"One can, then, conceive the production, by purely mineral means, of all natural hydrocarbons. The intervention of heat, of water, and of alkaline metals -- lastly, the tendency of hydrocarbons to unite together to form the more condensed material -- suffice to account for the formation of these curious compounds. Moreover, this formation will be continuous because the reactions which started it are renewed incessantly." -- Marcellin Berthelot, chemist, 1866
"Hydrocarbons can be re-defined as a 'renewable resource, rather than a finite one' (Gurney 1997)" -- Peter R. Odell, economist/geologist, 2004
Casselman, B., and Chazan, G., Cramped on Land, Big Oil Bets at Sea, The Wall Street Journal via Yahoo! News, January 6th 2010 (Hat tip: Jeffery Keown)
Chevron is leasing the Clear Leader, which floats in 4,300 feet of water in the Gulf of Mexico, to drill for oil through nearly five miles of rock.
Big Oil never wanted to be here, in 4,300 feet of water far out in the Gulf of Mexico, drilling through nearly five miles of rock.
It is an expensive way to look for oil. Chevron Corp. is paying nearly $500,000 a day to the owner of the Clear Leader, one of the world's newest and most powerful drilling rigs. The new well off the coast of Louisiana will connect to a huge platform floating nearby, which cost Chevron $650 million to build. ...
"These discoveries are changing the debate," says Ed Morse, chief economist for LCM Commodities, a brokerage firm. What remains unclear, he says, is whether the deepwater projects will ensure that new discoveries continue to meet demand.
Many in the industry argue the new fields have expanded the limits of where the industry can find oil, potentially delaying a decline in global production.
"There are vast unexplored areas in deep water, so tremendous opportunities for growth," says Steven Newman, president of Transocean Ltd., which owns the Clear Leader rig. ...
Adding to the challenge: The oil that Chevron was pursuing lay beneath a thick layer of salt, which disrupts seismic sound waves and blurs the images like a smudge on a camera lens. The company had to analyze the data with supercomputers to clear up that distortion.
-759725.jpg){kind=link}
17 comments:
Thank you Jeffery Keown for the heads up on the article.
Quoted from the linked article:
"Beyond the Gulf of Mexico, companies have announced big finds off the coasts of Brazil and Ghana [West Africa], leading some experts to suggest the existence of a massive oil reservoir stretching across the Atlantic from Africa to South America."
Geological indicators suggest this is a distinct possibility.
Actually, it would be a series of oil reservoirs stretching below the ocean floor between South America and Africa.
And if true, the only explanation is Abiotic Oil.
From the Telegraph, United Kingdom - May 27, 2008
"Oil crisis triggers fevered scramble for the world's seabed"
"Record prices drive secret underwater land-grab as old enemies capitalise on colonies."
Apparently, governments have been in the know for a long time about oil under the seabed.
And likely these governments know it is Abiotic Oil they are scrambling after.
"Bemused officials are watching with a mixture of awe and suspicion as Britain and France stake out legal claims to oil and mineral wealth as far as 350 nautical miles around each of their scattered islands across the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans. It takes chutzpah. Not to be left out, Australia and New Zealand are carving up the Antarctic seas."
The seabed is the future for multi-national private oil companies to explore & produce petroleum.
The linked article is informative.
And this isn't limited to the seabed between South America and Africa. It's going on all over the world.
More information regarding the quote from the posted article:
"Beyond the Gulf of Mexico, companies have announced big finds off the coasts of Brazil and Ghana [West Africa], leading some experts to suggest the existence of a massive oil reservoir stretching across the Atlantic from Africa to South America."
The following article from the Houston Geological Society (principly concerned with oil) lays it out:
Cracks of the World: Global Strike-Slip Fault Systems and Giant Resource Accumulations
"Evidence is mounting that the Earth is encircled by subtle necklaces of interconnecting, generally latitude-parallel faults. Many major mineral and energy resource accumulations are located within or near the deeply penetrating fractures of these “cracks of the world.” Future exploration for large petroleum occurrences should emphasize the definition, regional distribution, and specific characteristics of the global crack system. Specific drill targets can be predicted by understanding the local structural setting and fluid flow pathways in lateral, as well as vertical conduits, detectable through patterns in the local geochemistry and geophysics."
Again, the above linked article is informative.
The following link is the same article, but in a PDF file format. Why it is important is that there are a series of schematics that shows these "cracks of the world". The reader will see from one of the schematics that these "cracks of the world" run out into the Atlantic Ocean up to the mid-ocean ridge and on over to Africa and indeed these cracks are present on the seabed all over the world.
"Cracks of the World" schematics
Scroll through the PDF file for the schematics (the schematic of the Atlantic Ocean basin is several pages into the PDF file) and also appreciate this PDF file is how the document was actually presented to the members of the Houston Geological Society as opposed to the first link of the article without any schematics.
Also, appreciate that the Houston Geological Society is a professional organization concerned with oil exploration & production which wouldn't waste time with something the executive committee didn't take seriously.
The author of the article Stanley B. Keith who supports Abiotic Oil theory is the head of a research consortium supported by the oil industry (something to think about).
My apology for the failed link to the PDF format schematics.
"Cracks of the World" schematics"
Anaconda,
Two points:
1) before we can say abiotic for sure, the oil has to be tested against biotic theories, but everybody is keeping mum on Chevron, Tuppi and Angola deep water fields.
2) see the article at Bloomberg: Rubin, Oil Rally Predictor, Sees $100 Crude in 2010 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aZmJGmyDUVXM&pos=6
More important is the wide swings in prices that are predicted, and they are not good for the stability of our economies as well as politics
New Topic:
Vanadium and nickel seem to show up in biotic – at least algae based oils. This are not abundant metals. I could use some links on this chemistry.
KV,
There is no biotic theory.
Hydrogen and carbon are chemical elements not living organisms.
Furthermore 35,000-40,000 feet TVD is below the depth of any biological fossil.
OIM,
Separate your hypothesis (in your case - beliefs) from what the mainstream (do not include me in that) advocates for their higher purpose - profits.
It is not that hard to show that deep water oil does not contain the same evidence and traces that led mainstream to propose the decomposition of organic matter as oil, gas and coal.
Irrefutable proof of abiotic oil will get rid of all peak oil advocacy and let the economics and health and safety issues rule energy exploitation.
Next, you stated: Hydrogen and carbon are chemical elements not living organisms.
Can I say that since OIM is made of elements and therefor he is not alive?
KV,
"Separate your hypothesis (in your case - beliefs) from what the mainstream (do not include me in that) advocates for their higher purpose - profits."
I am well aware that scientists lie for profit.
"It is not that hard to show that deep water oil does not contain the same evidence and traces that led mainstream to propose the decomposition of organic matter as oil, gas and coal."
There is no evidence and no traces. The only biological material in crude oil is there as a contaminant.
"Irrefutable proof of abiotic oil will get rid of all peak oil advocacy and let the economics and health and safety issues rule energy exploitation."
Dream on.
OIM,
You are full of it.
According to generally accepted theory, petroleum is derived from ancient biomass.[14] The theory was initially based on the isolation of molecules from petroleum that closely resemble known biomolecules (Figure).
More specifically, crude oil and natural gas are products of heating of ancient organic materials (i.e. kerogen) over geological time. Formation of petroleum occurs from hydrocarbon pyrolysis, in a variety of mostly endothermic reactions at high temperature and/or pressure.[15] Today's oil formed from the preserved remains of prehistoric zooplankton and algae, which had settled to a sea or lake bottom in large quantities under anoxic conditions (the remains of prehistoric terrestrial plants, on the other hand, tended to form coal). Over geological time the organic matter mixed with mud, and was buried under heavy layers of sediment resulting in high levels of heat and pressure (diagenesis). This process caused the organic matter to change, first into a waxy material known as kerogen, which is found in various oil shales around the world, and then with more heat into liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons via a process known as catagenesis. - Wiki
Pic at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Treibs%26Chlorophyll.png
Annotation of the pic below:
Structure of vanadium porphyrin compound extracted from petroleum by Alfred Treibs, father of organic geochemistry. Treibs noted the close structural similarity of this molecule and chlorophyll a.
OIM,
This is why Ultra-deep oil composition is needed:
Geologists trace the source of the carbon in hydrocarbons through analysis of its isotopic balance. Natural carbon is nearly all isotope 12, with 1.11 percent being isotope 13. Organic material, however, usually contains less C-13, because photosynthesis in plants preferentially selects C-12 over C-13. Oil and natural gas typically show a C-12 to C-13 ratio similar to that of the biological materials from which they are assumed to have originated. The C-12 to C-13 ratio is a generally observed property of petroleum and is predicted by the biotic theory; it is not merely an occasional aberration. (13)
In addition, oil typically contains biomarkers—porphyrins, isoprenoids, pristane, phytane, cholestane, terpines, and clorins—which are related to biochemicals such as chlorophyll and hemoglobin. The chemical fingerprint of oil assumed to have been formed from, for example, algae is different from that of oil formed from plankton. Thus geochemists can (and routinely do) use biomarkers to trace oil samples to specific source rocks.
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/2423
KV wrote: "It is not that hard to show that deep water oil does not contain the same evidence and traces that led mainstream to propose the decomposition of organic matter as oil, gas and coal."
OilIsMastery, the above comment from KV basically agrees with Abiotic Oil theory and you criticize the statement?
I think you are starting to lose it, seriously.
(KV, I appreciate the statement, and, yes, Science can distinghish deep oil from shallow oil because as you suggest there are little if any biological contaminants in it.
Which makes sense since this oil is trapped below the salt barrier at depths where relatively few micro-organisms live.)
KV wrote: "...before we can say abiotic for sure, the oil has to be tested against biotic theories..."
Well, of course the tried and true "theories" have been trotted out: Prehistoric lakes...I kid you not.
And if you think "prehistoric lakes" ran all the way out to the Mid-Atlantic spreading ridge and on over to the other side, Africa -- I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
KV:
To respond to the substantive arguments in the passages you provided, let me link to the following paper (detailed reading and study is warranted -- it's an interesting read):
"Dismissal of the Claims of a Biological Connection for Natural Petroleum"
Every point raised in the cited passages is covered, analyzed, and dismissed.
The scientific basis of "biological oil" is tenuous at best and spurious at worst.
KV:
While the following paper does not address ultra-deep drilling in ultra-deep ocean basins, the analysis addresses the biological contaminants or lack thereof in deep oil issue and is instructive:
"Bacteriological analysis of the oil and the examination for so-called “biological marker” molecules: The oil produced from the reservoirs in the crystalline basement rock of the Dnieper-Donets Basin has been examined particularly closely for the presence of either porphyrin molecules or “biological marker” molecules, the presence of which used to be misconstrued as "evidence" of a supposed biological origin for petroleum. None of the oil contains any such molecules, even at the ppm level. There is also research presently under progress which has established the presence of deep, anaerobic, hydrocarbon metabolizing microbes in the oil from the wells in the uppermost petroliferous zones of the crystalline basement rock in the Dnieper-Donets Basin."
Other passages are enlightening and worth reading.
"The Drilling & Development of the Oil & Gas Fields in the Dnieper-Donetsk Basin"
Oh, and as the original posted article makes clear, all this deep oil is expensive to discover & produce.
Abiotic Oil does not mean the price of oil will dramatically go down, rather it means the supply is likely to be stable.
The price of oil needs to be about $75 a barrel to provide enough profit incentive to produce this deep oil (all oil is abiotic).
Investors have no need to fear Abiotic Oil -- its knowledge in the general public does not mean the collapse of oil prices.
Anaconda,
"OilIsMastery, the above comment from KV basically agrees with Abiotic Oil theory and you criticize the statement?
I think you are starting to lose it, seriously."
KV is saying there are biomarkers in shallow oil but not in deep oil.
That is not true.
There are biological contaminants in shallow oil and deep oil.
And C13 depletion is found in deep oil as well.
OIM,
Abiogenic must be testable consistently... There has to be an abiogenic test that biogenic fails and vice versa...
Anaconda,
I looked at the papers and their effectiveness is lost by disdain the author(s) expressed... so much effort is expended in dishing BOOP, but not a single proposal how abiotic could be tested.
OIM becomes nebbish because he is belief driven distorter and attacks others as a rabbid...
Post a Comment