Fossil Fuels May be a Misnomer
| Author |
Message |
|
Salvador T. Cordova
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:25 pm Posts: 32
|
 Fossil Fuels May be a Misnomer
Oil Made From Marble
Quote: A group of petrochemical engineers produced propane, butane, hexane, octane and other petroleum hydrocarbons from pure marble and iron oxide and distilled water, under 50kbar of pressure and 1500o C temperature. These conditions correspond to areas deep within the earth’s mantle. Their experiment was the capstone of an article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences online preprints (Aug 12) about the thermodynamics of oil production, and the constraints on chemical evolution by the second law of thermodynamics. They describe how the only naturally-occurring hydrocarbon at atmospheric pressure is methane, CH4, the simplest; all the other hydrocarbon chains require tremendous pressure and heat, more than can exist in earth’s crust. Accordingly, they dispute that oil can be produced from any biological material: “applying the dictates of thermodynamic-stability theory, disposes of any hypothesis of an origin for hydrocarbon molecules from biological matter, excepting only the lightest, methane.” They dispute that microorganisms or decaying biological material can produce oil, or that its formation depends on the properties of certain geological strata; instead, it must form below the crust, in the mantle, where temperatures and pressures are adequate to overcome the high chemical potentials of complex hydrocarbons. In passing, they note that a few biological compounds have similarly high chemical potentials: “Although there exist biotic molecules of unusually high chemical potential such as beta-carotene (C40H56), vitamin D (C38H44O), and some of the pheromone hormones, such compounds are relatively rare by abundance. They are produced by biological systems only when the producing entity is alive (and at formidable metabolic cost to the producing entity), and the production ceases with the death of the entity.”
|
| Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:33 pm |
|
 |
|
Jack Krebs
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 2:16 pm Posts: 1547
|
So what has the followup on this been? Have further studies been done to confirm or disconfirm this? Lots of papers bring up idea that don't pan out - what has been the history of this finding?
|
| Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:40 pm |
|
 |
|
Hrafn
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:57 am Posts: 587
|
 What misnomer?
This article appears to contain no information indicating that the bulk of "fossil fuels" may come from non-fossil processes, merely that it is theoretically possible to produce some of the lighter components of fossil fuels from non-fossil sources. They have not even established that this mechanism is observed in nature, let alone that it naturally occurs in quantities that are in any way significant.
Lacking any such substantiation to even say that "fossil fuels" "may be a misnomer" is premature in the extreme.
|
| Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:56 pm |
|
 |
|
Salvador T. Cordova
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:25 pm Posts: 32
|
Jack,
I posted this to solicit responses.
I believe this study will disconfirm several anti-YEC claims. This would be a fairly interesting data point if true. Something that would imply reversal of various textbook and popular understandings of Earth history.
This came from the PNAS, so it's no slouch group of scientists involved.
Sal
|
| Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:17 pm |
|
 |
|
lcraig
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:38 pm Posts: 751 Location: Kansas
|
 Oil from marble
Sal forgot to mention this is from the "Creation Safaris" website. The commentary below the quote he posted says:
Quote: If oil is not a “fossil fuel” but is produced in the mantle, perhaps it will not prove to be such a depletable resource. This raises questions about where oil is likely to be found, and how long it takes to form. It should be acknowledged that this paper represents a minority view. Nature Science Update disputes the claim, saying that most geochemists believe the bulk of earth’s oil is of biological origin and that the high temperatures and pressures are not required. We’ll leave those questions to the specialists to debate, but it should be noticed that thermodynamics must be taken into account in questions of chemical evolution. The oxygenated (organic) hydrocarbons in living things do not have such high chemical potentials as octane gasoline, but many still require special conditions for their formation. Notice the unusual nature of beta-carotene and vitamin D which would never form spontaneously by natural processes, but can only be formed by highly-specific enzymes; and when the organism dies, they decay rapidly.
Speaking of methane, the authors throw in a little humor about the “bean-eater’s” reaction: “no biochemical investigation has ever observed a molecule of any hydrocarbon heavier than methane resulting from the decomposition of biological detritus. After a meal of, e.g., Boston baked beans, one does experience biogenic methane, but not biogenic octane.” Scientific papers don’t have to be totally deadpan...
I doubt that this casts doubt on petroleum being a biological product. It seems to pose the question as to whether methane arises in the Earth's crust. Also, please note it was posted online prior to print.
Someone who knows what this is all about, please explain why this article might be of interest to a YEC.
|
| Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:31 pm |
|
 |
|
Les Lane
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:28 pm Posts: 865 Location: Lincoln NE
|
Quote: I believe this study will disconfirm several anti-YEC claims.
To claim that geological formation of hydrocarbons disconfirms biological origin of hydrocarbons is (like most YEC claims) wishful thinking.
|
| Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:31 pm |
|
 |
|
lcraig
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:38 pm Posts: 751 Location: Kansas
|
 No slouches
Sal,
I believe I read something about the PNAS (or some similar organization) initiating a policy where anybody can publish anything on their site without prior review. The idea was that it would democratize science, and researchers could get their work out there for their peers to rip, tear and shred.
The fact that "Creation Safaris" chose to cite the abstract makes me more than a little suspicious. That and the fact that one of the researchers is from Houston, TX, and the others are all Russian. Weird.
Either the study is ridiculous, or the interpretation of it by "Creation Safaris" is. Or both.
|
| Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:46 pm |
|
 |
|
wffarrell
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:16 am Posts: 488 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Trying to be polite on the New Forum let me first confess that I worked, willingly, for 26 years for a Major Oil Company and was deeply involved in the great oil conspiracy.
However, I would put forward the following observation. For the sake of argument let's call the abiogenic theory of oil production Theory A, and the biogenic theory of oil Theory B.
Now, consider this: all of the oil ever discovered, all of it, every field, even the field discovered by Chevron a few weeks ago, all of it was discovered using Theory B.
No oil, not a drop, not a drip, not a whiff, nary a molecule has been discoverd by Theory A.
What Sal is proposing by his "discussion" is that thousands of petroleum geologists for the last 100 years, successfully producing billions of barrels of oil have "somehow" missed the Great Concept that oil is really the product of calcium carbonate.
People with such insight should be contacting Exxon instead of the Kansas Citizens for Science Education.
|
| Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:33 am |
|
 |
|
Salvador T. Cordova
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:25 pm Posts: 32
|
 Link to PNAS articl
Here is the link to the PNAS abstract which links to the full PDF
[url=http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/172376899v1]The evolution of multicomponent systems at high pressures: VI. The thermodynamic stability of the hydrogencarbon system: The genesis of hydrocarbons and the origin of petroleum
[/url]
Quote: J. F. Kenney , Vladimir A. Kutcherov ¶, Nikolai A. Bendeliani ||, and Vladimir A. Alekseev || Gas Resources Corporation, 11811 North Parkway, Floor 5, Houston, TX 77060; Russian Academy of Sciences, Joint Institute of Earth Physics, Bolshaya Gruzinskaya 10, 123810 Moscow, Russia; ¶Russian State University of Oil and Gas, Leninski Prospect 65, 117917 Moscow, Russia; and ||Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute for High Pressure Physics, 142092 Troitsk, Moscow Region, Russia
Communicated by Howard Reiss, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, June 24, 2002 (received for review April 3, 2002)
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. For the theoretical analysis of this phenomenon, a general, first-principles equation of state has been developed by extending scaled particle theory and by using the technique of the factored partition function of the simplified perturbed hard-chain theory. The chemical potentials and the respective thermodynamic Affinity have been calculated for typical components of the HC system over a range of pressures between 1 and 100 kbar (1 kbar = 100 MPa) and at temperatures consistent with those of the depths of the Earth at such pressures. The theoretical analyses establish that the normal alkanes, the homologous hydrocarbon group of lowest chemical potential, evolve only at pressures greater than 30 kbar, excepting only the lightest, methane. The pressure of 30 kbar corresponds to depths of 100 km. For experimental verification of the predictions of the theoretical analysis, a special high-pressure apparatus has been designed that permits investigations at pressures to 50 kbar and temperatures to 1,500°C and also allows rapid cooling while maintaining high pressures. The high-pressure genesis of petroleum hydrocarbons has been demonstrated using only the reagents solid iron oxide, FeO, and marble, CaCO3, 99.9% pure and wet with triple-distilled water.
|
| Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:43 am |
|
 |
|
celdd
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:19 pm Posts: 11
|
 Biogenic and abiogenic theories of petroleum formation
This Wikipedia article explains about both the biogenic and abiogenic theories of the formation of petroleum. (scroll down past the intro paragraph)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum
The biogenic process is primarily a breakdown of exising organic matter, whereas, the proposed abiogenic process is a combining of essential elements into organic compounds.
|
| Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:50 am |
|
 |
|
Les Lane
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:28 pm Posts: 865 Location: Lincoln NE
|
If Sal's thinking troubles you, remember that the goal of the apologist is to maximize the influence of preconceptions on conclusions. If you understand science, the relationship of apologetic thinking to scientific thinking should be apparent.
The true apologist supports any conclusion, however weak, which supports preconcpetions and counters any argument, however strong, which is contrary to preconceptions. This is likely the most common type of reasoning in ordinary conversation.
|
| Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:12 am |
|
 |
|
wffarrell
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:16 am Posts: 488 Location: Houston, Texas
|
I just had an evil thought.
Hey, Sal, your quoted abstract says that oil can be made from marble. OK, where does marble come from?
Actually, I'll save you the trouble of going to Wikipedia. Limestone is a sedimentary rock that forms from the calcified remains of ancient marine creatures. Marble is the recrystalization of limestone. So, you see Sal old buddy, even if you could squeeze oil out of marble, which you can't by the way, it would still be a fossil fuel.
Thanks for the diversion. It was fun. Well, next on the list should be a discussion of C-14 in coal.
|
| Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:56 am |
|
 |
|
Salvador T. Cordova
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:25 pm Posts: 32
|
wffarrell wrote: I just had an evil thought.
Hey, Sal, your quoted abstract says that oil can be made from marble. OK, where does marble come from?
Actually, I'll save you the trouble of going to Wikipedia. Limestone is a sedimentary rock that forms from the calcified remains of ancient marine creatures. Marble is the recrystalization of limestone. So, you see Sal old buddy, even if you could squeeze oil out of marble, which you can't by the way, it would still be a fossil fuel.
Thanks for the diversion. It was fun. . Not so fast. On what basis can you prove your claim? Here is a different perspective on the origin of limestone: http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebo ... tone2.htmlQuote: Remarkably, earth’s limestone holds a thousand times more calcium and carbon than today’s atmosphere, oceans, coal, oil, and living matter combined. A simple, visual examination of limestone grains shows that few are ground-up sea shells or corals, as some believe.
Thus the quantity of limestone is inconsistent with purely biological origins. 
|
| Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:23 pm |
|
 |
|
Josh Rosenau
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:42 am Posts: 437 Location: Oakland, CA
|
Salvador T. Cordova wrote: I believe this study will disconfirm several anti-YEC claims.
Oh? Which ones?
_________________What's new at Thoughts from Kansas?
|
| Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:23 pm |
|
 |
|
wffarrell
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:16 am Posts: 488 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Not so fast. Look at a piece of limestone, Sal. It has shells in it. All limestone all over the world. Shells, shells, shells and ancient critters.
Your creationist claim has no basis in fact, as usual.
Have a nice day, courtesy of 4.5 billion years of evolution.
p.s. Sal, I'd appreciate it if you would stop buying fossil fuel gasoline. From now on please buy your fuel at an abiogenic gas station. Same for heating oil, plastics, chemicals...
|
| Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:30 pm |
|
 |
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|