It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Oil is not of fossil origin and is inexhaustible

page: 7
87
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   


i didn't say petroleum alternative, i didn't say bio-diesel, i did not say alcohol. i did not say synthetic fuel, i don't want cooking oil, i don't want propane gas. i said to replicate petroleum as if they were sucked out of the ground. not viable? why not? it's making billionaires. do you understand?

Im sorry what do you mean by replicate?
Star trek?
You can not photocopy a molicule yet. Believe me there are billions of dollars being spent on research to acomplish just such a thing.
rearanging basic subatomic parcitle (protons neutrons and electrons) takes up HUGE amounts of energy.(Bigger than a nuke....bigger than the output of the sun if you want to make a mass production method)


Creating the same compounds using chemical reactions is possible and was described in the links in the previous post.
Like i said the problem is in mass production.




posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   
I have article which shown in one of Polish portals about Swedish scientist who made an experiments in crating of oil and find a proof that oil could be created under earth surface not form fossils. Here is polish version and my translation.

source
kopalniawiedzy.pl...



Ropy nie zabraknie? 14-09-2009 15:19 Vladimir Kucherov · paliwo · ropa naftowa · gaz ziemny · szczątki organiczne Naukowcy ze szwedzkiego Królewskiego Instytutu Technologii (KTH) udowodnili, że szczątki roślinne i zwierzęce nie są konieczne do powstania ropy naftowej i gazu ziemnego. To olbrzymi przełom, który z jednej strony oznacza, że złoża paliw kopalnych będzie łatwiej znaleźć, a z drugiej - że powinny znajdować się one dosłownie na całej planecie. Korzystając z naszych badań możemy powiedzieć, w którym miejscu w Szwecji znajdziemy ropę - mówi profesor Vladimir Kutcherov z KTH. Kutcherov wraz z dwójką współpracowników przeprowadzili symulację warunków, jakie panują we wnętrzu Ziemi. Udowodnili, że przy podwyższonych ciśnieniu i temperaturze tworzą się węglowodory, główny składnik paliw kopalnych. Zdaniem Kutcherova, to dowód, iż paliwa kopalne wystarczą jeszcze na bardzo, bardzo długo. Dodał, że nie jest też możliwe, by ropa, po wytworzeniu się, przesiąknęła na głębokość większą niż 10,5 kilometra. Nie ma najmniejszych wątpliwości, że nasze badania dowodzą, iż ropa naftowa i gaz ziemny powstają bez udziału szczątków organicznych. Każda skała może być rezerwuarem ropy - mówi profesor. Jego studium zwiększa też szanse na znalezienie ropy. Obecnie, po przeprowadzeniu wszelkich specjalistycznych badań szanse, że trafimy na złoże wynosi 20%. Teraz prawdopodobieństwo to wzrosło do 70%. To powinno znacznie zmniejszyć koszty wydobycia i, być może, będzie skutkowało mniejszymi cenami paliw. Kutcherov podzielił Ziemię siatką, wyznaczaną przez pęknięcia w poszczególnych warstwach skorupy ziemskiej. Te pęknięcia to, według niego, "kanały migracyjne". W miejscach, gdzie się spotykają, warto szukać ropy.


My translation


Oil would never end? 14-09-2009 15:19 Scientist from Swedish Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) proved that vegetable and animals debris are not necessary to create oil and natural gas. It’s a huge breakout which from one side means that beds of fossil fuels would be easier to find and from another side that it should to be placed on the whole earth. Using that researches we could confirm in which places in Sweden we find oil – says professor Vladimir Kutherov from HTH. Kutherov with two of his coworkers conduct simulation of conditions which obtain inside earth. They prove that in elevated pressure and temperature they are creating hydrocarbons, main component of fossil fuels. In Kutcherov opinion it is prove that fossil fuels will suffice for long long time. He added that it is not possible that oil after creating itself could permeated for depth greater than 10,5 kilometer. There is no question that our researches proves that oil and natural gas are creating without participation of fossils. Every rock could be a container of oil – says professor. His stadium grow the chance for finding oil. Currently after conduct all specialized researches the chances that we find Oil is 20%. Now it this probability rise to 70%. This should significantly decrease cost of possessing Oil what probably could take effect in lower prizes of fuels. Kutcherov divide earth using grid pointed by bursts in different layers of earth crust. This burst are in his opinion “migration canals”. In places where they come across it’s good to look for oil.


[edit on 17-11-2009 by odyseusz]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:06 AM
link   
I think the formation of oil does not come only from fossils, but anything organic, plants, wood, fruits, vegetables and so on. Anything that is bio degradable will go in to the soil and mix up. Anyone think of this in a funny way? Next time you eat something that has no meat like beans and you get gas think about the formation of oil. It may sound inappropriate but taking a dump near a tree in the woods represents the future of oil reserves.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by odyseusz
 


reply to post by odyseusz
 





Oil would never end? 14-09-2009 15:19 Scientist from Swedish Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) proved that vegetable and animals debris are not necessary to create oil and natural gas.



Hydrocarbons=compounds of carbon hydrogen and other elements like nitrogen and oxygen.
It IS very possible to create these compounds outside and by other processes apart from decomposing organic matter.
The fact of the matter is that most if not all of the oil on THIS planet has come from organic sources.
No one is saying that you can not produce oil in a factory. Yuo will STILL have to pay for it once you put it in your gas tank.
It will STILL dump toxic fumes in the air once you turn on your engine.
We are STILL using more oil than we can produce/dig out which is why the prices WILL keep rising. There is No conspiricy in supply and demand
The More you demand the More the supplies will cost. Evryone wants to make money.
There is no MAGIC inside the earth's crust that produces oil out of thin air.
you will ALWAYS need the basic components of hydrocarbon molicules namely carbon and hydrogen and their most abundant source is SURPRISE!! the carbon and hydrogen found in living beings like plants and animals which die and break down. Life has been on this planet for such a LONG time that most of the carbon on this planet has been part of a living organism at some point in time or will be in the future.
That is why the study of carbon and its compounds is called ORGANIC chemistry.

Oil is NOT unlimited. WE drink water and put it back in the earth. WE BURN OIL AND DO NOTHING TO REPLENISH ITS RESEARVS.
Even if the oil is being formed from some magical process other than breaking down of organic matter IT IS NOT GETTING REPLENISHED FAST ENOUGH

[edit on 17-11-2009 by raptorinvictus]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


Most of the fossil fuels DO come from decomposed and broken down plants. Infact more so than animals.
Plants can also be fossilised. Coal is nothing more that fossilised wood.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:34 AM
link   
reply to post by raptorinvictus
 

It only makes sence, nature is everywhere and everything will go in to the ground at some point. The sea has alot of deposits because there is more moisture where there is water for example and any sea life that dies gets absorbed faster in to the ground.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


Exactly!
You can not make something out of nothing.
Even the arcane arts have some form of equivilant exchange.
Most if not all the carbon on this planet is part of the biosphere and has been part of some living organism at some point.
Point is that for fossil fuels you need carbon which is obtained from breaking down of carbon based life forms. NOT some ''unknown'' process that is producing oil at the earth's core.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:14 AM
link   
Hi again !
It's now 2 in the afternoon here, I'm having a short break.
First of all :

Originally posted by Staafke


J'ai l'impression que depuis quelques temps cela devient une tendance et une sorte de "mode" que de vouloir trouver des complots partout où il peut en exister et plus particulièrement dans les faits scientifiques. Comme s'il fallait trouver le moyen de prouver que toute les recherches effectuées ces 100 dernières années n'étaient que pour mentir à la population.
C'est d'autant plus triste quand cela touche à des domaines que l'on pratique, j'ai moi même vu et effectué des analyses sur des systèmes pétroliers, c'est pour cela que toutes ces fausses informations m'énervent au plus au point.

I'll try to translate this as accurate as possible, because it's a very important thing you're saying


Translation of above quote:
I've come to the impression that, for some time now, it has become a tendency and a fashionable thing to search for conspiracies where possible, in particular on subjects where scientific facts are presented. Like someone has found a way to prove that all scientific research and facts presented for the past 100 years where only created to keep the population ignorant and in control. It's especially sad when you're a practicing scientist yourself and you've effectively worked on an analysis concerning petroleum systems. It's because of this that misinformation angers me so much.
End of translation



Thanks you very much for your translation it really gives the sense I wanted to.

Also :

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Solenki
 


OK, so if you agree that hydrocarbons/oil can arise from abiotic processes, then how can you assume that those processes don't occur at all on Earth?


I've never assumed that those processes didn't occur on Earth, read my messages again.

I'm glad to see that this thread came up to the top and I hope that we helped some people having a better view of petroleum and how it is formed.

Again, always talk with people, get out , see by yourself and learn from the people knowing.

I think we should more concentrate on how oil is sold and the oil market than how it's formed, for the moment, and I repeat, for the moment now, this is important.
About the other sources of oil, well maybe in 15 years we will be able to detect source of oil in the mantle and extract them, for the moment this is not so simple.

Finally, don't deny the books or education, that's what they want, don't convince yourself that education is controlled by TPTB as teachers are people just like you and me, with a brain, a moral and a life (at least here in europe
).
Thrust me, here it's not so simple to access to knowledge, the more it goes, the more they try to separate us from schools, I could give you a lot of examples of how in my country they try to dissuade the youngs from pushing further, they are rising a full generation of idiot and it's a pain in the ass to see that they manage to do so.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:18 AM
link   


One of the most dramatic images of the concept under discussion, and one which brings various of our motifs together in one place, is invoked by the Indic myth, from the Mahabharata and the Bhagavata Purana, concerning the production of amrita (or ambrosia). In brief the myth is this: In an effort to produce this divine nectar, both gods and demons used Mount Mandara as a churning stick. Winding the serpent Vasuki, also known as Ananta, around Mount Mandara, the gods (at one end) and the demons (at the other) grasped hold of Vasuki by the head and tail and, pulling him back and forth, were able to rotate Mount Mandara fast enough to whisk the sea into an ocean of milk from which amrita was produced.


www.kronia.com...

Surely, uneducated people will come up with a story like this one.

So will educated people, who don't know everything there is to know. Then, what they take as a fact, their own ignorance, creates flawed truth. Ignorance is not a "fact". If you find a corpse in a river, you don't say that river consists of corpses.

To get ant-acid (formic acid) you need to squeeze ants. Yep! It's true.

en.wikipedia.org...



In nature, it is found in the stings and bites of many insects of the order Hymenoptera, mainly ants and is also present in stinging nettles[citation needed]. It is also a significant combustion product resulting from alternative fueled vehicles burning methanol (and ethanol, if contaminated with water) when mixed with gasoline.[citation needed] Its name comes from the Latin word for ant, formica, referring to its early isolation by the distillation of ant bodies.


Perhaps in depth of the Earth something or someone (god) twists space and time and dead organisms, and creates oil for insatiable humanity to drink it as ambrosia. Then some utterly incomprehensible force induced by the drunkenness with ambrosia creates "mind oil" which is further on used as fuel for such futile activities as scientific apologies of the existing processes of churning which exist on cosmical level and which cannot be comprehended by self indulging human minds.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Look Sport,

I don’t judge anyone based on whether or not they have or don’t have a degree!
What I do base my judgement on is what they claim and what they actually can do – facta non verba Sport!

So when someone comes onto a thread stating that they have heavily “researched” a topic, I don’t expect a lot, as usually anyone who feels they have to pre-emptively edify themselves to the board, are doing so to loan support to their less-than-solid argument.

A good argument however, doesn’t need that kind of support. In your case, so far, I’ve seen no argument, and plenty of erroneous statements.

Now, on a more amicable note, I would like to thank Selahobed, andrewh7, raptorinvictus, Astyanax, aorAki, nydsdan and most of all Solenki, for their informed, and thoughtful contributions. These handful of people have given you insight in to a topic that most people are blissfully ignorant of.

I don’t know these people personally, but I can tell that they are speaking from an informed base of knowledge. For those who are contributing to this thread, and aren’t au fait with the Peak Oil issue, you have the rare opportunity to gain insight into a topic that represents one of the greatest challenges facing human civilization! This thread offers all the chance to tap into the wisdom of industry insiders – a chance that that most individuals outside of ATS circles won’t ever get!

As I’ve said repeatedly in posts, don’t just accept the information you read here – go out and research and verify it for yourselves. There are several great primers on peak oil – they can be found Here , Here , and Here

I would strongly recommend taking the time to read all of them, and for those that decide they want to delve deeper into the issue (and I hope that is everyone), I would recommend going to the home pages of these two sites: The Oil Drum; and Energy Bulletin.
Whilst both are aimed at those working in the oil industry and related fields, the lay person can nevertheless pick up a lot of valuable information with which to build upon.

I would like to point out too, that the opinions on the state of Peak Oil is wide and varied at both these sites, so there is a great opportunity to get a balanced view of the state of global oil supplies. Whilst there is a hell of a lot of information to plow through on both these sites, if you stick with it, you’ll hopefully come out the other end with an informed view of where the global ‘energy economy’ is heading.

For those of you who would also like some documentaries on the subject of Peak Oil, I can recommend the following (apologies for the absence of links to the documentaries, but I am fairly sure you will be able to view them on Youtube):
• ABC Catalyst - Real Oil Crisis - The Peak Oil Debate
• A Crude Awakening
• The End of OiL 2004 (Suburbia, Collapse of the American Dream)
• ABC Four Corners, Peak Oil 2006
• Four Corners Broadband Edition: Peak Oil
• Peak Oil Documentary on the BBC - A Farm for the Future


Apart from the sites and documentaries, I’d also recommend to anyone wanting to delve deeper to look at a White House commissioned report by the US Department of Energy in 2005. The commonly referred to ‘Hirsch report’ examined the time frame for the occurrence of peak oil, the necessary mitigating actions, and the likely impacts based on the timeliness of those actions Link to Wiki Overview of Hirsch Report

The main author of the report, Robert Hirsch, also appears in an interview on the Four Corners Peak Oil documentary mentioned above. It’s quite sobering to hear his prognosis for Global oil.

Once again, thanks to the many contributors to this thread. I hope that all who read this thread can gain some benefit from my post and come to their own conclusions after studying the above resources.

Cheers,
Matt

[edit on 17-11-2009 by mckyle]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ufoptics
....I just don't understand the academic mindset, you people think your so above the rest of us....


ufoptics, I don't think anyone here is denegrating non-tertiary, or non-academic individuals!

I apologies if I come across that way - it's not my intention.

What annoys me are the anti-academics who lambast anyone who tries to put forth an argument based on his/her research, or based on the studies of other academics. I find that on ATS, an anti-academic, or anti-intellectual stance is often a security blanket for those who somehow feel inferior for not having a degree!

Whilst I respect a person for applyiong themselves to the pursuit of knowledge through academic channels, I respect anyone who can synthesise relevant information and put forward a sound argument.

What I don't have time for are people who espouse their alleged credentials and don't deliver! Something that happens all too often on ATS.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by mckyle]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:40 AM
link   
This theory states in short that Oil on earth is Not produced from breaking down of organic materials and there is an unlimited supply.

First off: Like i said in my previous posts where does the raw material come from?
does the core of the planet have a huge supply of carbon oxygen and hydrogen because that is the ONLY way this claim can be validated. if that is tha case the earth is basicaly one big bomb.
Last time i checked the earth's core is largely formed of iron thus the magnetic feilds which make compasses work. (or maybe you would like to say that that the magnetic field is formed because of a spell merlin casted)

Second: The whole idea that the supply is unlimited is prepostrous.
there is no such thing as an unlimited supply. Matter like energy can not be created but only can change from one form to an other.
Its the law of thermodynamics. You can not create something from nothing.
Even if there is an alternative process of naturally producing crude oil from random materials it is far too slow otherwise the whole planet would be one big bag of oil.
Thire: there is no point WHATSOEVER in claiming oh there is no dna therefore it could not be organic.
That is like writing an essay on paper. burning the said paper crushing it mixing it with glue putting it in a fusion reactor and compressing it till you get lead than alchimacaly turning it to gold with the philosopher's stone then claiming that that the essay never existed because you can not find proof that it ever did.

AND LASTLY: This does not solve any problems like pollution and high prices of fues because nomatter how you make the oil burning it will give you smoke and if you sell it you will make money of it. The more the demand the higher the prices.
Sorry to bust your bubble mate but you are looking for a conspiricy where there is none. there is a term for this: Paranoia!!!



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by raptorinvictus
Sorry to bust your bubble mate but you are looking for a conspiricy where there is none. there is a term for this: Paranoia!!!


Couldn't agree with you more mate


And with this particular issue, the fallacy/fantasy of unlimited oil is a dangerous one to perpetuate!

The public need to know NOW that we are facing an imminent energy crisis hitherto unseen by human civilisation, and there are no practical solutions on the horizon!! It's as simple, and sobeiring as that!

[edit on 17-11-2009 by mckyle]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by polar
 


Wow Polar, did you see the way that guy went for your juggulars!?

Debate is an amazing thing. After 2000 years we still have this argument about Jesus. My point is that no matter where you go there seems to be two different ways of taking ANYTHING.

Polars post was very long (granted it wasnt his writing). But just look at some of the stuff in there. For me the one about Saddam threatening to flood the market hit home. I was on the front lines of that invasion. There were no WMD's, not just our chemical/bio specialists were saying it, they were saying CIA was saying it too when we got to Baghdad (Not to mention what happened to United Nations Biological/Chemical weapons expert David Kelly ___there were no prints on the knife___ yet they called it suicide... when it happened next to a sidewalk.).

Now lets take a look at these so calleg Geologists like the one that attacked you. Their field is super sensitive. Can you imagine what kind of big brother stuff is going on with their education? Talk about concentrated brainwashing, there you go. Honestly, I do believe our scientists are tricked, and lied to about a lot of things. I believe the ones that 'wake up' get dealt with.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Solenki
 

Yay Solenki!
But (and I honestly don't mean to be snarky) you really need to work on your grammar. Your message will be so much more effective if you take the time to copy edit your work.
Your post reads like a hastily scribbled rant. So, even though its right on target, the haphazard writing and grammar detract from your ideas, and this site really, really needs thoughtful, smart, skeptical voices,
Just a thought,
the hopeful skeptic
KGE



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daniem
I have a friend whos father works offshore in Norway. He laughed his arse off when i asked about this stuff, if we're out of oil in a few years.

He told me its just something the bosses or whoever say, there is enough oil down there to last, if not for ever, a LOOONG time.


Well, if that father of your friend really did respond in that way, then my guess is the sum total of his "offshore" experience is flipping eggs for the drill crews and geologists.

There is indeed lots of oil still in the ground, but that has little to do with the problems facing the world now. Access to easy oil is the problem. And it's becoming a bigger problem year after year. But this concept is lost on most people who, like you friend's dad, laugh because they fail to understand the essence of Peak Oil and global energy supply.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by mckyle]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by kenochs
reply to post by Solenki
 

Yay Solenki!
But (and I honestly don't mean to be snarky) you really need to work on your grammar. Your message will be so much more effective if you take the time to copy edit your work.
Your post reads like a hastily scribbled rant. So, even though its right on target, the haphazard writing and grammar detract from your ideas, and this site really, really needs thoughtful, smart, skeptical voices,
Just a thought,
the hopeful skeptic
KGE


Considering Solenki is a French native with English as his second language, I think he is doing a damn fine job of explaining a complex issue.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Solenki
 


Thank you Solenki. I was about to give up on the state of American science education.As a PhD Chemist, I want to scream when I hear some uneducated "expert" declaim that prtroleum cannot be a fossil fuel because it is a hydrocarbon and other hydrocarbons have been found in abiotic environments. My God folks, what do you think a hydrocarbon is? It is merely a chemical binding of hydrogen, the most abundant element in the universe, and carbon, which while not as abundant is easily synthesized by fusing hydrogen, helium, lithium, etc., and which binds easily with hydrogen because of its particular atomic structure, i. e., four valence electrons just dying to hook up with a lonely single e-, like hydrogen has.I spent four years in general analytical chemistry in undergrad school, another 2 plus in grad school doing physical chemistry, and another three getting a doctorate in analytical (forensic) chemistry. I don't need some self aggrandizing Baptist fraud to educate me in the makeup and source of hydrocarbons. I can take a drop, put it in my GC-MS (gas chromatograph - mass spectrometer) or x-ray backscatter analyzer and know what it is, and isn't.
Please, please, folks, sign up for a beginning chemistry class at your local community college or tech school. Ignorance is more contagious than H1N1, and ultimately more pernicious.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chastral
reply to post by polar
 


... Talk about concentrated brainwashing, there you go. Honestly, I do believe our scientists are tricked, and lied to about a lot of things.


Talk about ignorance and embarrassingly idiotic comments.....



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:37 AM
link   
We as a species are on the leading edge of expansion every second of every day, zooming out into the far reaches of the universe at 40,000 miles a second.

We have only discovered this energy source in the last 150 yrs. of our existence. That is a micro second in the scheme of things.

It seems as if all the arguments/debates here are all under the assumption that this is the only source of energy we will ever use or need. As we progress in our knowledge, we will undoubtedly find alternative sources of energy that will be far superior to crude oil. As we bicker about it being fossil or non-fossil, we waste valuable energy and knowledge.

Wouldn't it be more prudent to focus on the solution...i.e., the end of fossil fuels...and not the problem?

There may very well be an energy source waiting in the wings, as yet undiscovered, that will supply us with all the energy we will ever need.

Shouldn't we be focused on that instead of who does or doesn't have a degree or phd?

just my $78.00 a barrel worth......

peas



new topics

top topics



 
87
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join