4 ms·

Oil may not be fossil derived, i.e. from dinosaurs. Abiotic theory says that it is produced die to the high heat and pressures of the earth's core. Russia has

by fwungy 4y ago

Oil may not be fossil derived, i.e. from dinosaurs. Abiotic theory says that it is produced die to the high heat and pressures of the earth's core. Russia has had great success in their oil discovery and field management with abiotic derived techniques. The peak oil supply curve may be a lot more deep on the right tail than is assumed. The peak may simply have been the draw down of the initial surplus, but known fields refill with time, and new fields can be discovered with search techniques based on abiotic theory. Western corporations have bet a lot of money on a peak oil transition driven crisis. It may never come.

kergonath 4y ago
> Abiotic theory says that it is produced die to the high heat and pressures of the earth's core. This is bullshit, though. Our best model for the Earth core has it made of iron, with an outer core of liquid iron and nickel. Lighter elements would not make sense from a simple physics perspective. Plus, we don’t really have any mechanism for stuff to get out of the core to the crust through the mantle. So I guess you mean mantle, but then that’s silicates. Again, that’s denser than carbon. We do know a couple of ways for matter to go from the upper mantle to the crust, but that matter is silicates. From a physical and thermodynamic all perspective, the only mechanisms that makes sense to get hydrocarbons underground imply that they come from the surface and get submerged. > The peak oil supply curve may be a lot more deep on the right tail than is assumed. That is an argument that can be made, but… > The peak may simply have been the draw down of the initial surplus, but known fields refill with time, and new fields can be discovered with search techniques based on abiotic theory. This is simply not happening. > Western corporations have bet a lot of money on a peak oil transition driven crisis. It may never come. Because it makes sense. They employ some of the best geologists and geophysicists, have access to more data than anyone else, and have more computing power than most other research entities to run their models on. They also hedge their bets because there are trillions of dollars at stake, so you’d think they’d be all over anything vaguely plausible.

by fwungy 4y ago

kergonath 4y ago

> Abiotic theory says that it is produced die to the high heat and pressures of the earth's core. This is bullshit, though. Our best model for the Earth core has it made of iron, with an outer core of liquid iron and nickel. Lighter elements would not make sense from a simple physics perspective. Plus, we don’t really have any mechanism for stuff to get out of the core to the crust through the mantle. So I guess you mean mantle, but then that’s silicates. Again, that’s denser than carbon. We do know a couple of ways for matter to go from the upper mantle to the crust, but that matter is silicates. From a physical and thermodynamic all perspective, the only mechanisms that makes sense to get hydrocarbons underground imply that they come from the surface and get submerged. > The peak oil supply curve may be a lot more deep on the right tail than is assumed. That is an argument that can be made, but… > The peak may simply have been the draw down of the initial surplus, but known fields refill with time, and new fields can be discovered with search techniques based on abiotic theory. This is simply not happening. > Western corporations have bet a lot of money on a peak oil transition driven crisis. It may never come. Because it makes sense. They employ some of the best geologists and geophysicists, have access to more data than anyone else, and have more computing power than most other research entities to run their models on. They also hedge their bets because there are trillions of dollars at stake, so you’d think they’d be all over anything vaguely plausible.