Comments on: Global warming and petroleum geology http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/ A blog about sedimentary geology. Fri, 25 May 2012 13:01:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: DitelHead http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-7140 Thu, 11 Nov 2010 06:29:25 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-7140 1. Most of the worlds co2 is sequestered in limestone not oil.
2. It is unlikely that we have taken even a fraction of 1% of the worlds oil reserves not to mention coal.
3. Co2 absorbs IR in a very narrow band which is nearly saturated.
4. There appears to be nothing unusual about the current warming trend.
https://www.dmr.nd.gov/ndgs/Newsletter/NL99W/PDF/globlwrmw99.pdf

]]> By: Phil Johnson http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-7031 Sun, 05 Sep 2010 18:24:04 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-7031 After listening to these arguments for most of my 72 yrears, I am still unconvinced that we understand petroleum generation and migration. There are just too many things that cannot be explained. For instance, small fault blocks containing oil swept from the samp down dip source often have radically different compositions. Geologic history is full of abandoned hypotheses. As for global warming, the causes of historical changes must still operate so climate change is a given. Why are we wasting intellectual and financial resources on CO2 when we should be building dams and levees and moving populations. Academia is good a science but poor at solutions.

]]> By: joyce http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-6154 Sat, 12 Dec 2009 08:58:08 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-6154 Thank you Thank you Thank you

With all due respect, it does not take a geologist to figure that out. What we have done to the earth in 150 years is dispicable. Now here we are and there is all the biggest money in the world at that summit, what do you think they are really trying to accomplish. Remember these are very swred affluent bottom line type of people. Do you really think they believe after destroying the earth with could fix it by taxing people, no like I said they know what they are doing and they are just making themselfs look really foolish if they think we believe them. What really is warming globally is how they managed to put this together, it has taken years, look at all the changes that our financial structructures have gone through and all the deregulation of the past 25 years and the new biology that they introduced about that time too. I could go on and on. I am just encouraging everyone to look for themselfs it is out there on the net and what you will find will make you ill. Be prepared.
Peace and Blessings

]]> By: BrianR http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-1016 Tue, 13 Nov 2007 06:21:07 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-1016 Kim…thanks…I’m glad you liked the post. As I say above, this is more about my perspective than it is a hard-core analysis. Nevertheless, it’s a perspective I rarely see or hear outside of my own geoscience circles. Those who like to talk about how much the Earth has warmed and cooled naturally over geologic time, and somehow make the leap that because of that then we have nothing to worry about, need to hear this perspective. Can the Earth handle this much CO2? Possibly…I don’t know.

]]> By: Kim http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-998 Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:53:14 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-998 Brian, this post prepared me to give an impromptu rant today in my intro earth systems science class. (I was just starting to talk about the atmosphere, and what makes it up. I had the students list gases that they knew were in the atmosphere, and of course they listed CO2 along with nitrogen and oxygen. And then I talked about how much of the atmosphere was nitrogen and how much was oxygen, and how little was CO2. And then I asked why we cared about such a small component… and they said nothing. I was horrified. So I spontaneously explained the greenhouse effect, out of my normal sequence. But I also talked about how quickly we were changing CO2, and part of my understanding of the scale had to do with this post of yours.)

So thank you!

]]> By: BrianR http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-675 Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:44:28 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-675 lab lemming…did my previous comment address what you were asking exactly?

also…since i’m not using Blogger anymore, I can’t comment on your blog…it only allows Google accounts to comment…just so you know

]]> By: BrianR http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-672 Tue, 30 Oct 2007 07:23:35 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-672 “How do predicted rates of GHG-induced sea level rise compare with the eustatic component of transgression seen in various petroleum-bearing strata?”

Getting at such short-term rates for ancient strata is pretty much a pipe dream. We just don’t have the temporal resolution to evaluate transgression/regression rates at the millennial (much less centennial) scale back too far.

But, if we want to look at the last glacial-to-interglacial transition (end of the Pleistocene) we can get some idea… let’s see…during the last deglaciation the fastest rate of sea-level rise was about 75 m over 6,000 years, which would equate to about 1.25 m per 100 years. I’d have to look at the various projections for sea-level rise, I forget, but I think some of them are getting close to that.

My figures above were done very quick and dirty…I very easily could have made an error. I’ll try and do it more rigorous tomorrow.

]]> By: lab lemming http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-671 Tue, 30 Oct 2007 06:18:20 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-671 Of course, those of us who are industrial hard rock geologists look at petroleum as a mere precursor for the formation of MVT and Zambian style base metal mineralization.

The great thing about that perspective is that we get to see how much of the world’s past oil reserves have leaked out and aren’t around any more.

Here’s a question, though. How to predicted rates of GHG-induced sea level rise compare with the eustatic component of transgression seen in various petroleum-bearing strata?

]]> By: BrianR http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-657 Sun, 28 Oct 2007 16:23:04 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-657 Karen…thanks…if you mean giving a talk about the subject of this post, I’m not sure my opinion on this issue would be appropriate for a formal talk. Plus, to fill 45 min I would have to expand it significantly (which would be fun, but I simply don’t have the time right now).

But, if your group would be interested in a talk about the specific projects I have going on (get an idea here), I would entertain that. Although, I might have to wait until after the defense :)

You have my email…feel free to contact me.

]]> By: Ole Nielsen http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-656 Sun, 28 Oct 2007 16:15:26 +0000 http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/10/27/global-warming-and-petroleum-geology/#comment-656 Well said!

]]>