Life After Oil and Gas
(a) Interesting read;
(b) Interesting to see this kind of article at all in a major media outlet.
(a) Interesting read;
(b) Interesting to see this kind of article at all in a major media outlet.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
NYT: Life After Oil and Gas
- Thread starter Robert.Boston
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Thumper
Active Member
The April issue of Scientific American has a great article titled "The true cost of fossil fuels". It analyses the EROI (energy return on investment) of various energy sources and mileage return on many energy sources. A generic electric car running from the current grid is twice as efficient as a petroleum powered car, and six times as efficient as a tar sand powered car! The article does not seem to be on their web site so I cannot link it but grab the mag. It is a worthwhile read.
Oil is massively subsidized in the US, much more so than renewables. Here's a pretty good graphic:
http://www.eli.org/pdf/energy_subsidies_black_not_green.pdf
If we removed all of these subsidies, at least renewable could compete on even footing. But even then, that wouldn't account for the massive health care and other costs borne by the government and society resulting from pollution from burning fossil fuels. Cap & Trade would start to move us in the direction of making polluters pay their own way (rather than making others suffer the costs), at which point I suspect renewables become a no brainer on the free market.
Last edited:
You're right. Let's start by putting a proper price on pollution since right now polluters do not pay for the damage pollution does to the environment.
Raffy.Roma
Rome (Italy)
ModelS1079
Member
But you can read the sidebar which is really cool:
Behind the Numbers on Energy Return on Investment: Scientific American
That however is a sure call to achieve nothing. Like, if politicians in Germany want to sabotage a new environment protecting legislation, they call for the issue "to be regulated first on an European level". And in hindsight they bash EU for "sticking their nose into things that we at the local level can regulate far better."
</rant>
US is a powerful economy. They can establish any subsidy and/or tax regime they want and compensate with tolls on imported/exported goods.
E.g. if cutting subsidies rises the price of domestic coal by 25%, create import toll of 30% and redistribute the toll income and saved subsidies as tax benefits - just not only to coal consumers, but to every man and every business. This establishes a true signal in the US energy market that coal is getting more expensive, without impacting personal income or international competitiveness of energy intense industries.
strider
Active Member
I agree. Let's take away all the subsidies oil companies get in the form of the US military in the Middle East, tax credits for oil companies, etc.
I just had this nasty, sci-fi vision of a large mercenary force occupying segments of the Middle East, funded entirely by the big oil companies. Scary...
William13
Active Member
The Scientific American article is good with the exception of its information on nuclear energy. Unfortunately it gives nuclear an energy return on investment of 5. I checked all of its references. None really address nuclear. In the body of the article and in prior reading that I have done the number is anywhere from less than one (from opponents of nuclear) to 300 (from nuclear proponents). No reasoning or data given.
The concept Energy Return on Investment EROI is a very important discussion. This compliments the above discussion of subsidies.
Please remember that although figures don't lie; liars figure. We need all the numbers to be comprehensively evaluated. This is several man years of work and will still require best guesses. The methodologies will need to be spelled out with the raw data published to allow alternative views: CO2 costs, land degradation, acid ocean, careful air pollution illness cost analysis, mining deaths, ?war deaths?, military in Iraq, Kuwait, Persian gulf, deaths from falling off roofs,
The concept Energy Return on Investment EROI is a very important discussion. This compliments the above discussion of subsidies.
Please remember that although figures don't lie; liars figure. We need all the numbers to be comprehensively evaluated. This is several man years of work and will still require best guesses. The methodologies will need to be spelled out with the raw data published to allow alternative views: CO2 costs, land degradation, acid ocean, careful air pollution illness cost analysis, mining deaths, ?war deaths?, military in Iraq, Kuwait, Persian gulf, deaths from falling off roofs,
Similar threads
