4 ms·
I see your sentiment, but the logic is a bit flawed. When we drill for hydrocarbons, we have good understanding of the geology of the reservoir; we know what ge
by gorkish 3y ago
I see your sentiment, but the logic is a bit flawed. When we drill for hydrocarbons, we have good understanding of the geology of the reservoir; we know what geologic era during which the deposits formed. Finding a bunch of new evidence for Precambrian photosynthesis is great, but it doesn't in any way imply that the bulk of the oil we produce is any older than we already know it to be. Very few precambrian deposits have ever been discovered or produced, though they most certainly are around. My understanding is a lot of the hydrocarbons from that time are thought to have been converted to bitumen and the like.
Not that any of this has any particular relevance. IMO humans have no business trying to plan for things on geologic timescales at this point in our development. Our governments struggle to forecast and act upon 10-20 year time horizons as it is.
- raffraffraff 3y agoI absolutely take your point, and I considered it before posting. But how long it take to evolve precisely the right conditions to create this reservoir-building machine?
- gorkish 3y ago> But how long it take to evolve precisely the right conditions to create this reservoir-building machine? I dont understand the nature of your question. A planet with carbon based life is a reservoir building machine. If you take environmentally available carbon and transform it into fantastically complex molecules through the miracle of biology, these molecules will eventually be buried and break down into a sludge of simpler molecules. The answer to your question here on earth is that as long as there is carbon based life, hydrocarbons in the geology are inevitable.