Criticism of Net Energy Analysis

This is the first out right critique I've ever seen publishes around Net Energy Analysis and Life Cycle Analysis and energy policy.

Came acrossed it at ScienceDaily.com. Two excerpts below:

However, Professor Bruce Dale from Michigan State University claims, "Net energy analysis is simple and has great intuitive appeal, but it is also dead wrong and dangerously misleading -- net energy must be eliminated from our discourse." Instead, Dale recommends comparing fuels by assessing how much petroleum fuel each can replace, or by calculating how much CO2 each produces per km driven.[]

[]The problem with net energy, says Dale, is that it makes an assumption that all sources of energy (oil, coal, gas etc) have equal value. "This assumption is completely wrong -- all energy sources are not equal -- one unit of energy from petrol is much more useful than the same amount of energy in coal...and that makes petrol much more valuable," says Dale.

Bruce Dale of Michigan State University continues his arguments further in depth in an article titled: "Thinking clearly about biofuels: ending the irrelevant 'net energy' debate and developing better performance metrics for alternative fuels."