Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Abiotic Oil Thread pt 3

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sat 23 Mar 2019, 14:45:41

Ah, the biogenic vs abiogenic debate has surfaced again. The following are just the thoughts of a geologist that has searched in the US for commercial concentrations of oil and NG for more then 4 decades. As such I was never concerned about the source…just what geologic conditions they might have become trapped in. Of course, had I been exploring in global regions with little or no history of drilling I might have been very focused on potential source rocks: no source rocks…no accumulation potential. Such as some areas of the coast of Alaska and the east coast where drilling results indicated no hydrocarbon source rocks: neither biogenic nor abiogenic.

I’ve been part of companies that have developed billions of bbls of oil and trillions of cuft of NG and no one involved ever questioned if biogenic or abiogenic: the efforts were solely focused on identifying geologic conditions conducive to accumulating hydrocarbons. As such I have no interest in joining the current debate. As far as it matters in my portion of the petroleum industry all hydrocarbons can be abiogenic. Or none at all.

Carry on, gentlemen.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11219
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby diemos » Sat 23 Mar 2019, 15:12:49

Hi Rockman,

Thanks for chiming in to let us know that you don't care what the answer is.

However, when it comes to the question of how we are going to power industrial society and its associated standard of living into the indefinite future. The issue of whether hydrocarbons are an endlessly renewable resource and it's just a matter of "Drill, baby, drill", or whether hydrocarbons are a one time inheritance that we are burning through as fast as we can dig it up and burn it and eventually other arrangements will need to be made is sort of the entire point of this site.

Please continue to do your excellent job of digging the stuff up, I sure enjoy burning it.
User avatar
diemos
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 02:00:00

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Sat 23 Mar 2019, 15:47:00

ROCKMAN wrote: the efforts were solely focused on identifying geologic conditions conducive to accumulating hydrocarbons. As such I have no interest in joining the current debate.

Thats a non-sequeter. If oil is abiogenic and comes from the mantle then you can drill deeper to find more oil. If you'd stuck with the original biotic belief that oil is only found in so-called sedimentary formations then many of today's good basement rock wells would still be undiscovered.
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Sat 23 Mar 2019, 16:12:28

If you'd stuck with the original biotic belief that oil is only found in so-called sedimentary formations then many of today's good basement rock wells would still be undiscovered.


every last oil and gas well that has produced from basement rocks whether it is igneous or metamorphic has been demonstrated to have hydrocarbons derived from an organic precursor and also has been carbon preference index matched to adjacent source rocks or source rocks immediately overlying basement, whether they be shales or marls. Please show us one that has not. Crystalline and volcanic basement traps in Vietnam...all sourced from Tertiary shales, large basement traps in Indonesia all sourced from adjacent Tertiary shales, crystalline basement traps in Egypt...sourced from adjacent Cretaceous marly shales, basement closures in the Dnieper-Donets basin all sourced from Paleozoic shales.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6832
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 00:05:52

peakoilwhen wrote:all this economic waffle is uninteresting. What is interesting is the geology of ethane. Today methane is accepted by everyone in science to be produced abiogenically in the interior of worlds. When they saw everyone else, petrologists dutifully followed suit and accepted methane was produced abiogenically. The pressure in the mantle is enough to press hydrogen atoms onto the carbon atom.

But that leads to an interesting question, at what point in the HC chain list do fossil fuel believers think that abiogenic processes fail? Rockdoc has a minor heart attack everytime he is forced to use his only argument against abiogenic petroleum : the mantle is too hot so petroleum will break down into natural gas. Break down to what... 100% pure methane? Or is ethane and propane abiogenic too? And if propane, perhaps a tiny bit of butane and pentane get thru too?
What are the hydrocarbon seas on Titan made of? 100% methane? Or is there some ethane there as well?
All in all its a slippery slope, or a pandora's box for fossil fuel believers. Once they open the lid on abiogenic hydrocarbon, there's no going back, and the lid is already open because methane has been ousted as abiogenic. Ethane is next in line.



ah you've woken up to the ethane thread now. here's a little present you left unrecieved. Maybe you were hoping you could pretend you hadn't seen it.
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby diemos » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 10:03:18

Methane is a carbon atom connected to 4 hydrogen atoms.

When it gets hot enough the hydrogen will react with the material in the surrounding rocks to form hydrides leaving behind a free carbon, otherwise known as soot.

You need to stop getting your science from investment newsletters and wishful thinking and pick up a textbook.
User avatar
diemos
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 02:00:00

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 12:07:28

Image
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby diemos » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 13:16:13

Really.

Chemistry 101.

You will learn many interesting and useful things.
User avatar
diemos
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 02:00:00

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 16:09:05

there's a reason why you didn't post the actual chem 101 syllabus relevant to this discussion.

show me one , JUST ONE chemistry 101, from any of the world's chemistry 101 courses where you learn :
mantle pressure carbon, hydrogen, hydride reactions
lucky you, you have every chemistry 101 course from over 100 universities to choose from.

you can't. because no chem 101 syllabus exists that covers mantle pressure reactions, let alone the particular mantle chemical reactions we're interested in.

that's another one of your turds flushed away. Wonder what crap you'll come out with next.
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 16:11:31

POW - "Thats a non-sequeter. If oil is abiogenic and comes from the mantle then you can drill deeper to find more oil." Obviously you know absolutely nothing about drilling for hydrocarbons. Very sad that you post here when you don't even understand the basics. And yet you challenge someone with more then four decades working in the petroleum industry. But that's your option to look the fool. I'll not waste time with you and suggest others do the same. For your own basic education I suggest you search "oil window".

Adios, niño.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11219
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 17:09:06

i know what the oil window is. And its a fair point, one that RD insists is an unresolvable problem from abiotic theory.
I don't agree.
a.) I'm not convinced that the crust has the same temperature and pressure with depth. There may be areas at the same dept where its cooler, and areas where its hotter. The places where its cooler and higher pressure will store hydrocarbon.
b.) if petroleum is continuously rising from the mantle, then it may rise fast enough to into your wells to avoid being cooked at low pressure \ high temperature.
it must get in place somehow.

in fact the concept of a petroleum window is fundamentally unsound wrt increasing pressure and temperature with depth. As the temperature increases with depth, causing the petroleum to crack, the pressure increases, thereby stopping the petroleum cracking. RD could never get his head round that, but its a pretty simple idea. Perhaps the 'petroleum window' is just another piece of bulshit they force their geologists to accept under duress of failing their exams.
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 17:28:05

Image
this oil window diagram illustrates the problem i have with it. Most importantly, its describing a biotic process : its based on the assumption that oil is made from carbohydrates from the surface. Now it may be that such biotic processes do indeed have a 'petroleum window'. But don't then go assert that abiotic processes have the same constraint. Abiotic processes don't require any crust conditions to create oil, they only require the crust for storage.
Even as a worst case scenario, even if the oil window does apply to abiotic oil : i.e. oil is created in the mantle, gets to the crust then cracks to gas, it is still a temporal process, i.e. it doesn't happen in less than a pico second. There's potential to grab the oil before it cracks to gas. Also bear in mind that reserviors replenish as RGRulz used to say here. Its oil supply from the mantle.
So every time a biotic believer calls out 'oil window', it triggers my retard alert. You are jumping to a desired conclusion not because you've seen results in the lab or from what you've experienced in the field, but because you're programmed to do it without thinking by rockefeller. Keep an open mind. If you don't, then your competitors will get the deep oil and the $millions that could have been yours.
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby diemos » Sun 24 Mar 2019, 19:48:08

peakoilwhen wrote:If you don't, then your competitors will get the deep oil and the $millions that could have been yours.


All those riches that could be yours ... if you would just believe!

If you knew there was a pot of gold somewhere why would you tell anyone else? Why wouldn't you be drilling for those riches yourself? :lol:
User avatar
diemos
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 02:00:00

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Mon 25 Mar 2019, 01:00:20

>if you would just believe!

drilling companies have found and exploited deep oil anyway, they don't need to believe, they can do it braindead. In fact braindead companies might fare better than those who listen to their biotic retards like rockdoc who implore them not to go deep prospecting for oil because it threatens their biotic fiction.

2018 News from the modern abiotic prospecting in China.
liquid hydrocarbons dominate the reservoir below 6000 m in the Rocket Mountain Basin and the North Caspian Basin. Black crude oil has been produced from the reservoirs deeper than 7000 m in the Tabei Uplift of the Tarim Basin; especially in the Jizhong Depression in the Bohai Bay Basin. Jixian Misty Mountain Formation's Well Niudong 1 at 5639 m produced natural gas and oil amounting to 56.3 × 104 m3/d and oil of 642.9 m3/d, respectively during the production test. In addition, deep buried high-temperature hill reservoirs in eastern China was declared to be found at the bottom of the hole (6027 m) at over 200 °C [8]. The discovery of deep oil and gas in the world has broken through the range of the oil-generating window (60–120 °C) and gas-generating window (0.6%–1.35%) as estimated by early kerogen theory.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 6X18300105

China has very few shallow reserves, so they took my advice and drilled deep and, sure enough, found a cornucopia of hot deep oil.

the only thing rockdoc and his ilk want to do if they can't desuade drilling companies from getting the deep oil is to spend a wad of cash trying to find a sedimentary layer a few miles up so they can scream "this is where it came from". It serves no useful purpose at all - Its just money pissed away in a hopeless attempt to preserve a myth from the last century.
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Mon 25 Mar 2019, 12:19:53

China has very few shallow reserves, so they took my advice and drilled deep and, sure enough, found a cornucopia of hot deep oil.

the only thing rockdoc and his ilk want to do if they can't desuade drilling companies from getting the deep oil is to spend a wad of cash trying to find a sedimentary layer a few miles up so they can scream "this is where it came from". It serves no useful purpose at all - Its just money pissed away in a hopeless attempt to preserve a myth from the last century.


The more you blather here the dumber you appear to everyone on this site. It is baffling how you can quote papers that you never read and certainly did not understand and somehow use this to support your ridiculous unfounded theories.

First of all the diagram, you show with regards to oil and gas generation is a general one formulated many years ago. It has been demonstrated through kinetic experiments that generation and cracking is a product of both time and temperature. This was first published by Doug Waples back in 1981:

Waples, D.W., 1981. Time and Temperature in petroleum Formation: Application of Lopatins’ Method to Petroleum Exploration, AAPG Bull, 64 (6). DOI: 10.1306/2F9193D2-16CE-11D7-8645000102C1865D

What that means is that if a basins history has oil situated at shallow depth for very long periods of time cracking can occur at lower temperatures, and alternatively, if the basin has undergone rapid burial (like the Tarim basin) then oil can persist to temperatures somewhat higher.

One of the deepest TVD oil fields in the world is at Tahe Field in the Tarim basin. The paper by Zhu et al which analyzed those oils and replicated burial history curves based on kinetic models demonstrates that oil preserved at depth there is consistent with current theory

Zhu. G et al, 2017. Non-cracked oil in the ultra-deep high-temperature reservoirs in the Tarim Basin, China. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 89, pp 252-262

Thermal stability of liquid petroleum in the subsurface is closely linked to reservoir temperature. Most oil accumulations occur at temperatures <120 C. Oil cracks into gas at temperatures >150e160 C leading to the dominance of gas condensate and free gas accumulations in ultra-deep high-temperature reservoirs. The recently drilled Fuyuan-1 exploration well (northern Tarim basin) produced high-quality non-cracked single-phase (black) oil from a carbonate reservoir located at maximum depth 7711 m and temperature 172 C.This is the deepest oil discovery in China to date and among the deepest in the world. The oil density (0.825 g/cm3 at 20 C or API gravity 40 ), relatively low gas/oil ratio (135 m3/m3 or 758 scf/bbl), low variety and abundance of adamantanes as well as lack of thiaadamantanes and dibenzothiophenes indicate that the oil was expelled from a source rock at moderate thermal maturity and has not been cracked. The molecular and isotopic composition of oil-associated gases are consistent with this interpretation. We suggest that the oil remained uncracked because the residence time at temperatures >150-160 C was relatively short (<5 my based on 1D modeling) and apparently insufficient for cracking. We conclude that there is potential for finding unaltered liquid petroleum in other high-temperature reservoirs with rela-tively low geothermal gradient and recent burial in the Tarim basin and around the world.


Other comments from the paper of siginificance:

Based on their bulk and molecular composition (Tables 1 and 3; Fig. 6), crude oils from the Fuyuan field have maturity consistent with expulsion from source rocks at temperatures ~140 C and vitrinite reflectance 0.8e1% (middle-upper oil window).


All in all the paper points out that the deep oils in the Tarim basin are entirely consistent with an organic origin as predicted by kinetic models. In particular, the very rapid late stage burial resulted in concomitant rapid heating. Doug Waples paper of 2000

Waples, D,W., 2000. The kinetics of in-reservoir oil destruction and gas formation: constraints from experimental and empirical data, and from thermodynamics. Organic Geochemistry, 31, pp 553-575

Outlines the kinetic model for oil generation and that model predicts that for heating rates encountered in the rapid burial of the Tarim basin oil can be preserved to ~185 C which is higher than the 172 C encountered in the Tahe oil field which means oil would be preserved to depths of around 8200 m. Again this is all consistent with an organic origin and the kinectics of oil and gas transformation. The idea that oils in the Tarim basin have an organic precursor is substantiated by numerous articles published over the last decade. A case in point is:

Xiao, Z et al, 2016. Source, oil charging history and filling pathways of the Ordovician carbonate reservoir in the Halahatang Oilfield, Tarim Basin, NW China. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 73, pp 59-71

In which the authors state:

The majority of oil accumulations discovered to date originated from the Middle-Upper Ordovician carbonates, although a couple of oil samples were thought to derive from Cambrian-Lower Ordovician source rocks (Zhang et al., 2002; Mi et al., 2007; Li et al., 2010b, 2012; Yu et al., 2011; Li et al., 2012). Previous studies have shown that oils from the Halahatang Depression are similar to those of the Tahe oilfield and correlate well with the Middle-Upper Ordovician carbonate source rocks in that oilfield (Zhu et al., 2012; Chang et al., 2013a).


Finally it needs to be pointed out that when we talk about ultra-deep oil that has been discovered we are talking about temperatures in the range of 150 – 200 C whereas the temperature at the base of the lower crust is around 1200 C or about 3-4 times higher than the temperature that oil cracks instantaneously in a catalytic cracking unit. Anyone suggesting that oil can survive as a complex chain at those temperatures needs to revisit their thermodynamics.

I have no wish to debate this further, it is well established in the literature. I simply post this information for those interested to demonstrate that your argument is based on a complete misunderstanding of the science. You come back here each year and post the exact same stupidity and no matter how many times you are shown why your theories can't work you come back again repeating them. It is obvious you do not have the intelligence to learn from your mistakes and it is a complete waste of my time to once again correct you based on very simple basic science. I'd rather be fly fishing or playing golf.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6832
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: THE Abiotic Oil Thread pt 3

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Mon 25 Mar 2019, 14:40:34

>I have no wish to debate this further
because you know you'll lose.

>whereas the temperature at the base of the lower crust is around 1200 C
where you get that from? The mantle-crust boundary can be as cool as 200C. 1200C is the average for half way to the centre of the Earth.

1200 C or about 3-4 times higher than the temperature that oil cracks instantaneously in a catalytic cracking unit. Anyone suggesting that oil can survive as a complex chain at those temperatures needs to revisit their thermodynamics.

they did it in the lab over 17 years ago.
https://www.scribd.com/document/4653767 ... J-F-Kenney
whatever theory you've got written down that asserts it can't be done has been refuted by evidence. I told you this last year.

>no matter how many times you are shown why your theories can't work
you wouldn't pass your 1st science lesson at school. Evidence trumps theory every time, and we have evidence that abiotic oil from the mantle is possible. Just because an army of stubborn old fools led by oil companies who profit from the 'we are going to run out of oil' myth from the last century fight tooth and nail to subdue further abiotic lab experiments to iron out all the details in the theory - doesn't mean the theory is wrong.
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: THE Abiotic Oil Thread pt 3

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Mon 25 Mar 2019, 15:30:27

whereas the temperature at the base of the lower crust is around 1200 C
where you get that from? The mantle-crust boundary can be as cool as 200C. 1200C is the average for half way to the centre of the Earth.


The Tarim basin sits on continental crust some 50 km in thickness. Even with the the lowest geothermal gradient that ends up being over 1000 C. Specifically at the location I was speaking to the gradient puts the temperature at the crust/mantle boundary around 1200 C. The only place in the world where the crust is somewhat cooler is where you are dealing with oceanic crust (not where the deep oil (below mud line)) is located. And there you are still arguing that oil would stay in its current long organic chain form at lower lithosphere and asthenosperic temperatures (well in excess of 1000 C...not going to happen).

Please show us the proof of any oil and gas accumulation due to anything other than organic precursors....go ahead that should be easy for someone as "educated" as you.

Please explain why we have never found a hint of oil in any mine in Precambrian crystalline rocks.

Please explain why each and every oil deposit ever found can be typed organically with nearby source rocks.

Please explain why we have never found a single drop of hydrocarbon on any of the exposed craton on various continents (Australia, Canada, Africa etc)

Please explain why all the reactions that both create oil from kerogen and result in it's eventual cracking are explained by both thermodynamic theory and kinetic modeling and those kinectic models along with 2d and 3d migration models (Temispak) can replicate the formation, migration and accumulation of each and every oil accumulation found to date.

And while you are at it please explain why you are such a moron when it comes to understanding basic science.

I am now definitely done. You need to find another forum where they don't let anyone participate who has an IQ in excess of 2 digits. :roll:
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6832
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: THE Abiotic Oil Thread pt 3

Unread postby peakoilwhen » Mon 25 Mar 2019, 16:15:15

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com ... 08RG000270
chapters 5 and 6 list precambrian formation oil.

>Please explain why each and every oil deposit ever found can be typed organically with nearby source rocks.
because oil leaks everywhere. once it gets to some sedimentary* rocks you lot insist the biomarkers found there imply the oil is from there. But methophlie microbes can live anywhere where there's oil, and they don't need to be from the surface. In fact life originated as hydrocarbon eaters underground.

>Please explain why all the reactions that both create oil from kerogen and result in it's eventual cracking are explained
because you've bashed a square peg into a round hole and convinced yourself its correct because your jobs depended on it.

>I am now definitely done.
good, a honourable decision which marks the end of the age of the biotic mineral oil myth. I am now the resident oil expert of this forum. Com back if you need expert instruction on anything oil, but change your name to 'rockstudent123', so everyone knows who is the senior between us.

*btw sedimentary rocks aren't really sedimentary. They are better described as surface precipitate accumulations. It will be explained in my upcoming geology book which will revolutionize mankind's understanding.
peakoilwhen
permanently banned
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed 08 Feb 2017, 07:53:15

Re: THE Abiotic Oil Thread pt 3

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 29 Mar 2019, 10:11:19

diemos - "However, when it comes to the question of how we are going to power industrial society and its associated standard of living into the indefinite future." You seem to be as narrowly sighted as POW. Again the simplicity of the petroleum development process: if you can't find accumulations of hydrocarbons it matter not the source. There are very specific geologic conditions under which hydrocarbons will be trapped. Those conditions are NOT dependent on the source of the hydrocarbons.

Again I've given up the task of educating Monday morning quarter backs such as you, POW et al. It's just too much wasted space on our site. All that needs to be learned is available on the www. If some are too lazy/stubborn to take advantage of that info they are simple wasting time here. My time is too valuable. Now you, like POW and a few others, are just background noise to be ignored. For those with legitimate questions I will always be available.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11219
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: The Ethane Thread

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Fri 29 Mar 2019, 12:03:01

peakoilwhen wrote:Image

If babbling uninformed nonsense were a way to prove random theories correct and science wrong, then all the major groups of science deniers would have been proven correct.

And yet, rational people realize the earth is not flat, that evolution is a thing, that AGW is a thing, and that oil is produced abiogenically via well understood processes (to site a handful of examples).

As I alluded to before -- want to prove oil is produced biogenically? Then SHOW HOW IT IS DONE IN A LAB under defined controlled conditions, and show how that process is repeatable. That's how the scientific process works.

And wala, you win. You get your name in the history books, yadda yadda. Babbling just makes you look like a nut case to rational people.

See how that works, or are you too far gone?
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 6755
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests