I tried to explain how an EROEI deficient well making me $1000/month should be plugged immediately, let alone what the owner would say to such a ridiculous idea. Just because you didn't make this calculation doesn't mean that society shouldn't consider EROEI when evaluating various routes forward. Money has whatever value society puts on it which can obviously change a lot and quickly, so it is not necessarily a good tool for comparing various energy sources at various times... Just because you didn't make this calculation doesn't mean that society shouldn't consider EROEI when evaluating various routes forward. Money has whatever value society puts on it which can obviously change a lot and quickly, so it is not necessarily a good tool for comparing various energy sources at various times... Society should consider all sorts of things when evaluating routes forward....and doesn't. Some of those at least make sense, racial equality, health care for all, education for those who want it, etc etc. EROEI doesn't qualify. Some country with stranded natural gas can make the investment to convert natural gas to liquids for the next century and make money on an EROEI&lt;1 process. Whereas Japan might save the 40% conversion loss and simply produce hydrates into regular NG transmission lines and pipe it to the mainland...not because of EROEI, but because they already have an economy and infrastructure built to accomodate natural gas and can use it more efficiently by avoiding the conversion loss. Money works great for what it