Sustainable oil

[NewGuy]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38645

About 80 miles off of the coast of Louisiana lies a mostly submerged mountain, the top of which is known as Eugene Island. The portion underwater is an eerie-looking, sloping tower jutting up from the depths of the Gulf of Mexico, with deep fissures and perpendicular faults which spontaneously spew natural gas. A significant reservoir of crude oil was discovered nearby in the late '60s, and by 1970, a platform named Eugene 330 was busily producing about 15,000 barrels a day of high-quality crude oil.

By the late '80s, the platform's production had slipped to less than 4,000 barrels per day, and was considered pumped out. Done. Suddenly, in 1990, production soared back to 15,000 barrels a day, and the reserves which had been estimated at 60 million barrels in the '70s, were recalculated at 400 million barrels. Interestingly, the measured geological age of the new oil was quantifiably different than the oil pumped in the '70s.

Analysis of seismic recordings revealed the presence of a "deep fault" at the base of the Eugene Island reservoir which was gushing up a river of oil from some deeper and previously unknown source.

Similar results were seen at other Gulf of Mexico oil wells. Similar results were found in the Cook Inlet oil fields in Alaska. Similar results were found in oil fields in Uzbekistan. Similarly in the Middle East, where oil exploration and extraction have been underway for at least the last 20 years, known reserves have doubled. Currently there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 680 billion barrels of Middle East reserve oil.

Creating that much oil would take a big pile of dead dinosaurs and fermenting prehistoric plants. Could there be another source for crude oil?

An intriguing theory now permeating oil company research staffs suggests that crude oil may actually be a natural inorganic product, not a stepchild of unfathomable time and organic degradation. The theory suggests there may be huge, yet-to-be-discovered reserves of oil at depths that dwarf current world estimates.

The theory is simple: Crude oil forms as a natural inorganic process which occurs between the mantle and the crust, somewhere between 5 and 20 miles deep. The proposed mechanism is as follows:

FANTASTIC ARTICLE.

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by NewGuy
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38645



FANTASTIC ARTICLE.

I know laboratory experiments have proven that under the right conditions, petroleum will break down to methane, a simpler form, but I've not seen any demonstration the opposite is true, under the conditions described and easily replicated in a lab. Have you seen any?

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by Comrade
I know laboratory experiments have proven that under the right conditions, petroleum will break down to methane, a simpler form, but I've not seen any demonstration the opposite is true, under the conditions described and easily replicated in a lab. Have you seen any?

Since I have no lab for doing such things, I would not automatically discount the article.

Did you expect me to have said lab?

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by NewGuy
Since I have no lab for doing such things, I would not automatically discount the article.

Did you expect me to have said lab?

But aren't you Dr. Evil?


Seriously, why are there many lab studies of petroleum converting to methane under heat and pressure, but not vice versa?

I would imagine such a process demands empiricle evidence, because it's not normal for compounds to reorganize under such conditions. They usually decompose into simpler compounds.

It's entirely possible oil fields connect to deeper sources, but it's by no means proof of oil being generated. Shifting geological forces explain most of these leaks to existings wells.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by Comrade
But aren't you Dr. Evil?


Seriously, why are there many lab studies of petroleum converting to methane under heat and pressure, but not vice versa?

I would imagine such a process demands empiricle evidence, because it's not normal for compounds to reorganize under such conditions. They usually decompose into simpler compounds.

It's entirely possible oil fields connect to deeper sources, but it's by no means proof of oil being generated. Shifting geological forces explain most of these leaks to existings wells.

It is just a proposed theory..... sounds pretty interesting too!

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by Comrade
But aren't you Dr. Evil?


Seriously, why are there many lab studies of petroleum converting to methane under heat and pressure, but not vice versa?

I would imagine such a process demands empiricle evidence, because it's not normal for compounds to reorganize under such conditions. They usually decompose into simpler compounds.

It's entirely possible oil fields connect to deeper sources, but it's by no means proof of oil being generated. Shifting geological forces explain most of these leaks to existings wells.

I guess you would believe the intense pressure created by all of that land and water to not account for it?

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by NewGuy
I guess you would believe the intense pressure created by all of that land and water to not account for it?

Yes, that's exactly my point. I can't find any study where heat and pressure (even using a catalyst) leads to convert methane to fossile fuel.

Methane is a product of fossile fuel refinement, under heat and pressure of crude oil, methane will rise to the top of the still as the lightest, most simple hydrocarbon byproduct, CH4.

Does CH4 convert to longer chains over C6H14 (gasoline) under after heat and pressure? No.

Is there some catalyst which would do so? Possibly.

Does any study identify the catalyst or replicate the process?
Not that I can find.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum

"Some scientists have proposed that the current understanding of petroleum and its orgins are incomplete. Some Russian scientists propose that petroleum is abiotic in nature. Some supporting scientific papers are at http://www.gasresources.net/. This theory also argues that oil supplies slowly replenish themselves, and that oil reserves are thus much larger than current estimates. Such theories are not widely accepted in the West."

Why would only a very few, mainly Russian scientists advance this theory?

Who would benefit from a perception of "endless oil" from existing sources?

Another source..


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiotic_petroleum

"Most geologists believe that oil and many other fuels are fossil fuels created by fossilisation of ancient organic matter. Oil, they believe, comes from ancient seas and coal from ancient forests.

A minor competing hypothesis is that oil is formed by non-biological reactions naturally in the Earth's mantle and core. The constituent elements of petroleum are commonplace and it might be conceivable that appropriate conditions exist for oil to be formed deep within the Earth.

Evidence against this hypothesis comes from the observable fact that known oil deposits are found within geological strata suggesting they were deposited by sedimentation. "


Lots of competing evidence don't you agree?

 

[NewGuy]

That is why it is all theory.

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by NewGuy
That is why it is all theory.

Hehe...

I know Russian scientists are underpaid by the state, and can only scratch out a living outside of the private market today.

So who would privately fund a study to show the value of the reserves are greater than the accepted potentialit's reserves?

LUKoil? Taftnet? GazProm?

Suspicious...

 

[JohnGalt]

hmm, good article. That much oil from such a deep underground flow? Doesn't sound like the heap of dead dinosaurs we usually get fuel from...