Jump to content

Revolutionary Discovery Means World May Not Run Out Of Crude


nivek
 Share

Recommended Posts

So the dinos that did not lumber onto the Ark were NOT made into dino-oil?

 

"Ahm sooo konfussed!" No, wait, no I'm not!

 

kL

************

djlogo.gifhttp://www.digitaljournal.com/article/279153

Revolutionary discovery means world may not run out of crude

Posted Sep 13, 2009 by Stephanie Dearing A team of scientists based at the Royal Institute of Technology inSweden have made a "revolutionary" discovery about how hydrocarbon isformed, learning that animal and plant fossils are not necessary toform crude oil.The discovery, the scientists say, means that the world will never run out of crude oil. Currently, theory statesthat crude oil is formed very slowly - over millions of years - fromthe remains of dead plants and animals. Buried under rock, over timethe pressure and temperature of natural earth processes results in thecreation of crude oil. But that theory is now old news, as thescientists, led by Vladimir Kutcherov, say they have proven thatfossilized plants and animals are not needed to create hydrocarbons.

“Using our research we can even say where oil could be found in Sweden,”

Kutcherov told Science Daily.The article, titled Methane-derived hydrocarbons produced under upper mantle conditions, and published in Nature Geoscience, states that

"Whetherhydrocarbons can also be produced from abiogenic precursor moleculesunder the high-pressure, high-temperature conditions characteristic ofthe upper mantle remains an open question. It has been proposed thathydrocarbons generated in the upper mantle could be transported throughdeep faults to shallower regions in the Earth’s crust, and contributeto petroleum reserves."

Kutcherov has said that his nextstep is to conduct experiments that will help him refine his new methodfor finding drilling points.The idea of endless oil mightbe a bane to environmentalists and high-stakes oil production fields,such as Canada's oil sands, but most of the world's population willthrill to the idea that they will not have to give up their belovedautomobiles.

 

Not only will it be a much simplermatter to find and extract petroleum fuels, but, as Kutcherov'stheories become reality, prices for natural gas and gasoline productsshould decrease. Kutcherov said the world is reliant on crude oil andnatural gas, which makes up 61% of fuels currently used.Kutcherov had recently proventhat hydrocarbons can be created out of water, calcium carbonate andiron, and this means that crude oil is a sustainable, renewableresource, according to reports. However, this discovery does not mean that emissions from the combustion of hydrocarbons do not create climate change.

 

Kutcherov is a professor at the Royal Institute of Technology in Sweden.Last year Science Magazine published an article that said crude oil is created by an abiotic processand not from fossil fuels. These recent discoveries were found bybuilding on a German process referred to as the Fischer-Tropsch type(FTT) genesis. Germany had plenty of coal but very little petroleum,which prompted a serious push by German scientists to find a way tocreate a substitute fuel. The FTT process was developed and patented inthe 1920s, and was subsequently used throughout World War II by Germanyand Japan. The process has been the basis for the creation of jet fuel made from water in the United States, as reported by Wired magazine.

 

While Kucherov's experiments have been proven in the laboratory, theyhave yet to be translated into reality, and there is no word on howlong the world might have to wait to take advantage of the newdiscoveries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno- I go back and forth on this 'abiotic' theory. On one hand, I find it hard to imagine how plants & animals of any sort could find themselves easily a MILE under the surface. I guess it seems plausible here and there- but oil well depths of a mile+ are COMMON. I know next to nothing about geology, but I've never heard a good explanation as to how that happened.

 

On the other hand- there's coal. It's a fossil fuel that isn't THAT different from oil- it can be easily hundreds of feet below the surface... maybe a couple thousand. I've been in/around old mines and I've SEEN distinct fossils in the shale immediately surrounding the coal vein. So I've no doubt that coal is truly a "fossil fuel".

 

Also, while I know almost nothing about geology- I do know quite a bit about math, physics, and engineering. And I have some idea of the rigor involved in academia- especially when it comes to a scientific field. I just find it hard to believe that academics in a field like geology (where theories can be clearly tested and falsified) have been overlooking and/or actively ignoring the obvious for generations. (I don't believe in 'intelligent design' either.)

 

I did a quick google search to try and find the original source of the article. Didn't find much, except that this article is posted all over the likes of FreeRepublic.com. So yeah, I have my doubts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The oil industry is desperately trying to come up with a new source of crude oil, because it's a zero-sum resource. Only big corporations can play, unlike the renewable energy field.

 

The thing that amazes me is how many people seem to think it would be a good thing to continue running the world on an easily-monopolized energy source which causes pollution problems at every stage, from extraction through refining and of course eventual burning. Crude oil is not a long-term solution for the world's energy needs, even if we can come up with an unending supply of the stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the dinos that did not lumber onto the Ark were NOT made into dino-oil?

 

"Ahm sooo konfussed!" No, wait, no I'm not!

 

kL

************

 

While Kucherov's experiments have been proven in the laboratory, theyhave yet to be translated into reality, and there is no word on howlong the world might have to wait to take advantage of the newdiscoveries.

 

I'd be willing to grant the "abiotic theory" of oil production, but that doesn't translate into unending supplies of carbon based fuels. Geologists have known for a long time where to find fuels in places where there wasn't any reasonable expectation of pre-existing plant life, but they are still having difficulty finding new sources even with satellite imagery and other technologies for locating oil.

 

Peak Oil is a phenomenon that is still being disputed, but if there is a limit to oil reserves then the shit is going to hit the fan. Likewise even if oil production is outstripped by oil demand, we may see global consequences of catastrophic proportions.

 

But why worry?

 

We'll all be "raptured".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, while people who say oil is destructive to the environment you forget that until there is a significant alternative we really can't drop it. Noble causes only go so far. Rather than bash on oil, alternatives need to get more funding.

 

As for Peak oil. It would be great if it wasn't true, but until they have actually drilled into some nowheresville and pulled tons of oil out of Sweden I think it is best to dismiss these claims as hired-gun hype being bribed by oil companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Peak oil. It would be great if it wasn't true, but until they have actually drilled into some nowheresville and pulled tons of oil out of Sweden I think it is best to dismiss these claims as hired-gun hype being bribed by oil companies.

I doubt the professors or researchers at the Swedish KTH are lackeys in the hands of the oil companies. You make it sound like Sweden somehow would be playing for the American team. Sweden is proud for it's social democratic economical system as well as strict environmental laws, which makes it very odd if they had an interest in supporting the American oil industry. They have no gains in this. And if anyone at KTH would be bribed to say these things, they would be kicked out without even getting their boots on. But, if the grants given to the department is given from an external source, then the direction of the research could be affected. That's a possibility of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Peak oil. It would be great if it wasn't true, but until they have actually drilled into some nowheresville and pulled tons of oil out of Sweden I think it is best to dismiss these claims as hired-gun hype being bribed by oil companies.

I doubt the professors or researchers at the Swedish KTH are lackeys in the hands of the oil companies. You make it sound like Sweden somehow would be playing for the American team. Sweden is proud for it's social democratic economical system as well as strict environmental laws, which makes it very odd if they had an interest in supporting the American oil industry. They have no gains in this. And if anyone at KTH would be bribed to say these things, they would be kicked out without even getting their boots on. But, if the grants given to the department is given from an external source, then the direction of the research could be affected. That's a possibility of course.

Regardless of why the Swedish said what they did, there is yet to be any actual product that significantly affects oil reserves. And it would take a hell of a lot of oil to move the current predictions for Peak Oil.

 

There will be new discoveries of oil without doubt as we scour the earth for more oil. The problem is that estimated undiscovered oil reserves, even if 1/3 of current known reserves, is still limited. It is difficult to tell how undiscovered resources will affect Peak Oil and the upcoming Oil Wars of the 21st century, but the reference below gives some graphical and numerical data that may help.

 

http://www.daviesand.com/Perspectives/Forest_Products/Oil_Reserves/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that amazes me is how many people seem to think it would be a good thing to continue running the world on an easily-monopolized energy source which causes pollution problems at every stage, from extraction through refining and of course eventual burning. Crude oil is not a long-term solution for the world's energy needs, even if we can come up with an unending supply of the stuff.

 

Not only pollution, but wars over share. Maybe it's good for population control :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.