| To Peak or 
					not to Peak, is that the question?   Whilst the oil keeps streaming from the hole in the 
					bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, it is fascinating what 
					different responses it causes in the professional world.  Whilst all are devastated by the effects it has on nature 
					and the floral and faunal world, there seems to be a 
					dichotomy on what this spill actually means.  Whilst in the Peak Oil movement the simple fact that BP 
					was drilling for a field with an estimated reserve of 
					apparently only 50 mm barrel, seen as a sign how desperate 
					the world is for new reserves and the difficulties oil 
					companies are prepared to go through to find new oil, other 
					analysts have a different story. v According to another 
					reading, the BP-leak is much more than an instrument 
					malfunctioning, causing a spill of hitherto unknown 
					dimensions. Here we can read that the drilling was in a very 
					sensitive spot and basically tapping in a grand vein of 
					possibly a-biotic oil with very large reservoirs below it. 
					Also the estimation of the amount of oil leaking in both 
					‘camps’ differ radically, whereas latest figures are now 
					actually moving toward a daily leaking of about 100.000 
					barrel a day, through what one analyst describes as: “what 
					lies under the gaping chasm spewing oil at an ever-alarming 
					rate is a cavern estimated to be the size of Mount Everest.”
					 When this information was passed on the several experts 
					in peak oil, the response was one from disbelief and 
					rejection: a-biotic oil does not exist!  To bring you in the loop: The theory of a-biotic oil, 
					developed long ago in the USSR and successfully applied in 
					finding provinces that would not have had oil according to 
					the normal geological calculations, says that oil actually 
					is formed deep inside the planet and slowly works itself to 
					the higher levels of the earth’s crust, where it can be 
					found.  The conventional theory about oil says that it is formed 
					in earlier times as a result of decaying natural material 
					(algae, plants etc.) that got locked in over time and after 
					a very long time (millions of years) under high pressure and 
					temperature became oil and migrated to places where we now 
					can find it.  Personally I have never understood the animosity between 
					the two ‘camps‘, as both theories do not exclude each other 
					and both have their merits. As anyone that has ever put his 
					boot in a canal with black mud knows: if you withdraw your 
					foot, an oilfilm most probably appears on the water: the 
					result of decaying natural material that turns in an 
					oil-like substance: this is the oil of the future.  At the same time there is the tale that the North 
					American Indians called oil ‘the blood of mother Earth’, 
					which makes perfectly sense, as the Earth is a living 
					organism and it has been proven that oil is formed up in 
					deep layers, migrating up, gathering in pools that we find 
					later as oilfields.  Of course it may need a different mindset to give credit 
					to the possibility of a living earth and oil forming up as a 
					natural fluid within the planet. That its original purpose 
					may not be, to be burned by humans to ‘fire up the 
					economies’ and pollute the atmosphere may be clear.  Nevertheless it is there and is an important part of our 
					living today.  The deep dichotomy between the experts appears in the 
					evaluation about possible reserves. The biotic oil-school is 
					trying to make the world take notice that we have found most 
					of the easy oil and that we need to find alternatives and 
					need to prepare ourselves for the eventuality of it being 
					only limitedly available. Peak Oil.  The people from the a-biotic oil-school are saying that 
					there is enough oil still to be found, would we only look 
					different and elsewhere, and try to invalidate or ease the 
					worry or unrest (or hype?) about the imminence of physical 
					shortage in reserves.  Peak oil supply is another issue, about which the worries 
					have been reduced the last years due to the combination of 
					economic recession and subsequent reduction in demand, and 
					new capacity in the market.  What is further causing unclarity about this is that the 
					speculators have been jumping on the bandwagon of the 
					peak-oilers, as this can be used for scare-scenarios that 
					help to drive the prices. (Recently a new record was broken 
					with only in the NY and London future markets 2,5 billion 
					barrels being traded in 1 day, 29 times daily global demand, 
					tendency growing).  Whatever may be the case: if BP was only drilling into a 
					small field, the disaster may still be limited, albeit of 
					enormous proportions.  If BP actually ruptured a vein of planet earth and has 
					caused a kind of ‘arterial bleeding’, we may be in deep 
					trouble, as this may be very difficult to repair.  When the leak continues, the oil (and the 
					dispersal-chemicals) will start to enter the warm 
					Gulf-Stream and oil will start to reach the shores of 
					England, Ireland and Scotland in not-to-far-distant times. 
					Whether this will have grander effects due to the changing 
					of the consistence of the water in the gulfstream, we do not 
					know yet, nor what this would mean for the climate in 
					Western Europe, which is mild due to this stream of warm 
					water.  Time will tell and we can only hope the best.  Stay flexible,  Alexander Your responses are welcome at
					
					alexander@gas-oil-power.com  |