Replies

“Fossil” has several meanings, including “of a past epoch.” In that sense, oil is a “fossil fuel” even if not from dinosaurs. Similarly, the deep aquifers of the American prairie are sometimes referred to as holding “fossil water,” meaning that the aquifers were filled long ago with little current replacement.

The larger point is that even if the abiotic oil theory is true — and it almost certainly is to some degree — it does not mean that oil fields will be replenished at a rate that is economically meaningful for us today. Once we find and deplete every economically useful oil field on earth, it will take a long time before oil reappears in meaningful quantities through abiotic processes.

In the meantime, we will need other energy sources. The best approach is to drill and dig so as to extend the fossil fuel era as long as possible. At the same time, we must develop other energy sources: solar; geothermal; hydro; tidal; ocean thermal; nuclear; biomass; biofuel; etc.

The Democrats are fools for thinking that finding and adopting economically useful successors for oil and coal will be easy or cheap. In disputing that folly, we should not let ourselves become fools as well by thinking that abiotic oil processes make such successors unnecessary.

The best approach is to drill and dig so as to extend the fossil fuel era as long as possible.

Let's just say that can last another 100,000 years. I'm kinda jazzed about drilling. Meanwhile, San Fran Gran Nan is out to "save the planet"

“The Democrats are fools for thinking that finding and adopting economically useful successors for oil and coal will be easy or cheap. In disputing that folly, we should not let ourselves become fools as well by thinking that abiotic oil processes make such successors unnecessary.”

Well put. Thank you.