Urbanite
Sophomore Author
Columbus
Posts:109
Points:1,390
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: May 3, 2006 8:24:28 AM
Owned.
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 8:20:54 PM
cptdenny, I have made this clear and I have repeated it as well. I don't care about abiotic oil theory or fossil fuel theory other than whether or not they can provide a continuous stream of new oil. The entire point and reason of this thread is to debate Peak Oil, not abiotic oil. If abiotic oil is what you want to talk about, create a thread. But if you'd like to discuss or refute peak oil, then talk about peak oil, not abiotic oil. If you think they're related, then please show how they are. One single field out of thousands that may (MAY) be refilling from abiotic sources does not mean that all fields act that way. None of your other articles referred to facts about refilling. In fact, you are such a big proponent of facts and not of opinion, yet many of your links are full of only opinions or have nothing to do with abiotic oil/peak oil.
You ask me to disprove what you say, but I have with Eugene (which you debunk with BS and don't respond to my reply) and I can't disprove the refilling of PA oil fields if you can't provide me with any references. Can't you even remember any of the fields? Where they were located more precisely? Again, PA fields are only producing about 7,000 barrels and Eugene a paltry 15 kpd. Oh, we're saved thanks to a whopping 22 kpd!!!
My info on Eugene is from here.
|
fast15
Champion Author
Calgary
Posts:1,615
Points:74,970
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 6:01:04 PM
Hey kids!!!! It's called "THE BIG LIE" and anyone that beleives it is a fool. They relese information that will financially benefit them the most. With virtually no regulations on the propoganda they chose to release, it's open season on the public. Until the people in charge of government get out of the pockets of oil companies we will continue to be there patsies. Young people are dying over oil as we sit here.
My estimation is that the wrong bodies are in those bags.
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 5:52:09 PM
ahlanwasahlan, Other than trying to get you the link which no longer opens on oil fields in Pennsylvania refilling themselves. You have added nothing but personal opinion to this debate.
Until you can show me who has proved the fossil oil theory with citations and references, your only spinning your wheels.
Either find what I asked for or disprove what I stated in my argument, with references, research papers and citations. I have been more than lenient with you, your time is up...
Don't waste another moment of my time without the proper backing, till then, you're talking to the hand.
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 5:42:45 PM
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/bg/bg159/
Nonexperts, including some in the media, persistently predict oil shortage because they misunderstand petroleum terminology. Oil geologists speak of both reserves and resources.
Reserves are the portion of identified resources that can be economically extracted and exploited using current technology.
Resources include all fuels, both identified and unknown, and constitute the world’s endowment of fossil fuels.
Oil reserves are analogous to food stocks in a pantry. If a household divides its pantry stores by the daily food consumption rate, the same conclusion is always reached: the family will starve to death in a few weeks. Famine never occurs because the family periodically restocks the pantry.
Similarly, if oil reserves are divided by current production rates, exhaustion appears imminent. However, petroleum reserves are continually increased by ongoing exploration and development of resources. For 80 years, oil reserves in the United States have been equal to a 10- to 14-year supply at current rates of development.15 If they had not been continually replenished, we would have run out of oil by 1930.
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 4:33:35 PM
I love how one of your articles is so completely right but he argues against it. He claims that "pumping oil isn't like draining a bathtub. The taps won't all suddenly go dry, and certainly not all at once all over the world. Instead, world supplies will gradually decrease". This is EXACTLY what Peak Oilers believe and he is trying to pass it off like PO is about the immediate decline of oil ("Welcome to The Peak Oil Theory, the latest in a very, very long line of predictions that the world is in imminent danger of running out of oil"). So he's stating half of the facts correctly. Oil doesn't plummet off, it's slows down then declines. Something Peak Oil is ALL about. This is the center of the belief and he, he being one of your sources, is CONFIRMING this and then passes off Peak Oil as false and based on 'running out of oil'. Pretty clever.
He also thinks that it's high prices that have led to so many believing in PO. Wrong! The fact that we haven't increased supply in a year is the reason so many think that PO is here (as that is one of the first consequences of PO). I don't know why you give credence to this guy. Just a manipulator.
|
Chazzer
Champion Author
Nevada
Posts:10,231
Points:2,150,660
Joined:May 2002
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 9:47:46 AM
The world will run out of oil eventually, probably in about 200 years, in the meantime it is scarce with commie China and India in the mix, plus the the other world situations.
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 6:51:33 AM
Again, nothing about any fields in Pennsylvania refilling themselves. But taking a quick look at the production numbers, we see that the entire state of Pennsylvania a whopping 7,000 barrels per day! Those fields must really be filled up, huh? EIA
I simply want to know of any evidence other than Eugene Island of fields refilling themselves. The whole point of debating abiotic is to see whether Peak Oil will come to pass or not. And I don't think that the world can rely only on Eugene Island to cover for losses in Cantarell, Ghawar, North Sea, Burghan, etc.
|
keiko01
All-Star Author
Honolulu
Posts:648
Points:133,085
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 2:02:31 AM
it's all bs, oil companies & producrs want higher prices to line their pockets or pay for terrorist training and equipment.
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: May 2, 2006 2:00:53 AM
>>"I guess you missed the Pennsylvania oil wells as well..."<<
+++Yup, care to show a link?+++
I have given you nearly a dozen links from my research, don't you read them or do you just spew your opinion rather than facts?
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/features/fex52182.htm
"However, several cracks have started to appear in the fossil fuel (and hence, the peak oil) theory: some oil fields seem to be re-filling almost as fast as they are being drained. The Wall Street Journal reported the case of Eugene Island 330, an oil field in the Gulf of Mexico, which hit peak production of 15,000 bpd, slowing to 4,000 a day by 1989.
"Then suddenly -- some say almost inexplicably -- Eugene Island's fortunes reversed. The field... is now producing 13,000 bpd, and probable reserves have rocketed to more than 400 mm barrels from 60 mm. Stranger still, scientists studying the field say the crude coming out of the pipe is of a geological age quite different from the oil that gushed 10 years ago."
Scientists observing the phenomenon say the oil field was being topped up from below, through a complex system of fissures and geological faults. According to Dave McGowan of the Centre for an Informed America, this is not news to Russian and Ukrainian scientists, who have published hundreds of academic papers on the abiotic origins of oil.
Western scientists have attempted to leap the evidentiary gulf by claiming that oil can be both organic and abiotic in origin, but not according to J.F. Kenney, an American who studied with the Russians and replicated in a laboratory the chemical processes occurring within the Earth's upper mantle.
Kenney says there are more than 80 oil and gas fields in the Caspian district alone, which were explored and developed using the abiotic oil theory. This supposedly helped Russia overtake Saudi Arabia as the world's largest producer of crude oil in 2004. Though evidence is hard to come by, Russian oil producers have reportedly struck oil at extreme depths, as much 40,000 feet below the Earth's surface. Western oil companies limit their exploration to a depth of six miles.
According to the abiotic theory, oil is present in abundance in the rocks below the Earth's surface, one just has to drill deep enough."
Here's more answers to the debate:
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/peak_oil/peak_oil_is_a_known_fraud.htm
ahlanwasahlan, you come up with many opinions yet I don't see any references to back them up. I hate to be wasting all this time proving along with citations and references, only to be ignored, since you don't bother to read them nor do you post any in your defense of your argument.
At this time I feel your just wasting my time, playing word games. Come up with citations and references supporting your argument, then we'll continue this debate. Till then I'll stand on my research.
|
tleonhar
Rookie Author
Minnesota
Posts:95
Points:2,440
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2006 4:43:01 PM
In 1973 when "we're running out of oil" first started airing, I had no way to prove or disprove. Either we were running out of oil, or the oil companies were using scare tactics just to jack up the prices.
So, my reasoning was this: If we are running out, we all have a duty to conserve as much as possible. If on the other hand it's simply a scare tactic, I don't want to give the b@$^@&ds any more of my money than absoluty necessary.
Still follow that premise today...
[Edited by: tleonhar at 5/1/2006 4:43:23 PM EST]
|
rayw45
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:6,130
Points:351,840
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2006 4:33:21 PM
Lindsey Williams is an ordained minister who volunteered to be the Alaskan Oil Pipeline's chaplain. He was awarded executive status by oil companies as their Chaplain. While he is not a scientist, he has spent a great deal of his time within oil industry and has written books and lectured on the supply of oil available in Alaska, claiming that there's a 200 year supply. Whether he is right or wrong, he has a following of believers. The question for Minister Williams and all who feel the oil supply is plentiful is simple. What if you are wrong? Should we continue our non-conservation ways when there are many geologists who fear that we have passed the tipping point already? What if you are wrong?
|
goldseeker
Champion Author
West Virginia
Posts:11,635
Points:1,542,670
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2006 3:17:38 PM
The peak oil theory has the attention of nations around the world.
Brazil has already straightened their problem out. Sweden has set a goal to be energy dependent by 2020.
Austraila and China are getting heavily into ethanol production.
We could waite until we run out of oil, start a huge world war and kill the human race off.
We can and will run out of oil. It is only a matter of when?
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2006 6:57:36 AM
">>"I'm sure that if you did analyze that oil, you'd find it of biotic origin. One of the common biomarkers is C-13 concentration."<<
The argument has been made and accepted that any bio-markers found in Abiotic oil, was contaminated on its journey to the surface."
That's complete BS. If it were contaminated, then it wouldn't look overwhelming like biotic oil. There would be a little less C-13 in the oil, but not a major dropoff like what happens.
"I guess you missed the Pennsylvania oil wells as well..."
Yup, care to show a link?
"You just made my point! Water is heavier than oil, if your fossil oil theory and teutonic plates theory were correct, then water would always be below the "fossil oil". If however crude oil is below the water, it (crude) has to come from deep below the earth's surface not from above!"
WTF? How does that disprove me again? "Water is heavier than oil, if your fossil oil theory and tectonic plates theory were correct, then water would also be below the "fossil oil'". You just showed how little you know about the most basic of petroleum. Oil doesn't rise to the surface because it is trapped in source rocks. And how exactly would this disprove biotic but not abiotic?
Biotic oil doesn't just spring up from any dead life, but it has to occur where the ocean recedes and overflows. The dead life is then trapped in the soil and over time, accumulating soil pushes the dead life further and further down where it is closer to the heat of the mantle and accumulating pressure. Oil can only be found within certain ranges, eitherwise, the temperature is too high, thus turning the oil into NG. Not close enough and it doesn't receive enough heat and stays in the form of kerogen or such.
I don't want to debate whether or not abiotic or biotic is correct. This thread is about Peak Oil, thus only a theory that shoots out oil at high rates (millions of barrels per year) is one that we should only concern ourselves with. And since you provide no proof, and no one else has, then it's a dead issue.
|
jmg144
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:6,621
Points:1,827,645
Joined:Jul 2004
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2006 6:56:09 AM
Good commentary. Remember the Club of Italy projection in the 1970's about the uman race running out of space on Planet Earth. However, we should as American consumers learn to become more conservative on using gasoline.
|
rheckard
Champion Author
Oklahoma City
Posts:11,576
Points:1,842,315
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2006 6:46:19 AM
The End of the world will come before we run out of Crude. According to the Mayan Calandar the world will end on 12-21-2012.
So what is to worry about!!
[Edited by: rheckard at 5/1/2006 6:47:29 AM EST]
|
Hans_Blix
Rookie Author
Toronto
Posts:1
Points:120
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2006 6:28:55 AM
Pee-Jay, you are on some serious drugs.
Environmentalists funded by Big Oil?
c'mon now...
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 11:57:10 PM
>>"Which resevoirs? There are thousands of resevoirs in the world and only one has been known to replenish, Eugene Island, which most likely came from another resevoir."<<
I guess you missed the Pennsylvania oil wells as well...
>>"The Earth's crust is not static; there are subduction zones at the plate edges where one plate slides underneath another. So what was at the surface once may end up many thousands of feet underground after millions of years if it was part of a plate that started sliding under another plate."<<
You just made my point! Water is heavier than oil, if your fossil oil theory and teutonic plates theory were correct, then water would always be below the "fossil oil". If however crude oil is below the water, it (crude) has to come from deep below the earth's surface not from above!
>>"I'm sure that if you did analyze that oil, you'd find it of biotic origin. One of the common biomarkers is C-13 concentration."<<
The argument has been made and accepted that any bio-markers found in Abiotic oil, was contaminated on its journey to the surface.
You're still avoiding the question, Show me or point to someone that has in the scientific arena proven the fossil-oil theory. Anyone???
|
goldseeker
Champion Author
West Virginia
Posts:11,635
Points:1,542,670
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 6:53:25 PM
ahlanwasahlan,
Good post. It is nice to see that someone in here knows what they are talking about.
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 6:00:40 PM
"the deepest ever discovered fossil was found at 16,000 feet below sea level. How then can we be pumping oil from depths greater than 20,000 feet below sea level? What's down there that's producing crude oil, since its not fossils of any kind and since there are no bio-markers in that crude?"
The Earth's crust is not static; there are subduction zones at the plate edges where one plate slides underneath another. So what was at the surface once may end up many thousands of feet underground after millions of years if it was part of a plate that started sliding under another plate.
I'm sure that if you did analyze that oil, you'd find it of biotic origin. One of the common biomarkers is C-13 concentration. 1.11% of the carbon atoms on Earth are C-13, meaning they have an extra neutron. C-13 however is not ideal for photosynthesis and thus has a much lower concentration in plants and thus in animals. Oil contains a C-13 concentration much similiar to that of animals and plants.
"A bunch of dinosaurs got together millions of years ago and walked over to the Middle East so they can die and produce crude oil. Weren't there dinosaurs fossils found all over the planet as well, but not crude oil. Were these dinosaurs the fat-free versions?"
Dinosaurs don't produce oil. I don't believe I've ever heard anyone with any intelligence say so. Oil is produced from the decomposition of plankton. And not all of the oil in the world is in the Middle East. The Middle East only has a little more than half the reserves in the world, mainly because it was one of the last regions to be tapped, so they're naturally going to have more current reserves.
"The Abiotic oil theory suggests that crude oil is created in the Earth's mantle and its a constant process. Many oil wells thought pumped dry decades ago have been replenishing themselves."
Which resevoirs? There are thousands of resevoirs in the world and only one has been known to replenish, Eugene Island, which most likely came from another resevoir.
"In 'Oil and Gas - 'Renewable Resources'?' Kathy Blanchard of PNL writes, 'Recent geochemical research at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution has demonstrated that the wide range in composition of the oils in different reservoirs of the Eugene Island 330 field can be related to one another and to a deeper source rock of Jurassic-Early Cretaceous age.'"
If the whole point of the debate here of abiotic oil is to debunk peak oil, then you are sorely mistaken. The resevoirs around the world are not refilling themselves, at least not on a grand scale. Let's do some calculations. If Abiotic Oil theory were right and oil has been produced since the creation of the earth 4 billion years ago, then rate at which the earth produced the 2 trillion barrels is a whopping 500 barrels per year. That means that in the past 100,000 years, we've produced 5 million barrels, enough to power the world for...a whole hour and 24 minutes. YAY!!! Meanwhile, if we take biotic oil theory, we'd get say 100 million years to create the same 2 trillion barrels of usuable oil, a rate of 20,000 barrels per year.
Neither of those rates are very high and thus insignificant to world use. Unless if you feel like waiting 100,000 years so we can go partying on for 84 minutes.
[Edited by: ahlanwasahlan at 4/30/2006 6:03:10 PM EST]
|
goldseeker
Champion Author
West Virginia
Posts:11,635
Points:1,542,670
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 3:21:23 PM
TXEscapeHybrid is right. Sooner or later the recoverable petroluem reserves will be gone.
Oh, we can drill deeper. Of course if we go too deep we may get magma. Of course then we could harness the heat for our homes, which might be a good idea.
I look for someone to start drilling in Antarctia before long. Maybe the moon next. lol.
|
limegremlin
Champion Author
Toronto
Posts:7,389
Points:1,631,390
Joined:Sep 2004
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 8:06:40 AM
Interesting comment "at the present rate of recovery"!
A large portion of what is recoverable is not easily done due to the form in which the oil lies...i.e. oil sands. This is very expensive and is just starting to come on line. The enviromental lobbies are a major roadblock to a large number of energy issues.
|
PopPop4
Champion Author
Pennsylvania
Posts:5,769
Points:1,112,230
Joined:Dec 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 8:00:56 AM
And your proof is ??? and who is Lindsey Williams?
|
meteorologist
Champion Author
Knoxville
Posts:4,827
Points:1,254,535
Joined:May 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 7:37:28 AM
There is still plenty of fossil fuel out there; however, much of the future fossil fuel resources are less accessible and will require higher recovery costs.
|
TXEscapeHybrid
Veteran Author
San Antonio
Posts:285
Points:2,770
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 7:04:27 AM
Denny, you have no grasp of basic logic. It's fruitless to attempt to get you to think. The Earth is only so big. The demand for oil is huge and growing daily. Go back to basic algebra. Unless aliens are depositing oil on Earth daily, I don't know how you think the Earth's supply of oil is limitless...or are you volunteering to burn yourself as fuel (or, more aptly, your grandchildren's children and so on...)? I guess if we burned people we'd have a limitless supply of fuel since human populations are self-replacing/limitless.
When people die they usually seal themselves up in boxes or are cremated. Not exactly fossil fuel-worthy. Dinosuars were massive creatures and abundant. Maybe in millenia where all the bison and other large herd animals were killed off there will be stores of oil, but buddy, we're talking many more years than you can count. Your logic is basically -- "Sure, the neighborhood is burning down, but I'm way at the end of the block and still safe. Why worry? Why help douse the fire? Why call the fire department? Ain't my problem."
Fossils aren't at the depths you mention because the pressure and heat and other forces at those depths turn them into (tah dah!) oil, natural gas, etc.
Go back to school... or continue believing the Earth's mantle is some perpetual oil producing machine. Take your pick. You'll be long dead and forgotten by the time it matters, so you don't really care about facts.
[Edited by: TXEscapeHybrid at 4/30/2006 7:09:54 AM EST]
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2006 1:38:38 AM
>>"Unless you've found dinosaurs living in your backyard, oil is very much a finite resource."<<
Oh, and this you can prove? I'm all ears.
Lets say that your correct for a brief moment about "fossil" fuel. Are you telling me that since the dinosaurs, nothing else has ever died since?
Next question, the deepest ever discovered fossil was found at 16,000 feet below sea level. How then can we be pumping oil from depths greater than 20,000 feet below sea level? What's down there that's producing crude oil, since its not fossils of any kind and since there are no bio-markers in that crude?
Something to ponder, the abiotic oil theory has been proven in many labs around the world, yet to this date there has never been anyone to prove scientifically, the fossil oil theory. At best, its only a guess.
A bunch of dinosaurs got together millions of years ago and walked over to the Middle East so they can die and produce crude oil. Weren't there dinosaurs fossils found all over the planet as well, but not crude oil. Were these dinosaurs the fat-free versions?
The Abiotic oil theory suggests that crude oil is created in the Earth's mantle and its a constant process. Many oil wells thought pumped dry decades ago have been replenishing themselves.
|
TXEscapeHybrid
Veteran Author
San Antonio
Posts:285
Points:2,770
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2006 3:26:45 PM
Same difference... all the stats apply. Desert Storm was '92ish
|
TXEscapeHybrid
Veteran Author
San Antonio
Posts:285
Points:2,770
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2006 3:22:51 PM
Let's see, pre-Persian Gulf War I, pre-9/11, pre-Afghanistan and Persian Gulf War (ongoing) II, etc. etc. etc.
Gee, why would prices be so much higher now, eh? Not to mention demand between 1988 and 2006 has gone up substantially not just in America but globally.
Read more. You'll learn a lot. Wikipedia.org's a good place to start.
|
TXEscapeHybrid
Veteran Author
San Antonio
Posts:285
Points:2,770
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2006 3:10:01 PM
Unless you've found dinosaurs living in your backyard, oil is very much a finite resource. Just because we don't know EXACTLY how many barrels of oil the world holds (nevermind how much is actually, ever, going to be feasibly extractable), or exactly how much ozone the Earth needs to sustain life as we know it, doesn't mean that these things are not limited and on the decline (one from direct use--oil-- and one from the burning of fossil fuels and other pollutants--ozone--).
Deny all you want, though, it won't be in your lifespan so what does it matter, right?
|
2h3rv1n
Veteran Author
Grand Rapids
Posts:429
Points:38,585
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2006 3:07:38 PM
I see your point.
|
goldseeker
Champion Author
West Virginia
Posts:11,635
Points:1,542,670
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2006 10:54:03 AM
Good post ahlanwasahlan ,
I couldn't agree with you more.
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2006 12:13:28 AM
>>"Did the whalers back in the 18th and 19th century give a rats ass if their children and grandchildren still had whales left to kill for oil?"<<
+++"I don't quite see your point here. "Hey, they didn't care, so neither should we." That's not really the best attitude towards the future or the situation."+++
ahlanwasahlan, The point I was making was that future generations will come up with a source of energy that will be compatible with their way of life. I hardly think that we're in the "Peak" smartest generation and all other generations after us will be less intelligent.
BTW, I accept your apology...
|
kf5nd
Rookie Author
Houston
Posts:68
Points:1,230
Joined:Oct 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 3:39:59 PM
ExxonMobil ridicules peak oil, but Chevron does not...
willyoujoinus.com
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 3:35:44 PM
Cptdenny, I'm sorry for my rudeness and unprofessionalism. It was pretty stupid and childish of me, so please forgive me.
1) I can't answer your question. It is pretty thought provoking. But that simple question does not simply rule out this theory that has been tested over and over again. I can't point to any proof to the fossil fuel theory other than the hundreds of thousands of wells that have been drilled on its behalf.
But one thing to remember is that there are very simple questions that 'debunk' the abiotic theory much like your question. For example: Abiotic theory holds that oil was the creation of millions of years of intense pressure and heat from inside the earth. Now, imagine that. Millions of years of extreme temperature means that alot of energy has been transferred to that oil. Yet about 10% (shale oil) of the world's reserves are not exploitable simply because they did not get enough energy and only require a few years of very mild temperatures. At very high temperatures and pressures like that inside the mantle, this is but a pretty moment. Now how can 10% have been pushed out just a few days or so quicker than the rest? That just doesn't seem to make much sense now does it? It spends millions of years under intense pressure and heat, yet a little bit longer and it's perfect?
Let's acknowledge something else. And that is that all of this talk and debate is nothing but for theory. It has no or little actual application in the real world. Our reserves are not replenishing themselves. Well, they are, but at extremely low rates, rates which mean pretty much nothing to us.
It's simply a debate about theory, in which case, I'd probably agree with you. It does seem very pretty unlikely that methane is one of the more common molecules and yet it doesn't form longer chains under high pressure. But that resource would be pretty inaccessible and thus of little use.
Again, I'm sorry for the name-calling and overall lack of courtesy on my part earlier.
">>"Should we just ignore the current crisis and leave it to our children and grandchildren? I think not."<<
Did the whalers back in the 18th and 19th century give a rats ass if their children and grandchildren still had whales left to kill for oil?"
I don't quite see your point here. "Hey, they didn't care, so neither should we." That's not really the best attitude towards the future or the situation.
|
ShanC
Champion Author
Rochester
Posts:7,093
Points:261,545
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 9:51:32 AM
"I'm telling you people, the Earth revolves around the Sun!"
"Burn him!"
Mmmmmm.... Scientific theories....
The Earth is flat.
Disease is caused by evil spirits.
Dead tissue spawns flies.
|
MATCO
Veteran Author
Ontario
Posts:492
Points:123,865
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 9:39:19 AM
It's all a bunch of BS. We are NOT running out of oil, it is not a finite resource. It's the oil companies ripping the world off.
|
SE3.5
Champion Author
Indianapolis
Posts:10,185
Points:1,979,450
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 8:38:55 AM
Ah, the debate rages on. My expert is better than your expert. Exit stage left.
|
Pookie1968
Rookie Author
Rochester
Posts:6
Points:200
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 8:35:11 AM
Have any of you noticed the spike in crime siNCe the gas prices have gone up? Everyone is talking about the depletion of the oil. Stop talking about it and help find alternatives. yes, I know there are alternatives, but the cost to the public is too high for us to buy them and help control the depletion. I have seen these alternatives, and they would work, I mean look at what they can do with corn, and trust me, the US can grow some corn. Cooking oil, I have seen people in NC transform their cars to this and they run fine. They get the old cooking oil from fast food places and they have fuel. Battery operated cars, solar cars, all this is available and we are complaining about oil, when we should be finding how fast and inexpensive we can make these work.
|
bfarlow
Rookie Author
New Jersey
Posts:37
Points:35,975
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 8:30:39 AM
We will eventually run out of oil, but not in the near term. Increases in global demand are driving todays prices, not the lack of oil.
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 1:45:33 AM
ahlanwasahlan, You have asked me for proof, which I have provided many references to you and all you can come back with is name calling???
Where is your PROOF of the "Fossil-oil" theory?
How can you explain the simplest test, If the deepest fossil on record was found at a depth of 16K feet below sea level, how can we be pumping crude oil from depths beyond 20K feet, without bio-markers???
If you can't or won't answer this, then you're wasting everyones time by attempting to debate me, without any foundation, merits, or references.
I put many hours into this subject as many can see here, yet no one to date has been able to answer the simple test above. All I get from you is name calling.
Next time bring your references, citations or something that can support your argument, otherwise go hump on someone else's leg for a change. My time is much too valuable to play the insult game.
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 28, 2006 1:33:28 AM
>>"Should we just ignore the current crisis and leave it to our children and grandchildren? I think not."<<
Did the whalers back in the 18th and 19th century give a rats ass if their children and grandchildren still had whales left to kill for oil?
The greenies don't want any kind of "fossil" fuel to be used as an energy source, don't you get it?
Even if we could get rid of all that nasty oil and coal, which I doubt. Wouldn't that be better for the world then? Then we can have cleaner air and move on to another energy source. What do you care, you ain't gonna be around to see it happen.
In the mean time China is right in our back yard trying to get oil drilling leases, and they don't play the green card!
|
goldseeker
Champion Author
West Virginia
Posts:11,635
Points:1,542,670
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 5:05:05 PM
I can assure you we are at or nearing the peak right now. When I was a budding geologist I did a term paper on the dwindling oil supply. That was clear back in 1981. My conclusion back then was indeed we would run out of oil. That was long before China, India, and other developing nations were starting to squeeze the world supply.
Worldwide, we are currently using 85 million barrels of oil a day. How can anyone believe that there is still plenty to be found.
Sure, there is tar sands, and shale oil. This can and will help, but it also will never last forever. I suppose when that runs out, we will just drill on the moon.
It is amazing that oil company execs and Arab oil ministers even admit that someday oil will run out.
Should we just ignore the current crisis and leave it to our children and grandchildren? I think not.
If you want to read a good comprehensive study try "Winning the Oil Endgame". You can buy the book outright or download it for free in a pdf file. It is quite long at 332 pages, but it covers it all.
Here is the link.Winning the Oil Endgame
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 4:55:37 PM
It's funny you said that bicycler. Because Exxon-Mobile, the most evil of all oil companies, has actually taken out ads in which they idiotically ridicule peak oil.
|
bicycler
Champion Author
Ontario
Posts:8,612
Points:1,527,885
Joined:May 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 4:52:55 PM
Interesting,I wonder who is right.I must say that I do not trust the oil companies!
|
Urbanite
Sophomore Author
Columbus
Posts:109
Points:1,390
Joined:Apr 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 4:49:55 PM
All this good debate aside, nothing but high prices will curb the growing world demand. And one thing is for sure...the supply side of the equation will continue to shrink indefinitely. Don't expect any more Ghawar's to be found.
^ That's the essence of Peak Oil.
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 4:33:42 PM
Umm, actually biotic oil has been proven not only in the lab (turkey gut plants), but also in the field, every single time. Ever talk to a geologist? Go ahead and mention abiotic oil. They'll laugh in your face.
So how exactly have you put your money on abiotic oil? I see hundreds billions of dollars being spent every year around the world to produce oil from biogenic sources. Not too many, actually none, that are following the abiotic theory. Even the 'abiotic' Russians still follow biogenic guidelines for drilling.
And abiotic oil originates from the 1800's. It was revived by Stalin, not scientists, in 1951.
|
Physicsnerd
All-Star Author
Los Angeles
Posts:926
Points:11,920
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 4:13:27 PM
This debate over fossil or abiotic oil, will continue for lack of proof of either. What we do know is oil reserves aren't being replaced at any substantial rate to prove the abiotic theory or slow depletion. So the debate is not worth the effort!
|
cptdenny
Champion Author
Florida
Posts:2,350
Points:1,333,000
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 3:41:47 PM
>>"Cptdenny, what makes you so sure of the abiotic oil theory? You realize it has little testing and validity right when it comes to the real world? And that almost nobody, except for retards, believe it right? Any proof? Any real geologists to back you up? Or will you hide behind 50 year old Soviet scientists that were FORCED to write that gibberish just so Stalin wouldn't send them to the gulags?"<<The Abiotic oil theory was discovered in 1951 in Russia.
The fossil oil theory was discovered in 1757 also in Russia at a time when most of the world was getting their oil from whales (the mammal).
The deepest discovered fossil was found at 16K feet below sea level, today we're drilling and producing oil from depths over 20K feet below sea level. How can this be if the deepest fossil ever found was at a depth of 16K feet???
So you rather believe in an ancient theory that's 249 years old, that's never been proven, rather than an up to date one proven in a lab?
Choose away to your heart's content,ahlanwasahlan:
http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/Theory/SustainableOil/
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47675 NASA scientists are about to publish conclusive studies
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158456,00.html
http://enewsblog.com/Gazette/post/2005-12-11_19:39:44/
http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_bartlett/bartlett200406090816.asp
http://www.gasresources.net/
http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/peakoil1.html
http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=1519
http://www.amcgltd.com/archives/004673.html
http://joevialls.altermedia.info/wecontrolamerica/peakoil.html
its not pro American but offers another side to the debate.
|
ahlanwasahlan
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:1,219
Points:15,240
Joined:Jan 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 12:30:18 PM
Care to respond to my questions, cptdenny?
|
Bus561
Champion Author
Lexington
Posts:10,423
Points:2,034,875
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: Apr 27, 2006 10:20:42 AM
Oil will definitely be around for the next 100 years, beyond that I could care less, how about you?
|