On Mar 17, 2008, at 2:12 PM, David Penfold wrote: > > Keith, > > I'm confused as to the relevance of abiotic over biotic sources of > oil. > > Given that Hubbert predicted the decline of US fields, I think his > approach may be relevant for any given field, whether abiotic or > biotic. Even if the source were to be abiotic, I think the problem > is resource depletion. > > Given our timescales, I would say that arguing over the where oil > comes from is a moot point as fields tend to show similar output > curves. Reserve growth or replenishment doesn't appear to have > any solid foundation in history.
At the risk of sounding like a devil's advocate for a position I believe is nonsense, perhaps the abiotic folks are noticing that regions which seem to have peaked are no longer seriously pursued (ie, other regions are more profitable), and so may be replenishing themselves "in the background". In other words, as soon as KSA is on the downslope, we can go back to Oklahoma, North Sea, or wherever, and there will magically be more oil there again! -Ken Provost _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
