Talk:EROEI
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Topics needing coverage
- Methodology
I think I have seen someone use the term energy accounting to mean measurement and disclosure of information that is useful in making energy resource allocation decisions. EROEI is a term that seem to be analogous to the accounting term ROI (return on investment). It seems to me that a methodology for determining EROEI should be somewhat similar to ROI accounting methods. - Another energy accounting issue
It is also important to know the complete energy usage required to perform a given task in a given way. For instance how much energy does it take to boil a liter of water on an electric stove as compared to a gas stove. That is similar to EROEI for energy delivered to the pan of water. - EROEI report
Using accounting-like methodology, EROEI would not be presented as a bottom-line number but would include some kind of detailed "income statement."
- References (I added one)
[edit] EROEI Values
Are these EROEI values given (3 for US and 10 for Saudi) supportable?
Cleveland and Kaufmann's latest work suggests an EROEI of around 10 for the US today, and Saudi Arabia will by extension by much higher. See the net energy page on www.oilanalytics.org, though the website appears to be down at present. 61.69.2.156 09:21, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
The values definitely seem low, but the language used is worse. I'm going to change it so it's a bit clearer.
[edit] Bad link
User:Renaissance Man removed a link to oilanalytics.org, once a legitimate site, but apparently now under new ownership. --C J Cowie 19:58, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- I found a cache of the correct page and restored the link. Linkspro 01:25, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Removed Sites Requiring Registration
Per WP:EL guidelines, removed 2 links that require registration to enter. Calltech 11:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fusion Power
Should the development of fusion power be mentioned? The focus of research in the field is to create an EROEI above one (currently only about 0.5). 71.103.22.71 01:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
