Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Lloyd » Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:55 pm

Anaconda:
Rapid continental division isn't supported by the scientific evidence, rather, it is a crutch for those who want to postulate a young Earth.

* Our main EU theorists won't agree with you at all on that issue. Thornhill told me privately that he thinks the Atlantic was carved out electrically in a very short time and I think Steve Smith has suggested the same regarding the other oceans. I think it was Roger Wescott who suggested in Kronos magazine that the myths state that there were no mountains or oceans in the Golden Age, only plains, hills and shallow seas. And I think Cardona stated agreement with that also in Kronos. The main EU theorists may not favor continental drift at all, but they agree that the continents became divided rapidly.
* Your so-called scientific evidence against rapid dividing of the continents is very probably as baseless as is much of conventional science. No offense. Just reciprocating.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4330
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby junglelord » Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:25 pm

Anaconda wrote:The bottom line: Oil is Abiotic.

I would bet my bottom dollar that the control of everything hinges on the lie of fossel fuels. The control of energy via so called limited "fossel fuels" and the manipulation of that market and price control is all part of one huge lie.

This deception on the human race and financial control of society as we know it today is governed by this lie and the manipulation of this lie on our consciousness.

How many people have died in belief of that lie?
One day we may all wake up....one day.
:cry:

Meanwhile Tesla is speaking to us from the grave, begging us to pay attention to mother nature and what she has to say when it comes to electrogravitics and longitudinal current propagation as well the understanding of phase conjugation physics. Then even Abiotic Oil will be unecessary.
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord
User avatar
junglelord
 
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Anaconda » Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:17 am

A post script:

The Canadian geology conference was in 1903, which raises an important point in this question of Abiotic Oil theory: Generally, many if not most of the mainstream media articles on the possibility of Abiotic Oil state that Abiotic Oil theory is a "fringe" theory or words to that effect, as did the New York Times article previously linked in a prior comment (see link below quote):

A theory long on the fringes of petroleum science gained some support from new research this week, but it is probably not enough to launch the concept into the mainstream.


http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/07/31 ... a-796.html

But is Abiotic Oil theory really fringe at all?

Looking at the the historical discussion of Abiotic Oil theory sheds light on the above question:

The so-called "fossil" theory of oil's origin was first proposed as a hypothesis in 1757 by Russian scientist Mikhail Lomonossov who originated the organic theory based on fossils that later became known as the “Rock Oil” theory. But within 50 years this "fossil" theory was challenged by many of the most eminent scientists of Europe:

"Petroleum is the product of a distillation from great depth and issues from the primitive rocks beneath which the forces of all volcanic action lie." -- Alexander Von Humboldt, famous naturalist, 1804


"The hydrogen gas evolved from volcanoes, or from chasms in the earth during earthquakes, is generally combined with sulphur or carbon; it is probably formed by the decompostion of water, when it finds access to subterranean fire." -- Robert Bakewell, geologist, compiled and authored one of the very first geology encyclopedia, 1813


"One can, then, conceive the production, by purely mineral means, of all natural hydrocarbons. The intervention of heat, of water, and of alkaline metals -- lastly, the tendency of hydrocarbons to unite together to form the more condensed material -- suffice to account for the formation of these curious compounds. Moreover, this formation will be continuous because the reactions which started it are renewed incessantly." -- Marcellin Berthelot, described as the greatest chemist of the 19th century, 1866


"The capital fact to note is that petroleum was born in the depths of the Earth, and it is only there that we must seek its origin." -- Dmitri Mendeleyev, chemist and developer of the periodic table of chemical elements, 1877


"It is obvious that the total amount of petroleum in the rocks underlying the surface ... is large beyond computation." -- Edward Orton, geologist, 1888


"All the petroleum, natural gas, and bituminous fields or deposits cannot be regarded as anything else but the products of solfotaric [sulphur] volcanic emanations condensed and held in their passage upward in the porous tanks of all ages of the crust of the earth from the Archaean rocks to the Quaternary. Nothing is so simple and therefore nothing so natural as this origin, and we will see that it can be abundantly proven." -- Eugene Coste, geologist, 1903


(while Eugene Coste is admittedly not famous and well known, his concise statement of oil's origin echoes Occam's razor: The simplest explanation is usually the best explanation -- Coste is the author of the 1903 presentation at the Canadian geology conference linked above in a prior comment.)

This list is not exhaustive nor a list of fringe scientists, but, rather, is a list of the most eminent scientists of the 19th century.

So what happened?

The British/Anglo school of geology, which held oil as being biological in origin won out. It seems no accident that British and Anglo (read American) oil companies dominated the world (most oil markets were national in scope as wide-spread oceanic shipping of oil was limited) oil markets and while the reality demonstrated periodic oil gluts as one new oil producing region was found after another (think Spindletop oil field in Texas, 1901), there was also in concert repeated proclamations of imminent "peak" oil, as the finite supply would run out, echoing the present day.

(junglelord, while I might not go quite as far as you in assigning "conspiracy", it has obviously benefitted the oil industry to maintain the finite paradigm of "fossil" theory. What is abundantly clear is that the "winners" write the history and in this case, while Abiotic Oil theory was never "fringe", it did "lose" and the "winners" did their absolute best to condition the general public to think of oil in finite terms, starting as soon as youngsters were old enough to see cartoons of cudly dinosaurs and on up into school and into adulthood. Even the nick-name "fossil" fuel was designed to hammer this perception of finite availability, while the proper name, hydrocarbons, suggests abundant chemicals that are readily available within the Earth as are other minerals, but seemingly, the neutral "hydrocarbons", is not used in daily parlance when disucussing oil in public forums.)

But as laid out in this series of comments the scientific evidence for Abiotic Oil theory is overwhelming and increasing over time as oil exploration & discovery move farther out into ultra-deep waters hundreds of miles from shore in the midst of the abyssal deep ocean sea floors in areas unequivocally connected to the deep faults of the world.
Anaconda
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Aardwolf » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:09 am

It's not just the oil companies that have an interest in keeping abiotic oil theory suppressed. Powefull environmental lobbyists need to keep the fossil fuel label intact as well, together with numerous governments which rely on the income generated from an inflated oil price.

However, I don't believe there is any kind of conspiracy, it just suits all parties to keep the status quo.
Aardwolf
 
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:56 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby bboyer » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:24 pm

Aardwolf wrote:It's not just the oil companies that have an interest in keeping abiotic oil theory suppressed. Powefull environmental lobbyists need to keep the fossil fuel label intact as well, together with numerous governments which rely on the income generated from an inflated oil price.

However, I don't believe there is any kind of conspiracy, it just suits all parties to keep the status quo.


"A rose by any other name...." :lol:
There is something beyond our mind which abides in silence within our mind. It is the supreme mystery beyond thought. Let one's mind and one's subtle body rest upon that and not rest on anything else. — Maitri Upanishad
User avatar
bboyer
 
Posts: 2410
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:50 pm
Location: Upland, CA, USA

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Joe Keenan » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:52 pm

mharratsc wrote:Yay! I can add something to this that I actually have some knowledge about!! :D

Temperature in different areas would also differ due to the amount of current flowing through a particular area, and the electrical resistance of the material there. Any 'wet earth' or conductive strata are going to be semi-conductive, and therefore having loss as heat to the current carried through it (much like the CPU chip in a PC).

That is going to add quite a bit of focused heat in areas for the above-mentioned reactions.

Mike H.


Nice info Mike! Perhaps electrical resistance may indicate geological formations?
Joe Keenan
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby bdw000 » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:07 pm

Some might like to read some of these articles concerning "peak oil," which the author considers a scam. For instance, a few years ago Shell closed down one of its most profitable refineries for no reason at all (neither supply nor demand for that refinery were limited). Much of the material below deals with abiotic oil and is quite good. At least one newsletter deals with the Soviet angle.

This site: http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/ has lots of material that can only be called "conspiratorial" to some degree, though a great deal of it is simple reporting.

The third block of links is the "newsletter" section. The following newsletters have varying degrees of peak oil and/or abiotic oil material:

50, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 64, 66, 70, 71, 74, 83.

Required reading in my opinion if abiogenesis of oil is your thing.

This guy can be VERY sarcastic at times, but usually in a very humorous way.
bdw000
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:06 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Anaconda » Mon Sep 21, 2009 1:34 pm

When one discusses oil, it is good to understand the "mother" of all oil fields, Ghawar, in Saudi Arabia, the largest oil field in the world.

To give some historical perspective, Ghawar was discovered shortly after WWII in 1948 and began producing in 1951. Even after all that time it still produces more oil than any other field in the world. Ghawar has produced a cube of oil 19 miles high, which is roughly 99,000 feet high (think of those airliners you see at 33,000 feet high and increase that three times, that's a whole heck of a lot of oil).

As described formally, Ghawar is situated over an active fault system (see link below quote):

Ghawar is a large north-trending anticlinal structure, some 250 kilometers long and 30 kilometers wide. It is a drape fold over a basement horst, which grew initially during the Carboniferous Hercynian deformation and was reactivated episodically, particularly during the Late Cretaceous. In detail, the deep structure consists of several en echelon horst blocks that probably formed in response to right-lateral transpression. The bounding faults have throws exceeding 3000 feet at the Silurian level but terminate within the Triassic section.


http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/docum ... /index.htm

What is interesting about the, above, passage is that while Ghawar is described as "over a basement horst...and was reactivated episodically...[and] the deep structure consists of several en echelon horst blocks...", the, above, passage makes no link between this active basement structure and the ultimate source of the oil (perhaps, the conventional view blinds the author to this connection).

Others, however, have made this connection explicit:

The oil fields of Saudi Arabia sit atop one of the most robust tectonic fracture and fault networks in the world. According to one study's author, H. Stewart Egdell, "Basement horst [a block of the earth's crust seperated by faults from the adjacent relatively depressed blocks] that has been periodically reactivated, underlies the world's greatest oil field, Ghawar."

These oil field structures are mostly produced by extensional block faulting in the crystalline Precambrian basement along the predominantly N-S Arabian Trend which constitutes the 'old grain' of Arabia. This type of basement horst, which has been periodically reactivated, underlies the world's largest oil field, Ghawar, and other major oil fields, such as Khurais, Mazalij and Abu Jifan. The basement horst beneath Ghawar Anticline has been suggested by Aramco (1959), from a positive Bouguer gravity anomaly which practically mirrors the field, and more recently, in greater detail, by Barnes (1987).


All Saudi Arabian offshore oil fields, and some near coastal fields, such as Abu Hadriya, Abqaiq and Dammam, are also produced by basement faulting which has cut the saliferous, Upper Precambrian Hormuz Series, triggering deep-seated salt diapirism.


(See, Basement tectonics of Saudi Arabia as related to oil field structures, by H. Stewart Edgell:)

http://pagesperso-orange.fr/brcgranier/ ... l_1992.htm

Again, note the reference to "reactivated" basement horst.

What does "periodically" or "episodically" reactivated mean?

Here's an analogy: Think of a glass of ice water with regular little ice cubes floating at the top; you jostle or agitate the drink and all the cubes slosh around and then reform a network of interlocking cubes. During the jostling, fluid is able to move up and around the cubes as they collide with each other.

Strike-Slip Fault Zone, Pop-up Block, Uplift, Detached Megablock, Extensional Block Faulting, Thrust Sheets, Fold-over, Lithotectonic, Thrust Fault, Regional Faults vs. Local Faults, Horsting, Fissures, Fractrues.

What do all these words have in common?

These words describe geologic structures on the edges of tectonic plates where collisions and interations take place. These words are the basics in understanding the interaction of the earth's crustal geology.

But they are also words used over and over in the exploration & discovery of petroleum. You just about can't read technical data about areas of potential oil discovery or production without these words.

Turns out, as has been previously commented and linked to, and as the title of one study indicates, the majority of the world's giant oil fields are located above where tectonic plates collide, fault, and fracture. Giant oil fields contain 65% of the world's proven reserves, and it starts off with the biggest oil field of them all, Ghawar.

Apparently, before the recent price collapse, Middle East oil producers were confident that they could raise oil production by 10 million barrels a day (see link below quotes):

Dubai: A massive $300 billion investment in boosting oil production is underway which could see the Arabian Gulf deliver a staggering 10 million barrels of crude a day in added capacity by 2015 more than half from Saudi Arabia alone according to project research firm Proleads.

"Recent analysis of total global oil production and development projects indicate that world crude production capacity from all sources has the potential to rise from 87 million barrels per day to as much as 108 million by 2015," said Emil Rademeyer, director of Proleads.


http://www.gulfnews.com/business/Oil_an ... 43278.html

Seems the Middle Eastern oil producers don't believe they are running out of oil anytime soon.

Why?

Abiotic Oil theory.
Anaconda
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Heftruck » Mon Sep 21, 2009 6:07 pm

I think the discussion about using peak-oil as a means to boost oil prices is really nonsensical. There isn't a single producer or buyer who cares. The only thing relevant to them is the current production. Then the magic of demand and supply happens. While the discussion about peak oil is very interesting in scientific circles, its relevance is zero in business. If peak oil turns out to be correct, that'll have consequences, but only when it is literally visible by a declining production. Furthermore, oil companies have no interest in keeping a-biotic oil theory suppressed. If it turns out oil is really a-biotic and they figure out an inexpensive way to mass produce it, that would be a huge boost them. The only people who could possibly be interested in suppressing a-biotic oil theory are people whose political power depends on it and those who offer substitutes for oil.

Just wanted to mention that because I feel the discussion about the 'political and economic' consequences and conspiracy theories in regards to them derail the topic.
Last edited by Heftruck on Mon Sep 21, 2009 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Heftruck
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 9:12 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Joe Keenan » Mon Sep 21, 2009 6:56 pm

Screw the deep earth, existing oil deposits were found by luck (oil oozing out of the ground), or, in conformance to prevailing dogma. Imagine the abiotic theory is correct, what geological structure would allow for shallow recovery of oil (like in Saudi).
Joe Keenan
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby webolife » Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:44 pm

Have you read Thomas Gold's paper?
http://trilogynet.net/Thomas_Gold/usgs.html
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby webolife » Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:56 pm

To Anaconda, on the subject of rapid continental drift... why the ad hominem argument?
The only evidence for slow continental drift in the past is the present state of fingernail growth pacing.
But there are significant factors also present which control that rate... namely the mountainous crustal conglomerations on the "leading edges" of the continents. In a time past, when worldwide topography was more "smooth", as nearly universally evidenced by what are often passed off as "shallow sea" depositional features, there would have been significantly less impediment to the sliding and spreading of the continents. Rapid-continental-drift-defying frictional calculations based on the current state of affairs are entirely based on the assumption of uniformitarianism, and not on any solid scientific evidence. The significance of a more rapid scenario to this thread is that it offers a better understanding for why major oil deposits occur only in particular orogenic environments and not all over the earth. I'm for a recognition of both biogenic and abiogenic oil, by the way.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Joe Keenan » Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:51 pm

webolife wrote:Have you read Thomas Gold's paper?
http://trilogynet.net/Thomas_Gold/usgs.html


Very nice, thank you!
Joe Keenan
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby juan » Sun Sep 27, 2009 12:05 pm

The implications and consequences of an abiotic origin of petroleum are profound from the point of view of investing. If the abiotic theory is correct, then the Peak Oil theory is mostly incorrect and oil's abundance is guaranteed, and price increases for its products are limited.

In reference to this theory, I asked a scientist and acquaintance what he thought about abiotic origins of oil and gas. His reply was that he had been involved in government studies of the problem and his team found that oil varied so much in its qualities and characteristics that they concluded it is of biological origin. He thought if oil were abiotic in origin, then it would be more uniform in composition. In support of the biological origns, my father, a petroleum engineer, used to bring samples of newly discovered oil home with him after a well was completed. Each seemed very different: some green, some black, some brownish. Some thick, some thinner.

What do you think?
juan
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:42 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby popster1 » Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:11 pm

Juan wrote:
He thought if oil were abiotic in origin, then it would be more uniform in composition.

That might be true if all oil experienced the same history after it was formed. I consider that unlikely; the variations in composition are much more likely to result from the geology the oil encounters after it forms.
I've lived long enough to see nearly everything I ever believed to be true disproved at least once.
User avatar
popster1
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:03 am

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest