Exactly.

It doesn't matter whether it's produced by biotic or abiotic processes or oil rays from Mars.

All that matters is that it took millions, maybe billions of years to create, and we'll have sucked it all up in under 2 centuries.

The difference is, it is biotically stinky or chemically stinky.

Is there any abiotic oil theories that quantify how much is being produced per day by Earth?

Hopefully it's 85 million bbl/d. It better be anyhow.

WOW. This thread is still going?

Thought it would've been flushed down the toilet a long time ago.

Magnet for stupidasses, I guess.

Hey KJ, ... lol... did I misspell a word or something???

I should have added, '... and 90 mb/d next year'.

Hey, were you not watching US debating whether they should teach Genesis as a science in US classrooms?

As long as those debates are around, abiotic will be around. I bet it is the same folks, too!

I thought they point to evidence of oil and gas bubbling up from the ground and the ocean nas evidence there is more oil and gas than we can produce?

I haven't read Black Gold Stranglehold, I'm convinced by the counterarguments set forth by Heinberg and others. Nor have I plowed all the way through the Abiotic Oil thread here.
Why do people bother to embrace this theory at all? The evidence is deeply weighed against it, why do they need to invoke it at all?

Is the abiotic oil theory embraced by some as somehow being in line with the Biblical history model? I can understand why Alex Jones would be behind it - your conspiracy of governments and corporations plus your not having to frighten your target audience with the overly distressing message that no one's going to be able to fill their tank someday.

So aside from (I assume) conservative Christians, maybe some scam artists (sell you an abiotic well, buddy? Cheap, never been used, replenishes itself!) and C2C guests doing battle with the Illuminati - why? It's like believing the Earth is hollow.

Desperation? They can't admit to the dieoff which is coming, not even to themselves, so they buy into whatever BS comes down the road?



Or flat. Or the sun won't rise tomorrow. Or little green men are going to invade. They are just scared, and can't embrace the oncoming dieoff without so much fear entering their bodies that they have to do ANYTHING else rather than face reality.

"Or little green men are going to invade."

Excellent!!!

Hoping to catch a ride off this rock when PO.com begins posting recipes on how to season asscheek.

Woah! Had my new post grafted on to the big 'un. Go back a page for details, including a rant about floridation. My questions don't have anything to do with Dr. Strangelove, however.

So what's this fascination with abiotic? Is it really being refined by subterannean Mole People? Is the answer back 10-15 pages?

An abiotic source of oil in the deep mantle/lower crust is incredibly unlikely. I have read the article linked that is "proof" of this process and it is scientifically flawed and easy to refute.

I am not a petroleum geologist, but I am an expert on igneous and meatmorphic petrology and study the deep mantle and lower crust. First, inorganic carbon does occur in the mantle and lower crust as graphite, diamond at high pressure, CO2 and methane. There are fluid inclusions which contain both methane and CO2, and sometimes polymers of carbon formed by reaction between graphite and fluids in the inclusions, mostly formed during uplift and exhumation of rocks. However, fluid inclusions are typically .01 to 1 mm in diameter. 1 mm fluid inclusion are huge, and are very, very rare in lower crustal or mantle rocks. Bulk chemical analysis of rocks shows that mantle rocks contain as much as 1% voliatiles (CO2, methane, H20, ...etc). So, for 1 km^3 of mantle rock you have about 10 m^3 volatiles. Lets assume this is pure methane. Note however, that most of the voliatiles are CO2 and H20 as proven by phase equilibria of basaltic rocks which cover 2/3rds of the earths surface.

The energy equivalent of 1 barrel of oil is about 170 m^3 of methane. This means that to get enough gas to equal 1 barrel of oil from the mantle we would have to remove ALL of the fluid inclusions in 17 km^3 of mantle. The total volume of the earths mantle is about 758,244,372,290,000,000 km^3. Of that only the upper 100 km or so can contain methane, because carbon will form diamond at higher pressures then this, just ask South African miners. That means that if methane was the only fluid in the upper mantle (it is not) and it was equally distributed throughout, there would be about 154 billion barrels of oil equivalent methane stored in the upper 100 km of the mantle. That sounds like a lot but... how would you get it out?

Given natural creep rates of mantle rock, which are about as fast finger nails grow we can make some guesses. At a rate of 2.5 cm year for rock uplift we could expect about 25 km of mantle to move towards the surface at places like mid-ocean spreading ridges in a million years. (Note spreading ridges are the only place where the mantle is moved near the surface at a large scale over geologic time.) There is presently about 80,000 km of mid ocean ridge, and most ridges are about 2 km wide at the axis. So we get 2x25x80000 =4,000,000 km3 of mantle near the surface in a million years. That gives us about 235 barrels of oil equivalent out of the mantle through natural processes in a million years. I am into long term investments, but I think I will take my money elsewhere.

Bottom line, even though there are carbon based compounds in the mantle (and lower crust), given reasonable assumptions, and even absurdly generous assumptions as above, there is simply no way the mantle can supply the oil we see in commercial fields.

Furthermore, carbon compounds derived from inorganic sources ARE chemically distinguishable from those in organic sources. Their formula and structures can be identical, but their isotopic compositions are distinct. Many isotope studies have shown that petroleum is derived from biotic sources. I can supply references to those who are interested.

Best,
Chris

hey opxcpx thanks for the analysis and welcome to peakoil.com and Peak Oil

As you've perhaps noticed there's not been much traffic on the 'Official Abiotic Oil Thread' lately. The proponents seem to have departed for loonier shores and crusts. Or they've gone to Pennsylvania to purchase that dry Venango County well old Colonel Drake has for sale. Do you want a piece of the action. It'll be pumping again real soon.

Nature has an article on abiotic oil; Deep-ocean vents are a source of oil and gas

You have to subscribe to get access to the whole article, so can anyone here fill us in on the gist of it? I heard about it at GNN, where they have a slightly longer excerpt