Skip to main content

IEA change tack slightly

This is an interesting article referring to the International Energy Agency starting to resile from their prediction of peak oil being about 2030. They are arguing a case that:

“It should be noted, too, that there does not tend to be great interest in new types of resources among service and supply-sector players…they need to have ready customers for their new products and cannot easily justify developing products for a market that does not yet exist. Furthermore, private industry cannot be relied upon to invest in research on technologies that are too far from being economical.”

This economic argument ignores the issue of EROEI - Energy Returned on Energy Invested. I heard an argument once that if people eat celery the energy taken to consume the celery is more than is obtained from the celery. I never liked celery anyway so as a dieting mechanism it never attracted me.

However, EROEI always trumps the laws of economics being as it is the law of conservation of energy. Extracting oil consumes energy (the marginal return of which comes from oil and gas). The harder to extract elements consume more energy. So as the cost of extraction goes up as energy costs go up the merit of trying to extract the oil goes down.

In the big Gharwar field in Saudi Arabia seawater is being injected to get oil out. This takes energy, but there is still a massively positive energy return.

Converting from one source of energy to another is another important issue. If hydrocarbons are burnt then there is a limit (the Carnot limit) set by the laws of conservation of Entropy as to the amount of energy that can be extracted. As a rule of thumb two thirds or so gets wasted in most car engines before transmission losses. Combined Cycle Natural Gas generators can convert about 50-60% of the energy inbuilt in the gas. Additionally Combined Heat and Power systems can be used to warm up cool locations although we really should look at insulation for this.

It is these matters that human ingenuity cannot get around because they are theoretical limits (much like the reason why the patent office won't accept patents for perpetual motion engines (although perpetual motion does exist particularly at very low temperatures)). [in this instance perpetual motion is the concept of something that makes energy out of nothing]

Comments

Apollo Project said…
I heard an argument once that if people eat celery the energy taken to consume the celery is more than is obtained from the celery.

Apparently a myth. Although an attractive one to this overweight celery fan.

Peter

Popular posts from this blog

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…