Big Oil vs. Russian Scientists
The Russian Ukranian Theory of Deep Abiotic Oil Genesis is at odds with the peak oil theory as well as everything Western geologists have been lead to believe or perhaps are leading others to believe. Western geologists for the most part still maintain that oil comes from dinosaurs or “bioligical detrius”, while the Russian theory seems to refute this idea out of hand. They assert that oil is created deep within the earth under intense heat and pressure and is “abiotic” or non-biological in origin. Western corporate media responds to this Russian brand of pure science with plattitudes, insults, and talking points. To date, There doesn’t seem to be any scientific literature from the West which matches the depth and detail of the Russian studies to support the “dinosaur theory” of the origin of oil. Aside from any theories, oil does in fact seem to be re-appearing in some wells previously capped. And small companies are able to “de-cap” these wells right here with minimal cost or environmental impact.
This “dinosaur theory” is of course the underpinning for the “peak oil” hypothesis which of course has “greased the skids” of the globalist agenda to centralize power. Are we really running out of oil or are the big guys simply restricting supply? What role does corporate consolidation play here? And there’s definitely a type of “horizontal integration” that leads to pipelines that undermine national sovereignty. A growing number of Americans are realizing that the struggle for freedom, national sovereignty, and cheap energy are one and the same. And as it has been pointed out, “It’s all about oil”.
December 31st, 2006 at 2:26 pm
The picture is of a capped oil well in Argentina.
December 31st, 2006 at 2:57 pm
“Aside from any theories, oil does in fact seem to be re-appearing in some wells previously capped.”
It’s not re-appearing. New technologies are making it feasible to extract the remaining oil. This isn’t a matter of empty wells becoming suddenly full again. It’s a matter of the tools we have to get at the stuff.
I find it a bit humorous that you’ll take the word of Russian scientists, who have historically been locked down and unable to freely communicate with other scientists. But you disregard all the free market scientists who theorize that oil is created from ancient organic matter.
Yeah, and money grows on trees (money is made from paper, so I’m right).
December 31st, 2006 at 3:01 pm
“I find it a bit humorous that you’ll take the word of Russian scientists.”
Like I said, I’ve yet to see any real response on a scientific bassis to the Russian theory.
December 31st, 2006 at 3:46 pm
http://reactor-core.org/peak-oil.html
December 31st, 2006 at 4:14 pm
“Likewise, there are two primal energy forces operating on this planet, and all forms of energy descend from one of these two. The first is the internal form of energy heating the Earth’s interior. This primal energy comes from radioactive decay and from the heat energy originally generated during accretion of the planet some 4.6 billion years ago. There are no known mechanisms for transferring this internal energy into any secondary energy source. And the chemistry of magma does not compare to the chemistry of hydrocarbons. Magma is lacking in carbon compounds, and hydrocarbons are lacking in silicates. If hydrocarbons were generated from magma, then you would expect to see some closer kinship in their chemistry. ”
A WORD ABOUT ABIOTIC OIL
Bill says: “Like I said, I’ve yet to see any real response on a scientific bassis to the Russian theory.”
You haven’t looked very hard then.
I would be happy as pie if the Russians were correct. I don’t think they are.
December 31st, 2006 at 4:37 pm
From your link Bill… this guy is talking about those claiming that oil will peak.
“Though attacking Campbell and his ilk is not the purpose of this report, his idiot claims can be debunked readily enough.”
And your initial post contains…”Western corporate media responds to this Russian brand of pure science with plattitudes, insults, and talking points.”
Now, call me an idiot, but I’d say the author of your link is engaging in insult throwing for no good reason.
Then he throws out this gem…
“The theory underlying how oil is formed at such enormous depths in the mantle of the earth is not central to this report, because the Russians have already proved its point of origin in absolute drilling terms more than 300 times. Those interested in the exact process should research the archives, where there are more than two hundred Russian papers on the subject.”
What he’s saying is “it’s already been proven, so I don’t have to prove it to you… go research it yourself. But I won’t provide a link so you can do it easily.”
What a worthless reference to cite.
Show me the reports that describe and account for the chemical inconsistencies between magma and hydrocarbon fuels.
December 31st, 2006 at 4:53 pm
I just want to see the report that verifies the claim that oil wells are continually refilling themselves. Some cameras mounted 40k feet down might help.
December 31st, 2006 at 4:58 pm
Compairing hot magma to conditions of heat and high pressure seems like a straw man argument to me. Not necessarily the same thing.
December 31st, 2006 at 5:10 pm
I hope you’re kidding Bill. “Comparing magma to conditions of heat and high pressure.”
Listen to yourself man. Magma is caused by conditions of heat and high pressure. So is oil. Their base materials are different. One can be traced to organic matter buried deep below the surface, and one is traced to silicate mineral deposits found deep deep below the surface.
Where are these Russian scientific reports so that we can read about this miraculous chemical transformation for ourselves? I think I can speak for all of Alaska when I ask you this. Our production has been in decline for years now, and our state government is 85% dependent on oil revenues. Our wells are not magically refilling themselves yet. Got a timeframe for me?
Peak oil is not a fantasy. It is a point on a curve. Plain and simple.
Rather than bashing science we should be looking to new technological breakthroughs that will allow us to do deep deep drilling. Of course then we’ll need to point out the fallacy of global climate change theory and it’s assumptions about the effects of hydrocarbon fuel consumption.
December 31st, 2006 at 5:11 pm
re: oil reserves increasing:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/crispin8.html
December 31st, 2006 at 5:12 pm
Captain Menace
In case you didn’t know, hot magma is red and oil is black, and they appear at different levels of the geological strata.
December 31st, 2006 at 5:14 pm
Captn, when’s the last time your wells had an oil filter change?
December 31st, 2006 at 5:38 pm
Bill, your scientific analysis is staggering… magma is red, oil is black.
Your link references Cook Inlet. Well, that one’s just about dry. Talk with some good old folk who live down on the Kenai Peninsula about it. I think they’ll be happy to hear that the field will be refilling itself shortly.
Agrarium is a company that used to produce fertilizers using the natural gas that came out of Cook Inlet. Agrarium shut down last year and laid off over 200 workers. Those were good jobs.
Your Russian abiotic oil theory breaks down at the practical level. Fields are being closed because there isn’t enough oil left in them.
Your article also points out that production increased (in a single field) from 1973 to 1989. Well, surprise, surprise. I don’t suppose technology might have played some part in that?
When you overlay the production “bell curves” for hundreds and thousands of wells, the numbers don’t lie. Hubberts curve reflects reality. Based on the actual production curves you have a better insight into potential production capacities.
“Captn, when’s the last time your wells had an oil filter change?”
Funny, I’d say we’re due for some basic maintenance for sure.
Our big push right now is to get a natural gas pipeline built. It’s a foregone conclusion around these parts that the state’s future in regards to oil is coming to an end. Even if we were to tap ANWR. Maybe if they can tap more deeply we’ll see more oil, but given what we’ve got now, oil is definitely NOT going to sustain the state.
December 31st, 2006 at 5:44 pm
Rather than bashing science we should be looking to new technological breakthroughs that will allow us to do deep deep drilling.
I would like it better if we could find new sources of renewable and clean energy, like solar and wind power. If nothing else to subsidize our current consumption of oil and coal resources.
December 31st, 2006 at 5:55 pm
Cap’n
Different oil fields (according to my memory after reading this) may or may not refill at all or rather slowly depending on what cracks or fissures are connecting these oil fields to deep source oil–sometimes not at all.
December 31st, 2006 at 6:26 pm
Speaking of Alaska, here’s an interesting tid bit.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13390
December 31st, 2006 at 7:26 pm
http://www.mises.org/story/1134
January 1st, 2007 at 9:56 am
Of course de-capping some of these oil fields may not be economical, but what’s the actual cost per gallon of gasoline if you factor in the cost of this Iraqi invasion?
http://geology.utah.gov/surveynotes/geosights/rozelpoint.htm
January 1st, 2007 at 4:25 pm
I see some potential here. Forget healthcare.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/04/world/asia/04azerbaijan.html?ex=1322888400&en=305a43d94e1e028d&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
January 1st, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Heya Bill, after reading your mises link I think you’d like the book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man“.
Very interesting look at the role the IMF and World Bank play in developing nations. Imperialism via a charitable facade.
As for the Alaska link, what’s really pathetic is that most of our politicians are in the pockets of the big oil corps. It’s no wonder at all that the case has been held up in courts. Nothing happens in this state without oil, and the oil companies know that only too well. C’est la vie.
For anyone interested in Peak Oil… take a look at this site. It scared the hell out of me, but then I researched a bit and wasn’t so scared. Still worth the read though.
http://lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
January 1st, 2007 at 8:33 pm
captain
I read the book it was very good.
January 1st, 2007 at 9:45 pm
captain menace
I read the front flap. Some of these multinational corporations are like dictatorships without borders.
January 1st, 2007 at 9:59 pm
It’s an almost perfect system. You get these free market economists advising third world countries to take out these enormous development loans. The money then goes to western contractors to build out infrastructure. The advice from the economists turns out to be crap, and the country ends up straddled with debt, and no easy way to pay. They also end up with high-tech infrastructure which they then have to maintain.
That’s where the negotiations begin… “you let company x develop your resources and we’ll talk about re-negotiating the terms of your debt.”
Actually quite a clever way to extract whatever resource you may need. At the end of the day I guess it’s good that I’m a citizen of a nation that benefits from this lopsided arrangement.
January 1st, 2007 at 10:11 pm
How would we know if there’s a net benefit to us or not? These folks are out there free wheeling it. And you’re always hearing about missing money with things like reconstruction. A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you’re talking real money.
January 1st, 2007 at 10:32 pm
The first problem Bill is defining “us”.
I think I benefit from whatever shady deals go on between financiers and third world nations. I get low cost foreign goods (mahogany wood for example, gems, marble, oil, fresh produce). And I get these goods at a fairly low price considering the product’s associated costs from extraction to consumption. Whatever barrel these impoverished nations are bent over… I personally gain from it. I don’t know about us, but I know that I’m doing alright all things considered.
At the end of the day “our guys” get what they want. And if they don’t… we’ve got the biggest guns…
And for the reconstruction costs… only requires a little creative bookkeeping.
January 1st, 2007 at 11:16 pm
Here’s another issue that results from arbitrary control of natural resources, related to energy production and distribution. Silicon is now considered rare, so rare that photovoltaic solar cell companies are closing up shop because of the allegedly tight supply of silicon, the second most abundant element on the planet behind oxygen.
January 1st, 2007 at 11:44 pm
I think there’s different qualities of silicon and everyone wants the best now. Then again maybe the silicon producers are colluding and there’s a bottleneck in production.
January 2nd, 2007 at 6:36 am
http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/partner/story?id=46779
January 2nd, 2007 at 6:40 am
Solar cells are getting better and better and there’s a big increase in demand. Do you think solar ever close the gap with cheap power or will always be a niche item?
January 2nd, 2007 at 7:43 am
Captain
When I read about these Russian Scientists I was suprised as anyone that good science could come out of Russia. I had a girlfriend who was a refugee from Cambodia and her parents were Doctors. They were killed by Pol Pot because he slaughtered all the educated people.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:53 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyqaprhUJlo&NR