Maybe Chris was looking for an academic citation, or a link to his webpage? We’d never do that form of referencing in the research reports that I’ve helped to prepare. We kept that info “in house” as a way of maintaining our Q&E reputation (helping with “future business development).

In contrast, the book “Life After Growth” does have academically-formatted endnotes. They cite, among others, Hall, Cleveland, Hirsch, and Murphy (i.e., Dave Murphy’s mentioned in endnote #10 on p. 72).

I think that Tim did a superb job of getting the work of these academic researchers a much wider audience.

Caelan
on January 2, 2020 at 3:15 am said:
Fair enough, Tim, at least with regard to the ‘extended pamphlet/book’ ‘research report’, but what about the other ostensible issue with Dave Murphy (and publisher) and with reference to Chris’ passage, ‘My work too, as well as others.’?

drtimmorgan
on January 2, 2020 at 6:38 am said:
Let me try to clarify this for you.

The research report (2010) brought Chris’s work to a new audience. To the best of my knowledge (though I’m open to correction), this was the first time that the energy economics interpretation had been endorsed by any leading financial firm (I was Head of Research at Tullett Prebon at the time).

The book, as first published (2013), did not include all of the footnotes and acknowledgements that are in it now. The reason for this was that I did not know what should be attributed to whom. When Charles Hall brought this to my attention, it was my decision to pull it, immediately, and reissue it after making changes discussed with him.

If you look back to a blog article here in October, you’ll find this passage:

“This idea [that the economy is an energy system] is by no means a new one and, though I’d prefer not to particularize, it’s been pioneered by some truly brilliant people. If those of us who base our interpretations on the energy-economics paradigm can see a long way into the future, it’s because we’re “standing on the shoulders of giants”.”

Caelan
on January 2, 2020 at 8:15 am said:
Thanks for the elaboration, guys.
It is hoped that Chris and others reading it may appreciate it as well.

drtimmorgan
on January 2, 2020 at 8:58 am said:
Thanks Caelan.

I’ve always tried to be clear that we’re building on the foundations laid by some truly inspired people. I’ve no hesitation in describing EROI, in particular, as the critical insight into how the economy works – and, if we’re to crack the environment/economy conundrum, EROI will be the key piece of knowledge that enables us to do so.

I would just add that, if I had a clear, agreed list of ‘who contributed what’, I’d be happy to include it here.

raymonddeyoung
on January 2, 2020 at 12:28 pm said:
Tim: Not sure if this is a clear and agreed upon list of who did what when with regard to EROEI. But it’s current and does a nice review of the history.

R. E. Melgar-Melgar & C. A.S. Hall (2020) Why ecological economics needs to return to its roots: The biophysical foundation of socio-economic systems. Ecological Economics, 169, March 2020, 106567.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106567

https://drive.google.com/open?id=14-_WNM5l2pAC2unccIUHq2UyJIdUwmju

drtimmorgan
on January 2, 2020 at 12:51 pm said:
Thank you, extremely helpful, and to be recommended to anyone interested in the background to the study of the economy as an energy system.

This is particularly helpful at this moment, as I’m putting together my Brief Guide, which might be a good place for acknowledgements.

For present purposes, might it be a permissible simplification to say that ‘Charles Hall, building on the work of Howard Odum, developed and named the concept of EROI/EROEI’, adding that ‘notable contributors have included Cutler Cleveland and Dave Murphy’?

I believe – though I’ve not found this in the document, as yet – that Euan Mearns created the “cliff chart” portrayal of EROI – am I right?

Steven B Kurtz
on January 2, 2020 at 1:08 pm said:
Tim,

Perhaps you could run this by Charlie Hall.

Steve

“For present purposes, might it be a permissible simplification to say that ‘Charles Hall, building on the work of Howard Odum, developed and named the concept of EROI/EROEI’, adding that ‘notable contributors have included Cutler Cleveland and Dave Murphy’?

I believe – though I’ve not found this in the document, as yet – that Euan Mearns created the “cliff chart” portrayal of EROI – am I right?”

[R]

drtimmorgan
on January 2, 2020 at 1:21 pm said:
Thanks, good idea. I was corresponding with Charlie just before Christmas.

rogerglewis
on January 2, 2020 at 1:27 pm said:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
http://euanmearns.com/eroei-for-beginners/

Full Story of the energy CLiff chart here in Euans own words.
The Net Energy Cliff
Many years ago during a late night blogging session on The Oil Drum, and following a post by Nate Hagens, I came up with a way of plotting ERoEI that for many provided an instantaneous understanding of its importance. The graph has become known as the net energy cliff, following nomenclature of Nate and others.

http://www.euanmearns.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/netenerycliff3.png

Figure 1 The Net Energy Cliff shows how with declining ERoEI society must commit ever larger amounts of available energy to energy gathering activities. Below ERoEI = 5 to 7 such large numbers of people would be working for the energy industries that there would not be enough people left to fill all the other positions our current altruistic society offers.

The graph plots net energy as a % of ERoEI and shows how energy for society (in blue) varies with ERoEI. In red is the balance being the energy used to gather energy.

https://surplusenergyeconomics.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/tp0510_tpsi_report_005_lr1.pdf (30 times to be precise.)

I have only skimmed Tims Book, Frankly, I find SEEDS an interesting index but as with so many “Experts” Tims expertise is very limited and most of his views beyond his own narrow field which was research into financial markets his views are actually very conformist/orthodox/mainstream. Tims work is also not Scientifically based the general level of scientific discourse on the Seeds Blog is very poor, the Oil industry-based sites are much better for science, due to a high number of Engineering and applied science specialists who have a much better grasp of physical sciences.
Martenson’s views also fall into the same category as Tim’s and that is why Martenson is protecting what he sees as his turf, it is him protecting what he sees as his slice of the Pie, from a competitor he sees as a threat. There could also be a measure of Academic/publishing Jealousy too on Martenson’s part.

Martenson I noticed is hosting a conference at which Mike Maloney is appearing. https://www.peakprosperity.com/seminar2020?utm_campaign=20200101_Peak_Conf_Email_12_General&utm_content=touchpoint_1_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zaius&__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=7391cb8465f6de6de6574fd9080dfbe6fed158eb-1577938548-0-AbVpqBVMkfaM-BofgxtwaEx5OUGPr7DeJsHNn6P1i2hwkv0pw67a06Dh0FFvHKtQSAhpqd_obOFS4II80uLIZzSnEXCPBUsbPkvmMEozOnRZH_r4Qds9OptNs_YsPZuw8wq_wyTW-4YIeujb3OYN4nuP9EziCEmqMxl2ICOszg3Ce9xrLr3PPLsQyumxFypwvKggO1Y3lTxMFv_LZMavjvgBsnb0fRBc0w3N3s7nCjVq3AJBqeMAwmRYoX2A7TuESMsftl9JpB8cRK54Nir0wAM0Gx8J_8gDpkFBwjQQUoFNc-kuxiR-pFiuGMJzrT68XWx04AWOXnObM3rqNUPVKDnah1h8oenMOC6Sw5JfBNogcXPCfH3enW7LXnDbotGbvoCPUoyHFYQ_Ce0aazx6fAvWP8Nb8iT0HFT9pnTWHAE9wi0or71DnF3PBmA5NkEs1A3rOrzsQhnNv3dfp-34uXGGH43Tm8NjZvBWhayZTnpv5_f3tM66WbA8fEVqUt5CMg

It’s a business in which they are engaged. I like Maloney and I do not criticise the fact these guys are trying to make a living by sharing their takeaways from the information. It’s only a short step between doing what they are doing and becoming a priesthood selling indulgences though. It is clear from Tims own Blog and the comments in the Peak oil Barrel article/open thread that there is no shortage of Green/worriers seeking to pay indulgences and forming factions to virtue signal their own badges of absolution from whichever Priesthood they have chosen to follow.

I did not comment on your comment but it did set me off on a train of thought of my own. /2020/01/01/tribal-territorial-marking-when-the-ephors-meet-the-gatekeepers-who-argue-with-the-watchers-whose-shitting-on-whose-slice-of-the-pie/
Even when I post without links at Tims blog my comments are often not published, every post I make there is actually moderated regardless of number of links or no links at all. I have been accused of promoting my own Blog etc, which is part of the same mentality that drives Martenson’s comments.

So for me, this is something of a curate’s egg, But Tims demeanour and response marks him out for the Gentleman he undoubtedly is. Martenson’s comments are unworthy and also wrong-headed.

That’s my 5 penneth worth, just one last point, if Tim is attracting flak from the US fringe gatekeepers it is likely that gatekeepers are policing his own thread, Seeds is a powerful tool and will be sidelined and derailed if it can not be co-opted in some way. Anything worthwhile gaining traction will suffer these attacks, as they are dangerous to vested interests ( Chomsky, the danger of a counter-example, however small). Will Tim try to beat em or join em? who knows, I have been disappointed with the direction of travel on Tims Blog for the past 9 months or so, but the work will prove influential I think, but not as much so as the work on Quanta by Wes Freeberg. Tim has shown little or no interest in Wes’s work which I think is a shame as they would enhance each other although Quanta stands on its own terms and Seeds ultimately fails without an energy-based unit of account, the adoption of an energy-based unit of account is inevitable for Seeds and needed for it ultimately to make scientific sense, I hope Tim does the hard yards to bring it up to snuff.

/2019/07/15/153-one-for-the-sceptics-nothing-to-fear-but-fear-itself-the-economy-as-an-energy-transformation-machine-nafta-rossperot-wrongkindofgreen-energyeconomic-8thwaytothink-conquestofdough-objecti/

Ok, a response did come through, but one ostensibly incomplete, so I’m awaiting another as my subsequent comment awaits ‘moderation’.
In the mean time, I’ve posted the results, including the one in moderation, on Peak Oil Barrel in the most recent Petroleum section (Dec 22. I think).

“Tim Morgan left a very bad taste in my mouth some years ago.

He watched the Crash Course which I produced, we emailed back and forth for a while, and then he produced an extended pamphlet/book that literally was the Crash Course in its design, but without any attribution. He lifted images, ideas, etc.

Okay, imitation is sincere flattery and all that. I let it go and didn’t make much of a fuss.

A few years later a book of his was coming out, I think it actually came out, and I was contacted by Dave Murphy (then a recent graduate of Charlie Hall) who was all in a bother about his own work having been lifted by Mr. Morgan and used without any attribution at all. My work too, as well as others.

Dave led an effort to force a recall by the publisher, it was that serious of a breach.” ~ Chris Martenson, comment quote from Peak Oil Barrel

open-thread-petroleumdecember-8-2019/#comment-693431

I originally commented this on Tim’s blog, but to no response, not even an email.