It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

"Abiotic" oil? Seeking intelligent dialogue...

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 12:27 PM
Some time ago, I was talking to a younger fella that came from India, whos family owned a gas station, to the U.S.. He explained that petroleum was in fact the byproduct of the "creation of magma", and that we have been "ill-informed". I was quite stunned actually, and had to research this for myself. I really couldnt find anything on the internet yet as it was still relatively new. As I was reading a different thread, I thought about checking again, so I did. While, I cannot
vouch for the credilbility of this website, it appears that it contains more coroberating evidence to substantiate this theory. ( I hope this is a "link").
A little exerpt will follow if I "upload it correctly.

Abiotic Oil
Addressing the theory in circulation that oil is not solely of organic origin, but that there may be another mode of origin as well from deeper in the crust, involving magma.

See also Peak Oil

Sterling's Preface:
There is a substantial body of evidence to support this theory. That does not negate, however, the quest for getting away from dependence on fossil fuels. The greenhouse gasses produced by the burning of such will continue to be a pressing matter that must be addressed. Now that the world has achieved a consciousness about how we treat our planet, this news that we are not so far from depleting our oil reserves is a welcome breath of fresh air, removing some of the panic effect that can foster unrest.

Supporting Evidence, Briefly
Oil being discovered at 30,000 feet, far below the 18,000 feet where organic matter is no longer found.
Wells pumped dry later replenished.
Volume of oil pumped thus far not accountable from organic material alone according to present models.
In Situ production of methane under the conditions that exist in the Earth's upper mantle. (PhysicsWeb; Sept. 14, 2004)

edit on 1-3-2011 by flashcube because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 12:34 PM
I've heard this theory quite a bit. Usually being labeled as pseudo science. Can't really form an opinion on it as of yet, but here's hoping people who understand this theory speak up and start a dialog.

If this is true, and I'm not saying it is or isn't, doesn't this throw the entire oil system on it's back? I mean, the reason oil and gas is so expensive is because it's costly to get at, and there's a limited supply.

Peak oil, peak oil, peak oil. Jump on the wayback machine to the 80s or 90s and you'll hear that a lot.

Now, on the other side of that coin, if it isn't true, what's the purpose other than relaxing restrictions on use of oil? i mean we're told we're close to the end and need to conserve, but these people say there is no end, endless oil, so burn burn burn.

I have some questions about the "evidence":

Wells pumped dry later replenished.

what wells? Where? how much? how long?

think about this, oil companies spend billions drilling wells then leaving them once they are dried up. If, in fact, the well refills, they need only every drill 1 well.

I can go to Texas, throw a rock, and hit an empty abandoned well. Hell in the gulf of Mexico alone there are hundreds of 'dead' wells.

I'm so on the fence about this it hurts.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 01:00 PM
I've been thinking of posting on this subject, so I'll cover briefly a few things that should make it more than obvious to anyone that oil does not come from fossils....

What is the deepest fossil ever found?

The 195-210-million-year-old specimen was found 2.3km (1.4 miles) below the floor of the North Sea by an offshore oil drilling platform.


What is the deepest oil has been found?

In September 2009, the rig (Deepwater Horizon) drilled the deepest oil well in history at a vertical depth of 35,050 ft (10,683 m) and measured depth of 35,055 ft (10,685 m)[9] in the Tiber field at Keathley Canyon block 102, approximately 250 miles (400 km) southeast of Houston, in 4,132 feet (1,259 m) of water.


Are we really that stupid to believe that close to a BILLION years ago that there was enough life (animals and plants) to create all of that oil? We can't even find anything in the fossil record that old, but there seems to be plenty of oil to say that there was lots of life back then that turned into oil.... PLEASE.

There are also plenty of stories of oil wells that were run dry and eventually "refilled" in a very short time geologically speaking.

It's a scam... if you wanted to be able to control and manipulate the price of something, you first have to make people believe that there is a limited amount of it. What better way than to say it comes from an extinct form of life that can't be verified today to find out how much existed back then.... then, you build an empire on top of said oil, making every single human being completely dependent on something that you can say "can't be created, can only be found". Fast forward to today, and look around you.

Fossil fuel is a myth. I hope people wake up and realize it before it's too late.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 01:01 PM
reply to post by phishyblankwaters

Thanks so much "phishy", for responding in a "respectfull" and generous way. I thought the first reply would certainly be someone bashing the theory or the source. I am still actually going over some of the material on the website, and quite frankly, its comforting to know that this is slowly trickling out into the mainstream.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 01:05 PM
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne

GREAT! Thankyou for sharing this. I have so much to read now. Its all about doing the best you can do, to form a truly educated opinion. In the end, even if its all true, this particular "knowledge", in our hands, weilds no "power".

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:54 PM

what wells? Where? how much? how long?

A good example of this is the Ixtoc well in the Gulf of Mexico. It was also the site of the first oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. I believe it was around '71. I can't remember the name of the scientist that worked on the Ixtoc spill but he said that oil was formed from decaying Bohrium and Thorium that fell from meteors. Aprox. 67 million years ago a meteor struck the Gulf and now we are finding that the Gulf is most likely the largest reserve on the planet.

Another instance that leads me to believe that oil is abiotic is the symptoms that clean up workers suffered from after the Exxon Valdez spill. Most of the symptoms are consistent with radation exposure.

Ixtoc or toxic

Ps - this is my first ATS post!
edit on 1-3-2011 by kip27 because: wrong quote

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:22 PM
reply to post by kip27

Welcome to ATS. Thankyou for choosing my first thread, to post your first reply. The questions you asked and ideas you have are not new. With some due diligence, you will seek what you search for.
Yes there are "abandoned" wells, all over the place, but putting yourself in their(big OIL) shoes, by keeping wells shut down, they are limiting the supply, therefore they have the power to keep prices elevated, based on a false perception, that the demand is out weighing supply.
I appreciate the fact that you mentioned that you are "on the fence" though, I feel your genuine in your concerns. I too, am still om the fence about this, but I am kkeping in mind that oil can be produced, or "forms, in a variety of ways.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 05:28 PM
I think the "fossil fuel" theory was thrown out the window when NASA found hydrocarbons on Saturn's moon Titan

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 07:07 PM
reply to post by leemachino

I must agree..."lee"! There was another thread that mentioned a possible ancient volcanic chain underneath Ohio, Illinois, and Missouri. I just read an article stating they discovered more oil in Vigo county Indiana. I guess, countrymark is doing the exploration and recovery on it. Here, hopefully is a "link" to the find.

Also... another thread mentioned 82 degree water @ 2900 feet deep underneath Terre Haute. Just thought Id mention it.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:00 PM
Wells pumped dry later replenished.?!

In many cases where this has happened the oil is thick or the oil deposit has other deposits below it.

bad practises like perforating in multiple layers can cause oil from one layer to migrate to the other pumped out layers.

In thick oil fields steam/water flooding and/or solvent flooding on one part of a field may cause increased flow in other parts of the field years later.

They may also cause increased flow in other oil layers if there are wells perforated in multiple oil layers.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:24 PM

Originally posted by ANNED
Wells pumped dry later replenished.?!

In many cases where this has happened the oil is thick or the oil deposit has other deposits below it.

bad practises like perforating in multiple layers can cause oil from one layer to migrate to the other pumped out layers.

In thick oil fields steam/water flooding and/or solvent flooding on one part of a field may cause increased flow in other parts of the field years later.

They may also cause increased flow in other oil layers if there are wells perforated in multiple oil layers.

Thankyou for your insight. I find this all very interesting.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:01 PM
Allow me to quote myself from a thread back in '04.

Originally posted by makeitso

Here is the PNAS information. Dated 2002.
PNAS The genesis of hydrocarbons and the origin of petroleum

Conclusions from the PNAS: The pressure of 30 kbar, at which the theoretical analyses of section 4 predicts that the Hydrocarbon system must evolve ethane and heavier hydrocarbon compounds, corresponds to a depth of more than 100 km. The results of the theoretical analysis shown in Fig. 2 clearly establish that the evolution of the molecular components of natural petroleum occur at depth at least as great as those of the mantle of the Earth, as shown graphically in Fig. 4, in which are represented the thermal and pressure lapse rates in the depths of the Earth.

Here is the followup testing (Again) Dated 9-2004
Physicsweb - Petroleum under pressure

Scientists in the US have witnessed the production of methane under the conditions that exist in the Earth's upper mantle for the first time. The experiments demonstrate that hydrocarbons could be formed inside the Earth via simple inorganic reactions -- and not just from the decomposition of living organisms as conventionally assumed -- and might therefore be more plentiful than previously thought.

And the PNAS for it:
Generation of methane in the Earth's mantle: In situ high pressure?temperature measurements of carbonate reduction

Conclusions: The study demonstrates the existence of abiogenic pathways for the formation of hydrocarbons in the Earth's interior and suggests that the hydrocarbon budget of the bulk Earth may be larger than conventionally assumed. The wide pressure?temperature?composition stability field of methane documented here has broad implications for the hydrocarbon budget of the planet and indicates that methane may be a more prevalent carbon-bearing phase in the mantle than previously thought, with implications for the deep hot biosphere (25). In particular, isotopic evidence indicating the prevalence of biogenic hydrocarbons pertains to economically exploited hydrocarbon gas reservoirs, largely in sedimentary basins (2); these observations and analyses do not rule out the potential for large abiogenic reservoirs in the mantle. Moreover, the assumption that CO2 is the sole carrier of mantle-derived noble gasses (26, 27) should be reevaluated. Finally, the potential may exist for the high-pressure formation of heavier hydrocarbons by using mantle-generated methane as a precursor.

From the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Dated 1999
Abiogenic methane formation and isotopic fractionation under hydrothermal conditions

These results, combined with the increasing recognition of nickel-iron alloy occurrence in oceanic crusts, suggest that abiogenic methane may be more widespread than previously thought.

Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Nagoya University, Japan. Dated 1994.
Mantle hydrocarbons: abiotic or biotic?

Analyses of 227 rocks from fifty localities throughout the world showed that mantle derived rocks such as tectonized peridotites in ophiolite sequences (tectonites) arid peridotite xenoliths in alkali basalts contain heavier hydrocarbons (n-alkanes), whereas igneous rocks produced by magmas such as gabbro arid granite lack them. The occurrence of hydrocarbons indicates that they were not derived either from laboratory contamination or from held contamination; these compounds found in the mantle-derived rocks are called here "mantle hydrocarbons."

It appears that hydrocarbons may survive high pressures and temperatures in the mantle, but they are decomposed into lighter hydrocarbon gases such as CH4 at lower pressures when magmas intrude into the crust; consequently, peridotite cumulates do not contain heavier hydrocarbons but possess hydrocarbon gases up to C4H10.

ATS Abiotic Threads

Google Mantle Hydrocarbons
edit on 3/1/11 by makeitso because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:06 PM
The reactions were perfected by Germany during WW2:
Coal Liquifaction

See also: Synthetic Fuel

These reactions mimic what happens in the Earth's mantle: carbon and hydrogen (from water) react in the presence of an iron catalyst to produce crude oil, CO2 and natural gas.

Abiogenic oil happens on every planet where temperature, pressure, and chemical composition permit the reaction.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:09 PM
reply to post by flashcube

i always enjoy the abiotic theory threads. if its true, it would be a secret corporations would kill for. it wasn't too long ago that scientists were able to prove that hydrocarbon chains (methane) could be created without organic materiel. a world where petroleum is constantly created in the earth's core. if you could prove this theory true, you would be killed within 24 hrs. its a theory which no country or oil company would permit to ever be made public.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:59 PM
reply to post by Lawgiver

Ohhhh soooo true! "Law", thankyou for replying to my thread. I'm glad a couple people are interested in this, even though its "fanciful" thinking. After making some observations over the last few years, I have found it most "comfortable" to only expect 10 percent of what they tell us is true. I call it my personal 10% rule. Going by that, we have at least ten times the amount of oil they tell us that they have and are aware of.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:55 AM
there were threads a number of years ago regarding this. it would be fair to say if it is the case, then those that control the supply would want to keep it under wraps. if it was found to be the case, the price per barrel would plummet instantly. a glut of oil would not be good for profit margins.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:45 AM
reply to post by phishyblankwaters

Actually there are over 20,000 platforms in the gulf of mexico and many of them have multiple wells. I have heard for years that the gulf will run out of oil but their still pumping and searching. As a matter of fact the guys I work with have also been hearing that for over 30 years and their still pumping. Also it is a fact about wells that were once dry filling up again and producing oil because I for one have seen it.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:54 AM
yeah when i was younger I read an article that said by 2010 we would have no oil left. Any way just thought i'd add that before I did an oil change on my car.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 07:39 AM
reply to post by jamgar28

And that's why I asked. i'm not dismissing this at all, i have no opinion on it yet all I've heard is second hand information. I'm just wondering why, if these wells refill, are they drilling new wells and abandoning the old ones? Part of a cover up possibly?

I'll have to take some time to go through some of the info provided by other posters

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 07:47 AM
reply to post by kip27

Another instance that leads me to believe that oil is abiotic is the symptoms that clean up workers suffered from after the Exxon Valdez spill. Most of the symptoms are consistent with radation exposure.

hmm not so sure of that, a lot of the illnesses after the Exxon cleanup can be traced back to Corexit, and I believe was one of the factors in getting it banned.

As well, oil from deep depths isn't just oil, it's oil, methane, and other contaminants. anything coming from that far down is potentially radioactive. This is something that really concerned me while watching the initial reports from the Gulf as people were handling this stuff with their bare hands and are almost assured to get some type of cancer.

Oil being radioactive doesn't mean it wasn't created from organic matter. With that, organic matter does indeed produce fossil fuels as we've learned through science, that has never been in question. The thing in question is if this is the ONLY method of creation and it appears that it is not.

The oil companies would kill to keep this type of information out of the public, or barring that, discredit it beyond belief. We had fully electric cars in the 90s, now gone, all you can get is hybrids and a few token electrics that are nothing near what they should be. ("who killed the electric car?" watch it). Was it stan meyers? I can't think of his name now, but the dude who created the car that ran on water, dead, never came to market. Various people and companies have apparently developed cheap, safe, and easy methods of pulling hydrogen from normal tapwater to make hydrogen fuel cells that are safe and cheap (actual hydrogen as we get it now was never a feasible fuel). Whenever they make headway, the government or big oil buys it up.

There are plenty of reasons to think they are keeping this from us.

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in