Pretty O'Neill cylinders, but...

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:55:44 -0500, Arthur Smith wrote:
(...)
> The question is replacement rate, no matter what the actual source of
> the "fossil" fuels. The "deep hot biosphere", if it exists, is not very
> productive. We are currently using fossil fuels at between hundreds of
> thousands and tens of millions of times the replacement rate. That's
> simply not sustainable.
(...)

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your statement, but Gold's theory does
not say that hydrocarbons are *produced* by the Deep Hot Biosphere.
Rather, they are abiogenic in origin and are just *contamined* by the
Deep Hot Biosphere.

According to Gold's predictions, there should be a layer 100 Km below
the surface where methane would be stable (despite the temperature,
due to the pressure). Depending on the thickness of that so-called
Methane Domain, there could be a kind of global "ocean" of methane
inside the Earth. If this "ocean" can be reached (technically and
economically speaking), then we would bypass any natural replacement
mechanism (namely, infiltration of hydrocarbons from below to the
surface) and have direct access to the source. And I don't think that
this huge reserve would be exhausted in any foreseeable future...

But of course the theory can be wrong (despite many favorable
evidences that I consider strong).