Peak Oil

Drill, Baby, Drill There Goes The Narrative 77 Comments

Russia Uncovers 511 Billion Barrels of Oil Beneath Antarctica

The 511 billion barrels reported is nearly double Saudi Arabia’s proven reserves and more than ten times the North Sea’s output over the last 50 years. This isn’t a minor find—it’s one of the largest oil reserves ever reported anywhere on Earth.

The discovery was made during recent expeditions by Russian research vessels operating in the Weddell Sea. While the stated purpose of these missions was scientific, officials and analysts in the UK and elsewhere are raising concerns that Russia is using research as a cover for resource prospecting—a move that would violate the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, which bans mineral and oil extraction.

77 Replies to “Peak Oil”

    1. I think what is happening here is this: as far as I can see, the Russian government has said little about this issue – the story is being pushed by the British government. They present it as a bad thing but at some point they will switch to arguing that if the Russians are going to do it then we have to as well. What the PTB in Britain really think is reflected in this article from a year ago: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/13/russian-oil-discovery-british-antarctic-falklands-argentina/
      Given that the Brits are bankrupt, they are scrambling for lifelines to anything that might help an economic recovery.

        1. This (above) press release states:
          “The potential hydrocarbon resources in the identified sedimentary basins are estimated at approximately 70 billion tons.”

          1. Like this (see below) and every other Russia-related debate on this blog, the discussion is based on Western lies, disinformation and propaganda rather than on an original Russian source.

    2. What I do not understand is why Russia has all these minerals and fuels in their Arctic and Canada doesn’t have a drop of oil, coal or minerals. All we have is holy FNs and Russia doesn’t.

  2. Let’s drill and mine the entire continent. Nothing grows there and nobody lives there. Why do the commie environmentalist haters get veto power over everything?

  3. I’m extraordinarily skeptical.

    First, determining the amount of oil in an oil field is difficult even in a mature field in the best of circumstances, and this is a new field in the worst of circumstances.

    Second is the number. 511 is remarkably specific. There’s no way they can be that accurate. “Somewhere between 200 and 700” would be more believeable.

    Third, given the lack of drilling in the Antarctic, their main exploration tool must have been seismic surveys. But seismic can not verify the existence of oil any more than GPR can verify the existence of a grave. It can tell you about the structure of the subsurface geology and suggest promising places to drill — that’s all.

      1. There’s nothing in your link that refutes what I just said. And by the way, I’ve been in the seismic industry for four decades.

        But thanks for playing.

          1. From your link:

            Seismic exploration has long been a cornerstone of the oil and gas industry, offering a sophisticated method to map the subsurface and identify potential hydrocarbon reserves.

            See that word “potential”? Notice it didn’t say “certain”.

            In a rarely drilled region like the Antarctic, the uncertainty is even greater.

          2. I’m with the Killer on this one. While GPR and seismic are apples and oranges, if they haven’t drilled there is no difference between 250 unmarked graves and 511 million barrels of undrilled oil.

            But this is a significant find. And it feels more political than economic at this point. Another arrow in Putin’s quiver I expect.

          3. You can’t be serious? You’re seizing on the word “potential” … when the seismic readings are revealing pools of oil miles below the surface? Of course it is all “potential” and not “certain” … because actual wells have not been drilled. Duh. It’s called using ACCURATE English language.

            The fact is that the seismic reflections off pools of oil and gas behave uniquely and differently than does say … a murdered little injun child’s body in the surrounding dirt and rocks. Apples and oranges.

          4. You’re seizing on the word “potential” … when the seismic readings are revealing pools of oil miles below the surface?

            Words can not describe how naive that statement is.

            Seismic surveys measure changes in acoustic impedance (rock density times rock velocity) in subsurface geology. That’s all they do. That is very useful for revealing the structure of the geology, and to a more limited extent rock properties. This can suggest where petroleum deposits might be.

            However, there is no direct way for seismic to detect petroleum with certainty. I wish there was. I’d patent it and make a large fortune, given that countless wells have been drilled on seismic evidence that have turned out dry.

            At best, conclusions about petroleum are tentative, especially in a new field with little or no well control. To truly know what’s down there, you have to drill. The petroleum industry has a term for that — ground truth.

          5. “Of course you are … playing. What your game is? Is anyone’s guess.”

            He was once a vaccine expert, remember? Then a climate scientist, then an economist.
            Gotta be the smartest guy ever to grace us with his presence…

        2. ” And by the way, I’ve been in the seismic industry for four decades. ”

          Sure you have. Was that before or after your career as a ‘scientific journal editor’?

          2. He spent decades in the seismic industry. Worked a lot of seismic shifts! Bet he can sing “Good Vibrations”.

      2. Kenji

        Since you have lots of money from Trumps stock market, I can show you lots of seismic work showing massive oil and gas deposits, including many with “direct hydrocarbon indicators” visible on seismic.

        You can invest in drilling these deposits and make lots of money!

        One little problem…
        They’ve all been drilled and the reservoirs were full of salt water. No oil or gas.

        1. Joe
          So yer saying the ‘engineers’ running the seismic equipment are fools, like you and killer unDork, . Different fluids have different seismic signatures, so run the ‘echos’ through a filter program and let it determine the % probability of what the fluid actually is.

          1. NME666
            With over 40 years experience in the upstream oil industry, including exploration, drilling, completions I’ve run numerous seismic programs, onshore and offshore.

            It’s true that different fluids have different acoustic impedances, as does rock of differing porosity. For example: a geologist with Shell discovered the Caroline gas field by mapping the differing seismic response of Devonian Reef porosity. Until Shell actually drilled the field, they didn’t know if they had found oil, gas or just salt water. They could see the porous structure, but didn’t know wht was in it. Fortunately they found a gas/condensate field. South of Caroline they mapped a similar structure; it was full of salt water.

            I’ve seen a well drilled into a fault block between two existing gas fields. The geophysicists could clearly “see” what they thought was a gas water contact on the seismic. Since the top of the fault block was above the two existing gas fields, everyone was confident of a successful gas well. The sand was encountered at the expected depth, but much to our surprise, logs and actual production testing showed no gas, just salt water. This was our fifth unsuccessful well based on seismic “direct hydrocarbon indicators,”

            You really don’t know iwhat you’ve discovered until you drill and actually test the well.

            The Russians may have discovered an interesting subsurface geologic structure, and “mapped” its size. But what is in the rock: salt water? oil? heavy oil? tar sand? CO2? H2S?

            And even more important; what is the rock permeability?

    2. @KM: Would have been great if you would have been ‘extraordinarily skeptical’ about Covid vaccines.

      1. I tried, but the evidence in favour of COVID vaccines is overwhelming, and the evidence against them is consistently shoddy.

        2. bla bla bla. my issue is why are they FORCED on a public?
          answer this marmot, IF one is vaccinated in a crowd of non-jabbed
          -you are not going to get sick from them,
          -they arent going to get sick from you.

          likewise, if you are unvaccinated in a crowd that took the jab, same result.
          why the corecion, why the hate mail, criticisms and bullying directed at those who ‘rocked the boat’????

          1. No, I’m not going to get into another long tedious abusive argument about vaccines here. You want to talk about petroleum, we can talk about petroleum.

  4. When I saw this on X/Twitter I thought it wasn’t likely … but when I see that “news” sites are covering this and saying it “ends Antarctic’s era of peaceful use” then I knew it must be real…
    When BBC “News” starts their campaign against it, I’ll know it’s even more real, and when the Democrats and tier 2 Canada’s #Libranos campaign against it, then I’ll know it’s certain.

  5. Let me guess the oil came from Dino-Penguins who slowly rotted into oil along with all that subtropical greenery?

    Or this is just more LIES from that War-CRIMINAL Pootin? Who is losing the Ukraine War … so he’s trying to distract?

    1. As I posted above, I’m highly skeptical of these claims.

      But Antarctica has spent much of its last 500 millions in the tropics, and was once north of the equator. It’ rocks are full of tropical plant and animal fossils. Only in the last 100 million years or so did it drift to the south pole.

      There’s no reason to think there isn’t petroleum there, perhaps a great deal. I just doubt the Russians have any real information on that.

    2. Kenji, ancient aliens placed it there for when they return to conquer the earth. They have no use for green energy.

      It’s so written on the wall of some prehistoric tomb somewhere.

  6. I have no opinion on it, just sharing the info. That said, I picked it up via an industry analyst known for playing it straight.

    1. I get that.

      But given that I’ve been in the oil industry forever, I thought I’d give some perspective. My brother could give an even better perspective, as estimating oil reserves was a big part of his job. Knowing what goes into such estimates, he’d probably laugh himself sick at the Russian claims.

      1. I just read a few articles on this and now I’m highly skeptical. The main issue is “a Russian research vessel” … “discovered 511 million barrels of oil reserves” … using “seismic methods”.

        So that isn’t possible. The word “reserves” has a specific meaning. It would make more sense to say “Russia has made a significant discovery in Antarctica which could translate into a major oil field if ever drilled”. Reserves are proven, probable and possible and all need to be drilled to make it to the reserve category. Proven means 90% recovery, probable means 50% or more and possible means at least 10%. You need to drill into the oil field and recover some oil, not just find a blip on your seismic section.

        If you translated that to the killing fields of B.C., you would need to excavate enough graves to estimate that 90% contain FN children in order to call it a “proven burial site” – something like 1 in 10 graves across the entire area and each grave would have to contain a child corpse. Enough excavating to confirm 50% or more of the graves contain children would be a “probable burial site”. Here you might find that half or more of the sites contained child corpses. For a possible grave site you would need to find at least 1 buried child. if you don’t excavate you have a plot of land – a prospect so to speak.

        It seems the Russian vessel was supposed to be a research vessel but was also exploring for oil. If I was Russia I would say end the war in Ukraine or we’ll pump Antarctica dry- among other things (like abandon all international treaties) .

        1. So. How do you suppose oil companies CHOOSE where to drill and where NOT to drill? How much $$$ is wrapped up in each exploratory well? No oil company will lay out millions of dollars if they don’t have substantial probability they will find oil. And how can they estimate 511 million barrels? Because if oil can be detected by seismic methods, then the boundaries and perhaps depth of those pools can also be measured. As we like to say here … “maths”.

          And why is the Antarctic sacred and the Arctic is not? We drill in the Arctic … but not the Antarctic. Why? Because some UN Agency took defacto ownership over the continent? Why not cooperative ownership … you know … like Russia and America joining forces in Space … for the good of all mankind. There is no SANE reason why Antarctica should be off limits to human exploitation.

          1. It’s Russia Kenji. And they didn’t drill a hole. It was just a survey. And from that the media used to the term “oil reserves”. That is impossible. Oil can’t be detected by seismic methods. Only the rock formations that are favorable to oil can be detected. The oil is inferred until the wells are drilled. Could be ancient sea-water. And why the Arctic and not the Antarctic? Very good question. I would say because the Arctic is too close to the US for Russian comfort.

        2. In addition, a single research vessel likely only carried out 2D seismic. To do a proper 3D survey on a huge field in a limited time window would would require a fleet of vessels, and cost a fortune. The lack of 3D would add to the already massive uncertainty.

          1. Re: your “ground truth” … you’ve not answered the fundamental question as to where and why oil companies decide to invest in exploratory wells? What? Do they just spit in the wind? Guess? Randomly mark an ‘X’ on a map? … or perform seismic explorations?

          2. Seismic surveys increase the success rate of drilling for petroleum, thus increasing oil companies’ profits.

            But “increase the success rate” is not the same as “guarantee the success”. The uncertainty is substantial, especially in an underexplored region.

        3. A “Russian research vessel”? Are you sure “Russian research” isn’t a euphemism of some kind?

  7. Yo KM. you seem to believe that “fossil fuels” are derived from fossils! then explain how hydrocarbons got on meteorites and on a moon circling one of the planets. Finally proof of Life in space? Or that hydrocarbons are made abiotically deep on the mantel of the earth? (also a Russian discovery, believe it or not)

  8. “bans mineral and oil extraction.”
    well isnt that convenient, RIGHT IN RUSSIA BACKYARD
    just saying . . . . .

  9. I see that the arguing vermin has arrived. It adds nothing to the discussion. Rather pointedly, he purposely plays the DUMBASS, preferring being the devil’s advocate, arguing just to argue. A pitiful old man.
    Kenji, don’t engage with it, it loves its Covid Toxin Jabs, (ignoring the vast field of literature and medical experts treating the injured since 2021), fear prevents it from rational common sense.
    Instead, the article shows a vast Oil Reserve in Antarctica. Small minds like the arguing vermin will tie themselves in knots over this.
    Arguing over 511 Million is a fools game (!), whether it’s 490, 495, or 450, it’s a vast, vast new reserve. Government deficits are similar, it’s a moving target. Whether a government is 1 Billion or 1.1 Billion in debt, is besides the point, it’s still an irresponsibly large, needless burden on taxpayers, not the politicians that created it.

    This is the definition of that dumbass, in case anyone forgets:
    https://youtu.be/ohDB5gbtaEQ?si=pi8tm7jhuh0J2z-5

    1. I agree. Don’t listen to someone who’s been in the seismic industry for four decades. Such experienced viewpoints would only muddy the waters.

      1. “I agree. Don’t listen to someone who’s been in the seismic industry for four decades”

        Given your history here, nothing that you say is to be believed without confirmation.

        Funny thing about credibility…it takes a while to establish, but can be destroyed with a single stupid post (and you have made many of those).

        1. I notice, Fred from BC, that you almost never address the substance of the debate with facts or logic. It’s all personal attacks with you.

          Good idea. By saying nothing about the actual topic, it’s impossible to rebut you on the topic.

          1. “I notice, Fred from BC, that you almost never address the substance of the debate with facts or logic. It’s all personal attacks with you.”

            Like several others here, I gave up trying to debate you long ago once I figured out that you were just a clever troll who derived some kind of puerile satisfaction from wasting our collective time with distortions, distractions, obfuscation and circular arguments.

            “Good idea. By saying nothing about the actual topic, it’s impossible to rebut you on the topic.”

            Your idea of a rebuttal was usually just another pathetic and obsequious reference to your precious ‘peer review’ (known to most of us now as ‘pal review’). GFY.

          2. Your idea of a rebuttal was usually just another pathetic and obsequious reference to your precious ‘peer review’ (known to most of us now as ‘pal review’).

            What you mean to say is that I would often reference the scientific literature to make my case.

            How trollish of me. I should have relied on unverified anecdotal evidence by aging doctors who have been decertified by medical associations and who sell unproven fringe remedies (the resemblance to Peter McCullough is purely coincidental).

            How about this… you don’t reply to my posts and I don’t reply to yours.

  10. 511 is evidence of a Computer generated guess.
    Normal estimate would be 500..
    So somebody is just trolling us,probable the Brits.
    Russia,Opec and Canada are not running out of ,cheaper to produce than Antarctica, oil.

    The irony,if the “world Community wanted to inspect what the Russians be doing in Antarctica,they would need to hire Russian Icebreakers to do so,although China might have a couple to rent..
    Remember “The Ship of Fools”?.
    And if the Russians or the Chinese did start drilling.??
    What could our fearless leaders do about it?
    Besides piss and moan?
    Climate Emergency!.

  11. KM starts with the premise that seismic exploration is bogus and doesn’t really “verify” anything … hence the Russians … who he hates … are lying about the potential oil reserves.

    Then … finally has to admit that seismic explorations … 3d and even 4d is the only tool we have for finding the best places to drill for oil.

    But he’s a seismic oil exploration expert. And I’m hung like John Holmes.

    1. In Kenji’s world, there are two possibilities:

      1. Seismic exploration is useless.
      2. Seismic exploration is near flawless at locating and estimating the extent of oil deposits.

      That there might be a middle ground — that seismic exploration increases your odds of finding oil, but cannot guarantee it — doesn’t seem to occur to him.

      That seismic data alone is insufficent to prove the existence of petroleum deposits is an uncontroversial statement in the oil patch. Yet here I am, wasting my Friday afternoon.

      And by the way, 4D is not an oil exploration tool. It’s an oil production tool, helping one to track the changes in the oil reservoir as extraction proceeds.

        2. You call it silly, I call it Canada Council grant. My new installation, “4D Void of Meaning: Size Mick Up”, coming soon to a progressive gallery near you.

    2. Kenji – you’re Orange-Man-Badding the Killer Marmot. Congrats on the coconuts.

      But you even said the truth – that seismic is a tool for finding the best places to drill. If you don’t drill you don’t have an oil reserve. You can identify a trap for oil and estimate the volume within the trap but you don’t know the contents of the trap without drilling. Then you have to test the well to determine its flow rate. And other stuff. But you can’t drag a ship along the coast of Antarctica and announce 511 Billion barrels of oil. Even if you’re American (unless you’re a stock promoter having a drink in a dark bar).

      1. However … the Russians seismic survey discovered “something”. Why would they falsify that information? At some point in time … we only suspected there was oil under the Arctic. Did you call those oil surveys BOGUS ? Why not? Because Pootin wasn’t the one announcing the “discovery”?

        What SUCKER sank the first well in the Arctic? Some huckster selling Annuities in Arctic oil futures?

        Elbow Canadians – Puhleeze?

        PS … what are you doing with all your landlocked oil up there in Canuckland? Drinking it ?

        1. Why Russians — or the press — do anything I’ll leave for others to speculate over. That way lies madness.

          What I do know is seismic exploration, and what can be reliably gleaned from it.

        2. What SUCKER sank the first well in the Arctic? Some huckster selling Annuities in Arctic oil futures?

          The successful first arctic well was drilled in 1920. Seismic exploration was in its infancy, and would not have been used.

          But let me tell you how it works today. Grand announcements about the discovery of major deposits only happen AFTER numerous exploratory wells are drilled. Doing so before is fraudulent, and could result in lawsuits.

          1. Re: Prudhoe Bay oil discovery …

            The discovery of the Swanson River Oil Field on the Kenai Peninsula in 1957 by the Richfield Oil Corporation prompted the company to send geologists to the Arctic starting in 1959 and seismic survey crews in 1963, which recorded a reconnaissance line across what was identified as the Prudhoe structure in 1964.[45] In 1965, during the state lease sale, Richfield partnered with Humble Oil and acquired leases over what was later identified as the gas cap while BP was awarded leases over the “oil ring”

            Ohhhhh … now I get it. You’re a really ollllllld dude … who still believes the only way to explore for oil is to poke holes in the ground … randomly. BTW … that method of Arctic exploration produced FAILED well after FAILED well … until a gas pocket was finally drilled.

          2. No one said seismic exploration isn’t a critical part of modern oil exploration. But just like a car transmission isn’t sufficient to drive to the store with, seismic alone isn’t sufficient to verify a petroleum deposit.

            At this point, you’re intentionally misinterpreting what is posted.

          3. Seismic exploration is fundamentally the ONLY way we explore for oil. Nobody can afford to just start randomly poking exploratory holes in the ground … unless you are certain you are over a known or suspected (previously explored) oil field.

            You said the Russians haven’t “found anything” … as if ANYONE claims a “find” … rather a likelihood there is a large oilfield. Because seismic exploration.

          4. A common way to find oil is…

            1. Do a seismic survey.
            2. Have that survey interpreted by geophysicists or geologists to infer (make an educated guess about) the geology.
            3. Decide on the most promising locations to drill for oil based on that inference.
            4. Drill at those locations in hopes of striking oil.

            Stopping after steps 1 and 2 is not finding oil. For that you also need steps 3 and 4. The Russians did not carry out all of these steps, and therefore did not discover oil. At most they discovered a promising region to drill exploratory wells.

          5. Here’s how you conduct a seismic survey and announce the results:

            1. Shake it up, baby.
            2. Twist and shout!

        3. It’s unfair to pick on a retarded brother (Canada). Who knows what we’re doing with our oil. Keeping it in the ground for a special occasion (e.g. end of the world or transition to a fusion economy).

          But yes the Russians discovered something. Pretty nice looking geology I would bet. I wouldn’t be surprised if Antarctica contained large amounts of oil. Wake me when they’ve drilled a few holes.

  12. Well the comments do confirm one thing.
    Most people have absolutely no idea how the oil industry works.
    So I am not going to get into pointless flame wars because that adds nothing.

    But, yeah, I’m old enough to remember when there was a rush to “confirm” assets off the Falkland Islands.
    And way back the end of last century a good result would be a 1 in 9 success in exploration wells.
    And read that word “exploration” thats not “evaluation” wells and certainly not “production” wells.
    There are many nuances around actual words that mean very much different things.
    There is a reason that oil industry spread sheets read like telephone numbers and development costs are offset for decades.

  13. For calibration: The Carbonate Triangle, which underlays the Alberta Oilsands contains between 400 and 500 billion barrels of oil, and we know it’s there..

    I’m sure the Russians should be able to unlock this resource?
    or perhaps AI can?

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation