YFIS Discussion Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 22, 2012, 12:52:13 PM
25943 Posts in 5463 Topics by 6581 Members
Latest Member: Forex Expert Advisor Revi
Home Help Search Login Register
YFIS Discussion Board  |  General  |  Science and Technology  |  Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen.  (Read 4929 times)
Stonewall
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 0


Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen.
« on: November 15, 2005, 07:38:52 PM »

In 2003, the proved oil reserves of the world was 156.700 million metric tonnes.

In 1999, it was 147.785.

In 1995, 141.928.

In 1991, 139.048... In 1987, 124.558... In 1983, 98.620...
(http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/energy-resources/variable-1209.html)

Recognise any patterns there?

The oil reserves of the world are not exactly running out, somehow miracoulously, they seem to be building up.

According the Washington Post (June 6, 2004) , the world is on the verge of oil famine.

BBC News declares "as certain as death and taxes, we shall one day be forced to learn to live without oil." Further, "people in middle age today can probably expect to be here" for the terminal oil shortages.

CBS, NBC and ABC have all presented grim and frightening reports of rapacious oil executives, unfeeling consumers, gas-guzzling SUVs and declining oil stocks, mostly in the powder keg countries of the Middle East. The unmistakable conclusion: An energy disaster of epic proportions is just around the corner.

Literally dozens of books and hundreds of websites used to paint a consistent and alarming picture of the decline of the American Empire and the end of the Age of Oil, until the latest news about MADCIC.

Could this be true? Are we really sliding downhill into a future defined by scarce resources, alternative fuels and mandatory conservation – a nightmare of strong governmental controls and diminished expectations?

The surprising answer: No.

The world has plenty of oil.

According to the United States Geological Survey, the U.S. Department of Energy and many, many other reputable sources, we have sufficient oil resources for at least the next several hundred years, maybe longer. The costs of extraction will likely be higher, but scarcity? No.

Without the emotional "the end of the world as we know it," paranoia from the traditional media, let's actually look at world oil reserves.

Currently, the world's recognized reserves of oil are higher than at any time in history. And, contrary to conventional media hysteria, the world's clearly identified reserves are growing every year. The USGS reports in the "World Petroleum Assessment 2000" that world reserves of conventional crude oil total 3,000 billion barrels. This estimate is an increase from a similar estimate in 1994 of 2,400 billion barrels, up from 1,500 billion barrels in 1990.

But this report considers only "liquid" or conventional oil – oil that's accessible and readily available from underground reservoirs. This does not include highly viscous oils, oil-tar sand deposits or oil shale.

The major media focuses with myopic intensity on conventional crude reserves, ignoring stunning reserves of oil located in tar sands and oil shale. At best, this is difficult to comprehend.

For example, little media attention was accorded to the dramatic increases in Canadian oil reserves. A December 2003 report in Oil and Gas Journal notes that Canada's oil reserves now total more than 180 billion barrels of oil, with most found in economically recoverably oil-tar sand deposits. In contrast, Saudi Arabia's reserves are estimated at 264 billion barrels.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers sees the oil sand reservoir at a stunning 2,000 billion barrels of crude, of which 315 billion barrels is currently recoverable. This is oil economically viable at prices between $18 and $20 per barrel. World wide, recoverable reserves of oil found in oil sands are currently reported in excess of 1,000 billion barrels.

But by far the largest potential reservoir of future oil is held in oil shale.

The U.S. Department of Energy, in a March 2004 study, reports oil shale reserves in the United States alone of over 2,000 billion barrels. World wide, oil-shale reserves are estimated as high as 14,000 billion barrels.

To put this in perspective, U.S. oil-shale reserves alone would be sufficient to provide 100 percent of U.S. crude oil consumed at current usage for over 200 years.

Worldwide reserves of 14,000 billion barrels are sufficient to provide the world's crude oil requirements for at least several hundred years.

The truth is, the history of oil prognostication is littered with scaremongers proclaiming false declarations of approaching oil famine. In fact, doom merchants have used oil as a vehicle for "end of the world" scenarios since before World War I. Consider:

* In 1914, the U.S. Bureau of Mines declared that the United States would run out of oil in 10 years.

* In 1939, the Department of the Interior predicted that oil reserves would last only 13 more years.

* In 1950, when the world's estimated reserves were thought to be 600 billion barrels, the Department of Interior again projected the end of the age of oil by 1963.

* Move forward to the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which prompted the highly respected journal Foreign Affairs to publish an article on "The Oil Crisis: This Time the Wolf is Here."

* In 1981, a respected textbook on economic geology predicted that the United States was entering a 125-year-long energy gap, expected to be at its worst in the year 2000 with dire consequences to our standard of living.

* In 1995, a prominent geologist predicted that petroleum production would peak in 1996 and that after 1999 many of the developed world's societies would look like Third World countries.

* In 1998, a Scientific American article titled "End of the Age of Oil" predicted that world oil production would peak in 2002 and that we would soon face the "end of the abundant and cheap oil on which all nations depend."

All of these predictions were wrong. In fact, from 1950 to the present, the world's recognized oil reserves have increased virtually every year.

The current USGS world estimate of 3,000 billion barrels of conventional crude is probably conservative. Consider Iraq. Only 2,300 oil wells have been drilled in Iraq, compared with over 1 million wells drilled in Texas. Furthermore, only 22 of the more than 80 major Iraqi oil fields have been fully explored.

Iraq is reported to have 112 billion barrels of oil reserves. But based on unexplored reserves, many geologists believe that actual number is more than twice current estimates.

Even North American reserves of conventional oil are probably understated since recent deep oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico has identified a huge vat of oil. President Fox has stated that the new reserves may be as large as 56 billion barrels. Deep oil wells are drilled to 25,000 feet below ground surface and represent a new frontier in oil exploration.

A classic example of oil reserve understatement is the Kern River field in California, where production wells were first drilled in 1899. By 1942, after 43 years of continuous pumping, remaining Kern River oil was estimated at 54 million barrels. Pumping continued, and over the next 50 years, the field produced over 736 million barrels. In 1986, using 3D mapping technology, the reservoir was reported to contain an additional reserve of over 970 million barrels.

Eventually the world will move from an oil-based economy to something better. But given the huge reserves of world oil, it's likely that technology will drive this change, not scarcity.

The deposits of hydrocarbons in the crust of the Earth have long been regarded by many investigators as deriving from materials incorporated in the mantle at the time of the Earth's formation. Outgassing processes, active in all geological epochs, then transported the liquids and gases liberated there into porous rocks of the crust. The alternative viewpoint, that biological debris was the source material for all crustal hydrocarbons, gained widespread acceptance when molecules of clearly biological origin were found to be present in most commercial crude oils.

Modern information re-directs attention to the theories of a non-biological, primeval origin. Among this information is the prominence of hydrocarbons—gases, liquids and solids—on many other bodies of the solar system, as well as in interstellar space. Advances in high-pressure thermodynamics have shown that the pressure-temperature regime of the Earth would allow hydrocarbon molecules to be formed and to survive between the surface and a depth of 100 to 300 km. Outgassing from such depth would bring up other gases present in trace amounts in the rocks, thus accounting for the well known association of hydrocarbons with helium. Recent discoveries of the widespread presence of bacterial life at depth point to this as the origin of the biological content of petroleum. The carbon budget of the crust requires an outgassing process to have been active throughout the geologic record, and information from planets and meteorites, as well as from mantle samples, would suggest that methane rather than CO2 could be the major souce of surface carbon. Isotopic fractionation of methane in its migration through rocks is indicated by numerous observations, providing an alternative to biological processes that have been held responsible for such fractionation. Information from deep boreholes in granitic and volcanic rock of Sweden has given support to the theory of the migration of gas and oil from depth, to the occurrence of isotopic fractionation in migration, to an association with helium, and to the presence of microbiology below 4 km depth.

In favor of an origin from deeply buried materials incorporated in the Earth when it formed, the following observations have been cited:

(1) Petroleum and methane are found frequently in geographic patterns of long lines or arcs, which are related more to deep-seated large-scale structural features of the crust, than to the smaller scale patchwork of the sedimentary deposits.

(2) Hydrocarbon-rich areas tend to be hydrocarbon-rich at many different levels, corresponding to quite different geological epochs, and extending down to the crystalline basement that underlies the sediment. An invasion of an area by hydrocarbon fluids from below could better account for this than the chance of successive deposition.

(3) Some petroleums from deeper and hotter levels lack almost completely the biological evidence . Optical activity and the odd-even carbon number effect are sometimes totally absent, and it would be difficult to suppose that such a thorough destruction of the biological molecules had occurred as would be required to account for this, yet leaving the bulk substance quite similar to other crude oils.

(4) Methane is found in many locations where a biogenic origin is improbable or where biological deposits seem inadequate: in great ocean rifts in the absence of any substantial sediments; in fissures in igneous and metamorphic rocks, even at great depth; in active volcanic regions, even where there is a minimum of sediments; and there are massive amounts of methane hydrates (methane-water ice combinations) in permafrost and ocean deposits, where it is doubtful that an adequate quantity and distribution of biological source material is present.

(5) The hydrocarbon deposits of a large area often show common chemical or isotopic features, quite independent of the varied composition or the geological ages of the formations in which they are found. Such chemical signatures may be seen in the abundance ratios of some minor constituents such as traces of certain metals that are carried in petroleum; or a common tendency may be seen in the ratio of isotopes of some elements, or in the abundance ratio of some of the different molecules that make up petroleum. Thus a chemical analysis of a sample of petroleum could often allow the general area of its origin to be identified, even though quite different formations in that area may be producing petroleum. For example a crude oil from anywhere in the Middle East can be distinguished from an oil originating in any part of South America, or from the oils of West Africa; almost any of the oils from California can be distinguished from that of other regions by the carbon isotope ratio.

(6) The regional association of hydrocarbons with the inert gas helium, and a higher level of natural helium seepage in petroleum-bearing regions, has no explanation in the theories of biological origin of petroleum.

« Last Edit: November 16, 2005, 08:02:50 PM by Stonewall » Logged
ckaihatsu
Cyberspace Sovereign
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 163



WWW
Re: Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen.
« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2006, 09:18:18 PM »

I've been thinking: If this information is accurate then the term 'fossil' in "fossil fuels" is *very* misleading.  (!)


Chris



___

YFIS Discussion Board
http://discussion.newyouth.com/search.php?s=&action=finduser&userid=598

Favorite web sites: chicago.indymedia.org, wsws.org, marxist.com,
rwor.org, fightbacknews.org, laboraction.org, substancenews.com,
socialismandliberation.org, whatreallyhappened.com, plenglish.com,
moneyfiles.org/temp.html, informationclearinghouse.info,
blackcommentator.com, narconews.com, truthout.org, raven1.net

Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
http://community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/
Logged
marlin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 0


Re: Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen.
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2006, 05:13:18 PM »

Great post Stonewall. After considerable time spent looking into the origins of petroleum myself, I concur with all the points you make in your analysis above.

In 1956 Academician Professor Vladimir B. Porfir’yev, senior petroleum exploration geologist for the U.S.S.R., told the All-Union Conference on Petroleum and Petroleum Geology, Moscow that: The overwhelming preponderance of geological evidence compels the conclusion that crude oil and natural petroleum gas have no intrinsic connection with biological matter originating near the surface of the Earth.  They are primordial materials which have been erupted from great depths.”
 
In 1963 Nobel Laureate and member of the Royal Society, Sir Robert Robinson, made detailed studies of natural petroleum and concluded: Actually it cannot be too strongly emphasized that petroleum does not present the composition picture expected from modified biogenic products, and all the arguments from the constituents of ancient oils fit equally well, or better, with the conception of a primordial hydrocarbon mixture to which bio-products have been added. Mendeleyev, who discovered the Periodic table, said more or less the same thing in 1870. Many of Robinson's papers incidentally have never seen the light of day/ They are held under lock and key by the oil giant Shell for whom Robinson worked.

In 1968 Professor Emmanuil B. Chekaliuk, informed the All-Union Conference on Petroleum and Petroleum Geology in Moscow that: Statistical thermodynamic analysis has established clearly that hydrocarbon molecules which comprise petroleum require very high pressures for their spontaneous formation, comparable to the pressures required for the same of diamond.  In that sense, hydrocarbon molecules are the high-pressure polymorphs of the reduced carbon system as is diamond of elemental carbon.  Any notion which might suggest that hydrocarbon molecules spontaneously evolve in the regimes of temperature and pressure characterized by the near-surface of the Earth, which are the regimes of methane creation and hydrocarbon destruction, does not even deserve consideration.”

In 1982 British astronomer and cosmologist  Fred Hoyle said: The suggestion that petroleum might have arisen from some transformation of squashed fish or biological detritus is surely the silliest notion to have been entertained by substantial numbers of persons over an extended period of time.

The French scientist and Nobel nominee, C. Louis Kervran, also proposed a revolutionary theory for the genesis of coal and oil:

Coal comes from schists, fabricated in situ, by high compression that produced the reactions: Si ® C + O. If O could not escape, and was compressed as well, one would have O + O ® S, from which one gets sulfurous coals. If there was no deformation, the coal remains mixed with argil to produce ampelite.

The presence of carbon in metamorphic and silicate rocks, formed long before there was any vegetation on Earth, is a clear demontration:

Graphite cannot be of vegetal origin, in which case another origin must be found for it, and I propose the silicium of these Archaean rocks. As for diamonds... here, too, one observes the presence of silicates, thus of silicon... In this way one can explain why all coal deposits contain silicon (up to 20%, or even 40%, and more) which form 'ashes'. The great amounts of silicon might be an indication that the transmutation from Si to C + O was imperfect, incomplete.

Kervran claimed that petroleum was not formed from flesh or plants, but from the reaction Mg ® C + C at great depth. If water is present, the hydrogen combines with carbon, and the oxygen forms sulfur (O + O ® S), giving sulfurous oil. The Mg can come from a pocket of saline water when Na + H ® Mg. Otherwise, Mg also can come from Ca or from adjacent layers of dolomitic rock. Oil deposits in the Sahara have been found in pre-Carboniferous rocks (Devonian and Cambrian-Ordovician) and in dolomite. Usually there is no communication between layers of petroleum deposits of different composition which are widely separated by hundreds of meters of impermeable rock. Kervran concluded:

The whole problem of prospection should be thought out all over again.

And finally, for now, as MIT professor Morris Adelman, one of America's foremost energy experts puts it — "the great oil shortage is like the horizon, always receding as one moves toward it."
Logged
marlin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 0


Re: Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen.
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2006, 03:28:21 PM »

In 1757, Mikhail Lomonosov hypothesized that oil was formed from dead marine and other animals. This was rejected about 50 years later by Alexander von Humboldt and French chemist and thermodynamicist Louis Joseph Gay-Lussac -they said oil is a primordial material that erupts from deep down in the Earth. Biasson and Sokolov developed French chemist Marcellin Berthelot’s Kolbe reaction experiments to show that petroleum is abiogenic. In the last quarter of the 19th century, Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev examined and rejected Lomonosov’s hypothesis, concluding that petroleum is a primordial material erupted from a great depth, and even hypothesized “deep faults” through which the petroleum reached the earth’s surface.

Apart from the estimates that if oil originated from vegetation then all the possible oil ever created would have long been used up (according to B.P. Tissot and D.H. Welte’s “Petroleum Formation and Occurrence”, 1978, less than 0.1% of such matter might be transformed into organic carbon), the point that oil occurs at greater depths than any fossil, and the fact that petroleum occurs in many places along the edges of the Earth’s tectonic plates, a number of more technical points are argued by J. F. Kenney and a group of Russian specialists.

http://www.gasresources.net/DisposalBioClaims.htm


The case for abiogenic oil includes the following arguments: The laws of thermodynamics prohibit spontaneous evolution of liquid hydrocarbons in the regime of temperature and pressure within the crust of the Earth; simply because certain molecules found in natural petroleum “look like” molecules found in biological systems, does not mean the former must “come-from” the latter; the only biological molecules observed in natural petroleum are contaminants; and claims about “biomarkers” have been thoroughly discredited by observations of those molecules in the interiors of ancient, abiotic meteorites and in laboratory synthesis using the Fischer-Tropsch process.

The Russian-Ukrainian petrologists point to the theory’s success:

“There are presently more than 80 oil and gas fields in the Caspian district alone which were explored and developed by applying the perspective of the modern theory and which produce from the crystalline basement rock (Krayushkin, Chebanenko et al. 1994). Similarly, such exploration in the western Siberia cratonic-rift sedimentary basin has developed 90 petroleum fields of which 80 produce either partly or entirely from the crystalline basement. The exploration and discoveries of the 11 major and 1 giant fields on the northern flank of the Dneiper-Donets basin have already been noted. There are presently deep drilling exploration projects under way in Azerbaijan, Tatarstan, and Asian Siberia directed to testing potential oil and gas reservoirs in the crystalline basement.”

http://www.gasresources.net/energy_resources.htm


Thus, since oil reserves are not limited by decaying organic detritus but have a primordial origin within the Earth’s vast mantle, there can be no question of their depletion in the foreseeable future. Nor is the presence of oil the only mineral detectable by study of the Earth’s tectonic plates. An article published by the Houston Geological Society in April, 2003, makes a number of interesting statements:

“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. ... A recent tectonic synthesis of Mexico ore deposits and tectonics has implications for worldwide giant petroleum accumulations and resulted from the incorporation of new constraints related to the regional geographic distribution of crustal oxidation states … In the Mexico region, over 500 additional oil and gas field occurrences were used to constrain crustal oxidation state. Petroleum occurrences can regionally coexist with other commodities (such as diamond, gold, and tin, antimony, mercury, lithium, and tantalum).”

http://www.hgs.org/en/articles/printview.asp?34
Logged
orwellcommie
Member
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126

0


WWW
Re: Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen.
« Reply #4 on: June 21, 2007, 03:26:23 PM »

The point I'd like to interject isn't that we ought to be worried about the use of fossil fuels for fear they will run out in our lifetimes.  The more pressing concern is that of the enviromental effects of constant greenhouse gass emmissions.  Some have said that trend of global warming is some how not as real as enviromentalists would have us believe however I have yet to see anyone actually counter the scientific pricipals behind what can be shown to be the ongoing effects of global warming.  The use of alternative energies is simple more benificial to mankind, even if some how global warming we just a myth and the world wasn't at risk as a result of it's effects me already know full well smog and air polution itself is no myth, that alone is reason enough to switch from automobiles that run on fossil fuels to ones that run on non-poluting energy sources.  Comrads this issue though not quite as important as say current millitary trends is still a very crucial topic for the long term success of humanity on this planet. 
Logged

Come read all the works of George Orwell for FREE at WWW.George-Orwell.org

"They're going to shoot me in the back of the kneck for this but I don't Care DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER,  they Always shoot you in the back of the kneck, I don't care DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER!!!"  1984 - George Orwell
marlin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 0


Re: Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen.
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2007, 10:05:17 PM »

The point I'd like to interject isn't that we ought to be worried about the use of fossil fuels for fear they will run out in our lifetimes.  The more pressing concern is that of the enviromental effects of constant greenhouse gass emmissions.  Some have said that trend of global warming is some how not as real as enviromentalists would have us believe however I have yet to see anyone actually counter the scientific pricipals behind what can be shown to be the ongoing effects of global warming.  The use of alternative energies is simple more benificial to mankind, even if some how global warming we just a myth and the world wasn't at risk as a result of it's effects me already know full well smog and air polution itself is no myth, that alone is reason enough to switch from automobiles that run on fossil fuels to ones that run on non-poluting energy sources.  Comrads this issue though not quite as important as say current millitary trends is still a very crucial topic for the long term success of humanity on this planet. 

You are wrong about global warming. "Global warming", "Peak Oil", anti-nucliar power for peaceful purposes, etc, are just some of the components of a new form of warfare — "Green" warfare — being waged against the masses. Carbon dioxide is a non poisonous atmospheric trace gas and has existed in far higher abundances in the atmosphere in the past than it does today, without any sign of it having resulted in runaway global warming anywhere in the whole of the paleological record. The computer model generated idea that increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide somehow reflects or reradiates heat or energy back to the Earths surface thereby causing additional warming, is a straightforward violation of the second law of thermodynamics, which holds that heat always moves from regions of higher density of heat to regions of lower density of heat. When a CO2 molecule absorbs IR radiation it causes an increase in the kinetic energy of the particles that form that molecule. This kinetic energy (or motion) causes the particles to emit heat, which in turn is transferred to other less hot regions of the molecule or towards other systems of lower heat density. Thus, the radiative effect of C02 cannot violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Contrary to what IPCC models suggest, C02 in the stratosphere cannot warm the troposphere. The troposphere is dominated by water vapor, where the 2nd law also applies, since the temperature gradiant increases as we move toward the surface. In other words, nothing in the atmosphere can warm the surface radiatively.

Land and oceans radiate IR, atmospheric water vapor (and to a lesser extent C02) absorb IR, and by conduction and convection, heat is transferred to other atmospheric components such as oxygen and nitrogen. Radiation from the troposphere up is from all the components of the atmosphere, dominated by nitrogen, oxygen, and water vapor. It’s a mistake to consider radiation on its own, or to think in terms of “re-radiate”.


Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0707.1161

Heat Stored By Greenhouse Gases
http://biocab.org/Heat_Stored.html

Greenhouse warming? What greenhouse warming?
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton_papers/greenhouse_warming_what_greenhouse_warming_.html

Consensus? What consensus?
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton_papers/consensus_what_consensus_among_climate_scientists_the_debate_is_not_over.html
« Last Edit: September 24, 2007, 12:43:28 PM by marlin » Logged
Empiricist
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 0


Re: Peak Oil: How it's not going to happen.
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2008, 01:11:15 PM »

Balderdash.

Oil that we use for vehicles comes from decayed animals and plant from millions and millions of years ago.

Since those animals (Dinosaur) were only around for so long, thhat means oil will only be here for a period of time.

We are using oil at a faster rate then oil being produce by nature
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to: