Abiotic oil

[FarmerChuck]

your thoughts please

[Gagundathar]

Are you talking about synthetic petroleum?
Or are you talking about the hypothesis that petroleum comes from abiotic sources?

[Malacandra]

It’s customary for the OP to provide some thoughts to kick off the discussion.

[DrFidelius]

I had shredded wheat and a banana for breakfast today.

[XT]

Pretty sure the OP is talking about the abiogenic oil hypothesis.

Abiogenic petroleum origin is a discredited hypothesis that was proposed as an alternative to theory of biological petroleum origin. It was relatively popular in the past, but it went largely forgotten at the end of the 20th century after it failed to predict the location of new wells.[1]

The abiogenic hypothesis argues that petroleum was formed from deep carbon deposits, perhaps dating to the formation of the Earth. Supporters of the abiogenic hypothesis suggest that a great deal more petroleum exists on Earth than commonly thought, and that petroleum may originate from carbon-bearing fluids that migrate upward from the mantle. The presence of methane on Saturn’s moon Titan and in the atmospheres of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune is cited[1] as proof of the formation of hydrocarbons without biology.[2]

The biogenic theory for petroleum was first proposed by Georg Agricola in the 16th century and various abiogenic hypotheses were proposed in the 19th century, most notably by Alexander von Humboldt, the Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev and the French chemist Marcellin Berthelot. Abiogenic hypotheses were revived in the last half of the 20th century by Russian and Ukrainian scientists, who had little influence outside the Soviet Union because most of their research was published in their native languages. The theory was re-defined and made popular in the West by Thomas Gold, who published all his research in English.[1]

It’s pretty much bunk, but I suppose some folks still believe in it.

-XT

[Dallas_Jones]

@FarmerChuck

your thoughts please

I think I’d like there to be a few more words to kick off a debate thread. Maybe a short paragraph.

So far I just don’t have enough information to decide if this issue is all the fault of the evil Republicans or the godless Democrats. I’m going to need a little more to go on.

Could be evil Democrats or godless Republicans too.

You just can’t tell with a five word OP.

[lieu]

It’s not very good with brushetta.

[Dallas_Jones]

Thank you xtisme. That’ what I had in mind.

[Ludovic]

@FarmerChuck

your thoughts please

Cool story, bro.

[Robb]

Could someone help me with the tl;dr version?

[Martin_Hyde]

I’ve started to hear it more and more. One person I know who is often the advocate of zany ideas like zeroing out all his bank accounts and hoarding gold coins for the coming apocalypse has been big on this theory for some time. He genuinely believes oil “bubbles up from the center of the earth” and collects in pools closer to the surface, which we then harvest.

His arguments are that since no life could ever be miles below the earth’s crust, which is where oil wells are, it is obvious oil does not come from dead animals.

I’ve always rejected it out of hand; I will admit though that my ability to debunk this particularl theory isn’t very strong. Geology is something I’m very uninformed on, so I’ve never contested it too much because I don’t want to appear as a false authority on things. I’ve just rested comfortably with the fact that if this was real Exxon and BP would be using the conclusions drawn from it to make new oil discoveries, from what I can tell that isn’t happening.

[John_Mace]

@lieu

It’s not very good with brushetta.

Nor with bruschetta. Pronounced with a hard “c”, not a “sh” sound.

[Marley23]

I left this thread because the OP was active and I figured he would explain himself in shortly. Since he’s logged off without adding to his non-OP, I’m going to lock this. FarmerChuck, please go ahead and start a new thread with an OP that clarifies what you want to know.