The Dollar signs behind the origin of the term “Fossil fuels”

Posted: June 28, 2020 by tallbloke in Energy, fuel poverty, government

H/T to John

Are “fossil fuels” really made from biological life? Coal, certainly. But oil? Maybe some of it. But oil drilled from 30,000 feet underground??

Comments
  1. uwe.roland.gross says:
    June 28, 2020 at 12:28 pm

    Reblogged this on uwerolandgross.

  2. JB says:
    June 28, 2020 at 5:30 pm

    An old article:
    http://www.viewzone.com/abioticoilx.html

    Haven’t kept pace with the latest developments, but its quite certain now, unlike the skepticism expressed in the article.
    Clifford Wilson’s 1970s book The Energy Non-crisis has some pretty good background material on the racket being run in the oil industry. The entire Middle East conflict today isn’t about limited supply. Its about monopoly control.

    The objective is world-wide clones in the populace, in the economy, in philosophy, in religion. Everything and everyone uniformly the same, to be managed and processed like cattle/chattel.

  3. Gamecock says:
    June 29, 2020 at 2:41 am

    Mr Prouty is not aware of biochemistry. Petroleum is chiral, a marker of biological origin.

    I do agree with him that ‘fossil’ is a bad term. It isn’t likely to be remnants of former organisms, though it might be. I prefer the theory that microorganisms process naturally occurring methane, resulting in larger organic molecules. If correct, Mr Prouty is correct that the supply is vastly greater than we realize.

  4. ichor0 says:
    June 29, 2020 at 2:56 am

    I don’t know if it is worth mentioning but physicist Eugene Bagashov (who was associated the ‘Thunderbolts project’) has a preprint on ArXiv suggesting a biosphere, 10-100km. Deep enough for those reserves Prouty mentioned in the video
    https://eartharxiv.org/bae7t/
    has a lot of downloads, I guess from that group.

    The paper is titled ‘Possible Tectonic Impact of Biosphere’ but separate from the main suggestion there are three paragraphs on petroleum. This conjecture would make them neither abiogenic nor fossil fuels, I guess. sample

    “One of the hints towards the viability of such perspective is the similarity between bacteria found in warm subsurface petroleum reservoirs and bacteria in oceanic crust (Hubert
    667 et al., 2009)”

    fwiw the bacteria found in petroleum is not the only mainstream argument for saying they are ‘fossil fuels’.

  5. Hifast says:
    July 3, 2020 at 2:23 am

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.