I'm not sure there is enough acceptable data to say that we are warming dangerously, but I certainly won't deny that it is possible. The item where we probably do have sufficient data is the concept of turning the temperature down by making major changes in our choice of energy sources. It is my contention that 'Green' energy projects don't produce net energy. If it is negative or very low then these projects merely distract us.
Conventional crude developments vary tremendously from negative net energy to 1:100 energy in to energy out. My pure guess is that it averages 1:10. Somewhere I have seen a number of 1:3 for the oil sands. Recent studies of the US corn to ethanol projects initially suspected a net loss of energy but the last I saw calculated was 1:1.36.
In Ontario we are paying 6X the normal price for solar generated electricity This suggests that the project is so dependent on subsidy that it might well be a net energy consumer.
This is critical information for our planning. Could any of you inspire some grad student to study all the significant energy sources and give an estimate of time to energy payback and efficiency over a reasonable lifespan of project?
Hugh Jones P.Eng., P.Geol.
