EROEI

1
EROEI

• Energy
• Returned
• On
• Energy
• Invested

2
(No Transcript)
3

• A more complex (quality corrected) version of
  the equation is this
• "...where is the quality factor for fuel type
  i at time t and Eo and Ec are the thermal
  equivalents of energy outputs and energy inputs,
  respectively. We construct Divisia indices for
  energy inputs and outputs to account for energy
  quality in the numerator and denominator. The
  prices for energy outputs (oil, natural gas,
  natural gas liquids) and energy inputs (natural
  gas, gasoline, distillate fuels, coal,
  electricity) are the prices paid by industrial
  end-users for each energy type (US Department of
  Energy, 1997)." (Aggregation and the role of
  energy in the economy, Cutler J. Cleveland,
  Robert K. Kaufmann, David I. Stern, Center for
  Energy and Environmental Studies and Department
  of Geography, Boston University, Centre for
  Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian
  National University, Canberra, 1999)

4
An EROEI of 1 means that for every unit of energy
you put in, you take 1 unit of usable energy out.
An EROEI of greater than 1 means you take more
energy out than you put in. For each barrel of
oil you extract from the Middle East, you take
around 30 times that usable energy back. Or put
another way, it costs you approximately the
energy of 1 barrel of energy to extract 30
barrels, refine it, move it around the world and
pump it into the tank of a vehicle.
5
You have 100 barrels in the ground

• Suppose EROEI is 10
• Use 9 barrels
• Get 90 barrels
• About 10 waste

• Suppose EROEI is 1.5
• Use 40 barrels
• Get 60 barrels
• About 40 waste

6
No, thats not right.Look at excel
7
What are some (approximate) EROEIs?

• Middle east oil 30
• Tar sands 1.5
• Hydro 45
• Coal 25
• Nuclear 5-20
• Wind 4-10
• Solar 4
• Corn Ethanol less than 1

8
EROEI from another WEB site

• Oil and gas (domestic wellhead) -1940's
  Discoveries gt 100.0 - 1970's Production
  23.0, discoveries 8.0 Coal (mine mouth) -
  1950's 80.0 - 1970's 30.0 Oil shale 0.7
  to 13.3 Coal liquefaction 0.5 to 8.2
  Geopressured gas 1.0 to 5.0
• Renewable Ethanol (sugercane) 0.8 to
  1.7 Ethanol (corn) 1.3 Ethanol (corn
  residues) 0.7 to 1.8 Methanol (wood)
  2.6

• Solar space heat (fossil backup) Flat-plate
  collector 1.9 Concentrating collector
  1.6
• Electricity Production Coal - U.S. average
  9.0 (27.0) Western surface coal No
  scrubbers 6.0 (18.0) Scrubbers
  2.5 (7.5) Hydropower 11.2
  (33.6) Nuclear (light-water reactor) 4.0 (12.0)
  Solar - Power satellite 2.0 (6.0)
  -Power tower 4.2 (12.6)
  -Photovoltaics 1.7 (5.1) to 10.0 (30.0)
  Geothermal -Liquid dominated .0 (12.0)
  -Hot dry rock 1.9 (5.7) to 13.0 (39.0)

9
(No Transcript)
10
Tar Sands

• ERoEI currently 1.5
• Amount in place 1.5 1.7 Trillion Barrels
• Amount recoverable 0.3 0.4 Trillion B.
• Environmental Cost?
• Cost effective?

11
Embodied Energy?

• Traditionally considered, embodied energy is an
  accounting methodology which aims to find the sum
  total of the energy necessary - from the raw
  material extraction, to transport, manufacturing,
  assembly, installation as well as the marketing
  and other costs of a specific material - to
  produce a service or product. (From Wikipedia)

12
Embodied Energy of an Auto

• 20 90 barrels of oil
• Higher embodied energy cost for hybrids?
• CNWs findings show that the Chevrolet Suburban
  has an energy cost per mile of 3.134, while a
  Toyota Prius , the darling of the hybrid crowd,
  comes in at 3.249. Obviously the Prius can go
  much farther than the Suburban on a gallon of
  gasoline, but according to the CNW report, that
  is only part of the equation, as you must also
  factor in the energy required to build the
  vehicle, service it through its lifetime, and
  recycle its parts at the end.
• As you can guess, the green crowd isnt taking
  this news sitting down, and are firing back with
  their own statistics. But this news kind of
  confirms the feeling Ive had toward hybrids from
  the get-go they arent all theyre cracked up to
  be. They may save a little on fuel, but not
  nearly enough to justify the higher sticker
  price, the higher maintenance costs, and the
  higher cost to retire them. Im no bean counter,
  but I know there is much more to the cost of a
  vehicle than its mpg figures.

13
http//www.greenhouse.gov.au/yourhome/technical/fs
31.htm http//www.canadianarchitect.com/asf/pers
pectives_sustainibility/measures_of_sustainablity/
measures_of_sustainablity_embodied.htmhttp//www
.foam-tech.com/theory/sustainability.htm
14
Conclusions??