Globally, people  are used to hearing and reading about fossils fuels. The first use of the term “fossil fuel” occurs in the work of the German chemist Caspar Neumann in 1759.

The term fossil fuels refers to hydrocarbon-containing materials formed naturally in the earth’s crust from the remains of dead plants and animals that is extracted and burned as a fuel. The main fossil fuels are coal, crude oil and natural gas.

Environmentalists believe that in order to save planet earth mankind must stop using fossil fuels.

For a dedicated environmentalist, like Al Gore, have used the words “fossil fuels” as a pejorative to demonize those who discover, mine, drill for, refine, transport, sell and then use coal, oil, natural gas to fuel their homes and businesses and keep the lights on in government buildings at every level.

Fossil fuels contribute 81% of the global energy system, the same percentage as 30 years ago. The remainder of the global energy system is: hydroelectric at 16%, nuclear at 10.3%, wind at 6% and solar at 2%.

These environmentalists also believe that mankind can control the climate by simply ending the use of all fossil fuels. 

Given the importance of having cheap and reliable power we have always been interested in new theories on energy. We received an email from a reader asking that we research the theory of “Abiotic Oil” and do a column on it. So being loyal to our readers we decided to some research on it.

We found that the theory of “Abiotic Oil” isn’t nearly as insane as  the environmentalist’s theory that mankind can control the climate by simply ending the use of all fossil fuels.

Here is what we found out about Abiotic Oil

Wikipedia states, “The abiogenic petroleum origin is a largely discredited hypothesis which proposes that most of earth’s petroleum and natural gas deposits were formed inorganically.”

QUESTION: Is Wikipedia right or wrong?

On November 13th, 2008 in a Forbes magazine article titled Endless Oil? Robert Langreth reported,

Everybody knows that oil and gas drilled out of the earth comes from the remains of plants and animals trapped underground millions of years ago. This received wisdom so dominates our thinking that it is enshrined in the very language we use–fossil fuels. They took eons to form, and we are using them up far faster than they can be replenished.

What if the whole theory is wrong?

That’s the premise of a small but passionate band of Russian and Ukrainian contrarians. They argue that oil and gas don’t come from fossils; they’re synthesized deep within the earth’s mantle by heat, pressure and other purely chemical means, before gradually rising to the surface. Under the so-called abiotic theory of oil, finding all the energy we need is just a matter of looking beyond the traditional basins where fossils might have accumulated.

The idea that oil comes from fossils “is a myth. … We need to change this myth,” says petroleum engineer Vladimir Kutcherov, at the Royal Institute of Technology in Sweden. “All kinds of rocks could have oil and gas deposits.”

Alexander Kitchka of the Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences brashly estimates that 60% of the content of all oil is abiotic in origin, and not from fossil fuels. He says companies should drill deeper to find it.

Kitchka says oil may be found in all sorts of geological structures such as volcanic rock or deep-sea thermal vents where companies aren’t looking today.

Read the full article.

On September 14th, 2011 in a U.S. News and World Report article titled Abiotic Oil a Theory Worth Exploring – Oil may not be formed the way we think it is Gregg Laskoski wrote,

It’s our nature to sort, divide, and classify. We label ourselves to identify political leanings, religious beliefs, the food we enjoy, and the sports teams we cheer. The oil industry too has its own distinct labels which include the “Peak Oil” theorists, those who believe the world is fast depleting the finite supply of fossil fuel; and the pragmatists, those who recognize that engineering and technological advances in oil drilling and extraction continuously identify new reserves that make oil plentiful.

And there’s a third group you may not know. These people are deeply interested in oil and its origins, but their advocacy of “abiotic theory” has many dismissing them as heretics, frauds, or idealists. They hold that oil can be derived from hydrocarbons that existed eons ago in massive pools deep within the earth’s core. That source of hydrocarbons seeps up through the earth’s layers and slowly replenishes oil sources. In other words, it turns the fossil-fuel paradigm upside down.

Perhaps the breakthrough for this theory came when Chris Cooper’s story appeared April 16, 1999, in The Wall Street Journal about an oil field called Eugene Island. Here’s an excerpt:

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 a day. By 1989, production had slowed to about 4,000 barrels a day.

Then suddenly—some say almost inexplicably—Eugene Island’s fortunes reversed. The field, operated by PennzEnergy Co., is now producing 13,000 barrels a day, and probable reserves have rocketed to more than 400 million barrels from 60 million. Stranger still, scientists studying the field say the crude coming out of the pipe is of a geological age quite different from the oil that gushed 10 years ago.

[ … ]

The idea that oil comes from fossils “is a myth” that needs changing according to petroleum engineer Vladimir Kutcherov, speaking at the Royal Institute of Technology in Sweden. “All kinds of rocks could have oil and gas deposits.”

Alexander Kitchka of the Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences estimates that 60 percent of the content of all oil is abiotic in origin and not from fossil fuels. He says companies should drill deeper to find it.

Is abiotic theory the real deal? Is Eugene Island “Exhibit A?” Look how long it’s taken for this conversation to reach a tipping point!

Read the full article.

Maybe is we stop using the term “fossil fuels” and start using the term “abiogenic petroleum” or “abiogenic power” the environmentalists will back off?

Just kidding. Their goal is to harm mankind while saving the planet. Get it? Got it? Good.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Abiotic Oil Formation

Read: How Much Oil is There?

Abiogenic Deep Origin of Hydrocarbons and Oil and Gas Deposits Formation

Clean Green Energy – Net Zero – Fairy Tales on Steroids

The Myth of Clean Energy

Reality Bites Wind

Planet Strippers: Amazon’s Balsa Forests Being Raped To Make Wind Turbine Blades

Megatons Of Toxic Waste from Solar Panels: Ticking Time Bomb