Guest Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 A few weeks back there was a brief discussion on Peak Oil vs. Abiogenic oil on these boards. I tried to search for the thread, but I kept getting an error. Anyway, I've read up on what Wiki says about this here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin but wiki seems to imply that it is a fringe hypothesis and not supported by evidence. IIRC, it was Skip N. Church that has worked oil fields before and said he has seen oil come back into a dried up well? I guess what I'm saying is although I've followed a few links, nobody seems to be reporting any real evidence of abiogenic origins. Just a few "Hmmm" scenerios. Is there no further research than this? I'd just like to hear what people on here think, and maybe be directed to a few links you may know of that can help me figure this out. I can't stop thinking about it, but there appears to be very little info about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott_In_Michigan Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I find this topic to be very fascinating. Until I read that older thread you mentioned, I never even knew that there were actually other possible explanations for the source of petroleum. Since reading it I've come to realize that I never felt completely satisfied with the idea that prehistoric remains are the source of oil. The concept seems laughable! How many barrels of oil do we consume in a day? And we're supposed to believe that there were that many dinosaurs and other organisms around to create that much oil? On a slightly different note...how do xtians explain oil if it comes from the decomposition of prehistoric creatures? I mean, is there anything beyond the shallow, "God put it there!" reasoning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I too never heard of any alternate hypothesis for oil origins untill I read that thread. However, from my readings on this subject I've learned that it is not dinosaurs that are supposed to be the source, but plankton-like animals along with algae! This makes it even more difficult to accept a biogenic origin now, for me at least. I can not fathom algae and plankton being able to generate the amount of oil we go through for the amount of time we have, all in localized locations. To be honest, I never really thought about it much, but it does seem almost laughable now. I really want to learn more about this... And I'm suprised xtians haven't latched onto abiogenic origins to defend a young earth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Oil (based on microfossils) tends to be blue green algae, and primitive plany life. The reason it exists is that there was , basically, nothing to decay it... In a few hundred million years time there'll be vast hydrocarbon reserves of high pressure cooked plastics from our land fills... since nothing (yet) decays plastics... ain't nature GRAND! We preserved the oil for the species that comes after us in the form of plastic ducks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Oil (based on microfossils) tends to be blue green algae, and primitive plany life. The reason it exists is that there was , basically, nothing to decay it... In a few hundred million years time there'll be vast hydrocarbon reserves of high pressure cooked plastics from our land fills... since nothing (yet) decays plastics... ain't nature GRAND! We preserved the oil for the species that comes after us in the form of plastic ducks... So you are saying that plastics do not decay because there are no microbes to facilitate it? Given a few million years time, some microbes will evolve to fill this niche and then plastics will decay just like anything else? Is this really the reason given why biomass became oil? That is something I have not read yet, but again, I am having trouble finding good reading on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Pretty much... and why biomass became coal too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 So basicly oil cannot be produced naturally today, because there is a rich microbial world to eat it up? Also, abiogenic oil is known, the dispute is just about commercialy available amounts, I believe. I'm reading alot about 50 years of Russian research and success with abiogenic theory, but nothing that explains or gives me any more detail than that. The site I was just reading http://questionsquestions.net/docs04/peakoil1.html seemed to imply that it is not formed from the magma (because its high in silicon) but that methane is converted to various hydrocarbons from some relationship to the mantle. It wasn't specific. But on the other side, I'm not finding much on the order of how we know that hydrocarbons used to be biomass. Couldn't the "bio-markers" found in crude oil be from microbes we know live in the crust? What if the bio-markers are a "contamination"? In the amounts of oil we use each day it does seem a bit insane to think that much tiny biomass ended up in the same place and created gillions of gallons of crude. Neither side seems to be fully explaining themselves, but I'm just looking at the first pages of a few google searches on certain key words. That's why I'm hopeing I can find more information here. I'm really curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 "So basicly oil cannot be produced naturally today, because there is a rich microbial world to eat it up?" To be accurate, the reason that there won't be significant oil or coal deposits laid down is because the organic matter that would form it would be eaten, not the oil or coal. If there was the right kind of flash flood or large enough pyroclastic flow from an eruption covering a forest to the 'right' depth and then other geology overlaying it before there was serious erosion, then you'd be looking at a possible coal field... but extensive coal and oil fields, formed in the way we think it was, will be a lot rarer in the future for the next Industrial species on the planet (assuming there is one... 100 billion years and we're the only industrial species we've found...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 "In the amounts of oil we use each day it does seem a bit insane to think that much tiny biomass ended up in the same place and created gillions of gallons of crude." Why? Any idea of the volume of Biomass in a 10 cubic metres of sea water? I seem to remember it was of the order of about 3 tonnes. They die, they sink, and there's nothing to decay them... most of the sea beds would be deep in dead plankton type creatures... where do you think Limestone comes from? The deep materials don't even have oxygen to react with...just pressure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ nivek ♦ Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Marty: Oil (petroleum 'thick') exists as a natural earth made lubricant. Thoughts at moment are that it does several things, one major being keeping the planet literally sliding along while it shifts and changes shape. Second thought is that with extreme heat processes, and time it takes for chemicals to come to relative surface to be pocket trapped and exploitable by mankind and our current technology, there will always be POL *somewhere*. Texas Gulf oil fields have been freshening up for past twenty years. Many of the older production wells in Gulf that has laid dormant, not quite yet underground capped, but shut off in preparation for total deconstruction had to be tested for potential environmental damage. What is done there is a "small core" drilling is done, sent down to take samples, and if any collapse has happened in well hole to do a core sample and drill through. When those cores were brought up, and quite often with a slight gusher of pressurized materials (think old buster Keaton like movies with well blowing out and up) there was some very clean, very "sweet" oil. This part of Texas Gulf has always produced some nice easy to refine crude, however the crude coming up wasn't black. Is a dark brown, almost infiltrate free clean, easy to crack, nice, "sweet crude". (Less infiltrates, less gunk carbon chunks, less effort in cracking/distilling crude takes. Right now, process to produce one gallon of uS blend gasoline takes 5-8 gallons of water. To crack an entire 50 gallon drum of crude takes 150-300 gallons of water depending on quality of crude to start. This in part is a headache facing world, using freshwater for POL distilling. Desalinated water is not the greatest for POL cracking, that is one reason why you don't see a lot of oil producing nations being oil distilling hot spots.) We're seeing a lot of this "new crude" coming up in places where the old has been removed as best as can be tapped. Deeper thinkers than I have forwarded idea that Earth itself makes on a continual basis the materials it needs to function, and that the "new crude" is simply something we're finally getting to take a look at. If it looks like oil, distills like oil, an in turn does the same things as "old oil" does, its oil.. "Peak Oil" is a so far interesting thought, but like any other mathematical/computer driven forecast, "it ain't right until it is proven right". Think we'll see more of the oil stories come out as they become of more interest to the paying public... Until then, political, rather than economic play drive our POL prices, and the fears of running out.. "ain'ta gonna happen" kL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 To be accurate, the reason that there won't be significant oil or coal deposits laid down is because the organic matter that would form it would be eaten, not the oil or coal. Gotcha, I thought you were saying that there were no microbes to break down the biomass, but now I think you were saying there were no animals (whales, for instance) to eat the plankton and algae, so they just accumulated on the sea bed in much bigger amounts that are possible today? Texas Gulf oil fields have been freshening up for past twenty years. Many of the older production wells in Gulf that has laid dormant, not quite yet underground capped, but shut off in preparation for total deconstruction had to be tested for potential environmental damage. Skip, thanks for your thoughts on this. I have read "peak supporters" say that this freshening up of old wells is nothing more than oil being pushed up from deeper reserves, and not "new" oil. However, they did not mention the cleaner quality of the oil as you did. What do you think of this? Think we'll see more of the oil stories come out as they become of more interest to the paying public... Until then, political, rather than economic play drive our POL prices, and the fears of running out.. You know, as I was reading abiogenic sites yesterday, I kept reading a "conspiricy theory" tone in their writing similar to creationist websites. Maybe it was just my frusteration at not being able to find evidence to support their claims...Anyway, I kept thinking that it would be just like our politicians to supress abiogenic origins in order to use Peak Oil as a means of frightening the U.S. into a frenzy and keeping oil prices high because of it's "scarcity". If it comes out that oil is all over the place, how could they justify $3.50+ for a gallon? I'd really, just like to hear more about Russia's 50 years of success with this...but didn't they also claim success with Lysenkoism evolutionary ideas? Also, how would you explain biological markers that seem to imply an origin of biomass found in crude? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 To be accurate, the reason that there won't be significant oil or coal deposits laid down is because the organic matter that would form it would be eaten, not the oil or coal. Gotcha, I thought you were saying that there were no microbes to break down the biomass, but now I think you were saying there were no animals (whales, for instance) to eat the plankton and algae, so they just accumulated on the sea bed in much bigger amounts that are possible today? No... I'm saying there was no microbes that had evolved to deal with dead stuff of plant matter... although quite how that worked in terms of how predators digested stuff is moot if that assertion is true... I admit, I've not looked at the issue for many years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I think I understand the process now... The act of being buried would provide a barrier to microbes that have to exist because of the existence of animals in the first place. Now protected under sediment the heat and pressure would then transform this biomass into kerogen and then hydrocarbons. Similar to how a fossil forms, right? It has to be the proper conditions, otherwise nature gets it and recycles its elements leaving not a trace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I'm loving this discussion. I would like to ask Skip N. if he has any theories or if he can put us to any theories on the origins of the abiogenic oil. I mean in specific terms not just a general idea that "the earth makes the oil." Any answer is appreciated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Maybe it's been there since the place formed... there are vast clouds of Hydrocarbons in deep space spectral analyses... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuaiDan Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Two compelling bits of evidence I've heard to support the abiotic origins or crude oil are as follows: Optical properties of crude oil. Two chemical compounds can have the exact same chemical formula in an identical arrangement, save for the fact that the molecules are mirror images of each other. Most organic compounds of a biological nature will contain only one isomer of the compound, crude oil frequently contains both. This makes crude oil less light refractive. Location of crude deposits. Most crude deposits are found in locations that would be very inconvenient for massive amounts of biologically generated organic material to settle or accumulate. I'd have to google the source, so for now just take it as hearsay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 From my leaking memory of optical isomer formation, the presence would be dependnet on how the oil had been heated and what pressures it been at. Effectively, crude oil has been cooked and crushed and cooled numerous times... I'm looking forward to expanding my knowledge in this area... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Isn't it fascinating how God put the oil in the ground for us humans to find it and pollute and ruin the planet? ... (And quickly I run out of the room... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 GLORY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts