Posted on 04/25/2013 1:38:16 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
You don't have to read the article to figure that one out: It's that nasty See Oh Too, Al Gore's favorite gas.
“It’s been known for quite a while now that oil is produced from ROCK.”
From sands. Like river alluvial fans, for instance where lots of organic material is laid down.
Oil comes from microscopic dead marine (and lacustrine, or lake) plankton; not only is all the oil we find consistent with that (including all the shale oil, etc.) we can directly analyze oil to determine the types of little critters it came from (and geologists have NEVER claimed they come from “dead dinosaurs.”)
I realize people are obsessed with abiogenic oil theories on FR but they’re not taken nearly as seriously by real scientists as a lot of people claim here.
The earth is finite, and so are fossil fuels. They may be renewable, however. And there might be more than we could ever use.
/johnny
You are correct. Oil is finite.
But I’m not convinced old wells are depleted.
North of Calgary, heavy distillates are injected with CO2 to improve or restart production.
Inorganic Origin of Petroleum
http://origeminorganicadopetroleo.blogspot.com/2011/02/normal-0-21-false-false-false-pt-br-x.html
Organic carbon on Mars is abiotic
http://origeminorganicadopetroleo.blogspot.com/
There are TWO sources of hyrdrocarbons on earth.
One, deep within the earth, and it’s responsible for the majority.
Two, fossil fuels.
On other planets, where there is no life, the only hydrocarbons are the inorganic ones.
We have the benefit of both.
If you believe otherwise, you are no better than those who thought long ago that the universe revolved around the earth......
What do I mean here? If EVERY OTHER hydrocarbon in our known universe (venus, titan, Saturn, Jupiter) are abiotic, then WHY DOES SOMEHOW the Earth operate under a different set of rules? Last time I checked, our planet does not have a strange field that negates the laws of nature.
Suuuure.
1 gallon is 231 cubic inches
There are 42 gallons in a barrel of oil.
Saudi Arabias oil reserves are estimated to be around 300 BILLION barrels.
300 billion barrels x 42 gallons= 12.6 TRILLION gallons
There are 1.6845 TRILLION cubic feet in 300 billion barrels.
There are 7.48 gallons in a cubic foot.
There are 748 gallons in 100 cubic ft.
In order to express large volumes of water use, this water use is expressed in acre feet numbers. One acre foot equals 43,560 cubic feet or 435.6 hundred cubic feet and is equivalent to 326,700 gallons.
1 sq mile = 640 acres
1 sq mile x 1 foot deep = 209,088,000 gallons
That means 300 billion barrels would be 10 miles x 10 miles square x 604 feet deep.
Thats an awful lot of dinosaurs to NOT DECOMPOSE, but compress and turn into oil.
Thats JUST Saudi Arabias known oil reserves.
The average person is about 155 lbs.
1 gallon of water weighs 8.34 lbs. That means 1 person displaces about 18.5 gallons 12.6 TRILLION gallons divided by 18.5 gallons = 681,081,081,081
or 681 BILLION people
There are currently 7.112 BILLON people on earth
SOoooooo...It would take almost 100 TIMES the ENTIRE earths population of people to fill the volume of JUST Saudi Arabias oil fields.
Even if they have it on Mars and a billion other planets, it is still finite. I understand what they were trying to convey, but the word they want to use is not “infinite”. Maybe “inexhaustible” for humanity. Or “sufficient”.
All god news on the energy front is bad news to them. They won’t be happy until the people of Earth resemble the “Bring out yer dead” sketch...but my, isn’t the sky one part per billion clearer...
I understand what you mean, but in terms of human use, it might as well be “infinite” since we’ll have some other, superior source of energy long before we get near exhaustion, if that even occurs.
I am a believer in the theory that the earth itself manufactures hydrocarbons. However, that was not what I questioned. I said that the supply was not infinite. If you dispute that, you need to examine the meaning of the words I used.
From sands. Like river alluvial fans, for instance where lots of organic material is laid down.
Is that why there are tar seeps at the very deepest depths of the oceans?
Under that definition, I have an infinite supply of hair.
Still clinging to the dino theory, eh? Well, that's alright. At least you don't believe in the Moon God.
Well not quite. Churchill was undoubtably a Great Man (and nobody better at making the case for that than WSC himself), able to see a coming wave and ride it. But he didn't create the wave. If anybody that would be the previous First Sea Lord Admiral Jackie Fisher, known as an "oil maniac" since 1886. (Although he too had his flaws - he would have loved the LCS)
From Coal to Oil - Defense Technical Information Center>
One requirement, Fisher told Churchill, was that the Queen Elizabeth-class battleships be built as a fast division, able to outmaneuver and cross the T of the German fleet. In 1912, Fisher wrote to Churchill, “What you do want is the super-swift—all oil—and don’t fiddle about armour; it really is so very silly! There is only one defenceand that is speed!”9Which illustrates Churchill's blind spot: Great on the big picture; a little shakey on the details. By 1912 the gnats (cruisers and destroyers) were already being oil-fueled.The war college was asked how much speed a fast division would need to outmaneuver the German fleet. The answer was 25 knots, or at least four knots faster than possible at the time.
Churchill concluded, “We could not get the power required to drive these ships at 25 knots except by use of oil fuel.” This was enough for him. Queen Elizabeth-class battleships were built to burn oil only.
'Once this decision was made,' Churchill wrote, 'it followed that the rest of the Royal Navy would turn to oil: The fateful plunge was taken when it was decided to create the fast division. Then, for the first time, the supreme ships of the navy, on which our life depended, were fed by oil and could only be fed by oil. The decision to drive the smaller craft by oil followed naturally upon this. The camel once swallowed, the gnats went down easily enough.10'
That change, as in the case of the Queen Elizabeth battleships had been driven by technical and engineering requirements (not Churchill's strong suite)
In the early part of the century both German and British light warships were given high forecastles, for very different reasons. The German ships were high speed torpedo boats with a very weak gun armament (3 x 4pdr guns), the Britsh ships were seaworthy torpedo boat destroyer with weaker torpedo but a far heavier (4 x 12pdr) gun battery.
However that, together with the need for workd-wide deployment range meant the British "River"/E class ships were 3 knots slower than comtemporary German ones (losing the speed advantage previous British classes had)
That state was obviously unsatisfactory, so the next class the 1905 program "Tribal"/F class had 60% more diplacement, twice the horsepower, 4" guns, and speeds in the mid-30 knot range ("Snap, Kaiser Bill"), because they were oil fueled.
This created another problem - providing a flagship for the detroyer flotillas. The 26knot "E" class could be managaed by a 25 knot third class cruiser. But the F,H amd subsequent classes needed something faster - than meant oil fuel.
Enter the (designed before Churchill bought the ME oil) "Aurora" 3d class cruiser, similar tonnage to previous classes but twice the horse power and 29-30 knots. That meant Oil fuel was necessary.
Which introduced two complications. The first, loss of the protection od the coal bunkers, required addition of a 3" armourd belt, which added a managable 250 tons to the design.
The second rose from the fact than cruisers at this time were laid out like ships of Nelson's day - a row of guns along each broadside (6" in second class, 4" in third).
The "Aurora" swapped the fore and aft pair of 4" guns for single 6" on the centreline because the Hun had started to arm his destroyers with 3.5" guns and bigger is better.
It was then found that the additional speed meant the second pair of 4" was too wet to be fought in a seaway, so they were also swapped for a centreline 6".
The mixed gun calibres looked untidy, so next years 3d class cruisers had all centerline 6" armament. So now, compared to the "Town" 2d class cruisers, 3d class cruisers were 1500 tons lighter, crewed with a 100 fewer men, had the same 3" arnour, were 4-5 knots faster, and had the same broadside as the traditional layout 2d class ships - one type was clearly redundant.
Long story short, engineering, tactical, and strategic considerationa moved British cruisers and destroyers to oil fuel by 1913 (when Germans ships were still coal powered), before Churchill bought the oil.
“Is that why there are tar seeps at the very deepest depths of the oceans?”
I don’t know what you are getting at.
I know what they teach in conventional petroleum curriculum.
I can flip your elevation model, and take you to fossils seashells at 10,000 elevation. The sea floor and seashore aren’t like they always have been.
Plus decades of empirical production results, validate with decline curves, consistent with finite amounts of oil in the bearing strata.
I don’t know what you are getting at.
Sure you do. Tar is a petrochemical substance. If the dino theory is true, there shouldn't be any tar seeps at the furthest depths of the oceans.
If the dino theory is true, we ought to find oil deposits at the tops of the tallest mountains - right alongside fossil sea shells.
Most likely they are. There isn't much free oxygen there either, I would imagine. Otherwise, every spark of static electricity would give the astronomers something to ooh and aah over.
The reality is that every oil deposit on Earth has been found in association with rock rich in organic material from biological activity. While it may have migrated from that source rock to a better reservoir, the origins remain biologically linked.
I'm not sure where the dinosaur canard came from, but algae and plankton are the most common fossils involved, along with a host of marine, and more rarely freshwater invertebrates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.