Oil Depletion

I just read this linkwww.fromthewilderness.com...
and pretty much it states that new oil reserves have been outpaced by world consumption - My question(s), and I know I'm having a bit of an alarmist reaction, Does any one know an accurate projection for the end of oil supply? I know there are alternate energy sources, but is there actually a serious plan/effort to institute a transference of public dependence before oil runs out? Gas prices arn't going down for a reason and I don't seem to see any public concern for what could be a hefty impact on the economy, much less standard of life.

Any thoughts on this?

Several years ago several Shell Oil scientist found that oil is actually an infinite resource. They found that deep earth microbes create oil continuously. The old million years to make oil is a lie...........

I doubt oil will last us another 35-40 years, and no...not because we will run out of it but because it will no longer be the dominator of the transportation industry as it is today. As the saying goes "Economies built on a single good are subject to a single change" It is likely that a more abundant fuel source will be found by then. Pherhaps Hydrogen will be the answer.

DrHoracid says:

"Several years ago several Shell Oil scientist found that oil is actually an infinite resource. They found that deep earth microbes create oil continuously. The old million years to make oil is a lie........... "

GARBAGE!!

Horacid, I cahallenge you to find any mainstream scientist who believes that "deep Earth microbe" hoax.

I challenge you to show us the names and reports from these "Shell Oil scientists".

The fact is, almost every petroleum geologist on the face of the Earth believes -- and so do I -- that our oil deposits are the result of prehistoric organic material. Any "recharging" of oil wells is simply due to slow hydrostatic pressure as the remnants of the oil pool seep back into the hole.

And Liquidus, in answer to your question, we have no way for sure of knowing the absolute amount of oil left, although I believe that we have already reached the "peak oil" point.

But regardless of when we run out (and it is not "if", but "when") the point is that we need to stop burning hydrocarbons, since, in addition to the fact that it is a finite resource, we are also in thrall to people who don't like us very much and they are economically and politically screwing us, it is a huge contributor to our balance of payments deficit, and the emissions and byproducts from hydrocarbon burning is killing us and the Earth as well.

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Several years ago several Shell Oil scientist found that oil is actually an infinite resource. They found that deep earth microbes create oil continuously. The old million years to make oil is a lie...........

I have also read this a long time ago. I have an Aunt with 20 years in the oil industry, I'm going to have to ask her what she knows, and she knows a lot.

Got a linky?

I am curious in the chemical process ivolving these Microbes.

I mean evidentally the oil is a waste product of these microbes being the case, and I am really wondering what raw material it is that they are feeding on.....

My curiosity has been perked, look out.

Truth is that papers released suggest that we may be going through peak oil within the next year (could be slightly longer).
Oil prices will rise to unheard of levels and at that time people-industries will start making the transition to a cleaner, more efficient, and more abundantly available source of energy, though, It probably �aint going to be pretty during the transition

Worst case scenarios say that the "economical viable" supplies will end in 2050. Optimists put this deadline at about 2080/2100. Of course there are plenty more supplies of oil, but they are not cheap to reach (for example many known deep sea deposits). The truth behind soaring crude prices is pretty simple: politics and sheer speculation. The "right" price for a barrel should be in the high 20s-low 30s dollars. I read an interview with former Saudi Minister of Petroleum Industry: he's alarmed by this speculation and he fears that, like all speculations, this will end up in a bursting bubble, which will affect his country the most. He said that the Iraqi crisis encouraged some countries to "play dirty", stockpiling crude or cutting down production capabilities to justify the enormous price tag. While politicians can focus on this issue, scientists need to focus on alternative fuel sources. Hydrogen is a little bit of an old dream: burn the fuel and all you get is water! Too bad right now there are some very serious production issues. The most viable method nowadays, mainly used to supply the industry with large quantities of hydrogen involves the endothermic reaction of steam on hydrocarbons or coke coal:
CH4+H2O=CO+3H2O
C+H2O= CO+H2
(sorry for the incorrect notation, but I can't find the "arrow" sign). Both of these reactions are at about 1000�C.
CO can be converted to CO2, generating more hydrogen, by passing the gases and more steam over an iron oxyde or cobalt oxyde catalyst at 400�C:
CO+H2O=CO2+H2.
This gives off an unwanted byproduct: CO2, which is reckoned to be one of the main greenhouse gases. While this is acceptable for the relative small amounts required by industry, it would be questionable on a larger scale. Hydrogen production using hydrolisis is some kind of "Holy Grail": it would solve all the problems at once. Too bad you need much more energy to fuel the reaction than you would get by burning the products. Moreover, the risk of an ozone (O3) production is always present. While all these problems can be ignored while working in a high school laboratory , it's not the same while working on a large scale.