By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
mai said:
generic-user-1 said:
mai said:
generic-user-1 said:
mai said:
generic-user-1 said:

burning great amounts of oil for energie isnt the cause, its a symptom.

How that relates to my question? What's your reserves you could actually excavate?

there are no reserves that would turn a profit  at the low prices for oil and coal we have today.  but that would change realy fast if the price would rise sharply or if the markets doesnt want to sell to us anymore. 

Profitable in terms of energy return. How much that cost in cut paper is completely irrelevant.

its very hard to have a negative energie return on coal or oil.  and making gasoline out of coal isnt a problem too.  thats 100 years old tech thats proven to work(and is still used in some parts of the world).

You don't need to have it negative, nobody will even bother with EROEI below 3-4 and that's a norm today, how much higher it's going to be when assosiated energy costs will go up, nobody knows. It's death spiral upside down. In terms of tech you're behind the times by a mile, would you have been as smart as you've claimed you'd have acknowledge simple facts: Europe has peaked on all fossil fules, Europe is hopelessly energy deficit, there's only two ways of covering the deficit: either by cutting costs (and given the time that is left the cutting would look more like collapse), or ramping up prodcutions of energies that could replace decline of fossil fuels, like nuclear as the best of options in terms of availability, output and price.

nuclear? are you out of your mind? thats the most expensive energie and the only that isnt mined enough for todays needs.

and cutting costs is no big deal, we come from the highest oil prices ever, prices that will not come again so soon with opec broken and iran sanctions lifted(the us doesnt have the power to block a deal and if europe and brics say yes to the deal the us wil follow).