Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hey guys. Does anyone out there think the abiogenic petroleum origin theory is true. I just found out about this theory very recently and find it intriguing. And if this is true imagine what kinds of political and economic impacts this would have.
"The theory of abiogenic petroleum origin holds that natural petroleum was formed from deep carbon deposits, perhaps dating to the formation of the Earth. The ubiquity of hydrocarbons in the solar system is taken as evidence that there may be a great deal more petroleum on Earth than commonly thought, and that petroleum may originate from carbon-bearing fluids which migrate upward from the mantle."
"The abiotic theory holds that there must therefore be nearly limitless pools of liquid primordial hydrocarbons at great depths on Earth, pools that slowly replenish the reservoirs that conventional oil drillers tap."
Hey guys. Does anyone out there think the abiogenic petroleum origin theory is true. I just found out about this theory very recently and find it intriguing. And if this is true imagine what kinds of political and economic impacts this would have.
"The theory of abiogenic petroleum origin holds that natural petroleum was formed from deep carbon deposits, perhaps dating to the formation of the Earth. The ubiquity of hydrocarbons in the solar system is taken as evidence that there may be a great deal more petroleum on Earth than commonly thought, and that petroleum may originate from carbon-bearing fluids which migrate upward from the mantle."
"The abiotic theory holds that there must therefore be nearly limitless pools of liquid primordial hydrocarbons at great depths on Earth, pools that slowly replenish the reservoirs that conventional oil drillers tap."
Let me state my bias upfront -- I am an energy type engineer, but mostly electrical and related production. Started heavy towards Renewable in 2005 after researching topics such as this. From what I follow -- abiotic is pretty much a scam thinking sort of thing. Like the mythic 200 mpg carb of legends past.
But it is supposed to be an attractive story -- in that it could be falsely extended to mean no end of the Age of Oil -- which by now is pretty well set to end and end hard by 2010's at the earliest and 2050's at the latest. Should note those ends happen whether we have any functional replacement figured out or not.
But let's say abiotic (non biological) source oil were fully true -- even then our demand is outstripping the supplies. While the US peaked in oil production in the early 1970's (the start of our downward debt cycle), worldwide production peaked in 2005. So without regard to the source we are way outrunning the supply. No additional supplies are coming online. And demand is increasinig daily. This is what Bush is doing the brainless beg-a-thon in Saudi about right now.
A couple other aspects of all this -- even if the supply were endless, we are toasting the air by burning so much carbon into it, and since we import and consume more of the dirty crap than we produce we lose money on every barrel, gallon and drop we buy and burn. Really dumb long term planning.
Real bottom line is this -- whoever gets off oil first wins and wins big. Those that try to stay to the end lose and die hard.
Location: Sitting on a bar stool. Guinness in hand.
4,428 posts, read 6,509,244 times
Reputation: 1721
thanks
Thank Philip T. I wanted to give you a point but the got to spread the point around first. Will make sure I get you some points later.
BTW think your right about toasting the air. I hate when I have to run outside sometimes because I have to breath in exhaust fumes. And you are also very correct with that fact that who ever gets off the oil first wins.
I don't believe the "global warming" CO2 theory, it is junk. However, I do believe the algae to oil theory and believe that increasing solar activity has warmed the earth. The chemicals released by burning oil are probbaly less than volcanoes through history. What concerns me the most is the politics of oil and how scarce supplies are destroying the progress made by cheap oil.
Let me state my bias upfront -- I am an energy type engineer, but mostly electrical and related production. Started heavy towards Renewable in 2005 after researching topics such as this. From what I follow -- abiotic is pretty much a scam thinking sort of thing. Like the mythic 200 mpg carb of legends past.
But it is supposed to be an attractive story -- in that it could be falsely extended to mean no end of the Age of Oil -- which by now is pretty well set to end and end hard by 2010's at the earliest and 2050's at the latest. Should note those ends happen whether we have any functional replacement figured out or not.
Your first paragraph is as true as the second one is false. Reserves of easy to get inexpensive oil are decreasing rapidly, however there is still a substantial supply available, and new technologies are making it more cost effective every day. We will not "run out" of oil in any of our lifetimes.
Your first paragraph is as true as the second one is false. Reserves of easy to get inexpensive oil are decreasing rapidly, however there is still a substantial supply available, and new technologies are making it more cost effective every day. We will not "run out" of oil in any of our lifetimes.
You are mis-stating the Peak Oil premise. The idea is not oil will "run out" in anyone's lifetime. No one I know nor I use the term "run out." That part is of your own creation in this conversation.
Whether one goes by the organic or abiotic origins, there is more being created all the time, albeit ever so slowly. However, presently we seem to be consuming vastly more than is being created.
You are correct that this is economics thing. The thing that appears to be ending by virtue of the Peak is Cheap Oil. The End of Cheap Oil is exactly what the entire Peak Oil theory is about. Cheap Oil is what we have built the house of cards upon. When the Cheap part goes away it becomes game over.
At the end of the day -- or more correctly at the End of the Era -- to spend more and more on technology to get less and less result will be fruitless and the switch to more suitable energy sources will be forced upon us.
All I am advocating is walking away from the poker table before we have lost all that we have won. Choose the better long-term path, now, and most of our economic, pollution, and energy problems fade away quickly.
I apologize for taking end of the Age of Oil -- which by now is pretty well set to end and end hard by 2010's at the earliest and 2050's at the latest out of context.
I apologize for taking end of the Age of Oil -- which by now is pretty well set to end and end hard by 2010's at the earliest and 2050's at the latest out of context.
Mike
oh, I did not take any bad in it, no apology needed. These are sort of interesting conversations in the outside (of energy sector) discussions. Allows some fresh thinking into the subject matter. Just folks often get tripped up in the words, just like we were.
Not saying my timelines are some absolute truth, just what I see ahead based on the money and economics more than the oil, itself. As demand is steady rising, and production appears to have maxed out, and supply is fixed and depleting. Like we both see, in the long run -- yunno that aint gonna fly
A key part of the Peak Oil models (and their fallout) is that it does not take a "run out" to crash the system and US in particular. Just running a little short over time piles up and runs the prices higher and higher. Folks on the bottom start getting "out bid."
If gas/diesel crosses into the $5 to $10 a gallon range, those SUVs start getting parked and abandoned. Somewhere between $10 and $20 airlines and farming will be starting into hard times (interesting article about how higher fuel prices seem to co-relate to higher farm profits here >>> The Oil Drum | The Fallacy of Reversibility ) $50 or so and even the Air Force curtails flying. Pretty much what I am calling the End of the Age or Era.
If there is not a major recession to chill demand, or we do not actively choose to go off oil, that is what I am supposing to see somewhere between the 2010's and 2050's. We all just bid ourselves right out of the market. The End of the Age, as it were.
My hope is that we have chosen to move on to something better than oil before we are forced to. Wisely choosing a path is generally better than having one forced upon you.
My bias is much wider use of electricity -- all ground transport (not the typical batteries, but directly grid powered roadways) and most farming, all driven by Solar Thermal Electric, and other Alternate/Renewable sources. Like I say that is my bias -- I am an Electrical Engineer type -- but that is something that everyone can live with and live fairly well.
Maybe think of this like horses. While the Horse Era is over, there are still plenty of horses around. Will be the same with oil.
There is no controversy at the scientific level . . .
Hello baystater:
There is no controversy at the scientific level; only at the political level (i.e. money level).
Vested interests, most especially in the West want no information distributed regarding the FACT that TRILLIONS of barrels of oil, the BILLIONS of tons of coal, and the TRILLIONS of btu's of methane could possibly have come from dead dinosaurs.
You'll note that the guy who CLAIMS to be an engineer also simultaneously admits, however unconscously, that indeed he has . . . a vested interest; who could have guessed. Someone that has jumped "heavy towards Renewable in 2005" is not just biased, they have a vested interest in the highly promoted but ignorant notion that oil, coal and methane en masse comes from dead this-or-that. The latest silliness is that the trillions of btu's of methane hydrates (ala the Bermuda Triangle, et al) comes from "microbes."
See (one of many) of my pieces here: The Origins Of Oil - Paul V. Sheridan (http://links.veronicachapman.com/OriginsOfOil.htm - broken link)
or try here [URL="http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47675"]'Fossil fuel' theory takes hit with NASA finding[/URL]
Introduction to Modern Russian Petroleum Science (http://www.gasresources.net/Introduction.htm - broken link)
Ever notice how Big Oil miraculously "discovers" massive oil fields . . . after the price is right? This is not rocket science.
I am still waiting for someone to explain where all of Titan's (and Uranus') dinosaurs went . . .
The enhanced-Enterprise class drillships from Transocean will drill in 12,000 feet of water and to 40,000 feet total depth, more than twice as deep as the mythological biogenic "oil window" and the deepest fossil ever discovered.
How many fossils does it take to make a barrel of oil?
"I have gone to the best geologists and the best petroleum researchers, and I can give you the authoritative answer: No one knows." -- Edward Teller 1979, father of the hydrogen bomb, on how living matter is converted into petroleum.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
thanks
. . .
