The Study: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/04/04/1014804108.full.pdf+html?sid=98416857-96a4-4487-847a-4617eca0a016
Determining the thermochemical properties of hydrocarbons (HCs) at high pressure and temperature is a key step toward understanding carbon reservoirs and fluxes in the deep Earth. The stability of carbon-hydrogen systems at depths greater than a few thousand meters is poorly understood and the extent of abiogenic HCs in the Earth mantle remains controversial. We report ab initio molecular dynamics simulations and free energy calculations aimed at investigating the formation of higher HCs from dissociation of pure methane, and in the presence of carbon surfaces and transition metals, for pressures of 2 to 30 GPa and temperatures of 800 to 4,000 K. We show that for T ≥ 2,000 K and P ≥ 4 GPa HCs higher than methane are energetically favored. Our results indicate that higher HCs become more stable between 1,000 and 2,000 K and P ≥ 4 GPa. The interaction of methane with a transition metal facilitates the formation of these HCs in a range of temperature where otherwise pure methane would be metastable. Our results provide a unified interpretation of several recent experiments and a detailed microscopic model of methane dissociation and polymerization at high pressure and temperature.
Refreshing that we are finally applying some of these science resources to understanding the source of energy of modern industry.
That would be a shocking discovery.....OIL IS RENEWABLE!
1 posted on
05/11/2011 11:03:06 AM PDT by
dila813
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
To: dila813; sully777; vigl; Cagey; Abathar; A. Patriot; B Knotts; getsoutalive; muleskinner; ...
Rest In Peace, old friend, your work is finished.....
If you want ON or OFF the DIESEL KnOcK LIST just FReepmail me.....
This is a fairly HIGH VOLUME ping list on some days.....
2 posted on
05/11/2011 11:04:17 AM PDT by
Red Badger
(Jesus said there is no marriage in Heaven. That's why they call it Heaven............)
To: dila813
OIL has always been renewable..........it never wears out...............
3 posted on
05/11/2011 11:05:35 AM PDT by
Red Badger
(Jesus said there is no marriage in Heaven. That's why they call it Heaven............)
To: dila813; markomalley; Bockscar; Thunder90; Dr. Bogus Pachysandra; Normandy; FreedomPoster; ...
4 posted on
05/11/2011 11:07:11 AM PDT by
steelyourfaith
(If it's "green" ... it's crap !!!)
To: dila813
Swedish scientists have also stated that oil supplies do not deplete permanently (about a year ago, I think)—that they are renewable.
5 posted on
05/11/2011 11:07:49 AM PDT by
DallasDeb
To: dila813
7 posted on
05/11/2011 11:13:23 AM PDT by
vanilla swirl
(We are the Patrick Henry we have been waiting for!)
To: dila813
Mass balances have hinted at this for a long time. In short, either there was A LOT more plant life that got wiped out in a cataclysmic event, or something else is going on.
We know you can make oil from dead plants, and that you can make hydrocarbons from methane. We are even fairly sure that a lot of the oils came from (in part) dead things. But it hints at a lot of it came from somewhere else. The Russians have suspected so for a long time.
8 posted on
05/11/2011 11:14:32 AM PDT by
redgolum
("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
To: dila813
Deep Hot Biosphere ping. Dr. Gold was right. Too bad that conflicts with wooden-headed Luddites and eco-nutjob types view of the world.
9 posted on
05/11/2011 11:16:22 AM PDT by
Noumenon
("One man with courage is a majority." - Thomas Jefferson)
To: dila813
I've always wondered aobut oil being a "fossil" fuel as defined by being the residue of earlier biological activity. There isn't any doubt about coal, but hydrocarbons were part of the solar nebula and doubtless condensed into the planets in varying degrees. Oil may be the result of geological activity on primal hydrocarbons that condensed when the planet did.
I believe some geologist sold one of the scandanavian countries on the theory that there were a lot of deep hydrocarbons, and they ran a really deep well. Found some methane, but not enough to make it worth drilling the hole.
10 posted on
05/11/2011 11:18:00 AM PDT by
from occupied ga
(Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
To: dila813
OIL IS RENEWABLE! For a long time I have had the opinion that petroleum was not a 'fossil' fuel. Look at the world oil consumption and try to figure out how many dinosaurs would have to die to supply that much oil.
At one time, I had taken the amount of oil rendered from the largest baleen whale on record and had come up with a 'baleen equivalent' number for the world oil consumption. Seem like it was in the neighborhood of 275,000 large baleen whales would have to die every day to supply the worlds oil consumption.
11 posted on
05/11/2011 11:20:59 AM PDT by
tbpiper
To: dila813
Unfortunately, there is no porosity or permeability for it to be stored or to flow through, except fractures. Think granite or concrete with a hairline crack in it.
To: dila813
Geologists and geochemists believe that nearly all (more than 99 percent) of the hydrocarbons in commercially produced crude oil and natural gas are formed by the decomposition of the remains of living organisms, which were buried under layers of sediments in the Earth's crust, a region approximately 5-10 miles below the Earth's surface.
13 posted on
05/11/2011 11:27:53 AM PDT by
fso301
To: zot
H’mmmm, oil as a renewable resource. Naw, greenies will get a consensus that it isn’t.
15 posted on
05/11/2011 11:33:50 AM PDT by
GreyFriar
(Spearhead - 3rd Armored Division 75-78 & 83-87)
To: dila813
Oil is not a “fossil” fuel. Evidence for its abiotic generation has been known of for quite some time now.
16 posted on
05/11/2011 11:34:38 AM PDT by
zeugma
(The only thing in the social security trust fund is your children and grandchildren's sweat.)
To: dila813
A new computational study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reveals how hydrocarbons may be formed from methane in deep Earth at extreme pressures and temperatures. LOL! This has been known for over a DECADE. The "fossil fuels" model was dropped by the Russians in favor of "abiotic oil" long ago. See The Deep Hot Biosphere (1998).
21 posted on
05/11/2011 11:46:28 AM PDT by
Carry_Okie
(Grovelnator Schwarzenkaiser, fashionable fascism one charade at a time.)
To: dila813
Russian scientists have believed this for a long time, haven’t they?
To: dila813
No, it's even better.
The hydrocarbon economy is SUSTAINABLE!
31 posted on
05/11/2011 12:59:16 PM PDT by
1010RD
(First, Do No Harm)
To: dila813
Methane I hear...
35 posted on
05/11/2011 1:28:41 PM PDT by
wastedyears
(SEAL SIX makes me proud to have been playing SOCOM since 2003.)
To: dila813
It doesn't matter if oil is renewable.
What matters is the rate of renewal versus the rate of consumption. If the rate of renewal is much less than the rate of consumption, then we will very soon need to cut back sharply on our usage.
We can be very sure that the rate of production over the last few hundred million years is much less than the rate of consumption over the last 100 years -- otherwise we would have had oceans of oil to deal with.
36 posted on
05/11/2011 1:43:07 PM PDT by
PapaBear3625
("It is only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything" -- Fight Club)
To: dila813
37 posted on
05/11/2011 1:48:38 PM PDT by
iceskater
(11/2/10 - the beginning of the beginning of restoration.)
To: dila813
These guys are obviously wrong.
I buried a carp in my back yard.
Any day now, I should be able to top off my tank...
;-)
38 posted on
05/11/2011 1:53:22 PM PDT by
djf
(One mouth. Two ears. Is that some kind of hint???)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson