My
education on the subject of crude oil continues, but not without difficulty. Academic
writers, who are notorious for making papers hard to follow, have nothing on what
writers in the oil industry routinely turn out.
Many
years ago I recall my company getting a successful cost information program functional,
only to discover that the last thing management wanted was to know what things
were costing. Their thinking went something like this. If we have accurate reporting
on this job, which is going to be quite profitable (and it was), there is no telling
who will learn about it, to our detriment. Whatever you think of this management
technique, that particular organization (it was a joint venture) succeeded in
losing in a few years most of the profit it had made since it began.
Something
similar goes on in the business of producing and marketing petroleum. Many people
do not want the world to know the facts; there are too many secrets to be kept,
axes to be ground, reputations to be maintained, and bureaucracies, government
and corporate, to be pacified. Then there is the propensity of so many to actually
look forward to the disaster they imagine will occur when the world "runs
out of oil." And one must suspect that the oil companies believe convincing
people we have a problem is a great way to persuade them to accept high gasoline
prices.
One particular
feeble discussion suggests that the deep drilling required to tap abiotic oil
fields, as the Russians are doing, is too expensive. The only solution is for
us to take whatever oil fields we feel the need for. Those making this argument
appear to assume that making war, supporting fleets at sea and in the air and
killing people is done at no cost. Their thinking must be that if we keep the
populace in a state of nervousness over the possibility of running out, if we
can forecast food shortages and starvation, we have a great opportunity to establish
big governments with armies and lots of cushy government jobs, as we resolve the
problems of the world, real or imagined, all caused by a lack of that oil. There
is now ample evidence that oil exists or is being produced in the earth’s mantle
to migrate up to the crust where we can get at it. There is ample evidence that
crude oil does not originate from biologic life and is not a fossil fuel like
coal. And there is ample evidence that there is lot of it.
The
earth’s crust averages some 9 miles in thickness; under the oceans it is much
thinner averaging about 3 miles. Where the upward movement is too slow to satisfy
us, deep drilling is the answer and Russia has become one of the world’s top producers
using this technology. In 1951 Russian scientists formalized the Russian Ukrainian
deep abiotic theory of the origin of oil. It suggests that crude oil either consists
of primordial compounds or evolves from primordial elements located below the
crust of the earth. Having been debated fiercely for 20 years in peer-reviewed
papers (all in Russian of course) by Russian scientists it is not longer a theory.
Using it Russian drillers have located deep oil, developed deep wells and are
marketing abiotic oil to the world today, from a seemingly limitless supply.
The
refusal of the oil industry in the West to abandon their scientifically unproven
theory of a biologic origin for oil for one that continues to find oil is a serious
mistake. Let’s hope the industry wakes up.