Research Findings Throw Some Doubt Into Theory of Peak Oil
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.
- » See also: Climate Change a Threat to Russian Oil Wealth
- » Get Gas 2.0 by RSS or sign up by email.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.’
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.