The Etp Model Has Been Empirically Confirmed

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Futilitist, Aug 24, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    it is also dated from 2013
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,453
    I have told you many times Fute, and any normal person would not need to ask, as it was the subject of the very post to which you are replying!

    However, since we now have some moderator attention on the thread I'll do so one last time:-

    Where does the energy content of the oil being produced appear in what you have cut and pasted here? Russ and I have looked for this without success.

    Without considering this, any pretence that this model can predict the energy available from the production process is entirely empty.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2016
    Russ_Watters and krash661 like this.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    well then, answer this question below so i cannot " misinterpret "(ahh yes-yes-- there is that word that is used when individuals do not comprehend the words they have read) since i agree with origin:
    " after 76 pages of this, i still do not have a clue as to what this etp model actually predicts. from what i can gather is that it predicts a range--which strangely enough is from 11 dollars to 66 dollars--which will then cause society to collapse-- am i now understanding this? "
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Futilitist This so called forum is a fraud... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,586
    That is because what you are looking for is not there. It is not necessary to evaluate the energy content of the oil being produced. The energy content of a barrel of oil never changes. It is the same as it has always been. What changes is the amount of energy required to produce the next barrel. That rises because of rising entropy production in the petroleum processing system. The Etp model measures rising entropy by using the Entropy Rate Balance Equation for Control Volumes, which is a second law statement.

    No.



    ---Futilitist

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: May 2, 2016
  8. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    when i tried to " interpret "(since it is not an actual phrase) the phrase, all i revived was nothing but food data--strange-- are you making shiit up ?
     
  9. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    the next sentence that you conveniently left-out states why(and you are whining about word games, correct?).
     
  10. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    (shakes head)-- MY GOD-- how pathetic are you actually ?
     
  11. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    my simple question of all of this is, why does not wall street use this etp model if it is so accurate, or oil companies in general?-- no one on wall street has even come across this shiit.
     
  12. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    well, if the joke is coming from a joke-- then one should assume that anything that they state is therefore a joke.
    he is referring to QE(again--his data is out of date).
     
  13. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    he is referring to two different time frames in one moment-- right now we have a glut, but years from now--we will not have oil to be glutted--is what he is saying.
     
  14. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    (shakes head)---what a pathetic joke you truly are..
     
  15. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,453
    How, then, can the model say the energy produced is insufficient for the energy needed in production? You obviously have to show both numbers and that one is greater than the other. Where are they and where is the expression showing the relationship between them?
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2016
  16. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Wow. Not that this thread has ever been particularly rational, but the diarrhea of the mouth in the past few days has gone to a new level. The arguments used to be just wrong and stupid, but now it seems you are intentionally making them gibberish, Futi. At one time when you would say "the economy is collapsing" you'd at least point to a GDP number. You were always wrong, but at least you made an effort to keep yourself connected to reality. But not anymore. Not only are you not referencing data anymore, but now you are making clear claims and then making up absurd definitions for the words after being asked for the references. Why? You can't possibly believe this stuff you are spewing anymore. What are you getting out of this? Have you blown a fuse?
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2016
  17. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Ok, lets look at it in rough numbers.

    The average cost of producing 1 barrel of oil in the US is about $52 and the average cost of producing 1 barrel of oil in Saudi Arabia is $10.
    This includes the costs involved with building oil facilities, pipelines and new wells. Also included in the cost are the costs of lifting oil out of the ground, paying employee salaries and general administrative duties.

    Energy in 1 barrel of oil is approimately 1,700 kWh of energy.

    The cost of energy in the US on average is $.12 /kWh.

    At a cost of $52 dollars a barrel that equates to 433 kWh.

    So the energy expended to produce 1 barrel of oil is only about 25% of the amount of specific energy in 1 barrel of oil.
    For the Saudi Arabian oil it is about 5%.


    So according to the the EPT model we are in fine shape and the 4 horsemen are going to have to put their horses out to pasture for a while longer.
    Sorry the disapointing news that the world is not going to end soon Futilitist.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    This has been fun but I need to go and enjoy my last few days before the apocalypse (just in case I made a math error).

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: May 2, 2016
    krash661 and Ophiolite like this.
  18. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,453
    Well yes you and I might think that but Fute says we are wrong.

    So we need Fute to show us, from the ETP model, what the two numbers are according to that model. I don't see any values, and I don't even see any expression containing them.
     
  19. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    There is a fairly significant error in your calc: you are comparing oil, which is a primary source of energy, with electricity, which is a secondary source. Electricity is made with about 33% efficiency, so your factors (which are the inverse of EROI) are high by a factor of 3: the expenditure of energy to produce oil in the USA is only 8% of the energy produced.

    Googling for EROI stats will verify that, but be careful of out-of-date stats on fracking: it is a lot easier than people realized even 5 years ago.

    But yeah, the point remains the same: we're so far away from the breakeven point that it isn't a common/relevant topic of discussion. That's why you don't regularly see it discussed in the media. Futie takes that silence and fills it in with falsehoods and gibberish.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2016
  20. Futilitist This so called forum is a fraud... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,586
    Wow.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It is really great to see how popular this thread has suddenly become, but I must admit that I am getting a bit overwhelmed by the sheer volume of the response to this topic. I step away for just a second, and when I come back, I find a dozen high quality comments absolutely filled with intriguing and thought provoking questions to answer! There just is no way for me to address them all personally. So I have decided to hire an assistant. As soon as I have done this, I will be right back to give all of your super important questions the attention they deserve. Till then, feel free to discuss amongst yourselves.



    ---Futilitist

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: May 2, 2016
  21. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,453
    Thanks. We note the preparatory groundwork for an evasion, but naturally hope to be shown to be unduly cynical. I expect this means that you will now run off to B W Hill to try to get an answer - which is fine actually. If you don't understand the model yourself, talk to its creator. It makes sense. Let's hear what he has to say.
     
  22. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    No, that's not how I read it at all. I read it as a mocking blow-off. I'm not sure if it means he's scuttling back under his rock for another 6 months or is just going to keep flooding and ignoring, but either way, he's blowing off what was basically just two simple and straightforward requests repeated by several different people (or you could even say it was one request for him to substantiate his two claims).
     
  23. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,453
    Well, I am trying to give the most generous interpretation I can, seeing that we are under the eye of the moderator now.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The days of "blowing off" are, I hope, over. Fute is on notice that he has to support his statements now, so let's see what he can come up with.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page