Comments on Energy Return on Investment (EROI): Reconciling Boundary and Methodological Issues

Moeller, Devin; Murphy, David J.

doi:10.1007/s41247-019-0055-x

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Including energy self consumption as energy investments (internal measure of energy returns), as we do (following recent works 65,66 ), may yield a 'more comprehensive measure of the total energy return from a production pathway' 26 . Conversely, excluding energy self consumption from energy investments (external measure of energy returns) may yield a measure more representative of the potential of the energy system to increase the net energy supply to society 2,26 .…”

Section: Accounting For Losses and Energy Self Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Estimation of useful-stage energy returns on investment for fossil fuels and implications for renewable energy systems

Aramendia,

Brockway,

Taylor

et al. 2024

Nat Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The net energy implications of the energy transition have so far been analysed at best at the final energy stage. Here we argue that expanding the analysis to the useful stage is crucial. We estimate fossil fuelsʼ useful-stage energy returns on investment (EROIs) over the period 1971–2020, globally and nationally, and disaggregate EROIs by end use. We find that fossil fuelsʼ useful-stage EROIs (~3.5:1) are considerably lower than at the final stage (~8.5:1), due to low final-to-useful efficiencies. Further, we estimate the final-stage EROI for which electricity-yielding renewable energy would deliver the same net useful energy as fossil fuels (EROI equivalent) to be approximately 4.6:1. The EROIs of electricity-yielding renewable energy systems, based on published estimations, are found to be higher than the determined EROI equivalent, even considering the effects of intermittency under a range of energy transition scenarios. Results suggest that the energy transition may happen without a decline in net useful energy, countering the view that renewable energy systems cannot replace fossil fuels without incurring a substantial energy penalty.

show abstract

Section: Accounting For Losses and Energy Self Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Estimation of useful-stage energy returns on investment for fossil fuels and implications for renewable energy systems

Aramendia,

Brockway,

Taylor

et al. 2024

Nat Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several methods for calculating the EROI have been published that contain points of agreement, but also methodological differences. The main disagreements relate to the way energy flows (Moeller and Murphy, 2019), system boundaries, and residual energy embedded in co-products are identified and quantified (Capell an-p erez, Castro, Javier and Gonz alez, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Return on Investment (EROI) and Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of biofuels in Ecuador

Chiriboga

Rosa

Molina

et al. 2020

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Ecuador, the net energy contribution of biofuels is unknown or unnoticed. To address this issue, we determined the Energy Return on Investment (EROI) for bioethanol and biodiesel.The selection of raw materials relied on their productive capacity, export and import records, and historical yields. Consequently, the scope included three raw materials for ethanol (sugar cane, corn, and forest residues) and four for biodiesel (African palm, pinion, bovine fat, and swine fat).Using a method based on the Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of each biofuel, we assessed the entire production chain through statistical processing of primary and secondary information. Then we calculated the calorific values in the laboratory, compared energy inputs/outputs, and finally obtained the energetic returns.EROIs for bioethanol were: 1.797 for sugarcane, 1.040 for corn, and 0.739 for wood. The results for biodiesel were: 3.052 for African palm, 2.743 for pinion, 2.187 for bovine fat, and 2.891 for swine fat. These values suggest feasibility only for sugarcane in the case of ethanol. In contrast, biodiesel has better prospects because all the feedstocks analyzed had EROIs higher than two. Nevertheless, biodiesel is not available for trading in Ecuador because energy policy has overlooked systems based on higher energy return. Future studies should consider more comprehensive variables such as climate change, land use, and water management.

show abstract

Comments on Energy Return on Investment (EROI): Reconciling Boundary and Methodological Issues

Cited by 2 publications

References 10 publications

Estimation of useful-stage energy returns on investment for fossil fuels and implications for renewable energy systems

Estimation of useful-stage energy returns on investment for fossil fuels and implications for renewable energy systems

Energy Return on Investment (EROI) and Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of biofuels in Ecuador

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About