Professor Hall to my surprise read through all theoildrum comments and sent me an email with his responses and some summary comments, which I have posted below.
I am rather blown away by the response to my post, both the many attacks and the equally many folks who have come out of the woodwork to my defense, or rather the defense of the validity of the EROI approach. I thank you all, for I think we need more discussion of this issue.
In addition this is advising week, we hope to get a new energy major approved by the faculty next week, and I have many graduate students to work with. The main thing I get out of all of this is that Nate is right, there just are different camps, just as there are differing favorite political candidates including none of above.
Please just sit happily in your camp. Carp if you must. I will ignore those who confuse conversion efficiency or material extraction with EROI See Science June 23 or who think that markets solve all problems. If you wish, however, I might introduce the latter to the Easter bunny. I am an ecologist but not of the tree hugging variety. All this EROI stuff comes out of my spending most of my life measuring and attempting to understand energy flows in natural ecosystems.
There is no money in these systems, but there are perfectly good economies. Likewise societies Tainter. For those like Mr. Barton who question my energy bona fides my graduate training under Howard Odum, certainly one of our great energy thinkers, was about energy every day, and included courses in energy and engineering as well as chemistry and biology.
