anaconda

Investing Into the End of the Hydrocarbon Age

Response to Kezorm:
There are two responses. First, the "oil window" of "fossil" theory, dictates that below 15,000 feet deep, oil will not form, or will disassocate, or "crack" because of the heat. This deposit, whatever is down there, is deeper than 15,000 feet deep, and Petrobas' statement said the "oil" is 500 degrees Fahrenheit, way over the tempertaure "fossil" theory's "oil window" states oil will "crack" into gas.

This was the basis for Mr. von Altendorf's stating he thought it would be gas. This writer asked whether von Altendorf subscribed to the "oil window" theory. His answer was not to directly respond, but, rather, to state that abiotic oil was "impossible." This writer took that to mean the "oil window" was inseperable from "fossil" theory.

There is another reason as well. Salt deposits are not strictly from evaporation, they are also a result of "solfataric" action. This is a kind of volcanic process, similar to a sulpher vent. What was interesting about von Altendorf's description of the Carioca field (how he knew, this writer does not know) included dolomite deposits, this was a reason the field was "suspect" as von Altendorf saw dolomite as a sign of low permiabilty. This mineral is also common to these solfataric "vents."

Kezorm, you sound genuine in your interest; check out the Oil Is Mastery website, at the left-hand column there are direct links. Under Eugene Coste, click Canadian Mining Institute Jounal: The Volcanic Origin of Natural Gas and petroleum (1903). This paper explains the "solfataric," volcanic process and the minerals that are expelled. Salt is one. Spindletop, the 1901, Texas gusher, Coste describes as a solfataric mineral "fumarole." The salt dome, that everybody knows about is a result of this action. Coste gives a very good explanation of the salt's presence, and documents salt as a mineral expelled fro solfataric fumaroles. The salt - solfataric association is never rebutted (they do object to his theory of the inorganic source of the oil). But also present is dolomite, actually Coste describes the oil in proximity to the dolomite. So, there is salt and dolomite at Carioca, just like at Spindletop. Dolomite is also found in the Brakken basin in North Dakota, within the oil deposits.

Actually, there is a strong association between petroleum and salt in many, if not most oil deposits.

So, the salt at the Corioca field may not be of depositional origin, but rather 'solfataric' in origin along with the dolomite.

This is entirely consistent with abiotic oil theory.

What Peak oil folks regularly claim is that hydrocarbons are not associated with volcanic action -- this is categorically false. The scientific literature is full of associations between volcanic sites and hydrocarbons.

The science is at Oil Is Mastery. The Corioca field will do a lot to prove abiotic oil, one way, or the other.

Investing Into the End of the Hydrocarbon Age

"THE ELECTRON AGE"

All well and good. This writer supports 'alternative' energy in all its myriad forms. Economics at some level is a function of man's desire -- and the desire to have dispersed energy sources is good in my book. Motivated man, is productive man. There are plenty of motivated men, inventors, who for fortune or intrinsic good, want to develop technologies for this 'Electron Age'.

More power to 'em.

But Mr. Kingsdale's turning phrase: "...[H]ow the hydrocarbon age will end...", is premature.

Petroleum -- crude oil, Texas tea, or an addict's drug, whatever you want to call it, will remain a powerful energy source for more than "ten to twenty years," Mr. Kingsdale muses about.

This writer may have missed Mr. Kingsdale's declaration for Peak oil, but the "ten to twenty years" transition statement suggests that's where he is: Peak oil.

But, that's not where the oil geology is at.

The next five years will prove whether this writer is right or wrong. The Brazil oil finds, specifically, the Carioca field will tell much whether the 'Age of Oil" will shortly pass.

Why?

Because it has been trashed, and dismissed -- chiefly because should it 'pan out' to anywhere close to the initial giddy, ill-advised "champagne popping" statement of 33 billion barrels of crude oil -- a new age will dawn -- the ultra-deep, deep-drilling offshore petroleum age. This would not be a "cheap" age. It averages $70 a barrel to produce -- but it would be stable and plentiful age of oil availability.

Why is this 'new age' trashed and dismissed?

Because it violates the principle's of the "fossil" theory.

This oil -- if it exits -- is too deep to be explained by "fossil" theory.
That's why Mathew Simmons and his acolytes have dismissed it.

But others have not. No, they are spending $750 million a pop for the rigs to get it, and Petrobas has ordered 40 of these ships. Yes, $30 billion in investment. That's part of the money Mathew Simmons is talking about.

This oil, if it exists, and it doesn't turn out to be natural gas, violates the "oil window" that "fossil" theory geologists hold dear.

That's why Alan von Altendorf, an oil geologist, predicts Carioca will be mostly, if not all, natural "gas."

But should it turn out to be mostly oil, it shows there are huge amounts of petroleum to be found. Again, expensive, yes, but available, steady, and consistent.

von Altendorf knows that there is no other explanation for this oil, if it exits, for while only one well test has been made, if it's a real play, then it must be abiotic oil. The science is there, now the observations can be made in the next five years, and, somebody, "way above my pay scale," has bet $30 billion that this is so.

Should this Carioca field 'pan out' and a trend of fields be found running down the lovely coast of Brazil, a new bosum of oil will be available for the world markets.

More power to the 'Electron Age', but don't count out the 'Age of Oil' just yet.

The website, Oil Is Mastery, is focussed on ultra-deepwater, deep-drilling investment.

See for yourself -- the science is there -- that's why Petrobas is rising in value. And the "proof is in the pudding," we will find out, one way, or the other, in the next five years.

Don't you want to get in before the investment "herd?"