"Abiotic" oil? Seeking intelligent dialogue...

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
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

I would guess that not all of them do refill, and the ones that do take a long time. So it would be a gamble on which one to expect to refill, and then you would play a waiting game.

I find this whole subject fascinating! Over the years I have done a tad of research here and there about it, always seeming to find pretty much the same info. It's proven hydrocarbons can come from biological as well as non-biological sources, so I don't see why this ides is looked down upon by mainstream science.

A question I have, how could we ever prove if a given well is full of fossil oil or abiotic oil? The whole thing seems rather mysterious but I would be interested in any addition info that comes out.

S&F!

reply to post by flashcube


There are so called "asphalt" volcanoes.

There is also this:

The oil and gas that fuels our homes and cars started out as living organisms that died, were compressed, and heated under heavy layers of sediments in the Earth's crust. Scientists have debated for years whether some of these hydrocarbons could also have been created deeper in the Earth and formed without organic matter. Now for the first time, scientists have found that ethane and heavier hydrocarbons can be synthesized under the pressure-temperature conditions of the upper mantle —the layer of Earth under the crust and on top of the core. The research was conducted by scientists at the Carnegie Institution's Geophysical Laboratory, with colleagues from Russia and Sweden, and is published in the July 26, advanced on-line issue of Nature Geoscience....
www.physorg.com...

But now the link no longer works

Think about it.

How can the Elite like the Rockefeller control us and charge huge prices for oil and scare us into poverty with things like "Peak Oil" and the "population explosion" If science proves they are LYING!

Look what happen with Nuclear!

Energy is a prime requirement for civilization. Any where from animal muscle power to oil we depend on energy. We have had the solution for PEAK oil since the 1950's!

If you do a bit of poking around you find the Rockefellers aka Standard oil, funded a lot of the research on the medical problems from radiation poisoning. Also SOMEONE funded all those nuclear protesters here in the USA A Want Ad I saw in the 1985 Boston Globe said "Nuclear Protesters $10/hour"

The result: Everyone is scared to death of Nuclear especially the long term storage problems.

Again do a bit of poking around we find:

In the 1950s and 1960s, U.S. scientists ignored thorium, and went with uranium because uranium produces plutonium the key ingredient in nuclear bombs. Link

The Basics
.... This thorium fuel cycle carries with it a number of important natural properties some of which contrast sharply with the uranium fuel cycle:

-At no point in the thorium cycle – from mining to waste – can fuel or waste products be used as bomb material in any way;

-The thorium fuel cycle is inherently incapable of causing a meltdown according to the laws of physics; in nuclear reactor parlance, the fuel is said to contain passive safety features;

-Thorium-based fuels do not require conversion or enrichment – two essential phases of the uranium fuel cycle that are exceedingly expensive, and create proliferation risk;

-Thorium fuel cycle waste material consists mostly of 233-uranium, which can be recycled as fuel (with minor actinide content decreased 90-100%, and with plutonium content eliminated entirely);
-Thorium-based fuels are significantly energy efficient;

-Thorium fuel cycle waste material is radiotoxic for tens of years, as opposed to the thousands of years with today’s standard radioactive waste;

-Thorium fuel designs exist today that can be used in all existing nuclear reactors;

-Thorium exists in greater abundance and higher concentrations than uranium making it much less expensive and environmentally-unobtrusive to mine;


These facts have many serious implications for the efficiency and security of energy delivery in the United States, and the world. SOURCE

A Chronology of Nuclear History

Reintroducing Thorium: Chem & Eng News

I found another link that does work: geology.com...

...These conditions mimic those found 40 to 95 miles deep inside the Earth. The methane reacted and formed ethane, propane, butane, molecular hydrogen, and graphite. The scientists then subjected ethane to the same conditions and it produced methane. The transformations suggest heavier hydrocarbons could exist deep down....

reply to post by Chakotay

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.

Actually I was thinking about all the PLASTICS manufacturers I worked for. We manipulate molecules of Carbon and Hydrogen and make very long chains through chemical reactions called polymerization. If mankind can do it easily and cheaply enough to form any different types of plastics and the EARTH can form DIAMONDS out of pure carbon, the idea of abiogenic oil is not hard to swallow.

...The ethene molecule (known almost universally by its common name ethylene) C2H4 is CH2=CH2

...Polyethylene was first synthesized by the German chemist Hans von Pechmann who prepared it by accident in 1898 while heating diazomethane. When his colleagues Eugen Bamberger and Friedrich Tschirner characterized the white, waxy, substance that he had created they recognized that it contained long -CH2- chains and termed it polymethylene.

The first industrially practical polyethylene synthesis was discovered (again by accident) in 1933 by Eric Fawcett and Reginald Gibson at the ICI works in Northwich, England.[9] Upon applying extremely high pressure (several hundred atmospheres) to a mixture of ethylene and benzaldehyde they again produced a white, waxy, material. Because the reaction had been initiated by trace oxygen contamination in their apparatus, the experiment was, at first, difficult to reproduce. It was not until 1935 that another ICI chemist, Michael Perrin, developed this accident into a reproducible high-pressure synthesis for polyethylene that became the basis for industrial LDPE production beginning in 1939... WIKI

Originally posted by fakedirt
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.
f

Yes, "makeitso", made it known above and it was in "04. Nothing since then has changed the way the suppliers manipulate the supply or their desires for the future. It boils down to if we dont "need" their product or services,they are gonna do whatever they gotta do, to "create" a "need". Whether that be oil, pills, insurance or protection.
There are somethings that have changed over the course of time since 2004, namely the speed at which people from all parts of the world, from almost all walks of life, can disseminate and recieve information. This increases the possibility, that enough people, in enough places can aggregate there information, join together to put the mechanisms in place to hopefully "force" change in the most peaceful way possible. (imho)
Thankyou for replying, I value your perspective and would like to hear more of "your" personal thoughts on how, if this data is true, can we initiate change. (please)

Originally posted by Slipdig1
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.

I gotta kick out of your reply! Thankyou

Even if this theory of abiotic oil is true, it still doesn't negate peak oil if we are consuming oil at a faster rate than it is replenished...

reply to post by flashcube


there is no such thing as "oil peak" , just A GIGANTIC WISH TO CONTROL THE WORLD!
And it's almost "there"/happening!
Oil is constantly beeing produced deep in earth!
As diamonds are but a lot faster and in bigger quantities!
The key to our "free from oil slavery" is SOLAR POWER!
The earth is flushed with energy every second but in different parts!
that energy would be enough to assure world independence from oil!
look here :
Solar Thermal Power in North-Africa: How Much Land to Power the World?
" Spiegel Online published a series of pictures titled "Desertec: Strom aus der Wüste" (translation: Desertech: Electricity from the desert). It includes this image of how much land would be needed to power the world, Europe or Germany with solar-thermal power. The idea is similar to a post we did a year ago: How Much Land to Power The Whole World with Solar?

The red square on the left is for the whole world, in the middle for Europe-25, and on the right for Germany. Below you can see pictures of the kind of technology they're talking about. It's a bit similar to Ausra's solar-thermal power system, but with curved mirrors. We're mentioning Ausra here, because they claim they're able to produce electricity from solar even at night (by storing some of the heat). "

www.treehugger.com...

reply to post by LS650


Not discounting the possibility that I am wrong, but I tend to want to disagree here. Deep drilling technology, may well run into pockets of petroleum that are being replenished faster than speed at which it can be pumped out. That would be for those from the camp that believes that it is the "byproduct of the creation of magma".
Also, if enough of the speculation pans out, that would mean that you could technically drill anywhere on the planet, and find petroleum/hydrocarbons, its just a matter of "how deep".

reply to post by flashcube


opec and other cartels will use their respective governments to control
the output.it could be fair to say that wars have and are possibly engineered
to control the flow (both output and ownership). these interests imo will not
allow any sharing of this resource, period. the companies may merge or branch off
but i suspect the same old characters at play here using public relations window
dressers.. er sorry, i meant nation leaders, prime ministers et al.

the sharing of all resources of this good earth and total global equality will
imo only come around through the mother of all events.
there are recent threads on the site
that discuss overthrowing governments/ruling classes/pharm/gmo.. the list is endless.
the system as it is will not allow these concerns to stumble and fall through mass
protests. states and nations survive through their perpetual threat of violence to
any opposition that requires that state or nation to change beyond its comfort zone.
the only solution imo with the bare minimum of unintended losses would be to focus on
changing government. if you would do me the courtesy of reading these two threads below,
you might well understand the perspectives of others as well as my self on matters of how to
try and change an unfair system. i feel any group concentrating on one specific corporation
or governmental aspect for the purpose of injecting absolute fairness will be swallowed
up by the whole. imo the common denominator is government. only when there are enough
in numbers to submit bills with overwhelming pressure will there be any chance of changing
a system for the better. this has to be global and synchronised. only then will all see
who rules the roost. what happens after the unmasking of the players is anyones guess.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

as i mentioned in one of the threads, i feel society is not being truly represented within
my own government. with enough numbers it would be possible to submit a public bill that would
require say two thirds majority of parliament to be made up of the general public. this
privileged ruling elite thing is not only wearing thin but causing untold damage to the lesser
fortunate nations and peoples of the earth. if we are to do anything we must all be as one on this.
the opposition will resist and want to keep their influence and wealth at all costs. as the days
unfold and more info comes to light,the more i feel uneasy about belonging to a system that exists
by oppressing others.

i can think of only two bloodless scenarios we could have the good fortune of experiencing.

1. as above and in related threads.
2. benevolent intervention where a tactical withdrawl of all opposition is allowed.

we will all have to change, for the better i hope.
regards fakedirt

reply to post by fakedirt


I am in the proccess of going through the first thread, and I just wanted to thankyou for your hard work on this. I am just trying to better inform myself, and people like yourself are helping me do just that. Thankyou for sharing this with me.

reply to post by flashcube


what i have written is nothing compared to what other honourable members have contributed to this site. glad i could assist you
f

reply to post by flashcube


Earth is growing at a rate of 90 cm in circumferince PER YEAR!
Inside the earth gas , oil , and other compounds are beeing produced!
Synthetic oil CAN BE MADE OUT OF WATER + CO2 !
Thus > Hydrocarbon fuel!
Oil is our slavery :
oil peak does not exists , oil is just a tool through witch HUMANITY IS MANIPULATED shameless by today "leaders"/criminals!
enjoy :

Konstantin Meyl Neutrino Energy Interview with William Alek
www.youtube.com...

I like this subject. You see we are actually using oil in the US at 2007 levels right now. Saudi and the rest has actually cut production to make money. Oil works plain and simple, its plentiful and we have no other clear alternative. Every indication shows wells do refill over time but like building a home or new structure those in charge make more $$ if they build a new structure vs renovating. And in the case of oil renegotiating a lease agreement wherever the platform is.
And we really have no choice. What do all the morons think we will all just go out and build and buy a new power source? Remember the whole hydrogen powered cars? Well they started talking about it…..until they found that a car powered by the stuff would weigh 3 times as much just to try to get close to fuels power rating. And a hydrogen gas station would be as big as a mall to store the equivalent fuel of a truck stop.
Oh but what about battery power…… well the batteries and the cars just don’t work in the winter and even with the gov flipping most of the bill at sale people hate them. No range and when you see 1000 pounds of battery all over the rd from an accident gas will look like nature seasoning in comparison.
And let’s say some new power source comes down the line. Great right? We will call them widgets, where do we build and take these widgets from? We have to get it or build it from somewhere right? Then the tree huggers will be crying because the widgets take up too much grasshopper food or something.
Oil comes from the ground and everything is derived from it. It took twice the weight of you computer in oil to make it.
Oil is great IMO.

reply to post by LS650


I think that's where I fall in this discussion. I'll be willing to admit that some of the hydrocarbons that we use come from sources other than dead dinosaurs. Still we can't get around the issue of replenishment/consumption rates. Obviously the rate we're consuming is outstripping supply or else we wouldn't have the need to keep drilling deeper and deeper.

Free pure water falls from the sky but I still have a water bill and read stories about drought and water shortages. Collecting, refining, storage, shipping. All of these factors are a determinate in the price of gasoline as well.

It doesn't really matter whether oil is abiotic or not if we consume it faster than it can be produced.

abit of an odd tangent. but, has anyone ever thought maybe abiotic theory and young earth theory are related? please be kind.

Originally posted by LS650
It doesn't really matter whether oil is abiotic or not if we consume it faster than it can be produced.

I'm inclined to agree. Even if oil does "come back", oil drilling is happening out in the oceans and other distant places, which wouldn't be necessary if oil replenished quickly. Besides, the oil companies have to pay for building and employment (and everything in-between, plus more), and that is usually something they tend to avoid as much as possible, and would do.

Also, how much oil can be synthesized? How much would that process cost? And so on. And as a side-mark, oil won't do any good if all other resources are stretched thin.

As far as abiotic sources it is really a moot point. The oil has to be discovered at a location where it is accessable with current technology for an economical price. If it is abiotic it took hundreds of millions of years to accumulate to a reservoir in which it was producible. So even if it is abiotic it is being generated in rocks that are either inaccessable or migrating so slowly that it is doesn't matter. Since 60% of oil discovered is unrecoverable by current technology it is not suprising that a well migrates small volumes over time. No well ever quits making oil, it only declines in rate where the volume is too low to afford to continue to pump.

"Volume of oil pumped thus far not accountable from organic material alone according to present models"

I asked my teacher about this in 6th grade and I will be 44 next month and even I knew way back then the math just did not work.
I my self like a lot of other people think that oil is just a nominal pack of the processes of being a planet. Drill an just about any planet and you will most likely find oil. The moon may not be big enough or active enough to have oil but it is possible even it could. If oil was fossil based we would have pumped the planet dry 50 years ago.