How petroleum is formed in the earth?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pgardn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earth Petroleum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the formation of petroleum in the Earth, exploring various theories regarding its origins, including organic decay and inorganic processes. Participants examine the validity of mainstream theories versus alternative hypotheses, as well as the implications of these theories on current understanding and practices in petroleum geology.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the formation of petroleum is primarily due to decaying organic material, specifically from algae, while others challenge this view by referencing alternative theories that propose inorganic processes.
  • A participant mentions that certain Russian scientists have synthesized hydrocarbons in laboratory conditions using water, carbonate, and metals, suggesting a potential inorganic origin for oil.
  • Another participant argues that the existence of metalloporphyrins in oil, which resemble chlorophyll, supports the organic theory and claims that there is substantial evidence against the inorganic theory.
  • Concerns are raised about the resurgence of discredited theories, with one participant expressing frustration over the portrayal of these theories in media, particularly in relation to public understanding of petroleum geology.
  • Participants discuss the implications of these theories on oil prospecting, noting that successful exploration is based on the mainstream organic theory.
  • One participant shares insights from a petrochemical lab regarding the unique composition of hydrocarbons in different deposits, linking this to broader discussions about environmental impacts and oil sourcing.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the origins of petroleum, with some advocating for the organic decay theory and others supporting alternative inorganic theories. No consensus is reached on the validity of these competing views.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the reliance on historical perspectives and the ongoing debate over the evidence supporting each theory. The discussion reflects a range of opinions on the credibility of alternative theories and their acceptance within the scientific community.

pgardn
Messages
656
Reaction score
2
I heard a whole show on Science Fridays on NPR that basically stated that we do not really know. Most people assume its decaying organic material, but the Russians and some other scientists have created all sorts of hydrocarbons in the lab with water, Carbonate in rocks, and iron or other common metals as catalysts under high pressure and temp. Some of the guys they talked to said that "oil" is mostly made INORGANICALLY?

So what's the consensus?
1. We don't know for sure 2. Organically decaying plant/animal material 3. Inorganically
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
2. Although it's only plant (algae) material, really and 'decaying' isn't quite the correct term. Sounds like a very unbalanced documentary.

Yes, there was a Soviet-era Russian (Kudryavtsev) who had an "alternative" theory, back in the 1950's, but it was not mainstream even in the Soviet Union, and is by no means a mainstream theory now. The main proponents could be counted on one hand, whereas every other petrochemist in the world is basically on the other side. And it's only the proponents who claim this is still an open question.

There's simply too much evidence saying otherwise. The biggest single piece of evidence is the existence of metalloporphyrins in oil, which are highly similar to chlorophyll. There's no other theory to explain these fairly complicated organic molecules. (I don't even think the proponents of 'oil abiogenesis' dispute that, but rather claim that while the porphyrins and other biomarkers might have come from biological material, all the rest of the oil came about via their mechanism.)

Oil prospecting is done, quite successfully, on the basis of the mainstream theory. One of the main proponents of oil abiogenesis, Thomas Gold, predicted on the basis of his theory that there'd be oil in the Siljan ring area of Sweden. They drilled for years there - and found absolutely nothing.

It sucks to see these old, discredited theories being dredged up. To me, it seems like the global-warming deniers have convinced themselves so thoroughly that the end of oil means the end of civilization, that they want to extend their delusions to pretending oil will last forever as well!
 
I can't believe they put this on NPR...

I heard it with another colleague and we were in shock that we were so behind as we thought organically.

Thanks for the reply. I had not heard about the chlorophyll like molecules.

I knew there was a bunch of stuff in diff. types of deposits after listening to a petrochemical lab that can ID oil by rig or formation as every place seems to have its own unique "slurry" of hydrocarbons and I got to thinking about that radio show. They were using the lab to ID tarballs and found out they were not from the current catostrophe in the gulf and probably from a ship(s) that had dumped some waste. Apparently its expensive to clean so some boats just dump hydrocarbons and this group tries to trace the source. A lot of boats are apparently dumping now thinking blame will be placed on the Deep Water Horizon.

Interesting.
 
pgardn said:
I can't believe they put this on NPR...

I can. :-p
 
Ira Flatow would do this... jeezzz...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K