I am a petroleum geologist/geophysicist with about 36 years of experience in oil & gas exploration mostly in the Gulf of Mexico. In light of Andy May’s recent post, Oil – Will we run out?, I thought I might post an essay on oil formation.
Over the past six years, I have been fortunate to have the opportunity to write guest posts for Watts Up With That thanks to Anthony Watts. Many of my posts have been about issues related to oil production and each of these posts usually triggers comments from Abiogenic Oil advocates. So, this post’s main thrust will be to explain why the Abiogenic Oil hypothesis is not widely accepted and why we think that the original source of crude oil is organic matter.
It’s possible that oil forms in the mantle all the time. The chemical equations can be balanced. So, as an olive branch to Abiogenic Oil aficionados, I will unequivocally state that their favored hypothesis is not impossible.
Biogenic vs abiogenic is really a poor way to characterize the issue. It implies that the formation of crude oil is either a biological or non-biological process. The process is thermogenic. The original source material is considered to be of organic origin because all of the evidence supports this.
The Generally Accepted Theory for Hydrocarbon Formation
I’m not going to go into a lot of detail on this. OffshoreEngineering.com has a very good basic primer here.
The basic steps are:
Algae, plankton and other marine and lacustrine photosynthesizers die and sink to the bottom of the ocean.
They are buried in mud under anoxic conditions.
As more sediment is deposited, they are buried deeper.
The geothermal gradient gradually raises the temperature of the buried critters.
Diagenesis and catagenesis lead to the formation of kerogen, then oil, then wet gas.
Metagenesis leads to the formation of dry gas and then high temperature methane.
The depth scale is generalized. It can vary a great deal depending on the nature of the overburden. http://www.offshoreengineering.com/oil-and-gas/petroleum-geology/1-hydrocarbon-formation
Or the old Conoco commercial which showed a Vibroseis crew hunting for a buried dinosaur, this has never been the theory of hydrocarbon formation.
Methane and Other Simple Hydrocarbons vs Crude Oil
What is a Hydrocarbon?
hydrocarbon
1. n. [Geology]
A naturally occurring organic compound comprising hydrogen and carbon. Hydrocarbons can be as simple as methane [CH4], but many are highly complex molecules, and can occur as gases, liquids or solids. The molecules can have the shape of chains, branching chains, rings or other structures. Petroleum is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons. The most common hydrocarbons are natural gas, oil and coal.
It’s important to note that “organic” doesn’t necessarily mean “related to life,” although it usually is.
Organic chemistry is the chemistry discipline that is concerned with the study of compounds containing carbon that is chemically bonded to hydrogen. Organic chemistry encompasses the synthesis, identification, modeling, and chemical reactions of such compounds.
Methane, ethane and other alkanes, alkenes, alkynes, cycloalkanes and alkadienes are simple hydrocarbons. Inorganically sourced methane is massively abundant on Earth and elsewhere in our Solar System and probably throughout our Galaxy. Other simple hydrocarbons are also often associated with inorganically sourced methane, usually in trace quantities.
The Saturnian moon, Titan, has seas of liquid methane and there is evidence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Titan’s atmosphere. PAH’s are pollutants that occur naturally in crude oil and coal deposits and as the result of burning of carbon-based fuels.
The fact that Titan’s methane-rich atmosphere can generate PAH’s and trace amounts of heavier hydrocarbons has no relevancy to how petroleum and natural gas liquids form on Earth. Even if it was relevant to the formation of petroleum, it would be totally irrelevant to how oil and gas accumulate in the Earth’s crust.
Methane and simple hydrocarbons are not even remotely close to crude oil.
There’s a fairly standard litany of Abiogenic Oil “evidence.” I am sure that the following does not cover all of the erroneous “evidence.”
Dniepr–Donets Basin, Ukraine
This is usually cited as proof of Abiogneic Oil because some Russians said there were no source rocks.
Palaeozoic source rocks in the Dniepr–Donets Basin, Ukraine
Reinhard F. Sachsenhofer, Viacheslav A. Shymanovskyy, Achim Bechtel, Reinhard Gratzer, Brian Horsfield, Doris Reischenbacher
DOI: 10.1144/1354-079309-032 Published on November 2010, First Published on October 20, 2010
ArticleFiguresInfo & Metrics PDF
Abstract
ABSTRACT The Dniepr–Donets Basin (DDB) is a major petroleum province in Eastern Europe. In order to understand the regional and stratigraphic distribution of source rocks for the dominantly gas-prone petroleum system, 676 fine-grained rocks from 30 wells were analysed for bulk parameters (total organic carbon (TOC), carbonate, sulphur, RockEval). A subset of samples was selected for maceral and biomarker analysis, pyrolysis-gas chromatography and kinetic investigations. Organic-rich sediments occur in different intervals within the basin fill. Maximum TOC contents (5.0 ± 1.9%) occur in the Rudov Beds, several tens of metres thick. The oil-prone rocks (Type III–II kerogen) were deposited in basinal settings above an unconformity separating Lower and Upper Visean sections. While maximum TOC contents occur in the Rudov Beds, high TOC contents are observed in the entire Tournaisian and Visean section. However, these rocks are mainly gas condensate-prone. Highly oil-prone black shales with up to 16% TOC and hydrogen index values up to 550 mgHC g–1TOC occur in Serpukhovian intervals in the northwestern part of the DDB. Oil-prone Lower Serpukhovian and gas condensate-prone Middle Carboniferous coal is widespread in the southern and southeastern part of the basin. Although no source rocks with a Devonian age were detected, their presence cannot be excluded.
The Dneiper-Donets Basin has clearly identifiable sedimentary source rocks.
Eugene Island 330 Field, Gulf of Mexico
The sudden, mysterious, inexplicable reversal of fortunes for the Eugene Island 330 field has often been cited as evidence for Abiogenic Oil…
Something mysterious is going on at Eugene Island 330. Production at the oil field, deep in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Louisiana, was supposed to have declined years ago. And for a while, it behaved like any normal field: Following its 1973 discovery, Eugene Island 330’s output peaked at about 15,000 barrels per day (2,400 m3/d). By 1989, production had slowed to about 4,000 barrels per day (640 m3/d). Then suddenly — some say almost inexplicably — Eugene Island’s fortunes reversed. The field, operated by PennzEnergy Co., is now producing 13,000 barrels per day (2,100 m3/d), and probable reserves have rocketed to more than 400 million barrels from 60 million.[5]
Firstly, there is nothing unusual about EI 330’s production curve…
Rate vs Cumulative Production https://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011205_no_free_pt2.shtml
Eugene Island 330 is one of the largest oilfields in the Gulf of Mexico. However, there is nothing unusual about its production curve. The “bump” in the late 1990’s was largely due to drilling activities. The field is still in decline. From 1972 through 2016, the field has produced 452 million bbl of oil, 1.88 TCF of gas and 484 million barrels of salt water. Last year, the field averaged about 11,500 BOPD, 14,400 MCFD and *28,400 BSWD*. Most of the reservoirs are strong water drives. These types of reservoirs can exhibit 50% or better primary recoveries.
The only odd thing about EI 330 has been relatively clear evidence (4d seismic) of oil migrating up a fault plane (which is how the oil got there in the first place). The source rocks in the Gulf of Mexico are still generating hydrocarbons, which are still migrating into geologic traps.
Ultradeep Oil Accumulations Are Too Deep and Hot to be in the Oil Window
Oil comes from organic material, mostly algae,which was quickly buried in mud at the bottom of oceans and lakes – So, it never had a chance to fossilize. Pressure, heat and time converted the organic material into kerogen, oil and natural gas…
As the biomass is buried more deeply in the sedimentary column, increasing pressure compacts it, increasing temperature cooks it and over time, the hydrocarbons slowly migrate toward the surface because they are less dense than connate/formation water. The kerogen first cooks to heavy oil, then light oil, then wet thermogenic gas, then thermogenic light gas, then high temperature methane…
Crude oil cracks at temperatures above about 300°F. It generally can’t exist at depths anywhere close to the mantle.
Walker Ridge 758 Chevron #1 is the deepest active oil producer in the Gulf of Mexico; drilled to a true vertical depth (TVD) of 28,497’ (8.7 km) in a water depth of 6,959’. It was completed in a Lower Tertiary Wilcox sandstone (26,831’ – 27,385’). The bottom hole temperature was 226°F. The oil migrated upward from deeper Mesozoic and Lower Tertiary source rocks. Even deeper oil reservoirs have been discovered in the oil window, many of these will be coming on production over the next few years.
There are no oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico with bottom hole temperatures outside of the oil window. The ultra-deepwater Lower Tertiary oil discoveries are well within the oil window. The shallow water Lower Tertiary gas discovery at Davy Jones is well out of the oil window, but in the gas window…
The depths on the chart are approximations based on a generalized geothermal gradient. The geothermal gradient is highly variable. Water and halite (salt) are less dense than most rocks. When the overburden consists of 8,000’ of seawater and 2,000’ of halite, 30,000’ of overburden weighs a lot less than it does when it’s all composed of more dense rocks.
The ultra-deepwater Lower Tertiary play in the Gulf of Mexico and the deep subsalt plays offshore Brazil are often cited as examples of abiotic oil because the reservoirs are supposedly too deep, too hot and/or too highly pressured to be in the oil window. This is simply wrong.
Tabular salt acts like a radiator. It conducts heat away from the substrata toward the surface. The combination of thick layers of salt and deep water depths enable oil to exist at depths previously unexpected. Salt and water are also less dense than most other overburden. This enables reservoir quality rocks to exist at deeper depths than previously expected.
I’ve drilled wells deeper than 20,000’ in the Gulf of Mexico. The bottom hole temperatures were in the range of 215°F (100°C). Ten wells in the Gulf of Mexico, drilled to true vertical depths greater than 20,000’ have each produced more than 20 million barrels of oil. The maximum bottom hole temperature (213°F) was encountered in the Mississippi Canyon (MC) 777 TF001 well, drilled by BP. The average bottom hole temperature of those ten 20 million barrel producers was 197°F.
For further reading about the geology and petroleum systems of the Gulf of Mexico, I recommend:
Offshore Vietnam and other Fractured Basement Reservoirs
Some oilfields produce from fractured basement rocks, usually granitic rocks. The Cuu Long Basin, offshore Vietnam is often cited as an example of Abiogenic Oil.
Petroleum Geology of Cuu Long Basin – Offshore Vietnam*
By Nguyen Du Hung and Hung Van Le
Search and Discovery Article #10062 (2004)
*Adapted from “extended abstract,” entitled “Hydrocarbon Geology of Cuu Long Basin – Offshore Vietnam,” for presentation at the AAPG International Conference, Barcelona, Spain, September 21-24, 2003.
[…]
Source Rocks
The effective source rocks are the Upper Oligocene shale that is present throughout the basin and the Lower Oligocene interbedded shale. They contain mostly kerogen type I/II generated from lacustrine sediments. The average TOC is from more than 1% up to nearly 10%; the hydrogen index ranges from 300 to more than 600 mg/gTOC (Figure 5).
Fractured Basement Reservoir
Fractured basement reservoirs are the unique characteristics of the Cuu Long basin, although there are other oil discoveries in clastics and volcanics plays. The first oil discovery in basement was made by Vietsopetro in the Bach Ho field in 1988. Oil was stored in macro-fractures, micro-fractures, and vuggy pores. The matrix porosity of the magmatic body is negligible. Fractures inside the basement may originate from one or a combination of the following factors:
Organic markers in the oil match the kerogen in the Oligocene shale. For the “abiotic theory” to work, the oil would have had to migrate out of the granite, leach the organic material from the shale and then migrate back into the granite.
There’s Not Enough Organic Matter Buried in the Oceans to Account for all of the Oil
Here’s the math…
The crust is ~1% of the Earth’s volume.
Sedimentary rocks comprise ~5% of the volume of the crust.
Total world crude production since 1900 has been ~1.3 trillion barrels.
If there are ~3.0 trillion barrels remaining to be found and produced, sedimentary rocks contain an average of 0.01 barrels of recoverable crude oil per acre*ft.
A typical oil reservoir has a recovery factor of ~300 barrels per acre*ft.
This means that only 0.003% of the Earth’s sedimentary rocks would have to be charged with crude oil to explain all of the crude oil ever likely to be produced on Earth.
The volume of organic carbon-rich sediment in the Earth’s crust is massively large. The Gulf of Mexico has accumulated more than 60,000′ of sedimentary column over the last 200 million years. The Cenozoic section, alone, is more than 40,000′ thick in places. The Quaternary can be more than 30,000′ thick in some locations. Most of the sedimentary column is composed of thick, organic-rich shale.
Oil is still being formed and migrating from source to reservoir rocks in the Gulf of Mexico. The Pleistocene reservoirs are less than 2.5 million years old and many have only been charged over the last 275,000 years. The reservoirs simply aren’t being charged as quickly as we are producing them.
Red areas indicate ~20,000 meter sediment thickness.
The Cretaceous, in particular, was a hydrocarbon “kitchen.” Marine conditions couldn’t have been more favorable for the deposition of source rocks even if they had been designed for such a purpose…
“DSDP sites at which Cretaceous sediments rich in organic matter were encountered. From Dean and Arthur, 1986.”
The Lower Tertiary Eocene was also a hydrocarbon kitchen (up to 21% TOC).
There is no shortage of organic matter in the sedimentary basins of the Earth’s crust.
The Siljan Ring
Proof of abiogenic oil would consist of the discovery of a significant volume of abiogenic oil.
So far, the closest thing to evidence has been the recovery of an “asphaltenic-type material removed from the drillstem at 5945 m [19,505 ft] in Well Gravberg-1 from the Precambrian granite, Siljan, Sweden.”
The chemical characterization showed that this material contains small amounts of hydrocarbons maximizing in the diesel range. No heavy hydrocarbons were identified, except for trace amounts of polycyclic aliphatics. From the chemical and stable isotopic characterizations, we concluded that the black gelatinous material is derived predominantly from the alteration of biodegradable nontoxic lubricant (BNTL) additives by caustic soda, admixed with diesel oil and trace amounts of polycyclic hydrocarbons from recirculating local lake water. No evidence for an indigenous or deep source for the hydrocarbons could be justified.
Unfortunately, the “asphaltenic-type material” was most likely derived from the drilling fluid used in the well.
Other Odd Arguments
These arguments, supposedly from Thomas Gold’s book, demonstrate a total ignorance of the conventional theory of hydrocarbon formation and accumulation…
(8) Petroleum and methane are found frequently in geographic patterns of long lines or arcs, which are related more to deep-seated large-scale structural features of the crust, than to the smaller scale patchwork of the sedimentary deposits.
Oil is generally trapped by structural features, commonly fault systems. Structural trends tend to follow linear and arc-like patterns…
The black blobs are salt bodies and the curvilinear line segments are major fault systems. Source: U. of Idaho
(9) Hydrocarbon-rich areas tend to be hydrocarbon-rich at many different levels, corresponding to quite different geological epochs, and extending down to the crystalline basement that underlies the sediment. An invasion of an area by hydrocarbon fluids from below could better account for this than the chance of successive deposition.
This is just plain ignorance. The conventional theory of oil formation and accumulation doesn’t state that oil forms in situ. It forms in deeper sedimentary rocks and migrates upwards to accumulate in structural and stratigraphic traps… In other words, “an invasion of an area by hydrocarbon fluids from below.”
“Hydrocarbon-rich areas tend to be hydrocarbon-rich at many different levels” because structural deformation creates traps at many levels and the oil migrates into them from below.
(10) Some petroleum from deeper and hotter levels almost completely lack the biological evidence. Optical activity and the odd-even carbon number effect are sometimes totally absent, and it would be difficult to suppose that such a thorough destruction of the biological molecules had occurred as would be required to account for this, yet leaving the bulk substance quite similar to other crude oils.
Abject nonsense.
(11) Methane is found in many locations where a biogenic origin is improbable or where biological deposits seem inadequate: in great ocean rifts in the absence of any substantial sediments; in fissures in igneous and metamorphic rocks, even at great depth; in active volcanic regions, even where there is a minimum of sediments; and there are massive amounts of methane hydrates (methane-water ice combinations) in permafrost and ocean deposits, where it is doubtful that an adequate quantity and distribution of biological source material is present.
The methane straw man. No one has argued against inorganically sourced methane.
(12) The hydrocarbon deposits of a large area often show common chemical or isotopic features, quite independent of the varied composition or the geological ages of the formations in which they are found. Such chemical signatures may be seen in the abundance ratios of some minor constituents such as traces of certain metals that are carried in petroleum; or a common tendency may be seen in the ratio of isotopes of some elements, or in the abundance ratio of some of the different molecules that make up petroleum. Thus a chemical analysis of a sample of petroleum could often allow the general area of its origin to be identified, even though quite different formations in that area may be producing petroleum. For example a crude oil from anywhere in the Middle East can be distinguished from an oil originating in any part of South America, or from the oils of West Africa; almost any of the oils from California can be distinguished from that of other regions by the carbon isotope ratio.
This is because the source rocks are “independent of the varied composition or the geological ages of the formations in which” the oil has been tapped.
This argument from Kenny et al., 2002 fundamentally misstates the conventional theory of hydrocarbon formation, migration and accumulation and then argues against a strawman of their own construction.:
The spontaneous genesis of hydrocarbons that comprise natural petroleum have been analyzed by chemical thermodynamic-stability theory. The constraints imposed on chemical evolution by the second law of thermodynamics are briefly reviewed, and the effective prohibition of transformation, in the regime of temperatures and pressures characteristic of the near-surface crust of the Earth, of biological molecules into hydrocarbon molecules heavier than methane is recognized.
The conventional theory of hydrocarbon does not bear any resemblance to a “spontaneous genesis of hydrocarbons” and the sources of energy are heat, pressure and chemical reaction resulting from heat and pressure.
Conclusions
One of the more inane criticisms of the generally accepted theory of hydrocarbon formation is the notion our adherence to an ancient theory prevents us from finding Abiogenic Oil. This is abject nonsense. We don’t look for oil using any theories about hydrocarbon formation. The theory was developed from the observations of hydrocarbon accumulations. When exploring a new basin, we do look for total petroleum systems; however, when I am prospecting in the Gulf of Mexico, I’m not looking for the source rocks.
Geologists generally adhere to Chamberlin’s Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses and most of us have an open mind to the Abiogenic Oil hypothesis. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) has even hosted conferences on the subject…
ABSTRACTS
AAPG Research Conference
Origin of Petroleum
June 18, 2005, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Search and Discovery Article #90043 (2005)
Posted July 26, 2005
Note: Items preceded by asterisks(*) designate extended abstracts, most with illustrations.
The conventional theory explains all of the observations.
It wouldn’t affect the process of oil & gas exploration.
The process of hydrocarbon formation is very organized, has been observed at all stages in nature, can be quantified in a rigorous scientific theory and can be largely simulated under laboratory conditions. The only part of the process that cannot be directly repeated in the laboratory is time.
Petroleum generation by laboratory-scale pyrolysis over six years simulating conditions in a subsiding basin
J. D. SAXBY & K. W. RILEY
CSIRO Division of Fossil Fuels, PO Box 136, North Ryde, New South Wales 2113, Australia
[…]
Consequently, we have heated potential source material from 100 to 400 °C over six years, increasing the temperature by 1 °C per week. This was done in an attempt to simulate the thermal history of a sample being buried in a continuously subsiding basin with a constant geothermal gradient. After four years, a product indistinguishable from a paraffinic crude oil was generated from a torbanite, while a brown coal gave a product distribution that could be related to a wet natural gas. Of great significance is the absence of olefins and carbon monoxide in all products. We believe the present experiments, which are possibly as slow as can be realistically planned within a human time scale, have for the first time successfully duplicated hydrocarbon generation in a continuously subsiding sedimentary basin.
While it is possible for oil to form through mantle serpentinization or the Fischer–Tropsch process, there simply isn’t any evidence that any crude oil has ever naturally formed through these processes on Earth. If oil was forming in the mantle, it would be flowing out of mid-ocean ridges (methane flowing out of mid-ocean ridges is not oil).
There are very few crude oil accumulations that are even consistent with the abiogenic hypotheses and no significant accumulations inconsistent with the generally accepted theory of hydrocarbon formation.
Ultimately, the entire debate is academic. “Oil is where you find it.” However it originally formed, it has to be found in economic accumulations. Igneous and metamorphic rocks are rarely porous and permeable… And rarely contain crude oil. Even if oil was commonly formed inorganically… It wouldn’t alter how and where oil companies look for oil. It still has to be trapped in porous and permeable reservoirs – Sandstones, limestones, shales and other sedimentary rocks. Even the oil that’s trapped in fractured granites and other basement rocks, had to migrate through and be trapped by sedimentary rocks.
Oil is derived from organic matter. It can be manufactured. Still working on the commercialization, so no I am not telling anyone how. So don’t bother asking. I will say it is not complex.
A lot of things are simple. Just too expensive for commercial use.
For instance, I know the very simple process for extracting gold from common seawater. Anyone feel like paying about $3 million a gram? (That was about ten years ago, come to think of it…)
Tar sands derived oil is being extracted commercially in Utah using solvents at under US$50/ BOE now. It will last about 200 years at current consumption. See MCWEnergy.com
Oil can be extracted from suitable plant derived material for under US20/ BOE. This works as a pre-commercial process now. It will last several thousand years at current consumption.
Oil can be manufactured in small quantities at about US$60/ BOE. Its renewable. it will last forever.
If you know how to use satellites to find oil it is of note that all existing reserves match certain parameters mapped by the satellite exactly. This makes finding ALL the other reserve locations a lot easier.
Within the collapse alcove of the giant Hebes Mensa salt dome on Mars, there is a feature called the “Oil Spill” (Adams et al., 2009). According to these researchers the fluid consists of liquid brines that have been coloured black by dark dust particles. However, – this cannot be true. http://oilonmars.blogspot.no/
Yes it can be true.
Hebes Chasma is not a salt dome. It is a collapsed regolith… A Karst-like feature. Adams et al conclude that the substrata was a mixture of “salts, water ice, and basaltic tephra.” The diapiric nature of the structure was not interpreted to be analogous to salt domes on Earth. Jackon’s model of the collapse of the regolith was based on salt tectonic principles.
the “Oil Spill” (Fig. 4C), was interpretedby Ori et al. (2005) as a low-viscosity
lava flow; however, a Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Context Camera image shows that the braided channels are smooth ridges and that the terminal deposit has a feather edge that grades into the surrounding, paler surface. We interpret the Oil Spill as particulates (basaltic tephra?) derived from LHF and entrained in aqueous springs along fracture zones. Dark material may
have accumulated in the Oil Spill channels as water evaporated. http://geomorphology.sese.asu.edu/Papers/Adams_etal_hebes_chasma_salt_tectonics_geol.pdf
One of Adams’ coauthors is Martin Jackson, one of the top experts on salt tectonics.
From Ori et al., 2005…
The same area has been imaged during the Viking mission nearly 25 years before (Figure 4). The dark feature appears not to have undergone any noticeable changes from the Viking era in term of both albedo and morphology…
This rules out an active oil seep or any other active process.
More from Ori…
The overall morphology of the dark feature clearly indicates that some material has been
removed from the area upslope, carried along the slope and deposited on an inclined bottom. However,
the morphology also suggests that the despositional process was a near viscous flow…
[…]
Based on the morphology of the dark feature, its location on a slope, and its resistance
to exogenic modification we think it is more probable that it has been emplaced by a low-viscosity lava flow. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2005/pdf/1648.pdf
@Martin Hovland – Review the definition of organic in the article. While the idea of surface oil on Mars is intriguing it is only a theory that most here will feel is far fetched.
Thanks for presenting this. I have a question. There is a lot of oil north of Barrow, Alaska. Was this area a tropical swamp at the time the organic matter was deposited, or was that tectonic plate nearer the equator, or something else? I guess I’m asking if the climate was warmer then.
The number one thing I learned in Geology about Ice Ages is that the Ice Age we are in currently is NOT the normal state of the planet.
Ice Ages are exceedingly rare relative to the age of the planet.
“Ice ages are rare in Earth’s history; ice age cycles are even rarer. In the past 2 billion years, ice ages occurred in only three of the 21 geological periods prior to our own (Quaternary) and those ice ages were relatively brief, with each one briefer than the last. The Quaternary is the only other geological period of the past 2 billion years during which ice sheets persisted. For the past 2.59 million years, thick sheets of ice have covered at least 10 percent, and as much as 23 percent, of the continents…. …..The present glacial age is also cyclical. Ice coverage of the continents oscillates rhythmically from 10–23 percent within either a 41,000- or 100,000-year period. Only during the last 0.00057 part of its history has Earth manifested an ice age cycle. Only during the last 0.00017 part of Earth’s history has the ice age cycle encompassed a 100,000-year period.”
From this page: http://www.reasons.org/articles/unique-ice-age-cycle-is-ideal-for-humanity
This is an excellent presentation of the downstream chemistry which is initiated by daughter reactions of nuclear core initiation. And know we won’t go away because we are right.
So, you are saying that even though the oil is produced from heating of dead life-forms deep below the sea-bed, it is still abiogenic because the heat came from radioactivity deep within earth’s core, correct?
troe
February 18, 2017 10:55 am
Its learning Saturday on wattsupwiththat. Good stuff.
Not necessarily. You have to extract it at some cost, at a rate determined by the geophysics. And you cannot extract all the OIP even with tertiary recovery methods. Remember, conventional oil is about 75% discovered based on basin creaming curves. That is all the best, lowest cost, highest recovery stuff. The ability to horizontally drill and frack source rock shales opened up new potential that has transitionally imballanced supply and demand. That is not a stable or permanent situation.
The concept of conventional or unconventional is quite contrived. from the first drilled well there has been a sold continuous stream of technical development.
What drives GDP is falling costs or prices relative incomes and Oil and Gas are just two parts of that, big parts at this time.
Technology has extended the life of oil massively past the expected lifespan of the product, as a member of the industry I can tell you there are as many surprised people in the industry as outside as the production continues to expand.
Standing and looking at a major oil discovery of say 100mmbbl then considering that it is but one day in the life of the world is humbling.
Bill, often asserted but not true. Conventional oil is precisely defined as API>10 (viscosity), in a reservoir with porosity >5% and permeability > 10 millidarcies. Oil never originated in that resevoir, it migrated there from some underlying source rock high TOC shale (with some exceptions loke Norway’s Haltenbanken. Viscosity is important because lower viscosities flow more slowly even if enhanced by heat or CO2, both extra expense and lower annual production.. Lower porosity and permeability is important because it flows much more slowly (by definition) and less is recoverable (by definition).
First I want to congratulate David for a most excellent article. Second I want to answer Stephen’s question: the answer is no. As of 2017 it’s looking fairly grim. We already picked off most of the easy reservoirs, so what’s left is mostly in OPEC nations, Russia, Canada, Venezuela and/or really expensive areas.
The only way we can get the oil to increase production to meet demand is with higher prices. And eventually prices will rise so much poorer nations won’t be able to afford buying oil. I would like to add that “fracking” is overhyped, and at current prices the only really decent wells are being drilled in Texas.
David: I did see oil wells with reservoir temperatures about 290 degree F. The big ones flow so hot we have to run the crude through coolers before we take out the gas.
Fernando, if oil prices rise to the extent poor nations can’t afford it, they can simply use coal, the price of which is pretty good. In the unlikely event renewables take over our energy grids, it should be even cheaper still.
Richmond
February 18, 2017 11:10 am
Thank you for a well documented post that advances understanding of oil.
Bloke down the pub
February 18, 2017 11:10 am
Nice article. I guess the only relevant question is how fast we extract c/f how fast it is produced, and the proponents of abiogenesis presumably think that their theory means that more is being produced now than would otherwise be possible.
Tom Halla
February 18, 2017 11:10 am
Good review article.
tty
February 18, 2017 11:20 am
It might be worth adding a few words about why the Cretaceous was such a good “oil kitchen”. Essentially it was due to two factors.
1. There were several OAE:s (ocean anoxic events), i. e. intervals when ocean thermohaline circulation more or less came to a stop and the deep ocean became anoxic and dead. This mean that the organic material that is always raining down from the photic zone near the surface accumulated on the deep ocean floor as organics-rich shales instead of being eaten by deep sea organisms as is usually the case.
2. The world continent Pangaea was breaking up. This meant that there were many and long rift valleys that were gradually changing, first into narrow seas, then wider seas and finally oceans. During the early stages of this process there were frequent switches back and forth in the various parts of the rifts between saline lakes, salt playas and narrow seas with restricted circulation and often anoxic bottom water. Such conditions are ideal for creating both source rocks and extensive salt deposits. Most of both the eastern and western Atlantic seaboards are “half rift-valleys”
The same processes also explain the Lower Tertiary hydrocarbon kitchen. I could have expounded a lot more on the role that the opening of the Atlantic Ocean played… And also on the deposition and subsequent mobilization of massive salt formations. Salt tectonics are wild.
Have You ever been to the Dead Sea Rift? The climate there is so dry that there is a salt dome that has actually penetrated 700 feet above ground level (Mount Sedom). There is even caves and karst topography in the salt (halokarst).
Well done, David! You even worked The Field Of Streams into the presentation. However, I’m commenting on tty’s comment to also mention the OAEs – which I yammer about to anyone willing to let me bend their ear. In the case of the Eagle Ford, the circulation cutoff is thought to be due to a slight lowering of the sea level. The Edwards Reef trend, essentially a large reef wall roughly parallel to the Texas coast line, choked any connection to the rest of the Gulf, leaving a fifty kilometer wide “back bay” filled with fetid sea water. In other words, for a while, the Texas coast smelled like parts of Louisiana.
I worked the East Texas Salt Basin from 1981-88 and have worked the offshore Gulf of Mexico since 1988. The geologic history of the the region is fascinating, particularly the role of the Louann Salt.
tty February 18, 2017 at 11:56 am
Have You ever been to the Dead Sea Rift? The climate there is so dry that there is a salt dome that has actually penetrated 700 feet above ground level (Mount Sedom). There is even caves and karst topography in the salt (halokarst).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No I haven’t. But just did a wiki picture tour and visited: http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/en/section/geophysical-deep-sounding/projects/past-projects/desert/
to get a feel for the tectonics of the region to help me understand what you said. http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/uploads/pics/desert_fig2.gif
Figure 2
Landsat TM Mosaic of the Dead Sea, the Arava Valley, and the surrounding area (see also Figure 1).The coverage shows Israel and the Palestine Territories on the left and Jordan on the right. The white arrows indicate the left-lateral motion along the DST.Present-day motion is approximately 4 +/- 2 mm/yr (Klinger et al. 2000a,b) between the African plate (left) and the Arabian plate (right). The linear structure indicated by the red arrows, striking at 15 deg N in the Arava Valley, is the Arava Fault (image courtesy of M. Munier, GFZ).
Looking for some subsidence maps for mesopotamia and surrounding regions, related to water and oil extraction over thousands of years. How this might affect the acceleration of the actively subducting African, Saudi Arabian and Indian plates.
Large portions the region look like a dead sea of land.
Duane J. Truitt
February 18, 2017 11:22 am
Very well researched and presented summary, Mr. Middleton.
A question for you – would the notion of abiogenic oil, should its existence ever be demonstrated, still be relevant to determining the ultimate reserve of oil in our crust, the infamous “peak oil” notion?
Reserves? No. Reserves are economically recoverable accumulations of oil. A fundamental shift in hydrocarbon formation would make no difference. However oil forms, we produce it at a much higher rate than it forms.
Peak oil isn’t a notion. The only issues we debate is the timing, how high will be the peak, what price range will we have when it happens, is there any new technology we can use to increase recovery factor, drill lower cost wells, etc. I tend to think peak oil will happen before say 2035. And it may be as close as 2020.
FL, I spent from 2009 researching this. Best guess is a peak in all oil 2023-2025. Remarkably insensitive to production function (gamma gives same ppeak answer as logistic, just a different tsil.) And classical conventional provably peaked in ~2008. Essays IEA Facts and Fictions and Peeking at Peaks lay out the autopsy details, repleate with creaming curve analysis of oil yet to be discovered.
Classical conventional oil peaked in 2008, but that fact has been swept under the rug by adding natural gas liquids to the conventional crude and condensates. NGLs production has continued to increase as a byproduct of increasing shale and tight formation gas. The problem is that NGLs are not as easily refined into gasoline and diesel transportation fuels. But by serving as petrochemical feedstocks, they do relieve some of the pressure on use of conventional oils.
NGL’s are higher grade refinery feedstock than most crude oils. Natural gas condensate is referred to as “drip gas” because it can be used as a motor fuel.
Fernando – thanks for your response, but the notion of “peak oil” is not whether there is such a thing (there obviously is because humans are extracting HC faster than they are created in the crust) but whether it is anything we will encounter within the foreseeable future. If peak oil indeed takes place within the next generation – 20 years plus or minus – then it is indeed imminent and of major concern But just as nobody foresaw the fracking revolution of the 2000s, it is equally possible, if not probable, that additional reserves will be discovered and exploited that will greatly extend the timeframe until peak oil arrives.
After all, we suffered peak oil 40 some years ago, if peak oil were defined as the volume of oil available at a price of $2 a barrel. If oil sold for $200 vs. where it sells today, or even $300 a barrel or more, then peak oil is much further down the pike.
Peak oil is as much about economics as it is geology and technology.
Duane – Peak oil may have already occurred or it may not occur for decades. There’s no way to forecast or even hind-cast it without knowing the ultimate volume of total recoverable resource. Hubbert’s peak oil prediction was based on the assumption that the total US recoverable resource was 150-200 billion barrels. Peak oil production was predicted to occur when half of that resource had been recovered.
Hubbert’s prediction failed because the total recoverable resource was much larger than his estimate… http://opstatic.com/img/usermedia/L56E0w4kSUiZxx50_nt9pw/w645.png
If the sum total of recoverable resource is equal to cumulative production + proved reserves + undiscovered recoverable resource, then peak oil occurred in 2004, assuming you smooth the curve with a Gaussian filter…?w=680
However proved reserves increase year after year and the undiscovered resource has been continuously revised upwards.
The idea behind Hubbert’s Peak is that the rate of oil extraction from a field tends to follow a Gaussian or “bell” curve. There is no intrinsic reason why it should be so, and political, economic, and technological changes can in principle change the curve. But Hubbert observed that it seemed to work in small fields that had been tapped out.
Hubbert applied the method, in about 1956, to the time evolution of oil extraction from the continental U.S. (top option on the page). The other piece of information he needed was an estimate of the total amount of oil that would ever be extracted. With this, he predicted using the data up that time (1956) that the U.S. would reach peak oil production in the early 1970’s. Alter the curve by changing the parameters, and see how much wiggle room Hubbert had to make this prediction.
Today, with respect to World oil production, we are in a position not unlike Hubbert’s, where uncertainty in the total extractable inventory of oil have some impact on how well can pin down the year of global peak oil. http://climatemodels.uchicago.edu/hubbert/hubbert.doc.html
Peak oil really isn’t something to be concerned about. It’s just a function of resource extraction. Doomsday scenarios like the the “Olduvai theory” are the epitome of Malthusian nonsense.
Bernard Lodge
February 18, 2017 11:25 am
Very interesting review. Thank you.
Greg
February 18, 2017 11:26 am
Think about vegetable oil, the same stuff that is in your kitchen, the same stuff you can run your diesel car on. Where did it come from? How long did it take nature to make it? (Hint: about 3 months…)
If we didn’t make plants into vegetable oil, what would happen to the oil molecules? Especially way back when, when the CO2 levels were very high and plants grew like crazy and generated huge amounts of dead plant material that piled up over millions of years…
BTW, corn produces 18 gallons of vegetable oil per year, oil palm over 600 gallons per year, per acre. Multiply by a million years or so, while the earth ‘cooks’ (refines) it.
Most of that plant material gets eaten. Did you ever walk in the forest and find a tree that died 500 years ago? The stuff that turns into oil has to escape being eaten.
Well said. And any bits not eaten are absorbed into new plant material but regardless, over geologic time an enormous percentage of organic material ends up in flowing to the ocean from erosion…
Jaakko Kateenkorva
February 18, 2017 11:32 am
“Even if oil was commonly formed inorganically… It wouldn’t alter how and where oil companies look for oil.”
No, but it would give a welcome break from alarmists.
Cannot resist when asked so nicely. Already the ancient romans had legitimate warnings about man-made resource depletion. Looking at the ancient Egyptian architecture, perhaps they had them even for rocks.
Peak oil surely existed before 1970’s, although that’s when I remember first hearing about it. While some over here act as if they discovered it now, you pick me for your advise?
The thing I’m missing is what the solar system / galaxy / universe is full of planets full of hydrocarbons? You also left out Thomas Gold’s thoughts on Abiogenic Oil, many are quite convincing.
I specifically mentioned extraterrestrial hydrocarbons and Gold makes no case at all for the existence inorganically sourced crude oil. He makes a reasonably good case for the possibility of such a process.
Of things that crack me up: “Dawn’s measurements aren’t precise enough to nail down exactly what the newfound organics are, but their signatures are consistent with tar-like substances such as kerite and asphaltite, study team members said.” https://goo.gl/0iRqNB
So Ceres has life, building source rocks, and been working on it for billions of years.
Can we get a rig out there?
Excellent article. A challenge to read, but we’ll worth the effort. I was willing to believe the abiogenic theory for oil creation, but I knew that I did not know enough to have a worthwhile opinion.
I remember listening to a radio interview with Gold about this a long time ago and wishing I knew enough so that I could believe or disbelieve him.This article gave me enough information to be very sceptical of Gold`s abiogenic theories. Thank you.
Good point. Hydrogen and carbon are currently considered to be among the six most abundant chemical elements in the universe. Seems likely chemical compounds containing them, including quite complex molecules like PAH, are likely to be more common in the universe than life.
We are working on a supertanker starship to go suck up Titan’s hydrocarbon lakes. My favorite design uses an antimatter drive.
You’re thinking too small, Fernando. I think Titan would make an excellent second moon for Earth. All we’d need to do is something like Space 1999’s “far side of the moon” explosion to knock it out of Saturn’s orbit towards Earth where we capture it. What could go wrong?
Dr. JK Kenney, or JF Kenney, called Thomas Gold (who could read Russian) a plagiarist, and entirely unequipped by reason of education in the sciences to make any intelligible assertions about abiotic oil. Kenney claims that Gold exploited the Cold War taboo regarding USSR science, and made ridiculous assertions about the discoveries of the Russian geologists recorded in 4,000 untranslated (to this day) scientific papers and monographs.
Claude Harvey
February 18, 2017 11:35 am
Watching a man who has mastered his trade distill a mountain of blather down to a precious stream of truth is glorious to behold!
markl
February 18, 2017 11:40 am
An explanation closer to my level of understanding than I’ve read before. Only had to use the dictionary a couple of times. Still holding out slim hope for Abiogenic oil though 🙂 Thanks.
DC
February 18, 2017 11:44 am
Gosh! I wish my notes after two semesters had been this clear and concise.
hunter
February 18, 2017 11:52 am
Thank you sir. As Texan I appreciate reading a well written discussion of the oil bidness. Yours was exceptionally well written.
David didn’t really get into the business end. That’s easily described as a business where the boss is called the pusher, joints come in 30 foot lengths, and dope is found on the rig floor in large plastic buckets.
Gold’s abiotic theory of Petroleum formation is astrophysical support for the Soviet Abiotic theory of Petroleum formation which has formulated in the early 1950s.
The Soviets naturally accused Gold of plagiarism. http://www.gasresources.net/VAKreplytBriggs.htm
It should be recognized that Gold’s priority [related to the subject of the modern Soviet theory of abiotic petroleum origins] must be set at 1979 when he published his article:
1.) Gold, T, 1979, Terrestrial sources of carbon and earthquake outgassing, J. Petrol. Geol., Vol. 1, No. 3, p. 3-19.
Concerning this article, one must pay particular attention to the following fact: The references given in that article do not contain even one of the works of any of the Soviet scientists. The well-known key leaders of the problem of abiogenic petroleum origins had already published their ideas and theory on that subject in many books and articles, beginning in the year 1951. The quantity of such publications exceeds a thousand, and for short I shall limit myself with the list of several key sources following below:
Answer 1. [to the question: “Are there key Soviet papers and Soviet ideas Prof. Gold fails to cite ?] by Vladilen A. Krayushkin,
Yes, there are many Soviet papers, articles, books and ideas of key significance dealing with the subject of the deep petroleum (i.e., oil and gas) theory which Prof. Gold fails to cite correctly or adequately.
It should be recognized that Gold’s priority [related to the subject of the modern Soviet theory of abiotic petroleum origins] must be set at 1979 when he published his article: Gold, T, 1979, Terrestrial sources of carbon and earthquake outgassing, J. Petrol. Geol., Vol. 1, No. 3, p. 3-19.
Concerning this article, one must pay particular attention to the following fact: The references given in that article do not contain even one of the works of any of the Soviet scientists. The well-known key leaders of the problem of abiogenic petroleum origins had already published their ideas and theory on that subject in many books and articles, beginning in the year 1951. The quantity of such publications exceeds a thousand, and for short I shall limit myself with the list of several key sources following below:
2.) Kravtsov A. I., 1967, Geochemical scheme of the formation of methane and liquid hydrocarbons in magmatic processes, and the basic criteria of prospects for oil and gas deposits, in Genesis of Oil and Gas, Nedra Press, Moscow, p. 314-325. (In Russian).
3.) Kropotkin P. N. and K. A. Shakhvarstova, 1959, Solid bitumens, oil and fuel gas in ultrabasic intrusions, trap brilliants and volcanic pipes, in The Problem of Oil Migration and the Formation of Oil and Gas Accumulations, The State Fuel Technical Press, Moscow, p. 151-164. (In Russian).
4.) Kudryavstev N. A., 1951, Against the organic hypothesis of petroleum origins, Petroleum Economy, No. 9, Moscow, p. 17. (In Russian).
5.) – “-, 1955, The modern state of the problem of petroleum origin, in “Colloquium on Problems of the Origin and Migration of Petroleum”, Ukrainian Acad. Sci. Press, Kiev, p. 38-81. (In Russian).
6.) – “-, 1959, Geological Evidence of Deep Petroleum Origins, Trans. of the All-Union Research, Geol. Exploration Petroleum Inst., State Technical Press, Leningrad, 210 p. (In Russian).
7.) – “-, 1959, Oil, Gas and Solid Bitumens in Igneous and Metamorphic Rocks, State Technical Press, Leningrad, 230 p. (In Russian).
8.) – “-, 1967, The state of the question on genesis of oil in the year 1966, in Genesis of Oil and Gas, Nedra Press, Moscow, p. 262-291. (In Russian).
9.) – “-, 1973, The Genesis of Oil and Gas, Trans. of the All-Union Research, Geol. Exploration Petroleum Inst., Nedra Press Leningrad, 216 p. (In Russian).
10.) Porfir’yev, V. B., 1960, On the nature of petroleum, in Problems of Oil and Gas Origin and Conditions of the Formation of Their Deposits, The State Fuel Technical Press, Moscow, p. 26-40. (In Russian).
11.) – “-, 1967, The present state of the problem of petroleum formation, in Genesis of Oil and Gas, Nedra Press, Moscow, p. 292-324. (In Russian).
12.) – “-, 1971, On a criticism of the theory of the inorganic origin of petroleum, in “Colloquium on the Inorganic Origin of Petroleum”, Scientific Thought Press, Kiev, p. 34-54. (In Russian).
13.) – “-, 1971, Experience of geological analyses of questions of petroleum content, Ibid., p. 3-34. (In Russian).
14.) – “-, 1974, Inorganic origin of petroleum, Bull. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol., Vol. 58, No. 1, p. 3-33.
15.) – “-, 1975, Significance of theoretical complex of petroleum geology in the solution of the problem of commercial oil content, in Regularities of Formation and Distribution of Commercial Oil and Gas Fields, Scientific Thought Press, Kiev, p. 17-27. (In Russian).
16.) Porfir’yev, V. B., V. A. Krayushkin, V. P. Klochko, V. B. Sollogub, A. V. Chekunov, G. N. Ladyzhenskiy and V. I . Sozanskii, 1977, Geological criteria of prospects for new oil and gas reserves in the territory of Ukraine, Scientific Thought Press, Kiev, 150 p. (In Russian).
17.) Porfir’yev, V. B., V. A. Krayushkin, N. S. Erofeev, G. P. Ovanesov, N. A. Eremenko, I. M. Mikhailov, V. A. Moskvich, I. Ye. Kotelnikov, Z. V. Ulybabov and P. M. Zozula, 1977, Perspectives of prospects for oil deposits in the crystalline basement of the Pripyat’ Basin, Geological Journal, Vol. 37, No. 5, p. 7-25. (In Russian).
These Soviet publications and the ideas contained in them cannot be considered peripheral to the subject of deep gas and the abiotic origin of petroleum in any fashion such that one might conclude, – or claim, – that the key ideas are Gold’s. On the contrary, the ideas published in the references 1-16 given in the answer to question 1 are the key ideas and consist essentially of the whole of the basic but multi-faceted aspect of the modern abiotic theory of deep gas and petroleum origins. None of the key ideas are Gold’s. Please read, for example, Porfir’yev’s article of 1974 in the Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists; and you will recognize that my opinion is correct upon this subject.
Yeah… A couple of things drive me bonkers.
1. The continuous argument that oil is abiogenic because the process is possible.
2. The totally clueless argument that the adoption of the abiogenic hypothesis would fundamentally transform oil exploration and instantly refill every depleted oilfield on Earth.
Yes, Middleton hammered it loud and clear. If anything is left unclear, a fresh reminder received at the gas stations and shops regularly. This is one reason I’ve understood cAGW clergy to a certain point and to feel uneasy about Trump.
Mr. Middleton, you complain that the following drives you bonkers:
1. The continuous argument that oil is abiogenic because the process is possible.
Have you read the 4,000 Russian papers and monographs in the original (since they were never translated into English)? I am IN NO WAY contradicting your excellent post above, but just curious why you disagree with the Russian reporting of the science as they discovered, or uncovered, it.
My understanding is that the Russians used Wegner’s explanation to arrive at their conclusions in the late 40s and early 50s. For decades, earth scientists had discredited Wegner’s ideas about continental drift only to discover the movement of tectonic plates (using his early 20th C insights) in the 1960s.
MRW,
4,000 papers explaining how the process is possible isn’t evidence of a significant accumulation of inorganically, abiogenic, or abiotic sourced oil.
The totally clueless argument
==================
Wouldn’t the abiotic hypothesis tend to favor the idea that oil/gas can be found both deep and shallow, while the organic hypothesis would tend to favor shallow oil/gas over deep oil/gas? Is there any preference re: statistical vertical distribution of oil/gas?
maybe there are 3 hypothesis about how oil can form?
1. organic
2. plate tectonics (reduction of limestone via iron)
3. primordial from planet formation.
ferdberple,
“Wouldn’t the abiotic hypothesis tend to favor the idea that oil/gas can be found both deep and shallow, while the organic hypothesis would tend to favor shallow oil/gas over deep oil/gas?”
No.
William
I have explored the Russian conclusions also and keep an open mind. I guess at this point the subject is a bit like the CO2 debate? Conclusions from both sides.
Not really. I’ve worked in the oil business for four decades and made a ton of money. The Abiogenic oil crowd barely gets by writing books for naive and wishful thinkers. Ask them how much crude oil they put in a tank. The answer is zero.
Ozone bust, I read the Russian stuff available in English. Worse than Mann’s hockey stick. Geological Lysenkoism. The purported Ukraine example is worse thsn bad geology. There were uderkying standard sedimentary source rocks that had been overthrust.
I had a slightly opened mind to abiotic oil, but thanks to Mr. Middleton, that door is NAILED shut.
If something is POSSIBLE, theoretically, that is the realm of SPECULATION. Only evidence can move speculation into the world of reality, and evidence is a precious thing that supports real world activities, such as oil discoveries and production…
How many miles to the gallon will speculation get you?
step 1and 2. how do the dead things that fall to the bottom get burried in mud, they fall on top, where does the mud on top of them come from, how can mud cover them fast enough before they decompose. where did the oxygen go?
Sediment is always dropping out of the ocean and falling to the seafloor. The further away from shore, the higher the clay content and lower the sand content. There is a steady stream of clay particles and dead foram’s, algae plankton and other critters falling to the sea floor. As new sediment falls, it buries the older sediment.
Deepwater environments (bathyal, abyssal and hadal zones) start out with low levels of dissolved oxygen. This why metal in shipwrecks is better preserve in deepwater; there is very little oxidation (rust). Redox reactions render the deepwater sediments anoxic.
This allows much of the organic matter to be buried with little decomposition.
Great post. Always wondered how methane on Titan correlated with biogenic oil.
Why is Peak Oil not a concern? It does seem that we will need to replace oil with some other energy source at some point – possibly soonish, considering eroi declines. Doesn’t that constitute a legitimate civilizational concern? (sorry for any made-up words.)
Back when CO2 levels were very high, e.g. as high as 7,000 ppm perhaps, plants would have grown like crazy (think Amazon rain forest, perhaps a few orders of magnitude greater…) and piled up on top of each other, thus burying the slightly older stuff quickly. This virtually unlimited food explains the size of dinosaurs and other huge living things.
Of course the plants would have increased the O2 levels eventually too. Just imagine the global firestorms that would eventually resulted…
Moderately Cross of East Anglia
February 18, 2017 12:30 pm
A really informative article that is a pleasure to read, thank you. I would only ask what asphalt is in relation to all this – is that organic or inorganic in origin?
Most asphalt used on roadways and for other construction purposes is produced from petroleum; although naturally occurring asphalt is quite common. Natural asphalt is often “overcooked” oil.
Pop Piasa
February 18, 2017 12:34 pm
This essay should be part of science curricula at the High-School level and above. Thanks David, for a copious infusion of comprehension on the subject of crude oil.
wonderful exposition with lots of real data.
Thanks Doc! Coming from you, that is a huge compliment.
Excellent article, a fellow geologist learns more geology. Thanks David.
Oil is derived from organic matter. It can be manufactured. Still working on the commercialization, so no I am not telling anyone how. So don’t bother asking. I will say it is not complex.
A lot of things are simple. Just too expensive for commercial use.
For instance, I know the very simple process for extracting gold from common seawater. Anyone feel like paying about $3 million a gram? (That was about ten years ago, come to think of it…)
What is oil doing on Mars and Titan, then?
Look it up here:
http://oilonmars.blogspot.no/
Tar sands derived oil is being extracted commercially in Utah using solvents at under US$50/ BOE now. It will last about 200 years at current consumption. See MCWEnergy.com
Oil can be extracted from suitable plant derived material for under US20/ BOE. This works as a pre-commercial process now. It will last several thousand years at current consumption.
Oil can be manufactured in small quantities at about US$60/ BOE. Its renewable. it will last forever.
If you know how to use satellites to find oil it is of note that all existing reserves match certain parameters mapped by the satellite exactly. This makes finding ALL the other reserve locations a lot easier.
Yes it can be true.
Hebes Chasma is not a salt dome. It is a collapsed regolith… A Karst-like feature. Adams et al conclude that the substrata was a mixture of “salts, water ice, and basaltic tephra.” The diapiric nature of the structure was not interpreted to be analogous to salt domes on Earth. Jackon’s model of the collapse of the regolith was based on salt tectonic principles.
One of Adams’ coauthors is Martin Jackson, one of the top experts on salt tectonics.
From Ori et al., 2005…
This rules out an active oil seep or any other active process.
More from Ori…
Regarding Titan, methane and PAH’s aren’t oil.
@Martin Hovland – Review the definition of organic in the article. While the idea of surface oil on Mars is intriguing it is only a theory that most here will feel is far fetched.
Thanks for presenting this. I have a question. There is a lot of oil north of Barrow, Alaska. Was this area a tropical swamp at the time the organic matter was deposited, or was that tectonic plate nearer the equator, or something else? I guess I’m asking if the climate was warmer then.
Oil generally isn’t generated from swamps.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/26/study-the-late-cretaceous-period-was-likely-ice-free/
The number one thing I learned in Geology about Ice Ages is that the Ice Age we are in currently is NOT the normal state of the planet.
Ice Ages are exceedingly rare relative to the age of the planet.
“Ice ages are rare in Earth’s history; ice age cycles are even rarer. In the past 2 billion years, ice ages occurred in only three of the 21 geological periods prior to our own (Quaternary) and those ice ages were relatively brief, with each one briefer than the last. The Quaternary is the only other geological period of the past 2 billion years during which ice sheets persisted. For the past 2.59 million years, thick sheets of ice have covered at least 10 percent, and as much as 23 percent, of the continents…. …..The present glacial age is also cyclical. Ice coverage of the continents oscillates rhythmically from 10–23 percent within either a 41,000- or 100,000-year period. Only during the last 0.00057 part of its history has Earth manifested an ice age cycle. Only during the last 0.00017 part of Earth’s history has the ice age cycle encompassed a 100,000-year period.”
From this page: http://www.reasons.org/articles/unique-ice-age-cycle-is-ideal-for-humanity
An informative post with research…. I see your work in your post. Well penned 👍
http://wp.me/p8g2rs-4S
At last a definitive article to stop FauxScienceSlayer posting his nonsense.
It won’t even slow them down.
Wishful thinking is eternal.
sure because it is not important, the most important thing is how and where to find to find oil…so let them find oil…
This is an excellent presentation of the downstream chemistry which is initiated by daughter reactions of nuclear core initiation. And know we won’t go away because we are right.
So, you are saying that even though the oil is produced from heating of dead life-forms deep below the sea-bed, it is still abiogenic because the heat came from radioactivity deep within earth’s core, correct?
Its learning Saturday on wattsupwiththat. Good stuff.
I’ll 2nd that!!
Many Thanks (!!!) to David Middleton for this most excellent ‘Petroleum Primer’ and source documents!
Thank you for an informative easy to read post. I’m not an expert in the field and I’ve wondered about some of the things you explained.
So the Earth’s mantle contains more oil and gas than we will ever need until technology becomes good enough to provide alternatives ?
Not the mantle. The upper crust.
Not necessarily. You have to extract it at some cost, at a rate determined by the geophysics. And you cannot extract all the OIP even with tertiary recovery methods. Remember, conventional oil is about 75% discovered based on basin creaming curves. That is all the best, lowest cost, highest recovery stuff. The ability to horizontally drill and frack source rock shales opened up new potential that has transitionally imballanced supply and demand. That is not a stable or permanent situation.
The concept of conventional or unconventional is quite contrived. from the first drilled well there has been a sold continuous stream of technical development.
What drives GDP is falling costs or prices relative incomes and Oil and Gas are just two parts of that, big parts at this time.
Technology has extended the life of oil massively past the expected lifespan of the product, as a member of the industry I can tell you there are as many surprised people in the industry as outside as the production continues to expand.
Standing and looking at a major oil discovery of say 100mmbbl then considering that it is but one day in the life of the world is humbling.
Bill, often asserted but not true. Conventional oil is precisely defined as API>10 (viscosity), in a reservoir with porosity >5% and permeability > 10 millidarcies. Oil never originated in that resevoir, it migrated there from some underlying source rock high TOC shale (with some exceptions loke Norway’s Haltenbanken. Viscosity is important because lower viscosities flow more slowly even if enhanced by heat or CO2, both extra expense and lower annual production.. Lower porosity and permeability is important because it flows much more slowly (by definition) and less is recoverable (by definition).
First I want to congratulate David for a most excellent article. Second I want to answer Stephen’s question: the answer is no. As of 2017 it’s looking fairly grim. We already picked off most of the easy reservoirs, so what’s left is mostly in OPEC nations, Russia, Canada, Venezuela and/or really expensive areas.
The only way we can get the oil to increase production to meet demand is with higher prices. And eventually prices will rise so much poorer nations won’t be able to afford buying oil. I would like to add that “fracking” is overhyped, and at current prices the only really decent wells are being drilled in Texas.
David: I did see oil wells with reservoir temperatures about 290 degree F. The big ones flow so hot we have to run the crude through coolers before we take out the gas.
Fernando, if oil prices rise to the extent poor nations can’t afford it, they can simply use coal, the price of which is pretty good. In the unlikely event renewables take over our energy grids, it should be even cheaper still.
Thank you for a well documented post that advances understanding of oil.
Nice article. I guess the only relevant question is how fast we extract c/f how fast it is produced, and the proponents of abiogenesis presumably think that their theory means that more is being produced now than would otherwise be possible.
Good review article.
It might be worth adding a few words about why the Cretaceous was such a good “oil kitchen”. Essentially it was due to two factors.
1. There were several OAE:s (ocean anoxic events), i. e. intervals when ocean thermohaline circulation more or less came to a stop and the deep ocean became anoxic and dead. This mean that the organic material that is always raining down from the photic zone near the surface accumulated on the deep ocean floor as organics-rich shales instead of being eaten by deep sea organisms as is usually the case.
2. The world continent Pangaea was breaking up. This meant that there were many and long rift valleys that were gradually changing, first into narrow seas, then wider seas and finally oceans. During the early stages of this process there were frequent switches back and forth in the various parts of the rifts between saline lakes, salt playas and narrow seas with restricted circulation and often anoxic bottom water. Such conditions are ideal for creating both source rocks and extensive salt deposits. Most of both the eastern and western Atlantic seaboards are “half rift-valleys”
The same processes also explain the Lower Tertiary hydrocarbon kitchen. I could have expounded a lot more on the role that the opening of the Atlantic Ocean played… And also on the deposition and subsequent mobilization of massive salt formations. Salt tectonics are wild.
Have You ever been to the Dead Sea Rift? The climate there is so dry that there is a salt dome that has actually penetrated 700 feet above ground level (Mount Sedom). There is even caves and karst topography in the salt (halokarst).
I haven’t been there. In The Prize Beneath the Salt, there are some cool images of salt glaciers in Iran.
Well done, David! You even worked The Field Of Streams into the presentation. However, I’m commenting on tty’s comment to also mention the OAEs – which I yammer about to anyone willing to let me bend their ear. In the case of the Eagle Ford, the circulation cutoff is thought to be due to a slight lowering of the sea level. The Edwards Reef trend, essentially a large reef wall roughly parallel to the Texas coast line, choked any connection to the rest of the Gulf, leaving a fifty kilometer wide “back bay” filled with fetid sea water. In other words, for a while, the Texas coast smelled like parts of Louisiana.
I worked the East Texas Salt Basin from 1981-88 and have worked the offshore Gulf of Mexico since 1988. The geologic history of the the region is fascinating, particularly the role of the Louann Salt.
tty February 18, 2017 at 11:56 am
Have You ever been to the Dead Sea Rift? The climate there is so dry that there is a salt dome that has actually penetrated 700 feet above ground level (Mount Sedom). There is even caves and karst topography in the salt (halokarst).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No I haven’t. But just did a wiki picture tour and visited:
http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/en/section/geophysical-deep-sounding/projects/past-projects/desert/
to get a feel for the tectonics of the region to help me understand what you said.
http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/uploads/pics/desert_fig2.gif
Figure 2
Landsat TM Mosaic of the Dead Sea, the Arava Valley, and the surrounding area (see also Figure 1).The coverage shows Israel and the Palestine Territories on the left and Jordan on the right. The white arrows indicate the left-lateral motion along the DST.Present-day motion is approximately 4 +/- 2 mm/yr (Klinger et al. 2000a,b) between the African plate (left) and the Arabian plate (right). The linear structure indicated by the red arrows, striking at 15 deg N in the Arava Valley, is the Arava Fault (image courtesy of M. Munier, GFZ).
Looking for some subsidence maps for mesopotamia and surrounding regions, related to water and oil extraction over thousands of years. How this might affect the acceleration of the actively subducting African, Saudi Arabian and Indian plates.
Large portions the region look like a dead sea of land.
Very well researched and presented summary, Mr. Middleton.
A question for you – would the notion of abiogenic oil, should its existence ever be demonstrated, still be relevant to determining the ultimate reserve of oil in our crust, the infamous “peak oil” notion?
Reserves? No. Reserves are economically recoverable accumulations of oil. A fundamental shift in hydrocarbon formation would make no difference. However oil forms, we produce it at a much higher rate than it forms.
Peak oil isn’t a notion. The only issues we debate is the timing, how high will be the peak, what price range will we have when it happens, is there any new technology we can use to increase recovery factor, drill lower cost wells, etc. I tend to think peak oil will happen before say 2035. And it may be as close as 2020.
FL, I spent from 2009 researching this. Best guess is a peak in all oil 2023-2025. Remarkably insensitive to production function (gamma gives same ppeak answer as logistic, just a different tsil.) And classical conventional provably peaked in ~2008. Essays IEA Facts and Fictions and Peeking at Peaks lay out the autopsy details, repleate with creaming curve analysis of oil yet to be discovered.
Classical conventional oil peaked in 2008, but that fact has been swept under the rug by adding natural gas liquids to the conventional crude and condensates. NGLs production has continued to increase as a byproduct of increasing shale and tight formation gas. The problem is that NGLs are not as easily refined into gasoline and diesel transportation fuels. But by serving as petrochemical feedstocks, they do relieve some of the pressure on use of conventional oils.
NGL’s are higher grade refinery feedstock than most crude oils. Natural gas condensate is referred to as “drip gas” because it can be used as a motor fuel.
Fernando – thanks for your response, but the notion of “peak oil” is not whether there is such a thing (there obviously is because humans are extracting HC faster than they are created in the crust) but whether it is anything we will encounter within the foreseeable future. If peak oil indeed takes place within the next generation – 20 years plus or minus – then it is indeed imminent and of major concern But just as nobody foresaw the fracking revolution of the 2000s, it is equally possible, if not probable, that additional reserves will be discovered and exploited that will greatly extend the timeframe until peak oil arrives.
After all, we suffered peak oil 40 some years ago, if peak oil were defined as the volume of oil available at a price of $2 a barrel. If oil sold for $200 vs. where it sells today, or even $300 a barrel or more, then peak oil is much further down the pike.
Peak oil is as much about economics as it is geology and technology.
Duane – Peak oil may have already occurred or it may not occur for decades. There’s no way to forecast or even hind-cast it without knowing the ultimate volume of total recoverable resource. Hubbert’s peak oil prediction was based on the assumption that the total US recoverable resource was 150-200 billion barrels. Peak oil production was predicted to occur when half of that resource had been recovered.
?w=680
Hubbert’s prediction failed because the total recoverable resource was much larger than his estimate…
http://opstatic.com/img/usermedia/L56E0w4kSUiZxx50_nt9pw/w645.png
If the sum total of recoverable resource is equal to cumulative production + proved reserves + undiscovered recoverable resource, then peak oil occurred in 2004, assuming you smooth the curve with a Gaussian filter…
However proved reserves increase year after year and the undiscovered resource has been continuously revised upwards.
Peak oil really isn’t something to be concerned about. It’s just a function of resource extraction. Doomsday scenarios like the the “Olduvai theory” are the epitome of Malthusian nonsense.
Very interesting review. Thank you.
Think about vegetable oil, the same stuff that is in your kitchen, the same stuff you can run your diesel car on. Where did it come from? How long did it take nature to make it? (Hint: about 3 months…)
If we didn’t make plants into vegetable oil, what would happen to the oil molecules? Especially way back when, when the CO2 levels were very high and plants grew like crazy and generated huge amounts of dead plant material that piled up over millions of years…
BTW, corn produces 18 gallons of vegetable oil per year, oil palm over 600 gallons per year, per acre. Multiply by a million years or so, while the earth ‘cooks’ (refines) it.
Most of that plant material gets eaten. Did you ever walk in the forest and find a tree that died 500 years ago? The stuff that turns into oil has to escape being eaten.
Plus 1000
Well said. And any bits not eaten are absorbed into new plant material but regardless, over geologic time an enormous percentage of organic material ends up in flowing to the ocean from erosion…
“Even if oil was commonly formed inorganically… It wouldn’t alter how and where oil companies look for oil.”
No, but it would give a welcome break from alarmists.
JK, some warnings are legit. Others not. THINK.
Cannot resist when asked so nicely. Already the ancient romans had legitimate warnings about man-made resource depletion. Looking at the ancient Egyptian architecture, perhaps they had them even for rocks.
Peak oil surely existed before 1970’s, although that’s when I remember first hearing about it. While some over here act as if they discovered it now, you pick me for your advise?
The thing I’m missing is what the solar system / galaxy / universe is full of planets full of hydrocarbons? You also left out Thomas Gold’s thoughts on Abiogenic Oil, many are quite convincing.
I specifically mentioned extraterrestrial hydrocarbons and Gold makes no case at all for the existence inorganically sourced crude oil. He makes a reasonably good case for the possibility of such a process.
Of things that crack me up: “Dawn’s measurements aren’t precise enough to nail down exactly what the newfound organics are, but their signatures are consistent with tar-like substances such as kerite and asphaltite, study team members said.” https://goo.gl/0iRqNB
So Ceres has life, building source rocks, and been working on it for billions of years.
Can we get a rig out there?
Excellent article. A challenge to read, but we’ll worth the effort. I was willing to believe the abiogenic theory for oil creation, but I knew that I did not know enough to have a worthwhile opinion.
I remember listening to a radio interview with Gold about this a long time ago and wishing I knew enough so that I could believe or disbelieve him.This article gave me enough information to be very sceptical of Gold`s abiogenic theories. Thank you.
Good point. Hydrogen and carbon are currently considered to be among the six most abundant chemical elements in the universe. Seems likely chemical compounds containing them, including quite complex molecules like PAH, are likely to be more common in the universe than life.
And they are, based on our solar system as an example.
We are working on a supertanker starship to go suck up Titan’s hydrocarbon lakes. My favorite design uses an antimatter drive.
Plus E+6 this time.
Fernando writes
You’re thinking too small, Fernando. I think Titan would make an excellent second moon for Earth. All we’d need to do is something like Space 1999’s “far side of the moon” explosion to knock it out of Saturn’s orbit towards Earth where we capture it. What could go wrong?
Dr. JK Kenney, or JF Kenney, called Thomas Gold (who could read Russian) a plagiarist, and entirely unequipped by reason of education in the sciences to make any intelligible assertions about abiotic oil. Kenney claims that Gold exploited the Cold War taboo regarding USSR science, and made ridiculous assertions about the discoveries of the Russian geologists recorded in 4,000 untranslated (to this day) scientific papers and monographs.
Watching a man who has mastered his trade distill a mountain of blather down to a precious stream of truth is glorious to behold!
An explanation closer to my level of understanding than I’ve read before. Only had to use the dictionary a couple of times. Still holding out slim hope for Abiogenic oil though 🙂 Thanks.
Gosh! I wish my notes after two semesters had been this clear and concise.
Thank you sir. As Texan I appreciate reading a well written discussion of the oil bidness. Yours was exceptionally well written.
David didn’t really get into the business end. That’s easily described as a business where the boss is called the pusher, joints come in 30 foot lengths, and dope is found on the rig floor in large plastic buckets.
LOL! [+∞ ]
Ok, THAT. IS. FUNNY.
Gold’s abiotic theory of Petroleum formation is astrophysical support for the Soviet Abiotic theory of Petroleum formation which has formulated in the early 1950s.
The Soviets naturally accused Gold of plagiarism.
http://www.gasresources.net/VAKreplytBriggs.htm
Middleton does make the point, however, that abiotic models for oil have proved useless for actually finding oil, whether they are valid or not.
Yeah… A couple of things drive me bonkers.
1. The continuous argument that oil is abiogenic because the process is possible.
2. The totally clueless argument that the adoption of the abiogenic hypothesis would fundamentally transform oil exploration and instantly refill every depleted oilfield on Earth.
Yes, Middleton hammered it loud and clear. If anything is left unclear, a fresh reminder received at the gas stations and shops regularly. This is one reason I’ve understood cAGW clergy to a certain point and to feel uneasy about Trump.
Not according to Dr Kenney on this NPR “Science Friday” interview: http://web.archive.org/web/20110217181842/http://www.gasresources.net/Kenney-NPR.mp3
Mr. Middleton, you complain that the following drives you bonkers:
Have you read the 4,000 Russian papers and monographs in the original (since they were never translated into English)? I am IN NO WAY contradicting your excellent post above, but just curious why you disagree with the Russian reporting of the science as they discovered, or uncovered, it.
My understanding is that the Russians used Wegner’s explanation to arrive at their conclusions in the late 40s and early 50s. For decades, earth scientists had discredited Wegner’s ideas about continental drift only to discover the movement of tectonic plates (using his early 20th C insights) in the 1960s.
MRW,
4,000 papers explaining how the process is possible isn’t evidence of a significant accumulation of inorganically, abiogenic, or abiotic sourced oil.
The totally clueless argument
==================
Wouldn’t the abiotic hypothesis tend to favor the idea that oil/gas can be found both deep and shallow, while the organic hypothesis would tend to favor shallow oil/gas over deep oil/gas? Is there any preference re: statistical vertical distribution of oil/gas?
maybe there are 3 hypothesis about how oil can form?
1. organic
2. plate tectonics (reduction of limestone via iron)
3. primordial from planet formation.
ferdberple,
“Wouldn’t the abiotic hypothesis tend to favor the idea that oil/gas can be found both deep and shallow, while the organic hypothesis would tend to favor shallow oil/gas over deep oil/gas?”
No.
William
I have explored the Russian conclusions also and keep an open mind. I guess at this point the subject is a bit like the CO2 debate? Conclusions from both sides.
Not really. I’ve worked in the oil business for four decades and made a ton of money. The Abiogenic oil crowd barely gets by writing books for naive and wishful thinkers. Ask them how much crude oil they put in a tank. The answer is zero.
Ozone bust, I read the Russian stuff available in English. Worse than Mann’s hockey stick. Geological Lysenkoism. The purported Ukraine example is worse thsn bad geology. There were uderkying standard sedimentary source rocks that had been overthrust.
Rud…
[+∞] e10 for Lysenkoism reference!
I had a slightly opened mind to abiotic oil, but thanks to Mr. Middleton, that door is NAILED shut.
If something is POSSIBLE, theoretically, that is the realm of SPECULATION. Only evidence can move speculation into the world of reality, and evidence is a precious thing that supports real world activities, such as oil discoveries and production…
How many miles to the gallon will speculation get you?
Dave Stephens…you and me both.
Your mind should never be “nailed shut.”
Nice guest review post. Well done.
Excellent report.
step 1and 2. how do the dead things that fall to the bottom get burried in mud, they fall on top, where does the mud on top of them come from, how can mud cover them fast enough before they decompose. where did the oxygen go?
Sediment is always dropping out of the ocean and falling to the seafloor. The further away from shore, the higher the clay content and lower the sand content. There is a steady stream of clay particles and dead foram’s, algae plankton and other critters falling to the sea floor. As new sediment falls, it buries the older sediment.
Deepwater environments (bathyal, abyssal and hadal zones) start out with low levels of dissolved oxygen. This why metal in shipwrecks is better preserve in deepwater; there is very little oxidation (rust). Redox reactions render the deepwater sediments anoxic.
This allows much of the organic matter to be buried with little decomposition.
Great post. Always wondered how methane on Titan correlated with biogenic oil.
Why is Peak Oil not a concern? It does seem that we will need to replace oil with some other energy source at some point – possibly soonish, considering eroi declines. Doesn’t that constitute a legitimate civilizational concern? (sorry for any made-up words.)
Back when CO2 levels were very high, e.g. as high as 7,000 ppm perhaps, plants would have grown like crazy (think Amazon rain forest, perhaps a few orders of magnitude greater…) and piled up on top of each other, thus burying the slightly older stuff quickly. This virtually unlimited food explains the size of dinosaurs and other huge living things.
Of course the plants would have increased the O2 levels eventually too. Just imagine the global firestorms that would eventually resulted…
A really informative article that is a pleasure to read, thank you. I would only ask what asphalt is in relation to all this – is that organic or inorganic in origin?
Most asphalt used on roadways and for other construction purposes is produced from petroleum; although naturally occurring asphalt is quite common. Natural asphalt is often “overcooked” oil.
This essay should be part of science curricula at the High-School level and above. Thanks David, for a copious infusion of comprehension on the subject of crude oil.
+1