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 nick c » Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:38 pm

Grey Cloud wrote:Abiotic oil would also put another nail in Velikovsky's coffin. Didn't he say oil (hydrocarbons) came from Venus?

No, it would not, I am afraid you are hammering imaginary nails. Velikovsky was a subscriber to the theory of abiotic origin of oil, although he did not rule out that it could be produced organically. He sighted numerous myths relating to rains of flaming pitch or naphtha which he associated with the Venus catastrophes. He never wrote ALL oil originated during planetary encounters, only SOME of it (p288 Earth In Upheaval). That is evident from:
This destroys the main argument the geologists have raised against the theory of the exogenous origin of some deposits of oil...
highlight added

The logic is obvious, oil can be formed abiotically here or out there, and during catastrophes it can be deposited.
During a cosmic catastrophe oil could be produced in electric discharges and this is the source of at least some of the Earth's oil.

nick c
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2475
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Anaconda » Mon Jul 27, 2009 6:06 pm

Hi solrey:

solrey wrote:
“The U.S. Energy Department predicted temperatures reaching a metal-melting 500 degrees Fahrenheit.”


Five hundred degrees Fahrenheit melts...what? Not much. That's a respectable temperature and all, but I bake bread at ~350-400, so if 500 F is metal melting, I'll have to rethink my position on 9/11...and get a new oven. :?

Even 500 C won't melt many metals. :cry:

Do they mean Kelvin? No, that's only ~440 F.

What are they saying? :roll:

Don't mean to nitpick, but... :?:

The fossil origin of oil theory does not seem to fit the facts.

Totally agree! 8-)
Many theories do not seem to fit the facts. There is one that does, though...something to do with an electric universe. :P


solrey, nick c, I appreciate and respect your opinions and I'm glad you've also chosen to weigh in on this issue.

Solrey, good point about the metals not melting, but this statement may have taken into account the very intense pressure and temperatures at the depths where the oil is located. The addition of pressure in addition to temperature causes metal to lose it tensile strength. That has been one of the difficulties with ultra-deep drilling, metal apparatus break and crush at such depths unless made of very strong alloys, but seemingly this difficulty has been solved.

solrey, a little follow up to your excellent quoted passages on electromagnetic energy playing a significant role in oil formation:

"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, chemist, 1866


"It may be supposed that naphta was produced by the action of water penetrating through the crevices of the strata during the upheaval of mountain chains because water with iron carbide ought to give iron oxide and hydrocarbons." -- Dmitri Mendeleyev, chemist, 1877


"Do these fuels result always and necessarily in one way from the decomposition of a pre-existing organic substance? Is it thus with the hydrocarbons so frequently observed in volcanic eruptions and emanations, and to which M. Ch. Sainte-Claire Deville has called attention in recent years? Finally, must one assign a parralel origin to carbonaceous matter and to hydrocarbons contained in certain meteorites, and which appear to have an origin foreign to our planet? These are questions on which the opinion of many distinguished geologists does not as yet appear to be fixed." -- Marcellin Berthelot, chemist, 1866


Notice, that while electricity is not mentioned specifically by these eminent chemists of the 19th century, the processes they refer to are suspciously connected to metals that are subject to chemical - electrical processes.

...heat, of water, and of alkaline metals... -- Berthelot


...iron carbide ought to give iron oxide and hydrocarbons. -- Mendeleyev


Is it thus with the hydrocarbons so frequently observed in volcanic eruptions and emanations... -- Berthelot


The first two quotes mention metals that are frequently in play in electrical battery type chemical reactions. And we have seen in numerous posts, here, in the forum where electromagnetic energy facilitates chemical reactions, even transmutations of chemical elements, such is the power of electrical energy to influence and control chemical molecular formation.

And the third quoted passage is specific to the observations that were quite common in the 19th century, but largely overlooked in the 20th century, that volcanic activity and hydrocarbons were observed in close association with each other.

Also, it is my hypothesis that hydrocarbons are found in particular strata, not because of abundant biological activity, but rather because of abundant electrical activity, say by increased auroral activity, or other means of increased electrical activity that heated up the crust and lead to a more active crust/mantel interface (increased volcanic and earthquake activity), and possibly one could even propose planetary electrical discharges causing hydrocarbon formation and would account for the high number of meteorites found with hydrocarbons embedded in them.

"Whether naphta was formed by organic matter is very doubtful, as it is found in the most ancient Silurian [Ordovician] strata which correspond with the epochs of the earth's existence when there was very little organic matter; it could not penetrate from the higher to the lower (more ancient) strata as it floats on water (and water penetrates through all strata)." -- Dmitri Mendeleyev, chemist, 1877


How come it seems that 19th century scientists like Birkeland and the above had so much on the ball, yet were ignored by supposedly more advanced 20th century Science :?:
Anaconda
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby solrey » Mon Jul 27, 2009 7:23 pm

Hey anaconda. :)

As I understand it, most substances, especially metals, melting temperatures increase with increased pressure. Water and covalent crystals being notable exceptions.

Is this incorrect?
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Anaconda » Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:27 pm

Hi solrey:

solrey wrote:Hey anaconda. :)

As I understand it, most substances, especially metals, melting temperatures increase with increased pressure. Water and covalent crystals being notable exceptions.

Is this incorrect?


I'll stand aside to your knowledge about melting points, but tensile strength is definitely effected by temperature and pressure. That has been a recurring theme in my research on oil drilling technology.
Anaconda
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Joe Keenan » Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:24 am

If every 40 foot increase in depth = 1 deg F increase in temperature we should be seeing 30,000 deg F temperatures at the earths core. Does anyone believe that? Perhaps at some point pressure and temperature conditions are perfect for the abiotic reaction to occur. If this reaction is endothermic the point in the earth where temp increases stop may indicate reaction zones.
Joe Keenan
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:17 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby GaryN » Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:06 am

Hi Joe,
Just wondering if you were familiar with Pastor Linsay Williams?
Yes, I had always assumed the ground temperature increased steadily with depth, but in some areas, it does not. From what I read, the permafrost can reach a depth of 5000 ft. How is that possible with a warm earth interior? Well, coincidentally or not, the deepest permafrost is found in a circle which seems to lie under the polar auroral oval. Magnetocaloric cooling?

There is an interesting point to mention in passing. Though the ground is frozen for 1,900 feet down from the surface at Prudhoe Bay, everywhere the oil companies drilled around this area they discovered an ancient tropical forest. It was in a frozen state, not in petrified state. It is between 1,100 and 1,700 feet down. There are palm trees, pine trees, and tropical foliage in great profusion. In fact, they found them lapped all over each other, just as though they had fallen in that position.

What great catastrophe caused this massive upheaval, and then led to such dramatic changes in the climate? We stress again that everything is frozen—not petrified—and that the whole area has never once thawed since that great catastrophe took place. So what could possibly cause these dramatic happenings?


http://www.reformation.org/energy-non-crisis-ch5.html
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby solrey » Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:21 am

Wattup Anaconda?

Yep, tensile strength does decrease with increasing temperature and pressure. Ever worked with a forge?

I suppose a more accurate way of saying it would be a metal bending temp and press? :)

It sounds like you've done more research on deep drilling than I have so you probably have better information.

Besides, it's a bit OT, don't want to distract from the main subject of the discussion, which I find fascinating. ;)

GaryN, great info...thanks.

Magnetocaloric cooling. Would that be similar to electron cooling? Where the electric current is more focused and organized, it reduces random particle collisions, thereby reducing the "temperature".
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby GaryN » Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:23 pm

Hi Solrey, here is the latest news I can find:

Certain materials get hot under the influence of a magnetic field, and then self-cool when the field is removed - the magnetocaloric effect.


http://www.electronicsweekly.com/Articl ... ystals.htm
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Anaconda » Tue Jul 28, 2009 5:00 pm

A lot of the evidence I have presented in this thread is regarding ultra-deep water, ultra-deep drilling because that is the evidence which most strongly contradicts the "oil window" corollary of the "fossil" fuel theory for oil's formation.

So, lets's have a noted "peak" oil advocate, Richard Heinberg, state the case for the "oil window" corollary in his own words:

More to the point, Gold also claimed the existence of liquid hydrocarbons—oil—at great depths. But there is a problem with this: the temperatures at depths below about 15,000 feet are high enough (above 275 degrees F) to break hydrocarbon bonds. What remains after these molecular bonds are severed is methane, whose molecule contains only a single carbon atom. For petroleum geologists this is not just a matter of theory, but of repeated and sometimes costly experience: they speak of an oil “window” that exists from roughly 7,500 feet to 15,000 feet, within which temperatures are appropriate for oil formation; look far outside the window, and you will most likely come up with a dry hole or, at best, natural gas only. The rare exceptions serve to prove the rule: they are invariably associated with strata that are rapidly (in geological terms) migrating upward or downward.


There is a problem with this: Apparently, the oil companies have abandoned the "oil window" corollary, by putting their money where Heinberg's mouth is (see link below passage):

Transocean announced that Chevron Corporation has awarded the company a contract for the construction of an enhanced Enterprise-class drillship...with an estimated total capital expenditure of approximately $650 million...drillship target the drilling of wells up to 40,000 feet of total depth...and will be capable of drilling in water depths of up to 12,000 feet...the world water-depth drilling record of 10,011 feet held by the Discoverer Deep Seas.


http://www.marinetalk.com/articles-mari ... 940IN.html

Oil companies don't order drillships costing $650 million with capabilities to reach non-existent oil deposits.

And Chevron is finding and producing ultra-deep water, ultra-deep drilled oil fields:

The deepest of the wells feeding the floating Tahiti platform reaches 26,700 feet below the surface of the Gulf, a record for a producing well, the company said.


And it is expensive to do, but these fields produce alot of oil (see link below passage):

Chevron Corp., the second-largest U.S. oil company, said its $4.7 billion Tahiti field in the Gulf of Mexico began pumping crude yesterday [May 5, 2009]...The field, located 190 miles (306 kilometers) from New Orleans in 4,100 feet of water, is expected to produce 125,000 barrels of oil and 70 million cubic feet of gas a day when output peaks, the San Ramon, California-based company said today in a statement.


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... ovp7R5a5gA

So you see, the oil majors aren't messing around.

And that "oil window" has been falsified because oil rises from deep faults in the Earth -- oil is abiotic -- all of it!

And, Petrobras, Brazil's state-controlled oil producer isn't messing around either (see link below passage):

Petroleo Brasileiro SA, owner of the Western Hemisphere's largest oil discovery in three decades, plans to order 40 drilling ships and platforms worth about $30 billion for delivery by 2017...The vessels cost about $750 million each, said J. Michael Drickamer, an oilfield- service company analyst at Morgan Keegan & Co. in Memphis, Tennessee.


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... wFt8vbefYM

An 18th century philosopher said, "When I speak I put on a mask. When I act I am forced to take it off."

The oil companies have taken off the mask and are acting with their money and technology...and remember that anonymous 20th century philosopher who said, "Follow the money."
Anaconda
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Anaconda » Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:28 am

Being that the oil majors are spending billions of dollars to discover & produce this ultra-deep water, ultra-deep drilling oil, what are the prospects that they will find a lot of oil?

The prospects are quite good according to the following paper and presentation: Cracks of the World: Global Strike-Slip Fault Systems and Giant Resource Accumulations (see link below passage):

Evidence is mounting that the Earth is encircled by subtle necklaces of interconnecting, generally latitude-parallel faults. Many major mineral and energy resource accumulations are located within or near the deeply penetrating fractures of these “cracks of the world.” Future exploration for large petroleum occurrences should emphasize the definition, regional distribution, and specific characteristics of the global crack system. Specific drill targets can be predicted by understanding the local structural setting and fluid flow pathways in lateral, as well as vertical conduits, detectable through patterns in the local geochemistry and geophysics.


http://www.hgs.org/en/art/?34

Consider this statement from the paper:

One of the dynamic driving forces in plate tectonics derives from revolutions about the Earth’s rotational axis...The scale of the kinematic reference frame thus shifts from crustal plate motions to motions between spheres (that is, lithosphere-asthenosphere differential rotations).


Could this be a kind of electromagnetic super rotation that has been discussed by Electric Universe theorists?

The paper is rich in ideas that seemingly are related to processes that could be driven by electromagnetic forces (of course, the author is unaware of the potential of these electromagnetic forces).

I would also suggest this "picture" of the Earth's crust is also evidence of the Earth's electromagnetic dynamics as economic minerals and oil are pushed up through these "cracks of the world", and that electromagnetic forces are responsible for the resulting mineral deposits and concentrations, by way of induced transmutation of chemical elements (gold, silver, daimonds, and so on) and electromagnetic facilitation of thermo-molecular chemical bonding of elements -- there are over 4000 minerals in the Earth's crust, many are rare or permutations of other minerals (minerals run in "families"), including oil.

The author of the above presentation, Stanley B. Keith, who authored two other abstracts I previously linked has also described "corkscrew" or "spiral" formations of economic minerals.

These "corkscrew" or "spiral" formations, which rise toward the surface, seem to reflect electromagnetic forces at work in the Earth's crust (the corkscrew or spiral morphology is common in electromagnetic processes and phenomenon).
Anaconda
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby redeye » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:46 pm

Could this be a kind of electromagnetic super rotation that has been discussed by Electric Universe theorists?


This differential rotation between spheres is also present in the atmospheric spheres (troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere). It is also reflected in Jupiter's lateral banding and the rings of Saturn (I think).

The author of the above presentation, Stanley B. Keith, who authored two other abstracts I previously linked has also described "corkscrew" or "spiral" formations of economic minerals.


This reminds me of this

Great thread.

Cheers!
"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind."
Bob Marley
User avatar
redeye
 
Posts: 394
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:56 am
Location: Dunfermline

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby solrey » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:56 pm

Great info! Those corkscrew or spiral formations of economic minerals are totally in line with EU. Beautiful.
As I recall, aren't a large number of mineral/metal deposits distributed in "fingers" or "veins" in a Lichtenburg type pattern as well?
It would seem that most all deposits mimic various patterns of electric discharge, then. ;)

Excellent, everywhere we look we see confirmation of EU. :D
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla
User avatar
solrey
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby redeye » Wed Jul 29, 2009 2:58 pm

Those corkscrew or spiral formations of economic minerals are totally in line with EU. Beautiful.


Apparently volcanic plumes can display a rotating helical structure also. There was information regarding this on a thread recently (I can't find it).

Cheers!
"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind."
Bob Marley
User avatar
redeye
 
Posts: 394
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:56 am
Location: Dunfermline

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby seasmith » Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:47 pm

~
Tzunamii wrote:
I believe He said as much, but that it may have been produced through electrical interactions is significant, if oil production is shown to be abiotic, then we know Velikovsky was at least thinking in the right direction.
Perhaps the same electrical stresses that may produce oil in the earth, were present at the meeting of Earths & Venuses electrical environments, & produced a variety of things, including some oil.


If "electrical stresses [that] may produce oi in the earth" is a perfectly valid and interesting question for a team of geochemists and plasmacologists, that i dont think has been settled yet.
If an electric encounter with Venus, [or another planetary body], acted to Release ultra-deep hydrocarbons; that i would imagine as highly possible.
Therefore i give V. high marks for forward thinking.
~
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Hydrocarbons in the Deep Earth?

Unread postby Joe Keenan » Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:06 am

I don't know where Heinburg gets his data but 275 Deg F does not break hydrocarbons down into methane. To change one hydrocarbon chain into another requires temperatures and catalysts specific to the desired reaction. Propane will remain propane at 275 F, it won't change into something else it may boil but, If the pressure is high enough it could also be a liquid.
Joe Keenan
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron