In 1877 Russian scientist Dimitri Mendeelev suggested that the large deposits of oil and gas we find under the surface of the Earth could be made without the decay of long-dead organisms in a process called abiotic synthesis of methane.
Since then the theory has been relegated to the back shelf due to a lack of evidence and the prevailing conventional wisdom that all deep oil and gas deposits arise from decaying prehistoric animal and plant material.
While it’s no doubt that the decay of dead animals and plants is one pathway to the creation of Earth’s oil and natural gas deposits (potentially the largest), new research done with high-tech equipment simulating the conditions of deep earth suggests that Mendeelev’s theory is correct.
The implications of this discovery are rather profound. Although we don’t know what percentage of fossil fuels are made in an abiotic (without decaying organisms) fashion in the Earth, the researchers’ results clearly indicate that at least some of the oil and gas we mine from the earth is produced constantly without the need for decaying organisms.
Why so profound? Up to this point we’ve been fairly confident that the Earth’s petroleum resources are finite, which has in turn given rise to the idea of Peak Oil and the rush to wean the Earth off of fossil fuels. Certainly it’s too early to say if the abiotic method of oil and gas production even makes a dent in the overall production of buried hydrocarbon deposits, but it gives legitimacy to the question: Are we really about to run out of oil?
In some ways the question is moot. It doesn’t matter if we are about to run out of oil because the burning of it is causing major problems with our environment. We should try to wean ourselves off the stuff as soon as we can regardless of the method of its formation. Results like this only serve to ultimately take away from the urgency of that transition. But science is science, and to be done correctly it has to be blind to the implications of its results. I like to present all the information regardless of its implications—from that perspective it leads to a better understanding of our world.
Plus, it’s more of a question of if demand will outstrip supply, not if the Earth can continue to make buried hydrocarbons regardless of where it comes from.
The findings will be published in the Nov./Dec. issue of ACS’ Energy & Fuels, a bi-monthly publication.
DOI: 10.1021/ef9006017: “In Situ Diamond-Anvil Cell Observations of Methanogenesis at High Pressures and Temperatures”
Source: EurekAlert!
Image Credit: nestor galina‘s Flickr photostream. Used under a Creative Commons License.
PDF 
I understand peak oil to mean the cost in $ & energy to discover, recover, process & distribute refined fuels to become too prohibitive. From what I’ve read, half of all oil reserves may well stay in the ground if the transition to renewables for energy needs is cheaper.
Same for other peak resources.
I understand peak oil to mean the cost in $ & energy to discover, recover, process & distribute refined fuels to become too prohibitive. From what I’ve read, half of all oil reserves may well stay in the ground if the transition to renewables for energy needs is cheaper.
Same for other peak resources.
Demand continues to grow, so either way it is not sustainable. And as you suggested, the pollution factor is always there.
Demand continues to grow, so either way it is not sustainable. And as you suggested, the pollution factor is always there.
Interesting and exciting, from the perspective that it is always exciting to learn new and unexpected things. But this could be terrifying if it turns out that we will continue to have oil to burn for far longer than we thought, because I really don’t think most people care about global warming enough to pay for higher cost alternatives to oil. In a sense, we would be very lucky if we started to run out of oil at just the moment when further use of oil could lead to our extinction. If it turns out that’s not happening, and if we are able to continue to burn oil indefinitely, then the fatal flaw in our species will have been exposed. Nature may have to start over again. My money is on the cats — they’re just so cool.
Interesting and exciting, from the perspective that it is always exciting to learn new and unexpected things. But this could be terrifying if it turns out that we will continue to have oil to burn for far longer than we thought, because I really don’t think most people care about global warming enough to pay for higher cost alternatives to oil. In a sense, we would be very lucky if we started to run out of oil at just the moment when further use of oil could lead to our extinction. If it turns out that’s not happening, and if we are able to continue to burn oil indefinitely, then the fatal flaw in our species will have been exposed. Nature may have to start over again. My money is on the cats — they’re just so cool.
What matters most is the rate of formation of oil. The abiotic vs. biotic debate on the origin of oil has long been considered moot from a resources perspective. If oil was being generated at anywhere near the rate it’s being consumed now(abiotically or otherwise), so much would have formed over the eons that we’d all be submerged in a sea of oil now.
What matters most is the rate of formation of oil. The abiotic vs. biotic debate on the origin of oil has long been considered moot from a resources perspective. If oil was being generated at anywhere near the rate it’s being consumed now(abiotically or otherwise), so much would have formed over the eons that we’d all be submerged in a sea of oil now.
Sir:
You do a terrible disservice to the world spreading mis-information on where oil really comes from and the challenge that Peak Oil presents to the 200+ countries and 6.5 billon people of the world.
Shame on you.
Paul
Sir:
You do a terrible disservice to the world spreading mis-information on where oil really comes from and the challenge that Peak Oil presents to the 200+ countries and 6.5 billon people of the world.
Shame on you.
Paul
Hey Nick,
Has anyone determined where the carbon in the abiotic oil originates. maybe it is totally carbon neutral as far as CO2 is concerned?
Wouldn’t that be a hoot?
Hey Nick,
Has anyone determined where the carbon in the abiotic oil originates. maybe it is totally carbon neutral as far as CO2 is concerned?
Wouldn’t that be a hoot?
I’m surprised you didn’t mention Thomas Gold’s (1920-2004) theories about the abiogenic origins of oil. And the idea that oil and methane are deeper in the crust of the earth than geologists have postulated is not new to these astrogeophysicists. Gold had investigated this on and off since 1950. Gold theorized that since petroleum and its component hydrocarbons were present across the entire universe, there was no reason to believe “that on Earth they must be biological in origin”. Gold proposed that fossil fuels were trapped inside the core of the Earth in randomized molecular form nearly 4.5 billion years ago. Over time, the extreme heat of the core “sweated” the rocks that contained these molecules, pushing them up through the porous layers of the Earth. As they move up toward the surface, the hydrocarbons fueled the development of large microbial colonies, which served as the basis for life on Earth. So he suspected that the idea of peak (biogenic)oil was not a relevant concept.
I’m surprised you didn’t mention Thomas Gold’s (1920-2004) theories about the abiogenic origins of oil. And the idea that oil and methane are deeper in the crust of the earth than geologists have postulated is not new to these astrogeophysicists. Gold had investigated this on and off since 1950. Gold theorized that since petroleum and its component hydrocarbons were present across the entire universe, there was no reason to believe “that on Earth they must be biological in origin”. Gold proposed that fossil fuels were trapped inside the core of the Earth in randomized molecular form nearly 4.5 billion years ago. Over time, the extreme heat of the core “sweated” the rocks that contained these molecules, pushing them up through the porous layers of the Earth. As they move up toward the surface, the hydrocarbons fueled the development of large microbial colonies, which served as the basis for life on Earth. So he suspected that the idea of peak (biogenic)oil was not a relevant concept.
C. Paul Davis:
If you want to embrace our all-knowing scientific community, such as those scientists who suppose to understand all of the intricacies of the earth’s climate, then you must also be willing to accept valid scientific evidence that may not suit your personal agenda. As a wise old professor of mine liked to say, ‘The more you know, the more you know you don’t know.’
C. Paul Davis:
If you want to embrace our all-knowing scientific community, such as those scientists who suppose to understand all of the intricacies of the earth’s climate, then you must also be willing to accept valid scientific evidence that may not suit your personal agenda. As a wise old professor of mine liked to say, ‘The more you know, the more you know you don’t know.’
and the cow jumped over the moon
Bruce Willis will rush in guns a basing and save us all
God will wave his hand and turn water into oil
Corporations will give their wealth back to the people
People will just keep buying crap
###
Remember:
GDP is the rate at which we extract natural resources and deposit toxic waste back into the earth
and the cow jumped over the moon
Bruce Willis will rush in guns a basing and save us all
God will wave his hand and turn water into oil
Corporations will give their wealth back to the people
People will just keep buying crap
###
Remember:
GDP is the rate at which we extract natural resources and deposit toxic waste back into the earth
I don’t understand how the research findings conflict with the theory of Peak Oil. It is nice to know the origin of oil, whether it is organic or abiotic, but it is rather irrelevant. What is important, is to grasp the concept that oil extraction, now close to a 1000 barrels a second, will lose momentum sooner or later. Combining that with a growing population, will mean that per capita, consumption will be forced down accordingly. The scenarios to choose range from resource wars to technofixing, but kicking the habit will happen, whether we like it or not.
I don’t understand how the research findings conflict with the theory of Peak Oil. It is nice to know the origin of oil, whether it is organic or abiotic, but it is rather irrelevant. What is important, is to grasp the concept that oil extraction, now close to a 1000 barrels a second, will lose momentum sooner or later. Combining that with a growing population, will mean that per capita, consumption will be forced down accordingly. The scenarios to choose range from resource wars to technofixing, but kicking the habit will happen, whether we like it or not.
A carefull read of the material cited would indicate that it is indeed possible to force the development of intermediate long chain fractions…..but not long enough to replicate unleaded petrol or diesel. And not in quantity. And not at an energy cost that we could bare.
Thats the issue. And wishful thinking that God would not create a world in which oil ever ran out….is I think just that wishful thinking. It is time to move on to other solutions.
A carefull read of the material cited would indicate that it is indeed possible to force the development of intermediate long chain fractions…..but not long enough to replicate unleaded petrol or diesel. And not in quantity. And not at an energy cost that we could bare.
Thats the issue. And wishful thinking that God would not create a world in which oil ever ran out….is I think just that wishful thinking. It is time to move on to other solutions.
Wonderful news. We can continue to make plastics and other useful products from oil with what is continually produced.
If continuous production of oil were ongoing at any appreciable rate, wells would not run dry.
Much as I have been interested in alternative vehicle fuels over the past 3 decades, electric is rapidly becoming the easy way to go. Now we just need a clean, efficient method of coal gasification or breakthrough in fusion….
Wonderful news. We can continue to make plastics and other useful products from oil with what is continually produced.
If continuous production of oil were ongoing at any appreciable rate, wells would not run dry.
Much as I have been interested in alternative vehicle fuels over the past 3 decades, electric is rapidly becoming the easy way to go. Now we just need a clean, efficient method of coal gasification or breakthrough in fusion….
Mr.Sinister,
So where are these scientists that actually are willing to put forth a complementary theory for depletion? It seems like plenty are willing to take oil industry money for research to prove that there might be more oil and gas, but no one will do the research for the opposite. That is as much a legitimate branch of science. Much like you can prove that methane could be cauised by abiotic processes, you can also develop a theory that it could never happen at a rate that would sustain itself.
Mr.Sinister,
So where are these scientists that actually are willing to put forth a complementary theory for depletion? It seems like plenty are willing to take oil industry money for research to prove that there might be more oil and gas, but no one will do the research for the opposite. That is as much a legitimate branch of science. Much like you can prove that methane could be cauised by abiotic processes, you can also develop a theory that it could never happen at a rate that would sustain itself.
Sir,
If you are going to suggest alternative sources of oil, please add some credibility to your case by quoting some figures or statistics to back it up.
How many barrels of oil from an abiotic source have been found on earth? None.
Currently there is no evidence that depleted oil fields are re-filling from abiotic sources deep in the earth. Assuming for a moment that they are…the recharge rate is so low that it’s not measurable.
In the meantime, the planet continues to use 78 million barrels of oil per day and the major fields such as Cantarell (Mexico) and the North Sea remain in terminal decline. We need to find the equivelant of a new Saudi Arabia every 2.5 years in order to keep up with the current decline rates. Are you suggesting that abiotic oil will magically appear and save us? Ha!
Gary
Canada
Sir,
If you are going to suggest alternative sources of oil, please add some credibility to your case by quoting some figures or statistics to back it up.
How many barrels of oil from an abiotic source have been found on earth? None.
Currently there is no evidence that depleted oil fields are re-filling from abiotic sources deep in the earth. Assuming for a moment that they are…the recharge rate is so low that it’s not measurable.
In the meantime, the planet continues to use 78 million barrels of oil per day and the major fields such as Cantarell (Mexico) and the North Sea remain in terminal decline. We need to find the equivelant of a new Saudi Arabia every 2.5 years in order to keep up with the current decline rates. Are you suggesting that abiotic oil will magically appear and save us? Ha!
Gary
Canada
Good news !
Scientists have discovered giant lakes of liquid methane on Titan, moon of Saturn. We don’t even have to worry about the rate of formation, it’s just sitting there in practically infinite quantities.
Now we just have to develop a fleet of spaceships to bring it back and fuel our Hummers for another 1000 years…
Good news !
Scientists have discovered giant lakes of liquid methane on Titan, moon of Saturn. We don’t even have to worry about the rate of formation, it’s just sitting there in practically infinite quantities.
Now we just have to develop a fleet of spaceships to bring it back and fuel our Hummers for another 1000 years…
Nick,
Back in the early 1980′s a respected physicist (not a geophysicist) developed a theory on inorganic origins for petroleum and natural gas. Basically what he said was that methane was present in large concentrations in the Earth’s magma, but we rarely saw it in volcanic gasses because it oxidized before we obtained samples. His theory was taken seriously by some, so much so that a Norwegian oil company spent millions of dollars drilling through thousands of feet of plutonic rocks in Norway in the hopes of discovering petroleum formed from de-gassing of the mantle. Plutonic rocks (e.g. granite, andesite) are almost never hosts for petroleum from organic sources. Needless to say these ultra-wildcat wells all came up dry. From my perspective that was the death knell of the inorganic petroleum theory.
Nick,
Back in the early 1980′s a respected physicist (not a geophysicist) developed a theory on inorganic origins for petroleum and natural gas. Basically what he said was that methane was present in large concentrations in the Earth’s magma, but we rarely saw it in volcanic gasses because it oxidized before we obtained samples. His theory was taken seriously by some, so much so that a Norwegian oil company spent millions of dollars drilling through thousands of feet of plutonic rocks in Norway in the hopes of discovering petroleum formed from de-gassing of the mantle. Plutonic rocks (e.g. granite, andesite) are almost never hosts for petroleum from organic sources. Needless to say these ultra-wildcat wells all came up dry. From my perspective that was the death knell of the inorganic petroleum theory.
“Earth’s petroleum resources are finite”
You can talk abiotic oil all you like, but if you accept the fact that the universe is finite please enlighten us as to how this small magical planet (well, at least until Western homo sapiens got his hands on it) will attract carbon atoms and hydrogen atoms from elsewhere in the universe to make an “infinite” supplu of hydrocarbons?
“Earth’s petroleum resources are finite”
You can talk abiotic oil all you like, but if you accept the fact that the universe is finite please enlighten us as to how this small magical planet (well, at least until Western homo sapiens got his hands on it) will attract carbon atoms and hydrogen atoms from elsewhere in the universe to make an “infinite” supplu of hydrocarbons?
Why is everyone all a’twitter? Algae oil and biofuels are oils too. Biotic. Most greenies support these technologies as renewable and CO2 neutral, or better. They can be used in our existing energy extraction technologies (cars, power generators, etc.) which is a good thing.
Is everyone pining for the day when we’ll be condemned to energy deprived existences to atone for our past “sins”?
Why is everyone all a’twitter? Algae oil and biofuels are oils too. Biotic. Most greenies support these technologies as renewable and CO2 neutral, or better. They can be used in our existing energy extraction technologies (cars, power generators, etc.) which is a good thing.
Is everyone pining for the day when we’ll be condemned to energy deprived existences to atone for our past “sins”?
Suppose you have five tomatoes in your kitchen that you bought at the supermarket, and you eat one per day. Then you plant a tomato plant in a pot on your back deck that will give you five tomatoes every three months. (That’s all you have room for next to your grill.) The plant on your deck does not “give legitimacy” to the question “Do I really need to keep going to the supermarket if I want to eat a tomato every day?”
Suppose you have five tomatoes in your kitchen that you bought at the supermarket, and you eat one per day. Then you plant a tomato plant in a pot on your back deck that will give you five tomatoes every three months. (That’s all you have room for next to your grill.) The plant on your deck does not “give legitimacy” to the question “Do I really need to keep going to the supermarket if I want to eat a tomato every day?”
Right. Show me one major oilfield that isn’t associated with a biogenic organic sediment layer dated a few hundred million years back – that’s what every oil company looks for. The basic description is here:
http://oilandgasgeology.com/
What abiotic hydrocarbons that have been found only consist of methane, not the longer-chain petroleum molecules that go into gasoline and diesel.
It seems a lot of old oil company PR is getting dusted off again… they started running “diesel is more energy efficient” ads, again – even though diesel is still the #1 cause of childhood asthma, and electric cars are at least four times as efficient, energy-wise.
Right. Show me one major oilfield that isn’t associated with a biogenic organic sediment layer dated a few hundred million years back – that’s what every oil company looks for. The basic description is here:
http://oilandgasgeology.com/
What abiotic hydrocarbons that have been found only consist of methane, not the longer-chain petroleum molecules that go into gasoline and diesel.
It seems a lot of old oil company PR is getting dusted off again… they started running “diesel is more energy efficient” ads, again – even though diesel is still the #1 cause of childhood asthma, and electric cars are at least four times as efficient, energy-wise.
P.S. The ability to make large volumes of hydrocarbon fuel from CO2 (from air or water, or as a byproduct of industrial processes such as cement manufacture):
http://arpa-e.energy.gov/projects/sf.html
“Towards Scale Solar Conversion of CO2 and Water Vapor to Hydrocarbon Fuels”
“The Pennsylvania State University (University Park, PA) and partner Sentech Corporation will develop catalyst-coated titanium dioxide nanotube membranes to use sunlight to convert carbon dioxide and water to methane and other hydrocarbon fuels. This innovative approach to direct solar fuels captures sunlight and uses CO2 as a carbon source to generate fuels for heating and transportation.”
P.S. The ability to make large volumes of hydrocarbon fuel from CO2 (from air or water, or as a byproduct of industrial processes such as cement manufacture):
http://arpa-e.energy.gov/projects/sf.html
“Towards Scale Solar Conversion of CO2 and Water Vapor to Hydrocarbon Fuels”
“The Pennsylvania State University (University Park, PA) and partner Sentech Corporation will develop catalyst-coated titanium dioxide nanotube membranes to use sunlight to convert carbon dioxide and water to methane and other hydrocarbon fuels. This innovative approach to direct solar fuels captures sunlight and uses CO2 as a carbon source to generate fuels for heating and transportation.”
Nick ,
” In some ways the question is moot. It doesn’t matter if we are about to run out of oil because the burning of it is causing major problems with our environment. We should try to wean ourselves off the stuff as soon as we can regardless of the method of its formation. ”
I do not agree . If this theory is indeed correct , it implies that we can establish our own carbon cycle . By deep well injection of CO2 waste
gases , we can stimulate more hydrocarbon production underground .
This amounts to a carbon cycle not unlike that done by photosynthesis .
Here the energy comes , not from sunlight , but from geothermal heat .
Nick ,
” In some ways the question is moot. It doesn’t matter if we are about to run out of oil because the burning of it is causing major problems with our environment. We should try to wean ourselves off the stuff as soon as we can regardless of the method of its formation. ”
I do not agree . If this theory is indeed correct , it implies that we can establish our own carbon cycle . By deep well injection of CO2 waste
gases , we can stimulate more hydrocarbon production underground .
This amounts to a carbon cycle not unlike that done by photosynthesis .
Here the energy comes , not from sunlight , but from geothermal heat .
Oh please… Just because someone can make methane by using high pressues and temperatues doesn’t mean then can make the complex hydrocarbons in oil – otherwise Venus would have been mined by Exxon by now. Poor journalism.
Oh please… Just because someone can make methane by using high pressues and temperatues doesn’t mean then can make the complex hydrocarbons in oil – otherwise Venus would have been mined by Exxon by now. Poor journalism.
Aceditor ,
This is not just methane .
It is a full molecular weight range
of hydrocarbons . Need proof ?
I hope you can read technical materials :
http://www.gasresources.net/AlkaneGenesis.htm
Aceditor ,
This is not just methane .
It is a full molecular weight range
of hydrocarbons . Need proof ?
I hope you can read technical materials :
http://www.gasresources.net/AlkaneGenesis.htm