It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
You people eat up Fox news exactly like Germany ate up Hitler in the 30's.
shouldn't we have streams, lakes, and ponds of oil?
Originally posted by Simcity4Rushour
Ok fine some oil may not be orginiac .now tell me how this helps us with our SUPPLY and demand problems .
Because regurdless of how much there may be you still need to drill pupm diliver refine and disturbuit it.
The info structure nessery to do this can no long be enlarged or even matained at current leavels.
So oceans full of oil will do you no good .
Ps and lets not forget green house effects aside a incress of co2 in the aire of 20% would kill us regurdless of the temp .(c02 poisining).
The point is we need other sorces of energy.
Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Someone forgot to tell 99 percent of the world's geologists and petroleum engineers. Maybe you ought to send them a memo.
If you could come up with a comparison between the cost of refining crude oil to gasoline and hemp plants into a viable internal cumbustion fuel, taking into consideration re-doing the complete world fuel infrastrucutre, the loss of land to other farm products, the amount of water needed to produce the hemp fuel, using available data to quantify your claims, people might believe you.
Even I might. But if you can't show that large-scale use of hemp-derived fuel is a cost-effective replacement for petroleum, nobody will buy your assertions....
If, as you say, there is no peak oil problem, then why aren't we pumping the oil out of our newly-replensihed oil wells in Texas and Oklahoma? If there is no peak oil problem, why even bother with hemp?
Originally posted by Gools
Geologists and other professionals apply the knowledge of how oil is formed and deposited to find it! And they have been quite successful.
As pointed out, dry wells don't refill. Once they peak they go into decline. End of story.
If crude oil was formed somehow by inorganic chemistry and percolated up through the earth it would be randomly distributed or form under very specific conditions different than those where it is now found.
You come here and insult the intelligence of moderators (thanks for the U2U BTW :shk: ), supermods, subject matter experts and members who are engineers?
Here's a clue for you to get. Were not in on the big conspiracy. We just use our heads.
Originally posted by djohnsto77
How do you explain that the carbon isotope analysis of petroleum matches biological material and disagrees with abiotic carbon sources?
Originally posted by Umbrax
Convince the population there is no limit to oil.
No need to change to other energy resources.
Instead of making coments that don't address the issues presented to you, why not try to answer them?
Originally posted by StellarX
The fact that oil comes out of the ground and normally percolates up trough it thus possibly picking up organic markers that way? Why would oil that is formed in a specific location not carry biological markets from that area is my question to you....
Supply and demand problems have nothing to do with supply and demand as there is far more supply than there is demand. That is also very much established fact.
the Sun heating up ( as all the other planets are heating up aswell) and not with our wastefull and criminally run energy infrastructures.
We have obvious energy sources to fall back on but they would not be able to manipulate these so they do their best to prevent them from getting on the market.
As if sending people memo's will change closed minds who only work to protect their jobs and standing...
The factor wich is most important is not what it costs but the fact that every country could produce their own in the quantities they needed.
Originally posted by djohnsto77
I'm not talking about biological markers, I'm talking about carbon atom isotope ratios. The ratio of 12C to 13C is different in material from life than it is from nonliving natural sources, due to a bias for carbon-12 shown in many biological chemical processes.
[edit on 12/16/2005 by djohnsto77]