Stephen Balogh
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Stephen Balogh has a total of 26 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Charles A. S. Hall
State University of New York
3 shared publications - Jesse Caputo
USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Amherst, MA, USA
3 shared publications - Timothy A. Volk
Department of Sustainable Resources Management, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA
3 shared publications Bruce Lippke
University of Washington
2 shared publicationsCharles A.S. Hall
2 shared publicationsElaine Oneil
University of Washington
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- 11 February 2014
- Published by Springer Nature in Urban Ecosystems
- Vol. 19 (4) , 1499-1534
Examining the historical and present energy metabolism of a Rust Belt City: Syracuse, NY 1840–2005
- 11 February 2014
- Published by Springer Nature in Urban Ecosystems
- Vol. 19 (4) , 1499-1534
Examining the historical and present energy metabolism of a Rust Belt City: Syracuse, NY 1840–2005
- Open Access
The Influence of Output Variability from Renewable Electricity Generation on Net Energy Calculations
One key approach to analyzing the feasibility of energy extraction and generation technologies is to understand the net energy they contribute to society. These analyses most commonly focus on a simple comparison of a source’s expected energy outputs to the required energy inputs, measured in the form of energy return on investment (EROI). What is not typically factored into net energy analysis is the influence of output variability. This omission ignores a key attribute of biological organisms and societies alike: the preference for stable returns with low dispersion versus equivalent returns that are intermittent or variable. This biologic predilection for stability, observed and refined in academic financial literature, has a direct relationship to many new energy technologies whose outputs are much more variable than traditional energy sources. We investigate the impact of variability on net energy metrics and develop a theoretical framework to evaluate energy systems based on existing financial and biological risk models. We then illustrate the impact of variability on nominal energy return using representative technologies in electricity generation, with a more detailed analysis on wind power, where intermittence and stochastic availability of hard-to-store electricity will be factored into theoretical returns.
Open AccessThe Influence of Output Variability from Renewable Electricity Generation on Net Energy Calculations
One key approach to analyzing the feasibility of energy extraction and generation technologies is to understand the net energy they contribute to society. These analyses most commonly focus on a simple comparison of a source’s expected energy outputs to the required energy inputs, measured in the form of energy return on investment (EROI). What is not typically factored into net energy analysis is the influence of output variability. This omission ignores a key attribute of biological organisms and societies alike: the preference for stable returns with low dispersion versus equivalent returns that are intermittent or variable. This biologic predilection for stability, observed and refined in academic financial literature, has a direct relationship to many new energy technologies whose outputs are much more variable than traditional energy sources. We investigate the impact of variability on net energy metrics and develop a theoretical framework to evaluate energy systems based on existing financial and biological risk models. We then illustrate the impact of variability on nominal energy return using representative technologies in electricity generation, with a more detailed analysis on wind power, where intermittence and stochastic availability of hard-to-store electricity will be factored into theoretical returns.
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 1 January 2014
- Published by Elsevier in Energy Policy
- Vol. 64, 141-152
EROI of different fuels and the implications for society
- 1 January 2014
- Published by Elsevier in Energy Policy
- Vol. 64, 141-152
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessEROI of different fuels and the implications for society
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 1 January 2014
- Published by Elsevier in Energy Policy
- Vol. 64, 153-167
Energy, EROI and quality of life
- 1 January 2014
- Published by Elsevier in Energy Policy
- Vol. 64, 153-167
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessEnergy, EROI and quality of life
- 6 July 2013
- Published by Springer Nature in BioEnergy Research
- Vol. 7 (1) , 460
Erratum to: Incorporating Uncertainty into a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Model of Short-Rotation Willow Biomass (Salix spp.) Crops
- 6 July 2013
- Published by Springer Nature in BioEnergy Research
- Vol. 7 (1) , 460
Erratum to: Incorporating Uncertainty into a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Model of Short-Rotation Willow Biomass (Salix spp.) Crops
- 22 June 2013
- Published by Springer Nature in BioEnergy Research
- Vol. 7 (1) , 48-59
Incorporating Uncertainty into a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Model of Short-Rotation Willow Biomass (Salix spp.) Crops
- 22 June 2013
- Published by Springer Nature in BioEnergy Research
- Vol. 7 (1) , 48-59
Incorporating Uncertainty into a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Model of Short-Rotation Willow Biomass (Salix spp.) Crops
- Open Access
Efficiency of Edible Agriculture in Canada and the U.S. Over the Past Three and Four Decades
We examine technological progress in the US and Canada to answer the question: has the efficiency (e.g., the edible energy efficiency, or EEE) for producing agricultural products in the US and Canada increased in recent decades? Specifically, we determined the energy efficiency of agriculture at the farm gate in recent decades by dividing the outputs (the total annual crop and animal output in energy units minus the feed used for animal production and the grain used for ethanol production) by the energy inputs: all the energy used by the nation to produce food (the energy used to generate and apply the fertilizer, pesticides, seed and to operate machinery) minus the energy inputs to produce grain for ethanol. Our data comes primarily from national and international agricultural censuses. Our study found that the energy efficiency of US agriculture has more than doubled from 0.8:1 in 1970 to 2.2:1 by 2000, then increased more slowly to 2.3:1 by 2009. The energy efficiency of the agricultural sector in Canada has not changed appreciably since 1980, and has varied about a mean of 2:1 from 1981 to 2009. Our study found that EEE improvements in the US could be attributable in part to advancements in crop production per hectare, and lower direct fuel consumption, but also a greater proportion of less energy-intensive corn and changes to the diet of livestock (e.g., increased use of meals and other by-products which have increased the availability of grain). Thus increases due to technological progress alone for the last several decades appear small, less than one percent a year.
Open AccessEfficiency of Edible Agriculture in Canada and the U.S. Over the Past Three and Four Decades
We examine technological progress in the US and Canada to answer the question: has the efficiency (e.g., the edible energy efficiency, or EEE) for producing agricultural products in the US and Canada increased in recent decades? Specifically, we determined the energy efficiency of agriculture at the farm gate in recent decades by dividing the outputs (the total annual crop and animal output in energy units minus the feed used for animal production and the grain used for ethanol production) by the energy inputs: all the energy used by the nation to produce food (the energy used to generate and apply the fertilizer, pesticides, seed and to operate machinery) minus the energy inputs to produce grain for ethanol. Our data comes primarily from national and international agricultural censuses. Our study found that the energy efficiency of US agriculture has more than doubled from 0.8:1 in 1970 to 2.2:1 by 2000, then increased more slowly to 2.3:1 by 2009. The energy efficiency of the agricultural sector in Canada has not changed appreciably since 1980, and has varied about a mean of 2:1 from 1981 to 2009. Our study found that EEE improvements in the US could be attributable in part to advancements in crop production per hectare, and lower direct fuel consumption, but also a greater proportion of less energy-intensive corn and changes to the diet of livestock (e.g., increased use of meals and other by-products which have increased the availability of grain). Thus increases due to technological progress alone for the last several decades appear small, less than one percent a year.
- 1 July 2012
- Published by Forest Products Society in Forest Products Journal
- Vol. 62 (4) , 305-313
Life-Cycle Assessment for the Production of Bioethanol from Willow Biomass Crops via Biochemical Conversion*
We conducted a life-cycle assessment (LCA) of ethanol production via bioconversion of willow biomass crop feedstock. Willow crop data were used to assess feedstock production impacts. The bioconversion process was modeled with an Aspen simulation that predicts an overall conversion yield of 310 liters of ethanol per tonne of feedstock (74 gal per US short ton). Vehicle combustion impacts were assessed using Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) models. We compared the impacts of bioconversion-produced ethanol with those of gasoline on an equivalent energy basis. We found that the life-cycle global warming potential of ethanol was slightly negative. Carbon emissions from ethanol production and use were balanced by carbon absorption in the growing willow feedstock and the displacement of fossil fuel–produced electricity with renewable electricity produced in the bioconversion process. The fossil fuel input required for producing 1 MJ of energy from ethanol was 141 percent less than that from gasoline. More water was needed to produce 1 MJ of ethanol fuel than 1 MJ of gasoline. The life-cycle water use for ethanol was 169 percent greater than for gasoline. The largest contributors to water use were the conversion process itself and the production of chemicals and materials used in the process, such as enzymes and sulfuric acid.
- 1 July 2012
- Published by Forest Products Society in Forest Products Journal
- Vol. 62 (4) , 305-313
Life-Cycle Assessment for the Production of Bioethanol from Willow Biomass Crops via Biochemical Conversion*
We conducted a life-cycle assessment (LCA) of ethanol production via bioconversion of willow biomass crop feedstock. Willow crop data were used to assess feedstock production impacts. The bioconversion process was modeled with an Aspen simulation that predicts an overall conversion yield of 310 liters of ethanol per tonne of feedstock (74 gal per US short ton). Vehicle combustion impacts were assessed using Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) models. We compared the impacts of bioconversion-produced ethanol with those of gasoline on an equivalent energy basis. We found that the life-cycle global warming potential of ethanol was slightly negative. Carbon emissions from ethanol production and use were balanced by carbon absorption in the growing willow feedstock and the displacement of fossil fuel–produced electricity with renewable electricity produced in the bioconversion process. The fossil fuel input required for producing 1 MJ of energy from ethanol was 141 percent less than that from gasoline. More water was needed to produce 1 MJ of ethanol fuel than 1 MJ of gasoline. The life-cycle water use for ethanol was 169 percent greater than for gasoline. The largest contributors to water use were the conversion process itself and the production of chemicals and materials used in the process, such as enzymes and sulfuric acid.
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 2 May 2011
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
- Vol. 22 (1) , 1-29
An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance
Collaborative governance draws from diverse realms of practice and research in public administration. This article synthesizes and extends a suite of conceptual frameworks, research findings, and practice-based knowledge into an integrative framework for collaborative governance. The framework specifies a set of nested dimensions that encompass a larger system context, a collaborative governance regime, and its internal collaborative dynamics and actions that can generate impacts and adaptations across the systems. The framework provides a broad conceptual map for situating and exploring components of cross-boundary governance systems that range from policy or program-based intergovernmental cooperation to place-based regional collaboration with nongovernmental stakeholders to public-private partnerships. The framework integrates knowledge about individual incentives and barriers to collection action, collaborative social learning and conflict resolution processes, and institutional arrangements for cross-boundary collaboration. It is presented as a general framework that might be applied to analyses at different scales, in different policy arenas, and varying levels of complexity. The article also offers 10 propositions about the dynamic interactions among components within the framework and concludes with a discussion about the implications of the framework for theory, research, evaluation, and practice. Colaborativa gobernanza extrae de diversas esferas de la practica e investigación de la administración pública. Este articulo sintetiza y extiende marcos conceptuales, resultados de investigación y conocimiento basado en la práctica dentro de un marco integrativo de gobernanza colaborativa. El marco específica un conjunto de dimensiones anidadas, abarcando un gran contexto del sistema, un régimen de gobernanza colaborativa, y las dinámicas y acciones colaborativas internas que pueden generar impactos y adaptaciones a través de los sistemas. El marco proporciona un mapa conceptual amplio para situar y explorar los componentes más allá de los límites del sistema de gobernanza los cuales van desde cooperación regional intergubernamental in base a programas o políticas hasta cooperación con interesados non gubernamentales en base a su localización hasta incluir asociaciones entre entes públicas y privadas. El marco integra información acerca de los incentivos y dificultades individuales de acción colectiva, el aprendizaje social y colaborativo, los procesos de resolución de conflicto, y las configuraciones institucionales para colaboración fuera de límites. El marco general que se presenta podría ser aplicado a análisis de escalas diferentes, en diferentes áreas de política, y en diferentes niveles de complejidad. El artículo también proporciona 10 proposiciones acerca de las interacciones dinámicas entre los componentes del marco y concluye con una discusión de las implicaciones del marco para teoría, investigación, evaluación y la práctica. Translations by Claudia N. Avellaneda, University of North Carolina Charlotte and Nicolai Petrovsky, University of Kentucky
- 2 May 2011
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
- Vol. 22 (1) , 1-29
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessAn Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance
Collaborative governance draws from diverse realms of practice and research in public administration. This article synthesizes and extends a suite of conceptual frameworks, research findings, and practice-based knowledge into an integrative framework for collaborative governance. The framework specifies a set of nested dimensions that encompass a larger system context, a collaborative governance regime, and its internal collaborative dynamics and actions that can generate impacts and adaptations across the systems. The framework provides a broad conceptual map for situating and exploring components of cross-boundary governance systems that range from policy or program-based intergovernmental cooperation to place-based regional collaboration with nongovernmental stakeholders to public-private partnerships. The framework integrates knowledge about individual incentives and barriers to collection action, collaborative social learning and conflict resolution processes, and institutional arrangements for cross-boundary collaboration. It is presented as a general framework that might be applied to analyses at different scales, in different policy arenas, and varying levels of complexity. The article also offers 10 propositions about the dynamic interactions among components within the framework and concludes with a discussion about the implications of the framework for theory, research, evaluation, and practice. Colaborativa gobernanza extrae de diversas esferas de la practica e investigación de la administración pública. Este articulo sintetiza y extiende marcos conceptuales, resultados de investigación y conocimiento basado en la práctica dentro de un marco integrativo de gobernanza colaborativa. El marco específica un conjunto de dimensiones anidadas, abarcando un gran contexto del sistema, un régimen de gobernanza colaborativa, y las dinámicas y acciones colaborativas internas que pueden generar impactos y adaptaciones a través de los sistemas. El marco proporciona un mapa conceptual amplio para situar y explorar los componentes más allá de los límites del sistema de gobernanza los cuales van desde cooperación regional intergubernamental in base a programas o políticas hasta cooperación con interesados non gubernamentales en base a su localización hasta incluir asociaciones entre entes públicas y privadas. El marco integra información acerca de los incentivos y dificultades individuales de acción colectiva, el aprendizaje social y colaborativo, los procesos de resolución de conflicto, y las configuraciones institucionales para colaboración fuera de límites. El marco general que se presenta podría ser aplicado a análisis de escalas diferentes, en diferentes áreas de política, y en diferentes niveles de complejidad. El artículo también proporciona 10 proposiciones acerca de las interacciones dinámicas entre los componentes del marco y concluye con una discusión de las implicaciones del marco para teoría, investigación, evaluación y la práctica. Translations by Claudia N. Avellaneda, University of North Carolina Charlotte and Nicolai Petrovsky, University of Kentucky
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
What is the Minimum EROI that a Sustainable Society Must Have?
Economic production and, more generally, most global societies, are overwhelmingly dependant upon depleting supplies of fossil fuels. There is considerable concern amongst resource scientists, if not most economists, as to whether market signals or cost benefit analysis based on today’s prices are sufficient to guide our decisions about our energy future. These suspicions and concerns were escalated during the oil price increase from 2005 – 2008 and the subsequent but probably related market collapse of 2008. We believe that Energy Return On Investment (EROI) analysis provides a useful approach for examining disadvantages and advantages of different fuels and also offers the possibility to look into the future in ways that markets seem unable to do. The goal of this paper is to review the application of EROI theory to both natural and economic realms, and to assess preliminarily the minimum EROI that a society must attain from its energy exploitation to support continued economic activity and social function. In doing so we calculate herein a basic first attempt at the minimum EROI for current society and some of the consequences when that minimum is approached. The theory of the minimum EROI discussed here, which describes the somewhat obvious but nonetheless important idea that for any being or system to survive or grow it must gain substantially more energy than it uses in obtaining that energy, may be especially important. Thus any particular being or system must abide by a “Law of Minimum EROI”, which we calculate for both oil and corn-based ethanol as about 3:1 at the mine-mouth/farm-gate. Since most biofuels have EROI’s of less than 3:1 they must be subsidized by fossil fuels to be useful.
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessWhat is the Minimum EROI that a Sustainable Society Must Have?
Economic production and, more generally, most global societies, are overwhelmingly dependant upon depleting supplies of fossil fuels. There is considerable concern amongst resource scientists, if not most economists, as to whether market signals or cost benefit analysis based on today’s prices are sufficient to guide our decisions about our energy future. These suspicions and concerns were escalated during the oil price increase from 2005 – 2008 and the subsequent but probably related market collapse of 2008. We believe that Energy Return On Investment (EROI) analysis provides a useful approach for examining disadvantages and advantages of different fuels and also offers the possibility to look into the future in ways that markets seem unable to do. The goal of this paper is to review the application of EROI theory to both natural and economic realms, and to assess preliminarily the minimum EROI that a society must attain from its energy exploitation to support continued economic activity and social function. In doing so we calculate herein a basic first attempt at the minimum EROI for current society and some of the consequences when that minimum is approached. The theory of the minimum EROI discussed here, which describes the somewhat obvious but nonetheless important idea that for any being or system to survive or grow it must gain substantially more energy than it uses in obtaining that energy, may be especially important. Thus any particular being or system must abide by a “Law of Minimum EROI”, which we calculate for both oil and corn-based ethanol as about 3:1 at the mine-mouth/farm-gate. Since most biofuels have EROI’s of less than 3:1 they must be subsidized by fossil fuels to be useful.