I recently encountered this very disturbing blog post arguing that there's an "energy trap" in using energy sources like wind, solar and nuclear because even as they may have high enough energy return on energy investment, since the energy return is spread out over many years, switching to them results in an energy investment that doesn't pay back quickly enough if one is trying to switch to a non-fossil fuel based economy. I'm not completely sure I buy into it: it seems like it assumes a very narrow range of EROEIs and even small improvements in the efficiency end might not lead to this problem. It is also possible that other improvements in energy use (e.g. more efficient cars and better battery technology) could help evade this sort of thing. But I'm not sure enough to evaluate the argument strongly one way or another. Thoughts?