>-----Original Message-----
>From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
>Behalf Of gordon brown
>Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2002 5:22 PM
>
>It seems to me that unless all the oil is offshore, you ought to be
>comparing Antarctica with Greenland, which is glaciated, rather than with
>Siberia and Alaska, which are not.
Antarctica is about 50% continental shield, which means that there are no
sedimentary rocks at all. It is like north central Canada and there is no
oil there at all. The part of the continent which is covered by sediments,
a significant part is thin. I would say that most of the oil to be found on
the continent will be found offshore. And given that Antarctica was first
glaciated about 14 million years ago with intensification 5 million years
ago, I would suspect that most oil will be found in sediment older than
this. Why? Glacial till and the droppings of rocks from ice-bergs do not
make for great reservoirs, at least as far as I know. Arco drilled a well
on a prospect offshore Alaska which found 8000 feet of glacial till and no
oil.
glenn
see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
for lots of creation/evolution information
anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 17 2002 - 01:06:29 EDT