Dark Skinny

Since the ’90’s Russia has steadily constructed pipelines into Europe, only too happy to supply and pander to the voracious European appetite for oil and gas. Russia has undoubtedly encouraged this dependency. These Soviet oil and gas tentacles now supply all the major European countries with their industrial lifeblood, as Putin and Medvedev patiently wait for their coming advantage.

With America’s stock market still pussing and bleeding all over the world’s financial markets, while the US government’s fiscal debt leaves its economy racked, bare and weak as the precious dollar value goes up and down like a yoyo, supported only by abstract statistical lies from the US government to its own people and the greed of Wall Street, and as US leaders desperately try to avoid their strained dependency on Middle East oil, Putin’s indirect plan continues to move steadily and quietly ahead, completely unhindered by both America or Europe.

In the recent conflict between Georgia and Russia, NATO’s reaction must surely be described as feeble. This weak political and martial response by Europe is quite evidently governed by stark economic fears. Energy is the lifeblood of any nation and Europe’s political mettle has recently been tested hard. Georgia wanted to join NATO, but Angela Merkel - the German Chancellor, vetoed against Georgia joining - amidst weak protests from France, UK and the US. Germany is a big and symbiotic industrial partner for Russia - Germany supplies the technology and organization, and Russia endlessly trickle-feeds Germany her precious oil and gas. If Georgia - on the border with Russia - were to be allowed into the NATO fold, Russia would not be very pleased. And all Putin would have to do is turn off the oil and gas taps into Europe as he has already done against his own rebellious satellites in recent years. Therefore, as perceived by Putin, Merkel and other European states, Georgia is surely a paltry sacrifice to pay as compared to the dire economic need for the persistent trickle of black Russian oil into Europe.

So, as Russia’s oil influence and dependency spreads inevitably like a surreptitious pox across Europe, the political tide will undoubtedly shift and change - the tug of Russia’s political sway too strong to resist, since Europe - for her own economic survival - must soon eventually bow and scrape in deference to Russia’s policies. And so, as Russia’s influence steadily blooms into outright dominance, this subtle takeover will be complete and a new hegemon is born.

In the bloodless aftermath, America will become more isolated and politically friendless - a lone, bewildered animal left to forage and fend for itself. Russia, in partnership with the likes of China, Venezuela and certain other countries in the Mid-East, will persist and continue to hurt America - and through America’s own callous loss of control over her currency - this cabal will be able to silently attack and wrong-foot America economically until the dollar falls big and - because of the American government’s careless laissez-faire attitude towards its own huge fiscal debt - dollar hyperinflation and bankruptcy will arrive to eventually decimate American World Leadership and lay waste the American Way, abruptly to dissolve into a forlorn and forgotten memory.

Of course this could never happen, could it ?

Keep praying.

-

References:

A Study in Collapse by J R Nyquist

The Monster at the Bottom of the Abyss by J R Nyquist

Inflation, Money Supply, GDP, Unemployment and the Dollar - Alternate Data Series - by John Williams

Menu of Pain by slowsmile

The Ravages of Ignored US Debt by slowsmile

-

The news vacuum has been filled with the never-ending debates and issues of the American presidential candidates, as well as with the teetering of the US financial economy. As a European, the presidential race to the White House is certainly a drag on my interest. I watched the recent presidential candidates debate with a certain amount of expectancy, which, in the end, was completely destroyed by its utter predictability. Nothing new was said, the usual vacuous accusations were tossed between the candidates, no-one was particularly passionate, no particular part of this performance sticks on my mind as very memorable. Obama promised to support “mainstreet” rather than “Wall street” and McCain seems only passionate about supporting the Iraq debacle, continually declaring his support for US veterans in this, that or the other. Nothing new there, nothing original or memorable. Unimaginative.

Of far greater interest to me are the power shifts subtly occurring within the arena of global geopolitics now, of the rise of Putin’s power and sway, and the sheer force of China’s rampant economic machine. We have seen the blatant incursions by Russia on Georgia, but did anyone notice the feeble response from both Europe and America on this important issue ? Despite strong words and objections from the EU and NATO, their phrases were picked carefully so as not to offend Putin too much. And why ? Too me it is obvious that Putin and Russia now control the supply of European oil and gas, the very lifeblood of its industry. In these hard times, even a small country like Georgia is worth the sacrifice to Europe, in order to prevent Putin from turning off that tap. We can also understand America’s torpid response to the invasion of Georgia by Russia, since America’s fiscal debt, dollar problems and credit hassles are all piling up against her economy now.

Certainly particular countries in the Middle East, South America, Russia and China are all watching these shifting economic sands with solid interest and some glee. With America’s economic weaknesses bleeding all over the world, you can be sure that these enemies will contribute at the right time. In late August, the dollar suddenly gained solid strength and the US government heaved a sigh of relief. But it wasn’t Bernanke’s policies that saved America - it was China. China raised her bank’s allowance for holding dollar reserves and T-Bills etc, from 15% to 17%. This demand is what strengthened the feeble dollar. But China wasn’t trying to help America, nothing so obvious. By achieving a strong dollar, China’s own currency - the renminbi and yuan, became weaker against the dollar - so her exported goods also became cheaper and more competitive. In other words, China grossly manipulated the US dollar for her own ends. China was playing with the dollar…

With America all infatuated with her presidential race, and also introverted on her own self inflicted fiscal mess, these are very dangerous times. My belief is that her enemies will do all they can to keep the US government off-balance economically, and if the US government doesn’t wake up and keep at least one eye on the international ball, she runs the risk of being economically left behind, a vanishing power in the world , no longer a hegemon. An understanding of all this is how I measure Obama’s or McCain’s leadership. And I am forced to admit that - so far - with both Russia and China easily outplaying the West on the geopolitical chessboard, I am very unimpressed with the new blood.

-

Within the broil of geopolitical opinion, political correctness, shadow agendas and trite, posturing exchanges between world leaders, it is certainly difficult to sort out the truth form the drivel. When we are told something of earth shattering importance by a mega-country politician we then always have to analyze and decode it. In its first tellings there is no such thing as basic truth. These political deliveries can usually be split into two areas of explanation: The Convenient Excuse and The Inconvenient Reason. Politicians always tell you only the Convenient Excuse which, if you like, is merely barely believeable propaganda. Try this formula with Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, the US Polish Missile Base and Georgia and, if you look carefully behind the door, you’ll find a damn good alternative rationale for their political actions and purpose — The Inconvenient Reason — such as aggression, dominance, greed, oil monopolies and a myriad of other power-play reasons to suit any type of Communist, Democratic or Banana Republic government agenda. Let’s face it, there isn’t that much difference between Communist and Democratic puckering or babble is there? And this certainly applies to Big Business too, and particularly to the Oil Majors which is what this blog is all about.

Is Peak Oil just a Convenient Excuse for High Oil Prices ?

In my last article - The Evidence for Limitless Oil and Gas — I presented as much evidence as I could for both the Western Biogenic Oil Formation Theory and the modern Russian Abiotic Oil Formation Theory. Before I researched this, I too was a firm Peak Oil believer. And Peak Oil can only be perpetuated and true if you believe in the Western Biogenic Oil Theory which, from its very explanation, determines that oil is finite. But then I became convinced of the validity of the Russian Abiotic Theory and wondered whether Big Oil was perpetuating The Peak Oil Theory for another reason. Perhaps Peak Oil is the Convenient Excuse and Excess Profit is the Inconvenient Reason ?

These two theories also must govern how you find oil. Using the Western Biogenic Method, you are only looking for an ancient static pool or reservoir of oil within the upper sedimentary layers of the Earth’s crust. This is an extremely difficult process, finding oil this way is very hit-and-miss as history has proved. Using the Russian Abiogenic Method, you simply look for cracks or fissures within the deeper igneous or metamorphic rock (called cap rock) which, according to the theory, leaks oil upwards through the hard cap rock into the sedimentary layers above. So oil can indeed be found in the sedimentary layers of rock but actually originates at much deeper levels below the hard capstone rock(as per Kudrayvtsev’s Rule). Searching for oil this way is much easier - just look for faults and fissures in the tectonic plates as evidenced by volcanoes, mud volcanoes, earthquake regions etc. and you will find oil albeit at much deeper levels. Or you simply drill through the cap rock to the oil below using special ultra-deep well extended-reach-drilling techniques. This kind of extended-reach-drilling technology in regard to its difficulty, compares easily with space technology. Also according to the Russian Abiotic Theory, if you have struck oil in shallow sedimentary rock and the oil becomes exhausted, then simply carry on drilling downwards and you will discover more oil either in the sedimentary layer below or in the region below the fissured cap rock.

The Discreet Affinity of the Bush Administration to the Peak Oil Theory

I am pretty stumped as to why the US government still beats its Republican drum concerning its dislike of Middle East Oil dependency. Bush is huffing and puffing about this, currently threatening to open up the offshore oilfields off Alaska and the American West Coast and hang the environmental cost. Bush and Cheney are both die-hard through-and-through American oilmen and are therefore closely aligned to the wishes of The Oil Majors(who funded and installed them into there current positions of power). So, simply put, I just can’t trust their judgements or their Convenient Excuses — since they are both probably well into the Peak Oil ruse. What a bluff!!….Yet another convenient perpetuation of Peak oil theory.

Consequences of Adherence to the Peak Oil Theory

You want reasons ? Click here to see the current running total of the profits earned by the five oil majors(Exxon, Chevron, Total, Shell and BP) since 2003.

The current rate of profit for the 5 Oil Majors is $3203.86 per second.

Well I can tell you, I’m plum exhausted now. To those Republicans(..and there will be a few) who violently disagree with my written blasphemy — for some enlightenment, can I suggest a driving holiday with a Budget Car in Russia ? If nothing else, the petrol will be significantly cheaper there (Russia is not part of OPEC nor does it adhere to the American Peak Oil Theory). For anyone else that disagrees and still sticks to the Peak Oil Theory - may I wish you all well and fair luck. And of course, happy walking. . .

I really need a break here, so I’m off to Burger Bust for the biggest, oilest, abiotic bull-bap I can find . . .And I will be driving. Optimistically, as it happens. . .

For further reading please see - The Evidence for Limitless Oil and Gas

“The suggestion that petroleum might have arisen from some transformation of squashed fish or biological detritus is surely the silliest notion to have been entertained by substantial numbers of persons over an extended period of time.”
Fred Hoyle 1982

My own layman’s view — as we all surely believe — has always been that oil and gas were derived through the natural and long decomposition of organic detritus. Therefore I’ve always believed that oil is a finite resource and that it will eventually run out. But recently - and after much hard searching out of the facts, my view has changed. If the Russian view that oil and gas are continuously formed or replaced from a physical/chemical thermodynamic process that continously regenerates oil from ultra-deep locations(>9,000 metres), then the inference here is that oil may, perhaps, not be a finite resource — and that there is plenty of it.

Oil and Gas Origins - Biogenic or Abiotic ?

Do oil and gas originate from the biological decomposition of organic material (biogenic) or do they originate simply through a natural physical and chemical thermodynamic process involving just heat and pressure (abiotic) ?

It is notable that the whole of Hubbert’s Theory of Peak Oil rests completely on the assumption that oil is biogenic in origin. Therefore oil is a finite resource. Simply everyone believes this, because everyone believes that this is a proven fact. I have also read that this Biogenic Theory directly contradicts and offends the Second Law of Thermodynamics. I became suspicious, so I searched all over the internet for substantiative proof — and particularly the research articles in Google Scholar.

Evidence for The Biogenic Theory

• In 1757 Russian Scientist, Mikhailo Lomonosov put forward a hypothesis and suggested that oil came from biological detritus.

• In his paper “The Abiotic Oil Controversy” by Richard Heinberg which sides with biogenic oil (With relatively little actual quoted research evidence) has even admitted :

“There is no way to conclusively prove that no petroleum is of abiotic origin…Perhaps one day there will be general agreement that at least some oil is indeed abiotic. Maybe there are indeed deep methane belts twenty miles below the Earth’s surface. But the important question to keep in mind is: What are the practical consequences of this discussion now for the problem of global oil depletion? “



Lomonosov

The normal geologists view is that all oil and gas formation is biogenic. So I began with Wikipedia which indeed puts forth and recognised the theories of both Biogenic and Abiotic oil and gas origin. And although there has been clear, modern Russian research evidence cited for the theory of Abiotic Oil formation - oddly - there were no proper citations or references for the Biogenic theory on Wikipedia. I searched the internet including Google Scholar and there seems to be no ‘absolute proof’ from direct modern research for the Biogenic Theory of oil and gas formation. This theory — for want of a better word — seems to be greatly ‘assumed’ by geologists throughout geological research.

Evidence for the Abiotic Theory

I am certainly surprised to admit that there is such a large body of research on this theory — and all mainly Russian in origin. But this modern research — which is very detailed, seems to have been generally and surprisingly ignored by the West.

• In the 19th century various abiogenic hypotheses were first proposed after advances in science in the nineteenth century by Alexander von Humboldt, Dmitri Mendeleev and Marcellin Berthalot.
  

  Nikolai Kudraysvtsev

• Definition and Evidence

• An Article called Dismissal of the Claims of a Biological Connection to Biogenic Oil by J F Kenney. This is a detailed and scientifically rigourous paper which sets sets out to disprove all the various “fuzzy” assumptions for the Theory of Biogenic Oil. This was the article that completely convinced me of the truth of Abiotic Oil Formation.

• Nikolai Kudrayvtsev’s Theory(1951)

• Abiogenic(Abiotic) Petroleum Origin - Wikipedia

• “An Introduction to the Modern Petroleum Science, and to the Russian-Ukrainian Theory of Deep, Abiotic Petroleum Origins” by J.F. Kenney, Russian Academy of Sciences.

• In the ‘Introduction’ and ‘Scientific Publications’ section of GasResources.net there are many bona fide Russian research articles.

• A Dissertation by J.F. Kenney(Joint Institute of the Physics of the Earth Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow). Here is an extract:

“ABSTRACT: For almost a century, various predictions have been made that the human race is imminently going to run out of available petroleum. The passing of time has proven all those predictions to have been utterly wrong. It is pointed out here how all predictions have

depended fundamentally upon anarchaic hypothesis from the 18th century that petroleum somehow (miraculously) evolve from biological detritus, and is accordingly limited in abundance. That hypothesis has been replaced during the past forty years by the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins which has established that petroleum is a primordial material erupted from great depth. Therefore, petroleum abundances are limited by little more than the quantities of its constituents as were incorporated into the Earth at the time of its formation; and its availability depends upon technological development and exploration competence.”

• Considerations about Recent Predictions of Impending Shortages of Petroleum…by J.F. Kenney

• A Russian Book - ‘ Advanced Drilling Solutions’ detailing deep and ultra-deep oil drilling technology beyond the Earth’s crust and sedimentary layers to depths of over 40,000 ft’.

• Confirmation that oil fields in the Dnieper-Donetsk Basin in the Ukraine are Aboitic

• Peak Oil Theory vs Russian-Ukraine Modern Theory

Apparent Disinformation and Prejudicial Judgement of the Abiotic Theory

It is peculiar that there is so little Western acknowledgement or research verification concerning the utra-deep Russian Abiotic Oil formation theory. Surely this is suspicious and bears investigating — even if you don’t believe the theory — because this would certainly remove the geopolitical effects and problems of the current thinking on oil — that it is running out. Concerning this theory, I have also found some evidence of plagiarism, disinformation and misrepresentation of research data regarding the Russian Abiotic Theory by fairly eminent western scientists and western news resources :

• Accusations of Plagiarism and Misrepresentation of Abiotic Russian Research on Thomas Gold a well known US scientist.
• Rebuttal of article “Fossil fuel without Fossils” (Nature magazine, T. Clark, 12 August 2002) by J. F. Kenney, V. G. Kutcherov, N. A. Bendeliani, V. A. Alekseev, (2002).

Conclusions

In the end, I tend to agree with Richard Heinberg in that Oil and Gas formation is probably both biogenic as well as abiotic as I have no reason to believe otherwise. And if this is the case, why are people saying that we are running out of oil ? — Since the abiotic theory of oil maintains that there is a huge, untapped amount of oil already deep within the Earth’s mantle.

See my follow-up article Deep Oil, Deep Power and Deep Pockets in answer to the above question.