Skip to main content

Explainer: Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROEI)

Support Provided By
eroeiexplainerimage.jpeg
It takes energy to make energy | Photo: Pedro Szekely/Flickr/Creative Commons License

There's no such thing as a free lunch, as the old saying goes, and that's as true in the renewable energy world as anywhere else. Every means of making energy has its energy cost, from the electricity used to pump oil out of the ground and the diesel that powers coal mining machinery, to the power to charge cordless drills for installing rooftop solar.

The concept is referred to in renewable energy circles as "energy return on energy invested," or EROEI, and it's a crucial measurement of how viable a source of energy is, renewable or not. The higher the EROEI, the more energy is "returned" on the energy you invest to get it, and thus the more efficient the energy source is.

Calculating EROEI is not an exact science. It's straightforward enough to figure out that the power used to operate an oil rig counts toward the oil's EROEI. But do you count the energy it took to build the power plant that powers the oil rig? Some sources count energy invested only if that energy is invested in the US, giving imported petroleum a higher EROEI than oil from domestic wells: we let someone else "pay" the energy costs of getting the stuff out of the ground. Still, it's not hard to get a rough baseline sense of just how much energy we need to put in to an energy source for every megawatt of energy we get out of it.

Fossil fuels tend to have a very high EROEI, and for good reason: they're concentrated sunlight, long chains of carbon built by living things, accumulated over millions of years of geologic time, and stored in a form that's relatively easy to move around. Coal is the best example, with an EROEI of around 80. For every megawatt of energy we use to mine and transport coal, that coal gives us around 80 megawatts of power. Oil and gas had an EROEI of around 30 back in 1970, but as reserves get tapped out and drilling takes place in more and more difficult circumstances, that figure has dropped, to around 15 in 2005.

That's still pretty good compared to most renewable energy sources, which is part of the problem with which we find ourselves confronted. If there was an easily accessible renewable energy source with a high EROEI, we could switch over from burning coal with little effect on our economy or our lifestyle. But most renewable energy sources have EROEIs running less than 7. Photovoltaic costs are dropping and energy investment per unit drops as more are built, but in 2010 PV's EROEI was slightly above 6. Biomass comes in even less efficient: sugarcane ethanol has an EROEI of 5, corn ethanol and biodiesel at 1.3.

Geothermal energy isn't common enough that the experts agree on how to quantify its EROEI, and the math involved is daunting. It looks as though somewhere in the range of 20 isn't too far off. Wind claims an EROEI of around 20 as well.

The true star in the renewable energy field is large hydroelectric, with an EROEI around 100, even better than coal. This makes sense: hydroelectric plants can have very long lifespans and the "fuel" -- water uphill of the turbine ---- is replenished by solar energy whether we have a dam there or not. All that EROEI must account for is construction and maintenance. (Of course large hydro carries a huge list of other ecological costs, but few of those are accounted for in EROEI.) As PV cells become more durable and the energy cost of their manufacture drops, their EROEI may well climb toward hydro's.

Support Provided By
Read More
A row of cows stands in individual cages along a line of light-colored enclosures, placed along a dirt path under a blue sky dotted with white puffy clouds.

A Battle Is Underway Over California’s Lucrative Dairy Biogas Market

California is considering changes to a program that has incentivized dairy biogas, to transform methane emissions into a source of natural gas. Neighbors are pushing for an end to the subsidies because of its impact on air quality and possible water pollution.
A Black woman with long, black brains wears a black Chicago Bulls windbreaker jacket with red and white stripes as she stands at the top of a short staircase in a housing complex and rests her left hand on the metal railing. She smiles slightly while looking directly at the camera.

Los Angeles County Is Testing AI's Ability To Prevent Homelessness

In order to prevent people from becoming homeless before it happens, Los Angeles County officials are using artificial intelligence (AI) technology to predict who in the county is most likely to lose their housing. They would then step in to help those people with their rent, utility bills, car payments and more so they don't become unhoused.
blue themed graphic including electric vehicles are charging stations, wind turbines and trees, 2023 in reference to year

A Look Back at Climate Solutions In 2023

The U.S. may have a long way to go in its decarbonization goals, but these stories show signs of progress in climate solutions.