Re: The end of the age of oil?

Kenneth Piers misreads the article I posted. The point is not that oil is
being generated within the earth, but
1. Estimating oil reserves has not historically been a very precise process
2. The technology for oil exploration and extraction has improved over the
years, making
more oil available

--- Kenneth Piers <Pier@calvin.edu> wrote:

> REPLY: No one has yet replied to Mr Hamilton's post suggesting that oil is
> supply will never run out because presumably it is being regenerated all the
> time according to the so-called "inorganic origin of oil" theory. According
> to this theory oil is continually being formed below the surface of the earth
> ( maybe more than 5-10 miles) or even further by the "cooking" of methane
> (CH4 - presumably itself derived from non-organic sources as around Jupiter)
> under high temperature and pressure. I have not been able to find the precise
> chemistry proposed for such a process but presumably it would have to be
> something like this (overall):
> 4 CH4 >> C4H10 + 3 H2
> (to use the methane to butane conversion as an example of methane undergoing
> condensation to higher molecular weight alkanes)
> Unfortunately for the inorganic oil theory, however, the thermodynamics for
> this kind of process is extremely unfavorable. I have on my computer some
> software (EQS4WIN) that allows the calculation of the equilibrium position
> for multiple of chemical reactions involving simple substances (such as those
> above) at any specified temperature and pressure.
> When calculating the equilibrium position for the above reaction at a
> temperature of 500K (the approximate temperature of the earth at a depth of
> 10-15 km) and 100 atm pressure (it turns out that the equilibrium position is
> quite insensitive to pressure), the software shows that beginning from
> methane alone, the conversion to butane under these conditions is less than
> 0.0005%. In fact if the ratio of butane/methane were to exceed 0.000005/1.
> the excess butane would be converted to methane under these conditions. So
> while the inorganic origin of oil is a nice speculation, it must be
> recognized as nothing more than that - it seems to be done in by the
> unforgiving science of thermodynamics. An irrefutable fact of thermodynamics
> is that under high heat and pressure, long-chain hydrocarbons break down to
> shorter chain hydrocarbons and eventually into methane - just as the
> geologists have been telling us all along.
> I also would like to ask Mr Hamilton when this presumed "inorganic source of
> oil-process" began. If it started already hundreds of millions of years ago
> it seems that the world would be awash in oil - in fact we might expect that
> the tectonic plates would be floating on oil. It seems odd that now, just as
> our oil reservoirs appear to be emptying in the early 21st century, just when
> we most need it, this inorganic production of oil has turned itself on to
> replenish our depleted oil reservoirs. Why was this process not in action a
> million years ago?
> ken piers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ken Piers
>
> "Everything should be as simple as possible - but not simpler." A. Einstein
>
> >>> Bill Hamilton <williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com> 12/1/2004 12:17:55 PM >>>
> I found this article in World Net Daily the other day. In honor of my
> father, an economist who passed away July 28, I am forwarding it to the ASA
> list. I know my father would have heartily approved of the article -- he
> pretty much subscribed to the classical economics view of the price
> mechanism. Also in the October 18 issue of Forbes there is an article on how
> the higher price of oil has spurred new exploration:
>
> The Big Plunge
> October 18, 2004
> High prices at the pump are finally giving oil companies the incentive to
> make long--and expensive--bets to find new supplies. No one is going deeper
> than ChevronTexaco.
>
>
>
> Glenn will probably disagree, and I'll not argue with him (much), but I
> thought it would be useful to inject some economics into the oil discussion
>
>
>
>
>
> To view the entire article, visit
> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41613
>
> Friday, November 26, 2004
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> The end of the age of oil?
> By Chris Bennett
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Posted: November 26, 2004
> 1:00 a.m. Eastern
>
>
> According the Washington Post (June 6, 2004) , the world is on the verge of
> oil famine.
> BBC News declares "as certain as death and taxes, we shall one day be forced
> to learn to live without oil." Further, "people in middle age today can
> probably expect to be here" for the terminal oil shortages.
>
> CBS, NBC and ABC have all presented grim and frightening reports of rapacious
> oil executives, unfeeling consumers, gas-guzzling SUVs and declining oil
> stocks, mostly in the powder keg countries of the Middle East. The
> unmistakable conclusion: An energy disaster of epic proportions is just
> around the corner.
> Literally dozens of books and hundreds of websites paint a consistent and
> alarming picture of the decline of the American Empire and the end of the Age
> of Oil.
> Could this be true? Are we really sliding downhill into a future defined by
> scarce resources, alternative fuels and mandatory conservation * a nightmare
> of strong governmental controls and diminished expectations?
> The surprising answer: No.
> The world has plenty of oil.
> According to the United States Geological Survey, the U.S. Department of
> Energy and many, many other reputable sources, we have sufficient oil
> resources for at least the next several hundred years, maybe longer. The
> costs of extraction will likely be higher, but scarcity? No.
> Without the emotional "the end of the world as we know it," paranoia from the
> traditional media, let's actually look at world oil reserves.
> Currently, the world's recognized reserves of oil are higher than at any time
> in history. And, contrary to conventional media hysteria, the world's clearly
> identified reserves are growing every year. The USGS reports in the "World
> Petroleum Assessment 2000" that world reserves of conventional crude oil
> total 3,000 billion barrels. This estimate is an increase from a similar
> estimate in 1994 of 2,400 billion barrels, up from 1,500 billion barrels in
> 1990.
> But this report considers only "liquid" or conventional oil * oil that's
> accessible and readily available from underground reservoirs. This does not
> include highly viscous oils, oil-tar sand deposits or oil shale.
> The major media focus with myopic intensity on conventional crude reserves,
> ignoring stunning reserves of oil located in tar sands and oil shale. At
> best, this is difficult to comprehend.
> For example, little media attention was accorded the dramatic increases in
> Canadian oil reserves. A December 2003 report in Oil and Gas Journal notes
> that Canada's oil reserves now total more than 180 billion barrels of oil,
> with most found in economically recoverable oil-tar sand deposits. In
> contrast, Saudi Arabia's reserves are estimated at 264 billion barrels.
> The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers sees the oil sand reservoir
> at a stunning 2,000 billion barrels of crude, of which 315 billion barrels is
> currently recoverable. This is oil economically viable at prices between $18
> and $20 per barrel. Worldwide, recoverable reserves of oil found in oil sands
> are currently reported in excess of 1,000 billion barrels.
> But by far the largest potential reservoir of future oil is held in oil
> shale.
> The U.S. Department of Energy, in a March 2004 study, reports oil shale
> reserves in the United States alone of over 2,000 billion barrels. Worldwide,
> oil-shale reserves are estimated as high as 14,000 billion barrels.
> To put this in perspective, U.S. oil-shale reserves alone would be sufficient
> to provide 100 percent of U.S. crude oil consumed at current usage for over
> 200 years.
> Worldwide reserves of 14,000 billion barrels are sufficient to provide the
> world's crude oil requirements for at least several hundred years.
> The truth is, the history of oil prognostication is littered with
> scaremongers proclaiming false declarations of approaching oil famine. In
> fact, doom merchants have used oil as a vehicle for "end of the world"
> scenarios since before World War I. Consider:
>
>
> In 1914, the U.S. Bureau of Mines declared that the United States would
> run out of oil in 10 years.
>
>
> In 1939, the Department of the Interior predicted that oil reserves would
> last only 13 more years.
>
>
> In 1950, when the world's estimated reserves were thought to be 600
> billion barrels, the Department of Interior again projected the end of the
> age of oil by 1963.
>
>
> Move forward to the 1973 Arab oil embargo, which prompted the highly
> respected journal Foreign Affairs to publish an article on "The Oil Crisis:
> This Time the Wolf is Here."
>
>
> In 1981, a respected textbook on economic geology predicted that the
> United States was entering a 125-year-long energy gap, expected to be at its
> worst in the year 2000 with dire consequences to our standard of living.
>
>
> In 1995, a prominent geologist predicted that petroleum production would
> peak in 1996 and that after 1999 many of the developed world's societies
> would look like Third World countries.
>
>
> In 1998, a Scientific American article titled "End of the Age of Oil"
> predicted that world oil production would peak in 2002 and that we would soon
> face the "end of the abundant and cheap oil on which all nations depend."
>
>
>
> All of these predictions were wrong. In fact, from 1950 to the present, the
> world's recognized oil reserves have increased virtually every year.
> The current USGS world estimate of 3,000 billion barrels of conventional
> crude is probably conservative. Consider Iraq. Only 2,300 oil wells have been
> drilled in Iraq, compared with over 1 million wells drilled in Texas.
> Furthermore, only 22 of the more than 80 major Iraqi oil fields have been
> fully explored.
> Iraq is reported to have 112 billion barrels of oil reserves. But based on
> unexplored reserves, many geologists believe that actual number is more than
> twice current estimates.
> Even North American reserves of conventional oil are probably understated
> since recent deep oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico has identified a huge
> vat of oil. President Fox has stated that the new reserves may be as large as
> 56 billion barrels. Deep oil wells are drilled to 25,000 feet below ground
> surface and represent a new frontier in oil exploration.
> A classic example of oil reserve understatement is the Kern River field in
> California, where production wells were first drilled in 1899. By 1942, after
> 43 years of continuous pumping, remaining Kern River oil was estimated at 54
> million barrels. Pumping continued, and over the next 50 years, the field
> produced over 736 million barrels. In 1986, using 3D mapping technology, the
> reservoir was reported to contain an additional reserve of over 970 million
> barrels.
> Eventually the world will move from an oil-based economy to something better.
> But given the huge reserves of world oil, it's likely that technology will
> drive this change, not scarcity.
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> Related columns:
> WND: Sustainable Oil
> BBC: When the Last Oil Well Runs Dry
> Washington Post: After the Oil Runs Out
> National Center for Policy Analysis: Are We Running out of Oil
> U.S. Dept of Energy: Strategic Significance of America's Oil Shale Resource
> Rense.com: Canada's Oil Reserves Second only to Saudi Arabia
> USGS: USGS: World Energy * Conventional Oil Reserves
> Bizjournals: Chevron announces deep oil discovery in Gulf of Mexico
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> Chris Bennett manages an environmental engineering division for a West Coast
> technology firm. He and his wife of 26 years make their home on the San
> Francisco Bay.
>
> © 2004
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Bill Hamilton
> William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
> 586.986.1474 (work) 248.652.4148 (home) 248.303.8651 (mobile)
> "...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! * What will yours do?
> > BEGIN:VCARD
> VERSION:2.1
> X-GWTYPE:USER
> FN:Piers, Kenneth
> TEL;WORK:526-6491
> ORG:;Chemistry
> EMAIL;WORK;PREF;NGW:Pier@calvin.edu
> N:Piers;Kenneth
> ADR;DOM;WORK;PARCEL;POSTAL:;DH 335
> LABEL;DOM;WORK;PARCEL;POSTAL;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:Piers, Kenneth=0A=
> DH 335
> END:VCARD
>
>

=====
Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
586.986.1474 (work) 248.652.4148 (home) 248.303.8651 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31

                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Received on Sat Dec 4 15:48:46 2004