Massive oil supply under antarctica?

I was thinking about it the other day.....shouldnt there be a crapload of oil under antarctica? I mean it was once a bustling jungle with all this wild life, so wouldnt that give way for a huge store of oil for the taking. Just a thought, but what do you guys think.

Considering Antarctica is 98% ice... I highly think not.

A layer of ice up to two miles thick covers a continent, I seriously doubt that there is anything there besides ice and water, and a couple of bottom dwellers.

Even though there is land below the ice cap, I don't think that oil would be found.

There probably is oil under Antarctica, but extracting it would not be easy or cheap. It would be difficult (though not impossible) to keep the oil exploration and drilling teams alive in such a climate. And once you get the oil to the surface, what then? A pipeline would need to be built to the coast, and once there, a major port would have to be built. None of that infrastructure exists right now and it would costs billions of dollars to build it. It can certainly be done, but again, it'll be difficult in more ways than one and possibly not economically viable at current prices.

One other potential problem could be international law. I'm not sure what's on the books regarding Antarctica, but there may or may not be treaties prohibiting any economic development on the continent.

As I suspected, the resources are there, but there are international treaties that prevent them from being developed:

www.eia.doe.gov...

even if we eventually found there was oil under antarctica we need to not use it because it would add to the heating of the earth already melting the ice caps

There's a lot of oil in a lot of places. The Gulf of Mexico - we're prohibited from drilling because Florida doesn't want to see ghastly rigs on it's pretty horizon. There is loads of oil where the Mississippi dumps. Mexico has loads of oil, but the damned place is so corrupt, they can't drill it. They did drill ONE well recently, and it TRIPLED their reserves. There are also large resources in South America, and Alaska that are as yet untouched.
There are probably a lot of old deposits, like under Antarctica, from even back to Panagea times. But, the depth of the resources makes them cost-prohibitive. Besides, I think because of the ice, seismic signatures would be a problem for finding oil. You can't just blindly drill around the place, hoping to hit the jackpot.

Originally posted by truttseeker
I was thinking about it the other day.....shouldnt there be a crapload of oil under antarctica? I mean it was once a bustling jungle with all this wild life, so wouldnt that give way for a huge store of oil for the taking. Just a thought, but what do you guys think.

I think oil is not formed from thousands of dead dinosaurs, nor from rotting forests that were suddenly covered by mud/liquid.

I believe the abiotic theory for the origins of oil is correct - but it is certainly not in the interests of oil companies for this to be widely accepted and taught. Russia uses this theory to find oil, and that is why it is not dependent anymore on external sources.

They have indeed found evidence of large forests and fossils of dinosaurs there though, so we know it wasn't always an ice-covered continent.

Duncan

Well, when it was Pangaea, it was well below the arctic circle.
I have no idea what the temperatures were like 220 million years ago, but they could be warmer than now. Not just that, I have no idea about the plants of the time, either. They could have loved a colder climate.
I'm still reading up about abiotic oil. It's interesting theory, but I don't see why oil business in the West hasn't tried it out yet. You would have thought they would have been all over it.

reply to post by nexusmagazine

Abiotic Oil, dream on dude, better yet ask the tooth fairy about it. There are 600 billion barrels of Oil in Anatarctica, mostly in the Eastern section. If you want ot get to it, tunnel through the ice and avoid the suface. Last great reserve on the planet. Get it before you go bust. Peak Oil will kill most of you in the end if you don't get moving.

perhaps after global warming really heats up and melts the ice caps, antarctica will become a livable place and then we can pump out all the oil and start burning even more fossil fuels!

A better chance is Greenland.

It was once green as the Norsemen or Danes or Vikings once
talked about.

So a dinosaur resting place for sure.

However most dinosaur bones are fond in dusty dried out lands.
And so is oil.

So lets hope for global warming to hits Greenland big time.
After all the ice the land is prime of oil rigs.

Come on people, stop be "repeaters" and just parroting the standard party line. It's quite obvious that oil is EVERYWHERE on the planet, though it may not be close to the surface and thereby easily extractable. The largest supplies are below the 30,000 foot mark, and it's quite clear that "those in the know" realize that oil DOES NOT come from dinosaurs! LOL! Do you really think there were that many beasts on the earth? And how did they get out in the middle of the ocean, where there are also VAST oil deposits. The problem is not that oil is not EVERYWHERE, but rather how far down it is, and how expensive it is to get out. Read up more on the ABIOTIC source of oil, and stop believing what the purveyors of the BLUE PILL want you to believe.

Who ever said cause there is ice = no oil you guys are stupid Antarctica is believed to have more oil stored than any other area in the world and yes it would cost a lil to get some approx 50 dollar per barrel to ship, mine and extract Also the ATS treaty will not allow any digging for oil and coal
The illegal capture and sale of the Patagonian toothfish has led to several arrests. Pictured here is the Antarctic toothfish, a sister species.

Although coal, hydrocarbons, iron ore, platinum, copper, chromium, nickel, gold have been found it is not enough to break this treaty so hope answerd your question a

P>S dont kill the penguins there ! lol =D

Oil under Antarctica.

Might as well be on the moon.

Yes there could be oil under Antarctica
the earth was about 10 to 15 degrees warmer 200 to 300 million years ago.

The earth only cooled down to what it is now less then 3 million years ago.
www.globalwarmingart.com...:65_Myr_Climate_Change_Rev_png
anthropology.si.edu...

I believe the abiotic theory for the origins of oil is correct - but it is certainly not in the interests of oil companies for this to be widely accepted and taught. Russia uses this theory to find oil, and that is why it is not dependent anymore on external sources.

Not entirely true.
Russia does claim to have extracted abiotic oil, but it's 8 major oil and gas fields are all biotic in origin.
Here's a link to a thread where I list them:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Abiotic oil, although it does exist, may not be abundant, and more likely, will not be drillable because of temperatures and depth - that's if it can even be found.
As for the oil companies not wanting people to know, that's nonsense. If they could drill resources of abiotic oil, they would be drilling it, pure and simple. Abiotic oil still costs money to drill, and still makes huge profits for the oil companies. There is no conspiracy here.

edit: Russia never was reliant on external sources!!!
Russia holds the world's largest natural gas reserves, the second largest coal reserves, and the eighth largest oil reserves. Russia is also the world's largest exporter of natural gas, the second largest oil exporter and the third largest energy consumer.

[edit on 11-12-2008 by cruzion]

Any evidence of palm trees on Antarctica?
The rest of the world seems to have evidence of an equatorial climate
at one time. Thus oil is possible under layers of earth.
Vegetation in this case being the source of oil.

I just reviewed a Velakovsky video and earth movement among
the ancients and before recorded history seems appropriately earth
shaping in many ways.

I don't recall oil dripping from the skies but the pole shifts seem
doable. A pole once being at the equator seems not in the cards.
Some how the lands of vegetation and animal life got flooded and iced
over while other areas got dried out.

reply to post by cruzion


Isn't Russia selling oil from other producers neglecting to burn off
their own reserves.

Russia might be on the receiving end of oil or gas pipelines from Iran,
Afghanistan and almost any country in that region.
Selling to North Korea at least.

Oil cartels are always accused of blocking Tesla inventions an perhaps
this is true as some may be very explosive generating too much current.
A cubic centimeter of radium has been mentioned as powering the
fictitious car Tesla drove in Canada. Interesting as Tesla once said
he could make radium. That device is locked away in Los Alamos
perhaps and powering strange flying devices.

A pole shift is magnetic, not physical.
The cause of glaciation and inter-glacial periods are the Milankovitch cycles.
Lithospheric plates (continents) move about the surface of the planet, because they are on top of plastic-like rock, and there are convection currents within the asthenosphere/upper mantle.
As I said, Russia is the #8 exporter of oil.
Oil is produced from organic life - mainly fossilized marine life from shallow oceans.
Don't rely on Veliskovsky for accurate information.

You all know, whenever anyone speaks of oil, they should always start it with....for example..the thread title should say.."Massive oil drug IV supply under Antarctica".

I mean literally, everyone talking about oil all sound like drug addicts talking about some new from of pot or meth or coke, and then actually some get defensive and rediculous, it mimicks the reactions exactly like drug addicts.

All those so called supplies found under Antarctica, the gulf, in Russia, under the bed, in the sewer, whatever, are NOT going to solve anything because those supplies will run out 10 times faster with the exponential world wide population growth and the fact that those supplies are just like the current ones, they will run dry.

So why is all this focus and effort pointed at a solution that is no solution but just adding another problem to an already exsisting problem that only gets prolonged with another problem????

None of you make any sense at all, nor does the energy department, or the goverment, or politicians who are all in the back pockets of big oil, and everyone knows, the only ones to benefit from oil are OPEC and big oil companies.

Again, sounding like addicts so hooked on the oil tit IV that it is all folks can talk about, and not even recognize that continuing to use depletion resources doesnt solve anything, it only prolongs the problems for your kids and their kids to deal with. Nice thing to leave your own kids and your grand kids with...goes to show how much people care for their future off spring to carry on.

There are hydrogen cars TODAY. There are hydrogen power generation units TODAY. There are practical was TODAY to get off the oil drug IV and oil tit of OPEC TODAY.

Why arent any of you demanding this? Why is everyone so addicted to the oil drug IV and cant even look at the permanent solution that is available TODAY, and demand it from the leadership and industry TODAY!

There is more than a supply problem people.

1. There is not enough refineries to process the current demands with the current supply source, so adding more source wont solve the lack of refining ability.

2. To meet the demand curve, which remember, grows exponentially every 6 months, those refineries would have to be built and completed every 3 months for the next 10 years just to be barely behind the growth demand curve.

3. During all this time, those new supply sources wont even be able to begin delivery in the quantities necessary to meet that demand curve within the first 10 years.

4. By the time 10 years goes by, the growth and demand curve will have already exceeded the "dreamland" expectations out of these new finds, and we will be right back where we started all over again.

It doesnt take nuclear science or a slide rule to clearly see how we went from the 70's crisis to today's crisis, and will repeat that same result, like we are in today, in the next 20 years and then what?

Isnt it better to go with a permanent, and practical, and readily available solution than to continue to do the same thing that got us here in the first place..no take that back..for the 2nd time again?

Why should the US provide trillions of dollars to OPEC over an energy source they already know will go dry, and they are already well ahead of the US in moving to the next resource..hydrogen!!!

Will we have to depend on others for hydrogen energy when on both coasts we are surrounded by vast oceans of that hyrogen source?!!

Is this nation just a forever consuming baby that desperately needs to be sucking a oil tit and never grow up to provide for itself????

There are permanent solutions to this energy problem right now, and will make this nation completely energy independant right now, and give all of us the ability to have nice huge vehicles that are green, made right here in America, powered by American energy that is renewable, and brings back the much needed jobs to industry right here in America.

Again, all those antiquated 1800's ways of powering the world is a relic and will only prolong the current problems for your kids, grandkids and great grandkids to have to deal with.

Do you want to leave that kind of future for them?

That is exactly what will happen.

The first oil crunch got left by those who today are our great grand-generations ago, here you are, dealing with it. Now put yourself in the shoes of your kids, their kids and the kids' kids and they will be right where we are today. THAT is what you will find in those oil drug IV supplies under the Antarctic.

Make the demand for REAL, practical and available change now, and get off that addiction America!!!!


Cheers!!!!