Peak Oil is fake
(media.scored.co)
I have a book from the 1930's that says we'll run out of oil by the 80's.
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
44 comments:
12
1 year ago
12 points
(+0
/
-0
/
+12Score on mirror
)
Permalink
Reply
Mirrored from scored.co
There's a theory that says oil is generated deep within the earth and does not have a biotic origin. Although you can certainly make oil from biomatter, the argument is that what we pull from the earth is inorganic.
Wouldn't surprise me. We use an unfathomable amount of the stuff and we still haven't run out yet? How?
Abiotic oil theory is interesting but probably bullshit. The geologic processes that generate oil are pretty well understood, and due to the Earth's much warmer past with significantly more CO2 there were just absolutely enormous quantities of bio-mass that were generated and subsequently buried. Plus, plants made from cellulose existed for IIRC tens of millions of years *before* any organism evolved to break down and digest said cellulose.
I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case. I have always wondered why we can extract plastic, a non-biodegradable material, from oil, a supposedly "biotic" material.
Because you don't understand chemistry.
Probably, chemistry wasn't my strong point. Enlighten me, where did all the calcium from the bones go?
I'm pretty sure that violates the first law of thermodynamics. Moreover, it is unlikely that such a process could meet human needs. Burning diamonds for fuel might be possible, but we would run out before the first day was over.
Want to know what "fossil fuel" really is? It's a pseudo-alcoholic residue created by decayed plant matter that has first been starved of oxygen. How do you do this? Kill an ecosystem in the desert, where nothing lives and therefore nothing is around to consume it. The sand whips over the dying plant matter before it can be absorbed by the environment, where it's stored up, the sand forming a primitive vacuum, and eventually "fossilizes", if you could call it that, into crude oil. Much of this gets absorbed into rocks and lets off a smell we call "petrichor". Only fracking can get the oil out of these rocks, but will essentially mean we can use oil forever. Which is why the jews shill so hard against it and fire up the HAARP machines whenever someone tries to extract it.
Why do you think gasoline evaporates in air? Why do you think it "goes bad" if it isn't used in a while? Why do you think diesel gets pest? Why do you think sugar kills a gas tank? Because it's really just an avant-garde type of alcohol, as evidenced by ethanol. Look up the structure of Ethyl benzoate some time. It's a type of alcohol, yet has a structure almost identical to a hydrocarbon.
Why do you think gasoline evaporates in air? Why do you think it "goes bad" if it isn't used in a while? Why do you think diesel gets pest? Why do you think sugar kills a gas tank? Because it's really just an avant-garde type of alcohol, as evidenced by ethanol. Look up the structure of Ethyl benzoate some time. It's a type of alcohol, yet has a structure almost identical to a hydrocarbon.
Pre-oil is peat. Peat forms where plants grow faster than they decay. Most of the organic matter that forms the peat is roots. The leaves and stems on the surface are exposed to oxygen and decay. But plants sink roots down to the water table to get water and nutrients. When the plant dies, the root dies. The dead root adds to the organic bulk which eventually compacts as the layers build upward until it becomes coal/oil. The key is the carbon content of the air. The higher the CO2, the faster plants grow. The faster plants grow, the wider the area where plant growth surpasses plant decay. In other words carbon is self regulating.
This graph is retarded. Why is time not the horizontal axis?
To date, no oil well has ever drained.. they simply find a new well to drill because its “cheaper”, also oil isnt a fossil fuel
I appreciate the point of this post, but I think it's worth noting that you (or some other autist) made this graph yourself and the data points are completely made up.
And for anyone who thinks I'm talking out of my ass, there's zero matches on reverse image search, meaning this graph was never published in any journal or news site. The design is too mediocre to be professionally made: It's highly unconventional to put the year on the Y axis, the data lines don't have contrasting colors, and it's unnecessary to have "years" or "years remaining" in BOTH the label of the X axis AND the key. This looks like something Excel would spit out on the first try before you went back into the data and settings to make it look nicer. Finally, let's be real, does anyone believe that there was exactly one "prediction" (from who?) for all three resources exactly every year for the entire timespan of this graph, and all of those predictions are perfectly linear when plotted? I'm not that gullible.
And for anyone who thinks I'm talking out of my ass, there's zero matches on reverse image search, meaning this graph was never published in any journal or news site. The design is too mediocre to be professionally made: It's highly unconventional to put the year on the Y axis, the data lines don't have contrasting colors, and it's unnecessary to have "years" or "years remaining" in BOTH the label of the X axis AND the key. This looks like something Excel would spit out on the first try before you went back into the data and settings to make it look nicer. Finally, let's be real, does anyone believe that there was exactly one "prediction" (from who?) for all three resources exactly every year for the entire timespan of this graph, and all of those predictions are perfectly linear when plotted? I'm not that gullible.
https://chatgpt.com/share/67a5adf5-2d74-8007-a03a-99b944a8a2bb
Wow you're pretty fucking dumb if you think that makes your graph a good dataset. ChatGPT gave you the best data it could scrap together and you basically forced it to mangle it up into an inaccurate and useless mess. Great job. "Take these data points from every decade and make them annual" Big fucking surprise it just smoothed the data out into a line, which makes it useless.
The Peak oil meme was started in the late 1800s by the Rockefellers as a means of justifying artificial shortages and price hikes.
https://warosu.org/sci/thread/15914754
https://warosu.org/sci/thread/15914754
We'll "run out" of oil whenever jews want us to run out of oil.
On another note: plastic is a renewable resource. It can be turned into the same products that are produced by crude, and the conversion process has positive energy efficiency. This will never become widespread because jews enjoy having plastic everywhere in nature because they hate beauty, that simple.
Oh. Also, the technology exists to create oil from literally any organic matter, as well as plastic, using thermal depolymerization. It's not gonna happen. Jews want the oil market cornered so that they can arbitrarily axe it whenever they want to do so.
On another note: plastic is a renewable resource. It can be turned into the same products that are produced by crude, and the conversion process has positive energy efficiency. This will never become widespread because jews enjoy having plastic everywhere in nature because they hate beauty, that simple.
Oh. Also, the technology exists to create oil from literally any organic matter, as well as plastic, using thermal depolymerization. It's not gonna happen. Jews want the oil market cornered so that they can arbitrarily axe it whenever they want to do so.
Plastic can be melted down and reused. It can't be "turned into the same products that are produced by crude". If you think it can, prove it. Show me evidence that technology exists. I'll wait. And what do you mean by "positive energy efficiency"? If you just mean it costs less energy to recycle plastic than make new plastic, well that's false. It costs less total resources to recycle plastic than make plastic, since you just need to input the resources for the energy, but the energy cost is higher. If you mean that recycling plastic results in more energy than you started with, then you're a moron.
We need to stop believing in technologic fairy tales. Believing stupid shit like this is as bad as the consooomers taking 6 booster shots and wearing 3 masks.
We need to stop believing in technologic fairy tales. Believing stupid shit like this is as bad as the consooomers taking 6 booster shots and wearing 3 masks.
Pyrolysis
Didn't mention recycling once.
>Show me evidence that technology exists. I'll wait.
Making things hot and then pushing the hot mixture through a bunch of chambers is as old as the industrial revolution
>same products as crude
You can make diesel and oil in your backyard using plastic trash. You can make gasoline with an extra step. Never seen it done but I presume that if you can make diesel and gasoline you could make it more complicated and make more processed oil products.
Didn't mention recycling once.
>Show me evidence that technology exists. I'll wait.
Making things hot and then pushing the hot mixture through a bunch of chambers is as old as the industrial revolution
>same products as crude
You can make diesel and oil in your backyard using plastic trash. You can make gasoline with an extra step. Never seen it done but I presume that if you can make diesel and gasoline you could make it more complicated and make more processed oil products.
>You can make diesel in your backyard using plastic trash?
Ever done that yourself?
Really gonna edit your comment twice while I'm trying to respond? Now I see the answer to that question is no. You haven't seen it done because it's not possible. You're making an assumption based on something you don't even know can be done. Amazing.
Ever done that yourself?
Really gonna edit your comment twice while I'm trying to respond? Now I see the answer to that question is no. You haven't seen it done because it's not possible. You're making an assumption based on something you don't even know can be done. Amazing.
https://youtu.be/TFuTCpCVSbM?si=0hvcpvuuEPX6dOUu
Thanks. What he's doing is melting the plastic down into something resembling gasoline, but not quite as useful as true gasoline. It isn't diesel. Do you notice that he's burning wood to fuel his incinerator? Why do you think that is? Why doesn't he use the fuel he produces to heat it? Because it's not energy efficient. He could try to melt all of the plastic in the ocean and he still wouldn't have any fuel leftover and all he'd have done is pumped tons of pollutants into the air and into his lungs. He does this because he can't power his generator with wood and it's probably easier to do this than to buy real fuel. That's all that's happening here. Don't you think that if this were a feasible and effective process, more people would be doing besides some hippy in the jungle?
>ever done that before?
I don't have the time to convert plastic into fuel because I have a job and shit to do and it's time consuming. I posted a video of someone actually doing the shit.
Plastic is a product of oil. It's pretty fucking obvious that if you heat certain things, they melt to their baser forms. Diesel is more processed than "crude" (it isnt technically crude) and gasoline is more processed than diesel. It stands to reason that if the process can create oil, diesel, and gas, that a more complicated setup can create more processed fuel.
I don't have the time to convert plastic into fuel because I have a job and shit to do and it's time consuming. I posted a video of someone actually doing the shit.
Plastic is a product of oil. It's pretty fucking obvious that if you heat certain things, they melt to their baser forms. Diesel is more processed than "crude" (it isnt technically crude) and gasoline is more processed than diesel. It stands to reason that if the process can create oil, diesel, and gas, that a more complicated setup can create more processed fuel.
Toast message