quote:

ORIGINAL: KYsissy

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
your entire premise rests on the veracity of petroleum being a finite resource.

im far from a geology expert, but it seems debatable as to whether or not that's true. there seems to be plenty of folks who think it isn't.

Then present evidence to the contrary.

Google abiotic oil. The Russians have claimed to have drilled for oil far far below where it cannot possibly be dino oil. NASA has found hydrocarbons in large quantities on one of Saturn's moons. It could be that hydrocarbons are more mineral in nature and the heat and pressures of the planet make oil. The theory has been around a while but evidence is starting to back the theory up.

Also there are many technical publications on this subject at www.gasresources.net

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

your entire premise rests on the veracity of petroleum being a finite resource.

im far from a geology expert, but it seems debatable as to whether or not that's true. there seems to be plenty of folks who think it isn't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Is the entire universe made of petroleum?

Well not the entire universe, but there seems to be a helluva lot of it out there.

The spectacular Horsehead Nebula in the Orion constellation is not only a favourite object of astronomy photographers all over the world, but apparently also a cosmic petroleum refinery... "We observed the operation of a natural refinery of petroleum of gigantic size," said astronomer Jérôme Pety. ~Source

More locally...

On the Origins of Deep Hydrocarbons

K.

quote:

bounty44: your entire premise rests on the veracity of petroleum being a finite resource. Hillwilliam: Is the entire universe made of petroleum?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extravagasm

quote:

bounty44: your entire premise rests on the veracity of petroleum being a finite resource. Hillwilliam: Is the entire universe made of petroleum?

This is SO IMPORTANT. And you are the only two who's inquiry will get anywhere close to reality. Before about 1980 the scare mongering relied greatly on the fear of exhausting finite resources. After then, scare mongering leaned more toward climate change. Because of the realization that resources are not in fact finite. Not in the aggregate, nor in their separate forms. On the earth, for example, the main resource that is finite is water, which is not even used as a hydrogen source, despite being loaded with it.

All petroleum (gas and solid) are being constantly produced from formerly organic material and have been since the beginning. Most people get confused by saying that it take "millions of years" to produce petroleum. But that staggering production time is irrelevant because it's already passed. Now, new, is being evolved, at the same rate as old plant life, was going into production (millions of years ago). Rate in equals rate out. Incidentally there are loads of non-sun plant life still under the earth, which is why so much herbicide must be added to fracking (a very dangerous process btw).

So the only significant question for scarce resource researchers, is: Does the neverending rate of use, exceed the neverending rate of production. No scientist i am aware of has ever tackled this question head on in the 100 years i have researched it back to. Instead they try to estimate the earth's resource stockpile. Also false and irrelevant.

Yes I am well aware everybody believes our rate of resource use exceeds our rate of production, or surely will soon. But this is wholly without evidence.

It is my opinion that the scare crowd is better off with the preventable-climate-change argument, than they were with the vanished-resources argument. Although they have not proved preventable-climate-change, either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Do you really believe that oil comes from dead dinosaurs?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Is the entire universe made of petroleum?

Well not the entire universe, but there seems to be a helluva lot of it out there.

The spectacular Horsehead Nebula in the Orion constellation is not only a favourite object of astronomy photographers all over the world, but apparently also a cosmic petroleum refinery... "We observed the operation of a natural refinery of petroleum of gigantic size," said astronomer Jérôme Pety. ~Source

More locally...

On the Origins of Deep Hydrocarbons

Again.

It is a FINITE resource.

The rest of the world is going to renewables.
What future do you want for your grandchildren?

A: Citizens of the leading nation on the planet?

B: Lackeys of China

Pick one.

Firstly, I don't accept the Sinophobic premise that those are our only two choices. Secondly, the only currently feasible alternative to petroleum as a large scale power source is nuclear. Thirdly, China isn't going to renewables; they are pushing one of the largest efforts on the planet to develop molten salt and fast accelerator reactors.

K.

quote:

You [extravagasm] seem to claim that the rate of production of carbon based fuels is similar to the rate of depletion and therefore the cycle is inexhaustible.
(Please correct me if I didn't read you correctly)
If that were true, the CO2 content of the atmosphere would remain constant.
i.e. Production of CO2 = sequestration into new fuel.
In fact, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has risen appreciably. Therefore, Production of CO2 > sequestration into new fuel.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extravagasm

Hill, i have no offense against your popular 1980s position, just that i cant justify it. You asked me to correct you, so i will, though i don't get into continuing posts. I prefer to be clear first time.

quote:

You [extravagasm] seem to claim that the rate of production of carbon based fuels is similar to the rate of depletion and therefore the cycle is inexhaustible.
(Please correct me if I didn't read you correctly)
If that were true, the CO2 content of the atmosphere would remain constant.
i.e. Production of CO2 = sequestration into new fuel.
In fact, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has risen appreciably. Therefore, Production of CO2 > sequestration into new fuel.

Answer: Hill, you're kinda arguing against yourself, here. The rate of use increases, as does population. Thus the rate of CO2 increases. Thus the better the climate change argument 'appears'. But it is not established that this rate equals or exceeds the rate of the earth's production--as would be required for your scarcity argument.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Is the entire universe made of petroleum?

Well not the entire universe, but there seems to be a helluva lot of it out there.

The spectacular Horsehead Nebula in the Orion constellation is not only a favourite object of astronomy photographers all over the world, but apparently also a cosmic petroleum refinery... "We observed the operation of a natural refinery of petroleum of gigantic size," said astronomer Jérôme Pety. ~Source

More locally...

On the Origins of Deep Hydrocarbons

Again.

It is a FINITE resource.

The rest of the world is going to renewables.
What future do you want for your grandchildren?

A: Citizens of the leading nation on the planet?

B: Lackeys of China

Pick one.

Firstly, I don't accept the Sinophobic premise that those are our only two choices. Secondly, the only currently feasible alternative to petroleum as a large scale power source is nuclear. Thirdly, China isn't going to renewables; they are pushing one of the largest efforts on the planet to develop molten salt and fast accelerator reactors.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PyrotheClown



Did you miss what I posted earlier,we(humanity)now have the ability to creat fuel from shit......Last time I checked,we have a lot of shit(not just in these forums)

The only thing that makes ethonal an unsuitable replacemeant for petrolium is that the production of ethonal consumes alot of agraculteral resources that are normally devoted to,you know,food production.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: PyrotheClown



Did you miss what I posted earlier,we(humanity)now have the ability to creat fuel from shit......Last time I checked,we have a lot of shit(not just in these forums)

The only thing that makes ethonal an unsuitable replacemeant for petrolium is that the production of ethonal consumes alot of agraculteral resources that are normally devoted to,you know,food production.

I didn't miss it at all.

You are talking about renewable, non petroleum energy.

This and other sources is what our nation needs to be leading the charge in, not waiting for someone else.

quote:

Hill post 34: If production equals usage, then byproducts are constant.
Byproducts are not constant, therefore there is not an equilibrium.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extravagasm

There is no established equilibrium here. That's what's distracting you.

quote:

Hill post 34: If production equals usage, then byproducts are constant.
Byproducts are not constant, therefore there is not an equilibrium.

I believe production far exceeds usage. No one has established to the contrary. It's funny no one believed otherwise for centuries. Now people do. But no one has established that production fails to exceed use.

As far as sequestration (the all important question) Now, new, is being evolved, at the same rate as old plant life, was going into production (millions of years ago). Rate begun (organic materials), equals rate produced/sequestered (hydrocarbon added to the inner earth). Incidentally there are loads of non-sun plant life still under the earth.