it useful for travel where battery isn’t even close (heavy industry, air travel, long distance trucking/travel). There is an article on the front page about solar companies in Australia shutting down every other day because of negative energy prices. Burning 100MW for 10MW of oil makes perfect sense under these conditions. Here’s a thought experiment for you: why do you think we have batteries given they take more energy to create than they will produce?

chongli 7y ago
Looks like you didn’t read the link. Quote: When the EROEI of a source of energy is less than or equal to one, that energy source becomes a net "energy sink", and can no longer be used as a source of energy, but depending on the system might be useful for energy storage (for example a battery). If oil is made to compete against batteries then it will lose. It may have higher energy density but it’s also non-rechargeable, requires a heavy and complicated and high maintenance (compared to a very simple electric motor) internal combustion engine, and produces large amounts of greenhouse gases. About the only thing it would still be cost effective for with a negative EROEI is aviation fuel, but even that application is facing competition from batteries [1]. [1] https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/electric-aircraft/index.html https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/electric-aircraft/index.h...
- kortilla 7y ago
  Aviation fuel is facing absolutely no competition from batteries. Neither is gas for long-haul trucking, bunker fuel for container ships, etc, etc, etc. EROEI will come and go with nary a shit given. The entire value prop of oil at this point already is it’s portability, density, and refuel time. Electric cars are already cheaper per mile when it comes to fuel, yet tons of people don’t bother because of charging logistics. Energy into extraction is just part of the cost like anything else. There is nothing magic or even meaningful about it. That whole theory is based on the stupid notion that energy is fungible.