The abiotic theory of petroleum genesis has zero credibility for economically interesting accumulations. 99.9999% of the world's liquid hydrocarbons are produced by maturation of organic matter derived from organisms.
The following articles take up, from different perspectives, the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins. Because that subject is one of which most persons outside the former U.S.S.R. are not familiar, a short synopsis of it and of its provenance and history, are given now. 1. The essence of the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins. The organization of the following papers does not follow the historical development of the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins but instead orders them according to the different aspects of modern petroleum science. The abiotic oil hypothesis is an attempt to explain the source and formation of petroleum. As the name suggests, the hypothesis proposes that oil originates from non-biological origins. The hypothesis is mostly Soviet, mostly archaic, and mostly debunked.  The modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins is extraordinary in almost every way, including the bizarre circumstance that it has been the object of probably the most daring attempt of plagiarism in modern science. The following articles take up, from different perspectives, the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins. Because that subject is one of which most persons outside the former U.S.S.R. are not familiar, a short synopsis of it and of its provenance and history, are given now. 1. Modern petroleum science, – or what is called often the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins, – is an extensive body of knowledge which has been recorded in thousands of articles published in the mainstream, Russian-language scientific journals, and in many books and monographs.  Recently I heard about the theory of abiotic oil. My understanding of the theory is that oil deposits are actually chemicals and material that is formed at the mantle boundary that seeps up further into the crust where it is consumed by micro-organisms that process it and turn it into what we know as oil. Abiotic oil vs the traditional theory of oil deposit formation [closed]. up vote 3 down vote favorite. 1. I am curious to see what people think of the abiotic theory of oil deposit formation versus the traditional theory. Though the current accepted theory of oil formation involves the slow transformation of animal and plant matter into hydrocarbon (the biotic or biogenic theory), it is not the only theory that has been put forth. The third and most substantial reason for discounting the abiotic theory is that the chemistry doesn’t add up. First, there doesn’t seem to be enough CO2 below the surface of the Earth to make the formation of oil possible. In scientific terms, the mass balance of the equation is errant. An important point to be recognized is that the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of abiotic petroleum origins was, initially, a geologists’ theory. Kudryavtsev, Kropotkin, Dolenko, Porfir’yev and the developers of the modern theory of petroleum were all geologists. The following articles take up, from different perspectives, the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins. Because that subject is one of which most persons outside the former U.S.S.R. are not familiar, a short synopsis of it and of its provenance and history, are given now. 1. The modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins is extraordinary in almost every way, including the bizarre circumstance that it has been the object of probably the most daring attempt of plagiarism in modern science. The organization of the following papers does not follow the historical development of the modern Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum origins but instead orders them according to the different aspects of modern petroleum science. Dr. Jon Clarke: . The fact remains that the abiotic theory of petroleum genesis has zero credibility for economically interesting accumulations. 99.9999% of the world's liquid hydrocarbons are produced by maturation of organic matter derived from organisms. Abiotic oil vs the traditional theory of oil deposit formation [closed]. up vote 3 down vote favorite. 1. I am curious to see what people think of the abiotic theory of oil deposit formation versus the traditional theory.
http://www.studien-von-zeitfragen.net/Zeitfragen/Petroleum/petroleum.html http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Abiotic_oil http://www.gasresources.net/Introduction.htm http://www.gasresources.net/ http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/41684/abiotic-oil-vs-the-traditional-theory-of-oil-deposit-formation http://www.petroleum.co.uk/abiotic-oil-formation http://www.gasresources.net/Introduction.htm http://www.studien-von-zeitfragen.net/Zeitfragen/Petroleum/petroleum.html http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/41684/abiotic-oil-vs-the-traditional-theory-of-oil-deposit-formation
what is the abiotic petroleum genesis theory