| Author | Message | ||
     Hex |
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/09091 0084259.htm Fossils From Animals And Plants Are Not Necessary For Crude Oil And Natural Gas, Swedish Researchers Find "There is no doubt that our research proves that crude oil and natural gas are generated without the involvement of fossils. All types of bedrock can serve as reservoirs of oil," says Vladimir Kutcherov. ScienceDaily (Sep. 12, 2009) — Researchers at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm have managed to prove that fossils from animals and plants are not necessary for crude oil and natural gas to be generated. The findings are revolutionary since this means, on the one hand, that it will be much easier to find these sources of energy and, on the other hand, that they can be found all over the globe. “Using our research we can even say where oil could be found in Sweden,” says Vladimir Kutcherov, a professor at the Division of Energy Technology at KTH. Together with two research colleagues, Vladimir Kutcherov has simulated the process involving pressure and heat that occurs naturally in the inner layers of the earth, the process that generates hydrocarbon, the primary component in oil and natural gas. According to Vladimir Kutcherov, the findings are a clear indication that the oil supply is not about to end, which researchers and experts in the field have long feared. He adds that there is no way that fossil oil, with the help of gravity or other forces, could have seeped down to a depth of 10.5 kilometers in the state of Texas, for example, which is rich in oil deposits. As Vladimir Kutcherov sees it, this is further proof, alongside his own research findings, of the genesis of these energy sources – that they can be created in other ways than via fossils. This has long been a matter of lively discussion among scientists. “There is no doubt that our research proves that crude oil and natural gas are generated without the involvement of fossils. All types of bedrock can serve as reservoirs of oil,” says Vladimir Kutcherov, who adds that this is true of land areas that have not yet been prospected for these energy sources. But the discovery has more benefits. The degree of accuracy in finding oil is enhanced dramatically – from 20 to 70 percent. Since drilling for oil and natural gas is a very expensive process, the cost picture will be radically altered for petroleum companies, and in the end probably for consumers as well. “The savings will be in the many billions,” says Vladimir Kutcherov. To identify where it is worthwhile to drill for natural gas and oil, Vladimir Kutcherov has used his research to arrive at a new method. It involves dividing the globe into a finely meshed grid. The grid corresponds to fissures, so-called ‘migration channels,’ through underlying layers under the surface of the earth. Wherever these fissures meet, it is suitable to drill. According to Vladimir Kutcherov, these research findings are extremely important, not least as 61 percent of the world’s energy consumption derives from crude oil and natural gas. The next step in this research work will involve more experiments, but above all refining the method will make it easier to find places where it is suitable to drill for oil and natural gas. Vladimir Kutcherov, Anton Kolesnikov, and Alexander Goncharov’s research work was recently published in the scientific journal Nature Geoscience. (Message edited by hex on September 13, 2009) | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
He adds that there is no way that fossil oil, with the help of gravity or other forces, could have seeped down to a depth of 10.5 kilometers in the state of Texas, for example I asked that question last week when oil was found at 36,000 feet in the Gulf of Mexico. I read something from the Russians a few years ago suggesting that oil is constantly being generated. I guess they were correct, after all. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Well, it's clearly easy to generate snake oil... Not a provable fact anywhere in that story... | ||
| Hex |
Well some believe the Universe is less than 10,000 years old. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationi sm What's your point Reep? If the actual peer review (not this high school article) produces proof positive, and volumes of new oil is discovered all over the world at these proposed sites, some will just say God created the oil. Who cares who's right or wrong if this theory liberates new reserves...I for one am fascinated by science. What will the military industrial complex fight over if this is in fact true. Will all the warriors take up peace in an abundance of newly discovered natural resources? Are we so blind? | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Doesnt really matter if there is more oil. The fight is over using it in the first place. If Gore and his stooges have their way we still will pay 10 bucks a gallon. | ||
| Hex |
Right, exactly, but now we can concentrate on extracting CO2 and containing it, instead of battling for more oil. What if all the mental energy of our great nation was used for peace and preservation not war and exploitation? | ||
| Hex |
God may have wanted us to create CO2 to avert the next IceAge. God may also want us to learn self preservation, so He doesn't have to babysit us any more. What if God left us this whole planet to be our own Geo-engineers? What if the planet He gave us can provide a continuous supply of energy and CO2 if we only learn how to use it? Maybe temperature control IS our only real purpose. Why then are we still fighting? (Message edited by hex on September 13, 2009) | ||
| Hmartin |
Hold on a second. Do we deign to speak for God? What does he say about what he "may" want us to do? "Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you." Does He tell us that the preservation of nature is His divine purpose for our lives? Be very careful when you bring God into an argument. Backfire Board, here we come, but I couldn't let this go. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
I often wonder why, in this day and age of advanced tech, can't scientists copy natural crude and gas? They clone people for god's sakes, they can't clone oil or gasoline?? | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
You can make oil from coal and shale. It's a problem of cost. | ||
| Reepicheep |
This is an old Russian crackpot theory. That article was carefully devoid of facts. "Oil Shale" won't "become" hydrocarbons, it is already filled with hydrocarbons, which can be extracted and converted to oil. | ||
| Hootowl |
You can make oil from any hydrocarbon. http://www.changingworldtech.com Been operating for several years now turning turkey offal into diesel fuel. | ||
| Hootowl |
"What if all the mental energy of our great nation was used for peace and preservation not war and exploitation?" Your statement ignores the fact that our "war and exploitation" brings freedom to millions who would otherwise languish under the brutal regimes. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
Who died and made us "ruler of freedom"? Maybe what's intended for our world is that of natural selection. Survival of the fittest, sounds cruel, but the US simply cannot afford to be at war and making other's lives better when there's "wars" here in the US to be fought to better our own citizen's lives. Why should we reuild iraq when there's people here starving...hell the Gulf Coast is still in shambles after a hurricane 5 years ago. If all was well here in the US, then I could support waging wars to help the oppressed. But seriously, we're far from being in a good shape ourselves. | ||
| Hootowl |
All true. However, my point was that "war and exploitation" are not what we're about. Whether we should undertake the task of freeing the world from despotism is another argument. | ||
| Hex |
Only way this one will go to the Backfire Board is if you guys continue to personalty insult me or anyone else who participates in an open exchange of ideas. If in fact it is true, that as a Nation, In God We Trust, wouldn't that suggest that He has some purpose for us? And when I say God or He, I mean the mystery of fate, and all the recognized and unrecognized forces that compel us. Personally, I am a Buell fanatic! Moreover, I am a Sportster fanatic, I love the simplicity, and heart beat it produces by design. I like little bikes even-though I'm a big guy. And both those platforms suit me excellently. So if Blake cares to suggest that I don't belong on a Buell because of my personal beliefs, that's his problem, and yours if you believe that philosophy. I believe I belong right here, in the snake pit. The Earth was flat once, crazy people set out to see the edge, most didn't come back, some found a new home and chose never to return. Yet others traveled around and around and around... In reality, we don't know sh!t about squat. It takes all ten of our senses just to toil and suffer until death. When I say war and exploitation I'm quoting what many believe to be the actual motivation of covert American empire building. I'm not making this up when I question our motives in the middle east. I was shown a movie called Zeitgeist Addendum by one of my friends who works day to day, in our state legislature. He shows me many thing from all sides of all arguments political. I thought some of the movie was crap like money from debt is slavery (maybe true), but I was fascinated with the facts presented about our long covert meddling in the middle east, specifically the link of the CIA to Iran (Roosevelt's brother, CIA, Shaw of Iran), Iraq (CIA training Hussein), Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan (CIA training bin Laden), etc. All motivated by American oil resource acquisition and exploitation. Forgive me if I question our humanitarian purposes. Burma/Myanmar anyone? So if some quack ruski/sweeds actually throw a monkey wrench into the whole necessity thing, why don't we embrace the notion and commit some parallel research to test their theories. If in fact they do find veins of geo-physically-produced oil which happens to flow through fissures in the Earth's crust to settle in underground deltas like the Texas Oil Fields, or the Middle East, etc. I say we try to tap the them. If oil is in fact a continuously produced geophysical substance, the only real problem is to decide what to we do with all the extra CO2. It might be to our ultimate advantage to learn how to manage it when we need to retain heat for the upcoming Ice Age. As long as we learn to extract and contain it from the atmosphere when we don't need the extra heat. Don't plants grow better in a concentrated CO2 environment? Don't greater populations need faster and quicker food supplies? Don't we need the extra thawed land like Greenland to house populations and grow more beans and rice? Just having a thought here... | ||
| Hootowl |
American Imperialism is a myth. We defeated nearly the entire world in WWII, and yet, we're not any larger for it. All those conquered lands are not ruled by the US. If we were an imperial power, all those places would be US colonies. They aren't. Our "exploitation" of the middle east is also a myth. All we do is dump incredible amounts of cash into their economies. Do they help their starving poor? No, they buy gold toilets and build ski resorts in the desert. They sell oil, we buy oil. It's really that simple. We're not stealing it. What they do with the money is not our business... ...except when they amass large armies and attack their neighbors for their oil. Saddam Hussein did that to Iran, then Kuwait. We helped Saddam initially because he was the lesser of two evils, and we didn't know just how much of a thug he was. Similarly, we helped Bin Laden because he was not as bad as the Soviets. in fact, he wasn't bad at all. He didn't do anything to us until we had the audacity to station US troops in the Holy Land (at the request of the government of the Holy Land) because Saudi Arabia was about to be invaded by Iraq. It was our mere presence there that inflamed him, and that wasn't until well after the CIA stopped providing the resistance fighters in Afghanistan with missiles to shoot down Soviet helicopters. If you view that movie with a critical eye, you'll see that the tinfoil hat theories it portrays are just that. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Hex, I'm sure the'll be happy to take as much money as you want to give them to continue their research. I have a theory that you can produce oil by taking extended motorcycle adventures, for example Ohio to Alaska. It must be possible, as there is all that oil up in alaska, and alaska is cold, so it couldn't have been a jungle, so the fossil fuel thing is a myth. Therefore my theory must be correct.  All I need is a $1 million "adventure grant"... I'm sure it'll work  | ||
| Hex |
Thanks guys for keeping it real. And thanks for not talking down to me, but talking me down. I'm still interested though...but I'm also interested in machinework and winemaking. It's a fascinating life! | ||
| Fast1075 |
I for one am doing all I can to help with the fuel problem...I eat tacos and make my own methane...but wait....I'm a fossil...nevermind...I make fossil fuel.. On a more serious note...the universe has large amounts of hydrocarbons that as far as we know have nothing to do with decaying plant and animal life. I submit that the hydrocarbons that seemingly are being "produced" by inorganic activity are actually hydrocarbons that were trapped during the planetary formation process and are simply finding their way to the surface. (Message edited by fast1075 on September 14, 2009) (Message edited by fast1075 on September 14, 2009) | ||
| Hex |
American Imperialism is a myth. We defeated nearly the entire world in WWII, and yet, we're not any larger for it. Huh?!? Alaska became 49th state of the U.S. on January 3, 1959. Hawaii was admitted to the Union on August 21, 1959. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
We bought Alaska. | ||
| Hex |
Occupy, bought, or fought for, still imperialistic expansion into strategic territory. By any means possible? | ||
| Hootowl |
Those places joined the union by their own free will, not through subjugation. Look to actual (former) Imperial powers for what Imperialism is. UK and France spring to mind. You could argue that the purchase of Alaska (and Louisiana for that matter) was illegal because the land was stolen from its native inhabitants. The French stole Louisiana, and the Russians stole Alaska. The British and Spanish stole most of the rest of the Americas. We are the former colony of an imperial power, not an imperial power. Our ownership of certain islands in the Pacific and Caribbean is one glaring exception. We are in the process of "un-owning" those though. Call it a mistake made long ago by people who died long ago. To call the US today an imperial power for purchasing oil and investing in oil producing infrastructure abroad is just ridiculous. Whatever imperial ambition past politicians have had in this country has long since died. | ||
| Hmartin |
...if you guys continue to personalty insult me...  Not here, I hope. I'm sorry if I overreacted a bit. Too many people, including preachers, say stuff like, "God wants us to..." without backing it up with scripture, and I guess it just touched a nerve. It's a fascinating life! It sure is! There's still so much we don't know. The puzzle just keeps getting bigger. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
We bought the Louisiana Territory as well. I guess since I bought my house, I am an imperialist occupier of my residence? Odd outlook. | ||
| Hex |
Funny, last time I got called a haole in the great State of Hawaii, I didn't feel very welcome. Haole: A word used mainly in Hawaii to describe a white person. Depending on how you say it, the word can mean either an insult or just a fact. Foreigner. Non native. Outsider. Imperialist? | ||
| Sifo |
So because some native Hawaiians are racist the US is imperialist? That's a new twist on racism. Funny that that kind of racism is accepted there. Another example where racism against whites is accepted. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
We are becoming a nation of whiners and pansies. | ||
| Blake |
"What if all the mental energy of our great nation was used for peace and preservation not war and exploitation?" You're a miserable traitorous fool, and I don't want you posting here anymore. I asked you once already, but you didn't honor. I won't ask again. Take a hike. |
