Hmm guys?

>>133670865
Earth is a living organism. A huge life, flat creature beneath a black dome.

>>133670865
>mfw oil is a renewable energy source all along

File: average north mexican woman.jpg (148KB, 1080x1349px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1080x1349px

>>133670865
>if you drill oil the earth wins

Most Petro on the planet is trapped in shale rocks where it can't flow away from.

"Conventional" wells represent a minority of all oil. Conventional meaning that the oil flows up from where it was formed until it hits a cap rock. Under the cap rock forms a pool of highly pressurized oil, resulting in the creation of gushers once they are broken by oil drillers.

If oil is created via abiogenesis, is it enough to supply modern civilization's needs, and is it economically viable to extract it? What is EROI? May not be worth it if it is too hard and expeensive to extract.

File: 1499532001338.gif (508KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 480x360px

>>133671031
>flat creature beneath a black dome
If this leads into more flat-earth shitposting, I fucking swear to God...

If we could suddenly put a trillion barrels on the market that would solve all economic problems.

>>133671251
Even without this theory, it still is.
Grass, plant life, and animal life are renewable.
They also use solar.
They die, get compressed, and break down into oil.
What animal or plant needs this oil to survive? None. We don't affect any of them by using it.
How much area is taken up to extract it?
Virtually none.
What happens when you burn it?
It produces carbon dioxide which plants need.
It IS the green solution and always has been.
We had to invent a false relationship between CO2 and catastrophic runaway global warming to demonize it. The better argument was that we would run out someday and that hasn't panned out either as technology advances.

>>133672174
>They die, get compressed, and break down into oil.

7 miles underneath the Earth?

File: OYVEY.jpg (11KB, 220x224px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 220x224px

>>133672133

>>133672063
>shitposting
You mean factposting?

>>133672267
It takes a while, but yeah, basically.

>>133672297
Exactly. My hunch says it's renewable, or otherwise it's "effectively renewable" i.e. the volume is so great we couldn't possibly use it all before we've long since moved onto miniature fusion reactors or liquid hydrogen or some as yet fanciful thing like that zero point voodoo energy that all those fruitcakes on YouTube talk about.

>>133672174
Carbon Dioxide is a greenhouse gas, not a very potent one, but it is one.

>>133672572
That makes no sense if you really think about it.

File: images (44).jpg (15KB, 470x313px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 470x313px

>>133672174
Cough cough good try cough cough

>>133672174
Deforestation is the problem there. People are growing too fast and stripping the natural co2 banks.

>>133672133
No it would not.

File: 1FQBRjU.jpg (107KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 700x700px

>>133670865

Been working in oil and gas for 10+ years. Abiotic theory is basically accepted by most people who actually work in the field -- Dead Dinos is what academics who've never got their hands dirty believe in.

White Tiger in Vietnam is producing oil out of 15,000 feet of solid granite. Nothing ever lived underneath that. Same with the Gulf, where we're drilling 5000+ deep to get the oil and gas.

Biotic oil origen theory derives solely from various organic trace markers found in some oil, and that was long before we knew just how hardy life is, and how many places it is found -- living things grow on underwater volcanic vents where the temperature is several times the boiling point. Those markers in crude aren't preserved organic matter -- they're likely oil-eating microbes.

>>133674444
Your quads and the wisdom of your words impress me, leaf.
You will be spared the rake.

>>133674764

Some of us leafs live in the real world

We have to, so we can pay for everyone else's gibs

>>133674444
Is there any research on this or is academia not down with that theory

>>133674990
I've been to leafland, once you guys get around to physically removing leftists, your country will be a thing of legendary beauty again.

>>133671031
That would make for a brutal story

File: 636108652280583995766440092_Pepe Confused.png (22KB, 612x491px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 612x491px

>>133674444
>oil eating microbes

like aliums aliens a some sort?

>>133672133
If by "solve all economic problems" you mean crash the USD and all other major currencies, sending the world into a huge happening - the ashes from which the survivors would have to cobble together a new society - then yes, it would solve all economic problems.

>>133675514
Extremophiles, motherfucker, lookem up.
I swear, sometimes it's like there are people on this board who don't have autism.

File: 1490853318754.jpg (30KB, 696x398px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 696x398px

>>133675081

Talk with field petrogeologists, read up on the entire history of the Russian oil industry.

They went out looking where abiotic origin said oil would be, and biotic origin said oil could not possibly EVER be, and they've been duking it out with Saudi Arabia for #1 oil producing nation ever since.

That's why they drilled White Tiger for Vietnam. That's 14,000 feet of Precambrian granite rock, formed billions of years ago. Dead Dinos geologists laughed at the very idea any oil could possibly come out of that, right until it started gushing out of the rods -- then they had to try to theorize some unseen and unknown massive organic deposit that got itself buried in sediment, decomposed, and then during that somehow squeezed itself down 3 fucking miles of crust, underneath rock almost as old as the Earth itself.

Or, our own Gulf of Mexico, which again produces massive amounts of oil from ludicrous rock depths.

Biotic theory had something going for it when we were drilling a few hundred feet into Texas or Sandland and striking oil -- it's been obvious bullshit from the moment the first super-deep well started producing oil. If you drill down 10,000 feet and 3 billion years and there's a million barrels of liquid hydrocarbon down there, oil is not a fossil fuel.

>>133670865
abiotic is dumb as shit

>>133676151
I find this very interesting, have any of them admitted they might be wrong? Do Russian scientists promote the abiotic theory? Any sources you'd rec or is this the kind of thing you essentially just have to be involved in to know about

>>133676875
>Do Russian scientists promote the abiotic theory

They literally based their entire oil exploration strategy on it, and with that the USSR went from basically no oil production to #1 in the world in a few decades. You go looking where a good-sized asteroid is known to have smacked into the Earth, fracturing the crust down to where hydrocarbons are produced in the mantle. They've got wells producing out of 40,000+ feet, where the temperature is in the hundreds of degrees and nothing has ever, ever lived.

Down at the mantle, the Earth is a giant Fischer-Tropsch reactor. Even the Swedes have gotten on board:

https://www.kth.se/alumni/nyheter/utdrag-ur-senaste-nyhetsbrevet/easier-to-find-oil-1.44177

>have any of them admitted they might be wrong?
>academics
>ever admitting they're wrong

c'mon now

>>133677458
Yep. When all the panic about "peak oil" started in the 90s I remember reading articles about how the Russians were laughing about it because they believed abiotic.

>>133677458
Thanks for the info. I am out of my depth here though.

>>133673091
Doesn't algae outdo plants like 3:1 in terms of how much oxygen they produce, and probably consequently in how much carbon dioxide they consume?

File: 1498801007944.png (337KB, 412x355px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 412x355px

>>133678453

There's lots out there, just google about the Russian and Ukrainian oil industries

Also, here is a hilariously /pol/-appropriate summary that is nonetheless essentially correct on the science:

http://www.rense.com/general75/zoil.htm

>>133678214
>When all the panic about "peak oil" started in the 90s
>yfw you find out Peak Oil started in the literal 1950s with a prediction of PO in the 70s, and the prediction has been pushed back every single fucking decade since then, as oil production continues to increase and increase and increase

File: 1499496330048.jpg (20KB, 300x400px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 300x400px

>>133676412

>>133675514
They already existed in nature and have been recreated on the labarotary level
http://aabaco.com/micro-n.aspx

>>133670865

interesting. i always gave abiotic people shit but maybe, just maybe there might be something to this. i mean, a truly scientific mind can't rule it out.

redpill about earth turns out to be that:

-oil is earth's poop + pee (much how birds poop and pee is the same compound
-natural gas is earth's farts

the earth is alive and everything is ok and we are using its poop and farts

>>133671031
to it's basically a turtle
also why clouds don't adhere to the supposed curvature of the earth?

>>133672267
During the carboniferious era 360 something million years ago, plants didn't decay or rot, so they just grew and fell over on top of each other, until the very bottom of the piles started to get crushed down.
This is where all our coal comes from. Wouldn't be surprised if something similar is where we get all our oil from too.

Nowadays bacteria and fungi eat the plants and they rot so this doesn't happen anymore.

>>133671031
someone call Del Toro now

File: 1484304041630.jpg (44KB, 640x340px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x340px

>>133683699
With that logic, you are basically arguing in favor of the expanding earth theory.

File: 1498893326498.jpg (42KB, 460x720px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 460x720px

>>133672133
>venezuela oil is worth even less now

boy

>>133672428
Bullshit. Everyone knows the Earth is hollow.

>>133682747
wtf i hate oil and gas now

>>133671450
kek
you got me

>>133683699

fungi and bacteria existed before the carboniferous era.

>>133676151
>oil is not a fossil fuel

how can I start talking about this subject in class without being called an autist? where can I read further on this?

>>133670865
yeah hydrocarbons in space, fucking methane and some others, nothing even close to oil

File: IMG_9920.jpg (172KB, 750x1125px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 750x1125px

Finally the day we get to liberate Canada's oil and bring those savages the death they deserve

File: memri-tv-he-is-even-worse-than-a-jew-he-4689911.png (77KB, 500x377px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 500x377px

>>133674444

I get my hands dirty in the field, and abiotic oil theory is utter bullshit.

Oil is always found in deep sediments -- never in granite (white tiger is producing from onlapping sediments, not granite).

Also, the chirality of the oil molecules shows that it was produced biogenically.

>>133670865
The fossil fuel theory made so much sense though when the Russians, the worlds largest oil producer drilled far deeper than fossil fuels theory would have led them to.

>>133685623
lol hands dirty in field, brain still muddy tho

>>133671031
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW0ER-DtW_o

>>133672174
>Grass, plant life, and animal life are renewable
>They die, get compressed, and break down into oil.
Except all surface life decomposes, releases all the carbon it contains in the process. What is left turns to dust/dirt, not much organic material remains to be compressed into oil well below the surface. If the oil is from compressed organic material then that material did not originate from the surface of the earth imo.

When I google "abiotic oil" and click on the "rationalwiki" and they say its an old archaic Russian theory, thats all I need to know

Abiotic oil is CONFIRMED

>>133672133
>american education

>>133686585
Pretty much, anything that needs (((debunking))) got truth to it.

Where there is smoke there is fire.

>>133684313
Yeah, but there's a theory that the fungi from before the carboniferous couldn't decompose lignin, only cellulose. This is why carboniferous coal contains so much lignin; the fungi couldn't decompose it.

There are some wrinkles to the theory, though. If coal was deposited in oxidizing environments, you would predict there would have been lots of forest fires, so there would be more fossil charcoal in the carboniferous coal. There's some equivocal data on this; some sources say there was more charcoal, others say there wasn't. Difficult to say.

>>133686148
My brain is like a timex -- it keeps a lickin' and keeps on tickin'.

>>133686372
>If the oil is from compressed organic material then that material did not originate from the surface of the earth imo.

You should make a post on /x/.

>>133670865
As a former investor in some natural gas plays, I can tell you that geologists are all fucking liars.

>>133674444
Having faith is the way.

The gas giants in our solar system are composed of high percentage of methane, obviously not formed biologically. #NotAllHydrocarbons

It's hell.

You notice how over the last two decades the concern over oil use shifted from "we're going to run out!" to "it's causing global warming!"

(((They))) likely changed course after they realized petroleum will essentially never run out.

>>133678957
>what are harmful algal blooms?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmful_algal_bloom

Wtf I love abiotic oil now.

>>133688743
peak oil was just another Y2K then

>>133673091
wrong. The total forested area in the United States has actually increased since 1914, despite massive population growth.

>>133671882
All oil is eventually worth extracting til we no longer have use for it

>>133677458
Today I learned something from a Leaf and strangely I am not ashamed. I guess I something new to research.

>>133689131
Oil extraction has expanded so much and so quickly and with so many countries that we've got record low oil prices now, and nobody wants to stop mining the shit.

>>133670865
Yea obviously there's lots of oil. Why do you think the ancient Africans moved Atlantian civilization down there?

They saw enough resources to live happily away from the savage white man who was just emerging from the prehistoric caves.

>>133689909
The russians don't base their entire oil exploration around the basis of abiogenic oil though.

He's 100% wrong about that. The Soviets DID try, but they didn't get much success.

>>133690377
so youre saying that atlantean destruction was a planned move and that all stories related to the fall of atlantis after a flood are wrong including Plato?

>>133683945
I used to entertain this idea as a toddler but haven't thought about it since. This is a real theory?

File: IMG_0485.jpg (40KB, 286x343px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 286x343px

God buried dragons 10 miles underground to make Arabs powerful 250 million years later, good goys

>>133690427
It's an interesting enough point to look into though and see if anything shakes from the tree. I come for the interesting ideas to research. Always, sometimes, never believe /pol.

File: IMG_0844.png (84KB, 882x480px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 882x480px

based sheikh

>>133690527
A flood is another way of saying the island sunk under the ocean. THEY sunk it.

They burrowed deep under ground where the primitive whiteman wouldn't be able to find them.

>>133690604
>This is a real theory?

Not much substance to it. But look up the electric universe and the electric sun theory, they imply an expanding earth.

>>133672133
There's a reason we don't fuck with Saudi Arabia and OPEC anon...

File: flood.jpg (90KB, 625x453px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 625x453px

>>133690926
not sure about your theory but i will keep it in mind

Not sure why many of the academics believe in the "fossil fuel" theory. It's not like all carbon of the planet went to the surface and became organic matter.

>>133672133
it would probably make them worse honestly.

>>133691623
>Not sure why many of the academics believe in the "fossil fuel" theory.

Because the oil company pays them to (((study))) it. It keeps the price up.

>>133676151
Can't oil migrate downwards as well as upwards tho? How do you know the oil was generated at shallow depths and migrated down fault planes to deeper traps?

For example, isn't most North Sea oil found below the Kimmeridge Clay source rock?

Not saying you're wrong, just curious as I'm going by what I was taught in uni.

File: 51WSOAPkPAL._AC_UL320_SR212,320_.jpg (20KB, 212x320px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 212x320px

One of THE must read books of the abiotic theory comes from the guy that probably fought the hardest for it, Thomas Gold. He even attempted an experiment at drilling where abiotic theory said that oil would be in Sweden and even though he found some oil everyone claimed that the test was null and void because the oil based lubricants for the drill bits had mixed into the samples and therefore couldn't be accepted.

I don't know much about Russia's oil history but this is wikipedia's take on it. I'd love to know what the canada dude thinks about this.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
Some abiogenic hypotheses gained limited popularity among geologists over the past several centuries. Scientists in the former Soviet Union widely held that significant petroleum deposits could be attributed to abiogenic origin, though this view fell out of favor toward the end of the 20th century because they did not make useful predictions for the discovery of oil deposits.[1] Previous to today, it was generally accepted that abiogenic formation of petroleum has insufficient scientific support and that oil and gas fuels on Earth are formed almost exclusively from organic material.[5]

>>133692858
>Can't oil migrate downwards as well as upwards tho?

If that were the case then why do you need cap rock to trap oil in the first place?

>>133694160
>oil was hidden on purpose

dun dun dunnnn

>>133694160
No petroleum system is the same, yes, its going to tend to be relatively buoyant. But there are definitely circumstances where it accumulates below the source.

>>133689301
It's increased since the Pilgrams landed. At least.

>>133670865
But my peak oil!

Goys we are running out of oil.

>>133694016
Gold basically reiterated what the Soviets said. He was the only American/Western academic to treat the subject seriously.

And for that he was labelled a crank, and nobody has ever attempted to translate the Russians findings into a English, lest people get ideas in their heads.

>>133674764
He gets the blower of friendship!