|
April 28, 2006
No fair! no peaking!
DDOS attack at Host Matters (which Glenn Reynolds says originates from Saudi Arabia); hope this goes through, and please forgive any errors I haven't caught! (BTW, there is a Classical Values backup site, which I rarely use....) Anyway, I'm more than skeptical about peak oil theory, and I appreciate Justin's recent post on the subject. In fact I'm even skeptical about oil theory. Back in 2004, I wondered whether fossil fuel is in fact that, and I linked to the work of Nikolai Alexandrovich Kudryavtsev -- "who first enunciated in 19511 what has become the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins. After Kudryavtsev, all the rest followed." All the rest includes a recent book by James Corsi and Craig Smith which apparently ruffled a few feathers in the scientific oil community. Anyway, I don't have time to get into detail here, and I don't know enough about the field. I cannot state with confidence that I know that "fossil fuel" is a Big Lie promoted by Big Oil and Big Environmentalism. I will say that these two huge interests could be expected to find common ground propping up the fossil fuel theory. Is "fossil fuel" a theory? Or is it fact? What got my attention were the ad hominem attacks directed at the American authors. Their book explores the Russian/Ukrainian theory, but the criticism of them seems to be based largely on Corsi's Swift Boat background. Staniford's column is titled "The Swiftboating of Peak Oil," an allusion to Corsi's co-authorship of "Unfit for Command," the New York Times No. 1 best-seller during the 2004 presidential campaign that challenged Sen. John Kerry's claims about his Navy swiftboat service in Vietnam.Surely the scientific community can come up with a better rebuttal than that. Fark.com has an interesting discussion of the theory, which doesn't convince me one way or the other, but the simple logic of one commenter appealed to my sense of logical pathos: If oil comes from fossils, how many fossils does it take to create a big huge oil field that supplies billions of barrels of crude, and how did all those fossils get in that one place? Really... I want to know.. because it just doesn't seem logical.I want to know too. But I don't. Highly compressed swampland over millions of years, perhaps? And might both theories possibly be right? Verifying the abiotic oil theory by taking an inside peek might take a journey to the center of the earth. We can't get there from here. UPDATE: More on the DDOS attack (via an email from Rand Simberg to Glenn Reynolds): Rand Simberg emails, correctly, that originating in Saudi Arabia doesn't actually mean that the perpetrators are Saudis -- just the computers they've hijacked. True enough.For all we know, the computers could have been hijacked by angry gay activists. Or irate Christian fundamentalists. CIA agents working for Michael Moore. No way to know. And no way to retaliate. posted by Eric on 04.28.06 at 09:13 AM
Comments
JonBuck · April 28, 2006 07:40 PM Okay. That's odd. Here's the full URL: http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=6823506 JonBuck · April 28, 2006 07:40 PM There's a third possibility. (Hmmm, looks like a tag needs to be closed, and since I'm not an admin here I can't edit comments. So insert a "" at the appropriate location. Thank you.) Anyway... Way down in the Earth's crust are archeobacteria living very slow lives. They produce methane, slowly but in vast amounts. Most of this methane is then consumed by other bacteria living further up in the crust, but some gets through to be released into the atmosphere, or trapped in hydrates or in natural storage chambers. There, over time, it is cooked into oil. With natural gas a step in the process. Thus our oil and natural gas is still biotic in origin, but the source is living and oil is therefor a renewable resource. Alan Kellogg · April 28, 2006 10:17 PM I do appreciate the links and comments, and I fixed the missing html from the Economist. Very interesting about the archaobacteria, Alan. Eric Scheie · April 28, 2006 10:23 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Holiday Blogging
The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth! My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Dave McGowan has a good review of the fossil fuel, peak oil, and abiotic theories at the following url:
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr52.html
He spends a large amount of time covering his then-recent arguments with Michael Ruppert, but once you get past that, he makes some very compelling arguments. I don't always agree with him, but his research is always comprehensive and he is very good at making complex subjects easily understood.