Dinosaurs & Diamonds

[Flanders]

Has OPEC misled us about the size of its oil reserves? The short answer is probably. The long answer is that currently, there is no way to know for sure.

OPEC has Probably Deceived Us About the Size of its Oil Reserves
By Kurt Cobb | Mon, 10 September 2012 22:58 |

OPEC has Probably Deceived us About the Size of its Oil Reserves

What do diamonds and oil have in common? Answer: The general public believes there is a limited supply of both. Those beliefs do not stand up to scrutiny. Diamonds are not only plentiful in nature they can be mass produced by man. And the oil in the ground is more than enough for the foreseeable future. That makes fuel refined from corn unnecessary. So why so many myths about diamonds and oil?

The reason for the diamond myth is obvious. “Rare” jacks up the price. Oddly enough the sales slogan “Diamonds Are Forever” should lower prices because the cumulative effect flies in the face of scarcity. Think about it.

Petroleum

Nobody needs a diamond, but everybody needs petroleum one way or another. Since “Oil Is Not Forever” amounts to false advertising, a variation of the diamond industry’s pricing mechanism was called for. Basically, petroleum pricing depends upon consumers believing the world will run out of oil in the near future. The best way to sell the idea of future scarcity was to show where oil came from.

An animated story on TV showing how petroleum reserves originated helped sell the idea of a finite resource. A graphic presentation illustrating dinosaurs melting away and seeping into the ground forming huge pools of oil used to be final word on petroleum’s origin. Sinclair Oil even used a dinosaur in it’s advertising:

SINCLAIR OIL ANIMATED COMMERCIAL 1960s DINO THE DINOSAUR - YouTube

The dinosaur myth had but one purpose. Scarcity in the future justified higher prices today since the world is not likely to see dinosaurs again.

NOTE: I always thought the dinosaur story was absurd. I was partial to vegetation being the raw material that produced petroleum. Decaying vegetation combined with insect poop eventually squeezes out petroleum under gravity’s constant pressure made more sense to me.

Petroleum aside, engage your imagination with a bit of speculation concerning the much ballyhooed dinosaurs; now extinct:

The theories surrounding the demise of dinosaurs always fascinated me. Well, I’m happy to announce that well-liked assumptions about dinosaurs have been discredited —— at least in my mind. A few years ago I heard a brief news story on my car radio informing me that a baby dinosaur had been found inside a mammal’s stomach. I think the report said that the hungry mammal was about the size of a squirrel, or somewhere in that neighborhood. Stay with me on this.

After hearing the news blurb it was instantly clear to me that, over a period of thousands of years, mammals snacked on baby dinosaurs until finally there were no more pro-life grownups left to reproduce their kind.

Another factor to consider is size. Obviously, dinosaurs were equipped to do battle against other heavyweights. I doubt if they could defend against legions of ravenous mammals.

My point: Legislators should think twice whenever fortunetellers demand that an endangered species be saved. The species you save might multiply and eat your descendants.

Now let’s go to the philosophical:

It’s generally agreed that dinosaurs did not possess a sharp wit. If I’m interpreting the aforementioned discovery correctly it’s fair to say that dinosaurs weren’t into maternal instincts either. Go one step further and say that dinosaurs disappeared because they did not protect their offspring, while mammals thrived precisely because of maternal instincts. Go even further and say that the fate of dinosaurs is God’s way of telling us “Protect your children or you’re history.”

Now let’s go to pseudo-science and fossil fuel politics.

Environmental freakazoids woke up in wacko heaven when displaced Communists flocked to the environmental cause after the Soviet Union collapsed. An influx of Communist true believers quickly made petroleum and coal the villains. Wind, sun, and alcohol refined from plants became gods to tax dollar hustlers like Al Gore and the nincompoops who believed him.

New battle lines were drawn when the Cold War ended. With a lot of support from the United Nations an army of tree-huggers who truly believe they are saving the planet mobilized faster than Americans mobilized for WWII. Media and the education industry became prophets of doom warning that something had to be done even if it meant reducing the lower economic classes to primitive living conditions.

I’ll close with a dubious statistic from Kurt Cobb’s article:

OPEC, short for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, currently claims that its 12 members hold 81.3% of the world's oil reserves. And, with few exceptions the world believes them.

I am curious as to why OPEC inflates the amount of oil reserves it controls? De Beers sure as hell does not jack up the accepted number of raw diamonds in the world. It seems to me that converting 81.3% to actual barrels of oil would decrease the accepted amount of known reserves. That should increase the asking price.

Just to be clear, pricing and marketing are incidental to the politics involved. There is no shortage of petroleum, nor will there be a shortage for a thousand years if ever.

 

[Katzndogz]

There is a theory that oil is actually a renewable resource that is continually created.

Is Oil A Renewable Energy? - Blogcritics Politics

Oh, dear! What is President Barack Hussein Obama going to do now? Evidence is mounting that not only do we have more than 100 years (or more) worth of recoverable oil in the US alone, but that we also actually have a limitless supply of oil because it is a renewable resource that is being constantly created.


Dr. Thomas Gold, astronomer and professor emeritus of Cornell University, presents the theory of "abiotic" oil-creation. He states that "biotic" creation of fossil fuels, that decaying organic matter is compressed into oil, is incorrect. According to Gold, we have an unending supply of oil, some of which is constantly migrating upward from the depths at which it is created to refill existing oil deposits, and much more of which remains far below the surface. Gold has maintained for years that oil is actually renewable primordial syrup, starting as methane, continually manufactured by the earth under ultra hot conditions and tremendous pressures. This substance migrates upward, picking up bacteria that attack it, making it appear to have an organic origin. or to appear to come from dinosaurs and vegetation. Under the right conditions of temperature and pressure, this primordial syrup converts to more complex hydrocarbons, such as oil. This oil can be recovered using existing technology.

It stands to reason that the forces that created oil in the first place have never gone away. They still exist and are still making oil.

 

[Flanders]

According to Gold, we have an unending supply of oil, some of which is constantly migrating upward from the depths at which it is created to refill existing oil deposits, and much more of which remains far below the surface.

To Katzndogz: The Kern River field discovered in 1899 is but one of many fields.

Since 1899 Kern yielded over 2 BILLION barrels of oil with an estimated half billion barrels remaining. Improved recovery technology will increase that number dramatically.

In 1942 estimates put Kern at 54 million barrels remaining. The amount of oil recovered since 1942 indicates the pool is being replenished; possibly from below as Gold suggests. The Kern River field in California gives Gold’s hypothesis some credibility over the organic matter theory, but the jury is still out. In any event it sure as hell ain’t dinosaurs.

 

[Old Rocks]

I do believe that I will trust the USGS estimates far more than those of amatuers.

 

[percysunshine]

I do believe that I will trust the USGS estimates far more than those of amatuers.

The USGS are amatuers. They look at basin creaming curves and then make up stuff.

 

[Old Rocks]

Lol. Ok.

 

[percysunshine]

Lol. Ok.

I will give the USGS some credit. Oil companies tell them what to say.

 

[Mr. H.]

If we wait 3 weeks, Jiggs will show up with a 5 page response.

 

[Flanders]

I do believe that I will trust the USGS estimates far more than those of amatuers.

To Old Rocks: I do believe you also trust everything the United Nations puts in its reports about global warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

American Geophysical Union, the scientific society that has the most climate scientists in it of any scientific society in the world.

AGU Position Statement: Human Impacts on Climate

AGU Position Statement

Human Impacts on Climate

Adopted by Council December 2003
Revised and Reaffirmed December 2007

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our scientific understanding of the climate.

During recent millennia of relatively stable climate, civilization became established and populations have grown rapidly. In the next 50 years, even the lower limit of impending climate change—an additional global mean warming of 1°C above the last decade—is far beyond the range of climate variability experienced during the past thousand years and poses global problems in planning for and adapting to it. Warming greater than 2°C above 19th century levels is projected to be disruptive, reducing global agricultural productivity, causing widespread loss of biodiversity, and—if sustained over centuries—melting much of the Greenland ice sheet with ensuing rise in sea level of several meters. If this 2°C warming is to be avoided, then our net annual emissions of CO2 must be reduced by more than 50 percent within this century. With such projections, there are many sources of scientific uncertainty, but none are known that could make the impact of climate change inconsequential. Given the uncertainty in climate projections, there can be surprises that may cause more dramatic disruptions than anticipated from the most probable model projections.

With climate change, as with ozone depletion, the human footprint on Earth is apparent. The cause of disruptive climate change, unlike ozone depletion, is tied to energy use and runs through modern society. Solutions will necessarily involve all aspects of society. Mitigation strategies and adaptation responses will call for collaborations across science, technology, industry, and government. Members of the AGU, as part of the scientific community, collectively have special responsibilities: to pursue research needed to understand it; to educate the public on the causes, risks, and hazards; and to communicate clearly and objectively with those who can implement policies to shape future climate.

 

[Old Rocks]

Part of the Geological Society of America's statement on global warming.

These are American Scientific Societies, but every scientific society in the world is in agreement with their statements.

The Geological Society of America - Position Statement on Global Climate Change

As a result, greenhouse gas concentrations, which can be influenced by human activities, and solar fluctuations are the principal remaining factors that could have changed rapidly enough and lasted long enough to explain the observed changes in global temperature. Although the 3rd IPCC report allowed that solar fluctuations might have contributed as much as 30% of the warming since 1850, subsequent observations of Sun-like stars (Foukal et al., 2004) and new simulations of the evolution of solar sources of irradiance variations (Wang et al., 2005) have reduced these estimates. The 4th (2007) IPCC report concluded that changes in solar irradiance, continuously measured by satellites since 1979, account for less than 10% of the last 150 years of warming.

Greenhouse gases remain as the major explanation. Climate model assessments of the natural and anthropogenic factors responsible for this warming conclude that rising anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases have been an increasingly important contributor since the mid-1800s and the major factor since the mid-1900s (Meehl et al., 2004). The CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is now ~30% higher than peak levels that have been measured in ice cores spanning 800,000 years of age, and the methane concentration is 2.5 times higher. About half of Earth’s warming has occurred through the basic heat-trapping effect of the gases in the absence of any feedback processes. This “clear-sky” response to climate is known with high certainty. The other half of the estimated warming results from the net effect of feedbacks in the climate system: a very large positive feedback from water vapor; a smaller positive feedback from snow and ice albedo; and sizeable, but still uncertain, negative feedbacks from clouds and aerosols. The vertical structure of observed changes in temperature and water vapor in the troposphere is consistent with the anthropogenic greenhouse-gas “fingerprint” simulated by climate models (Santer et al., 2008). Considered in isolation, the greenhouse-gas increases during the last 150 years would have caused a warming larger than that actually measured, but negative feedback from clouds and aerosols has offset part of the warming. In addition, because the oceans take decades to centuries to respond fully to climatic forcing, the climate system has yet to register the full effect of gas increases in recent decades.

These advances in scientific understanding of recent warming form the basis for projections of future changes. If greenhouse-gas emissions follow the current trajectory, by 2100 atmospheric CO2 concentrations will reach two to four times pre-industrial levels, for a total warming of less than 2 °C to more than 5 °C compared to 1850. This range of changes in greenhouse gas concentrations and temperature would substantially alter the functioning of the planet in many ways. The projected changes involve risk to humans and other species: (1) continued shrinking of Arctic sea ice with effects on native cultures and ice-dependent biota; (2) less snow accumulation and earlier melt in mountains, with reductions in spring and summer runoff for agricultural and municipal water; (3) disappearance of mountain glaciers and their late-summer runoff; (4) increased evaporation from farmland soils and stress on crops; (5) greater soil erosion due to increases in heavy convective summer rainfall; (6) longer fire seasons and increases in fire frequency; (7) severe insect outbreaks in vulnerable forests; (8) acidification of the global ocean; and (9) fundamental changes in the composition, functioning, and biodiversity of many terrestrial and marine ecosystems. In addition, melting of Greenland and West Antarctic ice (still highly uncertain as to amount), along with thermal expansion of seawater and melting of mountain glaciers and small ice caps, will cause substantial future sea-level rise along densely populated coastal regions, inundating farmland and dislocating large populations. Because large, abrupt climatic changes occurred within spans of just decades during previous ice-sheet fluctuations, the possibility exists for rapid future changes as ice sheets become vulnerable to large greenhouse-gas increases. Finally, carbon-climate model simulations indicate that 10–20% of the anthropogenic CO2 “pulse” could stay in the atmosphere for thousands of years, extending the duration of fossil-fuel warming and its effects on humans and other species. The acidification of the global ocean and its effects on ocean life are projected to last for tens of thousands of years.

Public Policy Aspects

 

[Flanders]

American Geophysical Union, the scientific society that has the most climate scientists in it of any scientific society in the world.

Part of the Geological Society of America's statement on global warming.

These are American Scientific Societies, but every scientific society in the world is in agreement with their statements.

To Old Rocks: Please do not clutter up my thread with the same old global warming crap that has been discredited time and time again by SCIENTISTS WITHOUT A VESTED INTEREST IN AUTHENTICATING GLOBAL WARMING BULL-DUNG. There is no MANMADE global warming threat except the one coming from government entities trying to stampede Americans towards global government. Bottom line: Every environmental scare tactic is designed to give the United Nations authority over the oceans and the atmosphere.

 

[Old Rocks]

American Geophysical Union, the scientific society that has the most climate scientists in it of any scientific society in the world.

Part of the Geological Society of America's statement on global warming.

These are American Scientific Societies, but every scientific society in the world is in agreement with their statements.

To Old Rocks: Please do not clutter up my thread with the same old global warming crap that has been discredited time and time again by SCIENTISTS WITHOUT A VESTED INTEREST IN AUTHENTICATING GLOBAL WARMING BULL-DUNG. There is no MANMADE global warming threat except the one coming from government entities trying to stampede Americans towards global government. Bottom line: Every environmental scare tactic is designed to give the United Nations authority over the oceans and the atmosphere.

You are full of shit. Post some of the peer reviewed articles from these 'scientists'.

 

[Flanders]

You are full of shit. Post some of the peer reviewed articles from these 'scientists'.

To Old Rocks: You can start your own research with this:

SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims - Challenge UN IPCC & Gore | Climate Depot

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The US Space program has made a total mockery of the notion of "Fossil fuels"

Here's a photo where the blue areas are lakes of liquid "Fossil fuels". This is on Saturn's Moon Titan, 300 below zero, no pressure cooked velicoraptors either. It's abiotic, it's a natural byproduct of planetary geology and chemistry...just like here on Earth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

OR is a fucking mental patient. Tell the nurse on the floor that he didn't take his meds, he's off posting his failed "AGW" nonsense again

 

[Old Rocks]

You are full of shit. Post some of the peer reviewed articles from these 'scientists'.

To Old Rocks: You can start your own research with this:

SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims - Challenge UN IPCC & Gore | Climate Depot

A right wingnut site dedicated to lying about what real scientists are saying. Not only that, it simply makes a claim that '1000 scientists' agree with it's nonsense, with only excerpts from a few fruit loops.

Climate Depot - SourceWatch

ClimateDepot.com is the website of Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow employee Marc Morano, a conservative global warming denier who previously served as environmental communications director for a vocal political denier of climate change, Republican Sen. James Inhofe. Launched in spring 2009, Climate Depot claimed it would be "the Senate EPW website on steroids," and "the most comprehensive information center on climate news and the related issues of environment and energy."[1

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Nurse! OR only pretended to take his meds!

See?

 

[Old Rocks]

AGW Observer

Causal decoupling between total solar irradiance and global temperature has appeared since 1960s

Evidence of recent causal decoupling between solar radiation and global temperature – Pasini et al. (2012) [FULL TEXT]

Abstract: “The Sun has surely been a major external forcing to the climate system throughout the Holocene. Nevertheless, opposite trends in solar radiation and temperatures have been empirically identified in the last few decades. Here, by means of an inferential method—the Granger causality analysis—we analyze this situation and, for the first time, show that an evident causal decoupling between total solar irradiance and global temperature has appeared since the 1960s.”

Citation: Antonello Pasini et al 2012 Environ. Res. Lett. 7 034020, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/7/3/034020.

 

[Old Rocks]

Natural variability and mankind warmed sea surface which played vital role in extreme climate events of 2010
AGW Observer

Climate extremes and climate change: The Russian heat wave and other climate extremes of 2010 – Trenberth & Fasullo (2012)

Abstract: “A global perspective is developed on a number of high impact climate extremes in 2010 through diagnostic studies of the anomalies, diabatic heating, and global energy and water cycles that demonstrate relationships among variables and across events. Natural variability, especially ENSO, and global warming from human influences together resulted in very high sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in several places that played a vital role in subsequent developments. Record high SSTs in the Northern Indian Ocean in May 2010, the Gulf of Mexico in August 2010, the Caribbean in September 2010, and north of Australia in December 2010 provided a source of unusually abundant atmospheric moisture for nearby monsoon rains and flooding in Pakistan, Colombia, and Queensland. The resulting anomalous diabatic heating in the northern Indian and tropical Atlantic Oceans altered the atmospheric circulation by forcing quasi-stationary Rossby waves and altering monsoons. The anomalous monsoonal circulations had direct links to higher latitudes: from Southeast Asia to southern Russia, and from Colombia to Brazil. Strong convection in the tropical Atlantic in northern summer 2010 was associated with a Rossby wave train that extended into Europe creating anomalous cyclonic conditions over the Mediterranean area while normal anticyclonic conditions shifted downstream where they likely interacted with an anomalously strong monsoon circulation, helping to support the persistent atmospheric anticyclonic regime over Russia. This set the stage for the “blocking” anticyclone and associated Russian heat wave and wild fires. Attribution is limited by shortcomings in models in replicating monsoons, teleconnections and blocking.”

Citation: Trenberth, K. E., and J. T. Fasullo (2012), Climate extremes and climate change: The Russian heat wave and other climate extremes of 2010, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D17103, doi:10.1029/2012JD018020.