Second Energy Challenge - Lack of Alternatives

xav031
Nov 7, 2014
2 min read

Unfortunately, the fossil fuels EROI issues examined previously are compounded by a lack of alternatives. In earlier postings we referred to this as the Second Energy Challenge. As summarised on the right hand side of Figure 1, recent analyses show that oil currently brought on stream and all alternative energy technologies are presently below the 20:1 minimum EROI necessary to maintain industrialised societies in ways at least equivalent to the situation that prevailed before 2006 and that most remain well below the bare viability minimum of 10:1.

In short, because of too low EROIs, while fossil fuels are no longer viable energy sources, alternatives concerning nuclear or so-called “renewables” are not viable either.

The emerging harsh reality must be faced. We are witnessing the triple failure of what has come to be known as “Business-as-Usual” (BAU), that is, the failure of:

The BAU development trajectory followed since the 1950s – the world is now plunging below barely viable EROIs;
The lack of anticipation of the present situation by decision-makers in spite of 40 years of warnings;
The lack of viable alternatives – in spite of over 30 years of efforts and massive investments none of the present or emerging alternative technologies has an EROI high enough to enable a viable, sustainable, global civilization. Let’s stress for clarity and avoidance of doubt that by “alternative” here we mean the entire spectrum of technologies including those concerning non-conventional fossil resources (such tar sands, shale oil and gas, coal seam methane, methane clathrates), new nuclear, as well as direct and indirect solar derived resources (flat photovoltaic [PV], concentrated photovoltaic [CPV], concentrated thermal solar power [CTS or CSP], wind, waves, ocean currents, and biomass).[1] Again, all remain with EROIs below 20:1 and most are below 10:1.

In recent years it has become increasingly clear that none of the technologies in use or under development aiming for sustainability could compete with fossil or nuclear derived energy without recourse to massive governmental intervention or assistance (carbon credits, carbon tax, feed-in tariffs, etc.). That is why well-known figures like Bill Gates have been calling for “energy technology miracles”:

“The most important innovation required to avoid climate change will be a way of producing electricity that is cheaper than coal and that emits no greenhouse gases. There will be a huge market for this...” [2] “What we’re going to have to do at a global scale is create a new system... So we need energy miracles.”

While ignoring EROI concerns, Bill Gates clearly stresses the imperative of replacing fossil resources with sustainable competitive ones and the urgency of the matter, declaring that “we have to drive full speed and get a miracle in a pretty tight timeline.” [3] The urgency is all the greater when considering EROI

[1] Exceptions are very few, for example some run of the river micro hydro technologies can achieve high EROI. While many large hydro schemes have also high EROIs, well above 30:1, they however are also high generators of methane, a potent Greenhouse Gas, which puts them on a par with coal power stations in terms of global warming impacts.s

[2] Bill Gates’ 2010 Annual Letter, http://www.gatesfoundation.org/annual-letter/2010/Pages/annual-letter-conclusion.aspx

[3] John D. Sutter, CNN, February 13, 2010.