Customer Discussions > Science forum

Crude Oil and Coal: Natural Elements found throughout the Solar System or Made by Old Plants and Aminals?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 26 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Mar 28, 2012 1:33:06 AM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 28, 2012 5:07:16 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
Both. It's a limited resource that will eventually run out, AND the petroleum companies are constricting the supply by limiting the number and output of refineries in order to control the price.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 28, 2012 9:01:52 AM PDT
Re original post: Both coal and petroleum (and also natural gas), as now found and used as fuel, are of biological origin, and can eventually be exhausted. However, carbon and hydrocarbons are found in space -- but not in sufficient quantity nor availability to be useful as fuels here. But there is a lot of all natural fuels available; oil is notorious for being "about to run out in ten to twenty years" -- as first predicted in the 1920's, and in every decade since.

Over the long haul, fossil fuels will become too expensive to extract, and technologies such as solar and nuclear will be necessary. (Wind power will never be economic: the technology is centuries old, and has been improved as much as it can be. Although new wind farms are being built, it is with massive subsidies.) Eventually, liquid hydrocarbons will have to be made from water and carbon dioxide, using vast quantities of energy, because for transportation (particularly aircraft) there is no possible technology which can replace these for fuel.

Posted on Mar 28, 2012 5:01:43 PM PDT
how does one explain wells that have been capped off due to running dry, only to discover that they've filled back up? Could there be a possibility that crude oil didn't come from dead bio and that it's just something that is part of the earth?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 28, 2012 5:14:59 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 28, 2012 5:18:39 PM PDT
Rev. Otter says:
<<how does one explain ...>>

same way anything is explained: with actual information.

"Capped wells may appear to refill after a few years, but they are not regenerating. It is simply an effect of oil slowly migrating through pore spaces from areas of high pressure to the low-pressure area of the drill hole. If this oil is drawn out, it will take even longer for the hole to refill again. Oil is a non-renewable resource generated and deposited under special biological and geological conditions."

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/04_04_02_oil_recession.html

<<Could there be a possibility that crude oil didn't come from dead bio and that it's just something that is part of the earth?>>

sure, that's possible. it's also possible that the oil is made by tiny, plaid, guitar-playing demons. there's exactly as much evidence for both.

Posted on Mar 28, 2012 6:05:28 PM PDT
"Researchers at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm have managed to prove that fossils from animals and plants are not necessary for crude oil and natural gas to be generated. The findings are revolutionary since this means, on the one hand, that it will be much easier to find these sources of energy and, on the other hand, that they can be found all over the globe."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090910084259.htm

"The findings are a clear indication that the oil supply is not about to end, which researchers and experts in the field have long feared. "Using our research we can even say where oil could be found in Sweden," says Vladimir Kutcherov, a professor at the Division of Energy Technology at KTH.
Together with two research colleagues, Vladimir Kutcherov has simulated the process involving pressure and heat that occurs naturally in the inner layers of the earth, the process that generates hydrocarbon, the primary component in oil and natural gas.
According to Vladimir Kutcherov, the findings are a clear indication that the oil supply is not about to end, which researchers and experts in the field have long feared.
He adds that there is no way that fossil oil, with the help of gravity or other forces, could have seeped down to a depth of 10.5 kilometers in the state of Texas, for example, which is rich in oil deposits. As Vladimir Kutcherov sees it, this is further proof, alongside his own research findings, of the genesis of these energy sources - that they can be created in other ways than via fossils. This has long been a matter of lively discussion among scientists.
"There is no doubt that our research proves that crude oil and natural gas are generated without the involvement of fossils. All types of bedrock can serve as reservoirs of oil," says Vladimir Kutcherov, who adds that this is true of land areas that have not yet been prospected for these energy sources.
But the discovery has more benefits. The degree of accuracy in finding oil is enhanced dramatically - from 20 to 70 percent. Since drilling for oil and natural gas is a very expensive process, the cost picture will be radically altered for petroleum companies, and in the end probably for consumers as well.
"The savings will be in the many billions," says Vladimir Kutcherov.
To identify where it is worthwhile to drill for natural gas and oil, Vladimir Kutcherov has used his research to arrive at a new method. It involves dividing the globe into a finely meshed grid. The grid corresponds to fissures, so-called `migration channels,' through underlying layers under the surface of the earth. Wherever these fissures meet, it is suitable to drill.
According to Vladimir Kutcherov, these research findings are extremely important, not least as 61 percent of the world's energy consumption derives from crude oil and natural gas.
The next step in this research work will involve more experiments, but above all refining the method will make it easier to find places where it is suitable to drill for oil and natural gas.
Vladimir Kutcherov, Anton Kolesnikov, and Alexander Goncharov's research work was recently published in the scientific journal Nature Geoscience.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 28, 2012 6:21:13 PM PDT
tom kriske says:
no

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 28, 2012 11:36:59 PM PDT
Re Kober, 3-28 5:01 PM: "Could there be a possibility that crude oil didn't come from dead bio ... ?" This is a good question, and one that I myself asked previously in one of these forums. I suspected that some of the hydrocarbons (particularly natural gas) might have been of primordial origin, since there was a lot of it in the earth's early atmosphere. But I was told that isotopic analysis indicated that the hydrocarbons were of biological origin.

Posted on Mar 29, 2012 7:50:50 AM PDT
thanks for that input. more to research!

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2012 8:36:28 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
Your article shows that petroleum formation does not necessarily coincide with fossilization, NOT that petroleum comes from non-organic sources and therefore might be inexhaustible.

It is still a finite resource.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2012 8:21:16 PM PDT
Vladimir is exactly correct. Just how much time is involved in earths production of hydrocarbons is the ?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2012 10:35:51 PM PDT
Re Curtis, 3-29 8:36 AM: The origin of petroleum has nothing to do with its potential exhaustion; no matter how it came into being, there is still a finite amount of it (as you correctly note).

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2012 5:04:51 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
True; good catch.

Posted on Mar 31, 2012 5:07:59 AM PDT
Did anyone else not notice the solar system part of the question that implies that carbonaceouceous chondrites and other extra-Earth, highly-concentrated carbon sources may also be the detritus of life elsewhere. Our neighbourhood is plenty old enough. Alternatives include serendipity will of God and stuff-of-stars, coincidetally to Earth-life, supernova delivery. Take your pick, but extra-Earth life best confronts Occam's Razor.
071V8

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 31, 2012 10:49:16 AM PDT
Re Bailey, above: This idea is conventionally called "panspermia." It would be supported if chondrites and similar debris contain sufficiently complex organic molecules; so far, no such have been found. The major problem with the idea is that it is simply passing the buck: if life arose on another planet first, how did it do so there?

Posted on Apr 6, 2012 11:34:26 PM PDT
"The idea that petroleum is formed from dead organic matter is known as the "biogenic theory" of petroleum formation and was first proposed by a Russian scientist almost 250 years ago.

In the 1950's, however, a few Russian scientists began questioning this traditional view and proposed instead that petroleum could form naturally deep inside the Earth.

This so-called "abiogenic" petroleum might seep upward through cracks formed by asteroid impacts to form underground pools, according to one hypothesis. Some geologists have suggested probing ancient impact craters in the search for oil.

Abiogenic sources of oil have been found, but never in commercially profitable amounts. The controversy isn't over whether naturally forming oil reserves exist, said Larry Nation of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists. It's over how much they contribute to Earth's overall reserves and how much time and effort geologists should devote to seeking them out.

If abiogenic petroleum sources are indeed found to be abundant, it would mean Earth contains vast reserves of untapped petroleum and, since other rocky objects formed from the same raw material as Earth, that crude oil might exist on other planets or moons in the solar system, scientists say.

Both processes for making petroleum likely require thousands of years. Even if Earth does contain far more oil than currently thought, it's inevitable that reserves will one day run out. Scientists disagree sharply, however, on when that will occur. And, some say, a global crisis could begin as soon as increasing demand is greater than supply, a possibility that might be measured in years rather than decades, some analysts argue."

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 9, 2012 9:56:00 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 9, 2012 10:43:01 AM PDT
A. Caplan says:
Please note that nowhere in the article is an alternative method of oil and natural gas creation discussed. What is the alternative theory? Also, although there may be alternative processes that have created fossil fuel, this in no way implies that the supply is not limited. The main crux of the article just seems to be that, based on this theory, there may be as yet undiscovered supplies. In other words, more oil, but still a finite amount.

Addendum: I am not going to purchase the article, but I have located the abstract. Interestingly, the references to the article that I can find are in 'science' news articles, which are merely repeats of the article cited in the post, and in sites that use the submission as "proof" that our energy policy is wrong because the submission "proves" that oil is no only biological in origin. What I cannot not find is any followup research on the matter since 2009.

It's a nice theory, but until research on the predictions that it makes is done, it has no meaning. As I do not get to UCF much lately, if anybody has access to a university library, perhaps you could see if there is any followup to the original submission.

Posted on Apr 11, 2012 9:47:01 PM PDT
Hoo-Zen!! says:
We'd have to use all our current oil supplies to make the fuel to get to the interplanetary resources. Catch 22 Earthlings!!!!

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 12, 2012 6:08:58 AM PDT
Not really there one of Jupiters moons is rich in hydrocarbon fuels. then you have the planet itself with its sweet sweet hydrogen reserves.

Posted on Apr 12, 2012 7:29:30 AM PDT
Obviously there's a finite amount of crude oil in the earth's crust, just as there's a finite need for it as well. I think that somehow we've come to a conclusion that man heeds an infinite amount of energy, and there's no way man could even use that much energy. therefore, I'm in the school of thought that there's ample supply of crude to keep us going long after the current predictions of what Exxon and BP etc. say there is, and the notion is there to make it sound precious to drive up it's price.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 12, 2012 8:01:52 AM PDT
There is an ample supply of crude wbut its typically restricted via permitting. Granted we always harvest the low hanging fruit first so remaining reserves are more difficult to obtain. when you factor in nuclear, and coal reserves we have more than enough energy to carry us to the fusion age.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 12, 2012 11:22:09 AM PDT
<<<<<Brian Curtis says:
Your article shows that petroleum formation does not necessarily coincide with fossilization, NOT that petroleum comes from non-organic sources and therefore might be inexhaustible.

It is still a finite resource.>>>>

the earth is finite. So what? compared to man it's proportions would seem infinite. Man is way more finite than to earth. If one would compare the earth's mass to that of mankind and everything mankind has, is, or will ever manufacture, it would be like a speck of sand on a beach a mile long. It's incomparable.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 12, 2012 11:24:10 AM PDT
Rev. Otter says:
<<the earth is finite. So what? compared to man it's proportions would seem infinite.>>

congratulations! attitudes like yours are what got us into the current mess. :)

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 12, 2012 11:46:01 AM PDT
Brian Curtis says:
"compared to man it's proportions would seem infinite."

But not compared man's rate of consumption of that finite resource, which is the whole point. Passenger pigeons were a finite resource, and we used them up. The same can happen--and indeed IS happening--with oil.

Posted on Apr 12, 2012 11:53:53 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 12, 2012 11:54:59 AM PDT
Finite vs. infinite arguments are completely worthless, as time progresses our technology has gotten better and we can readily create the materials neccessary as they are needed. We have nuclear,solar, hydro, wind, coal, natural gas, and in a few more decades fusion. There is more than enough oil to get us through our reserves. Most power plants don't run on oil because of the volatility of the pricing. When its economical natural gas and coal can easily be converted to syngas for Fisher-Tropsch. Arguing a resource finicity is virtually a moot point.

Now if you really want to have a solid debate lets talk about helium.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  11
Total posts:  26
Initial post:  Mar 28, 2012
Latest post:  Apr 12, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions