An interesting story that came up from somewhere (where I have forgotten). I’ve been intending to make a posting about it, linking it to other coal deposits elsewhere. But I’m a bit short of time, so I’m just going to point it out here and quote a couple of little bits.
The basic point is that there’s a heck of a lot of fossil fuels in the world. Loads of it. In 2005 they found 3000 billion tons of the stuff near Norway. Yes, it is under water and nearly impossible to mine at present. But technology changes. Whenever it is desirable enough, we can send small robotic mining machines down to get it.
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2005-12-28/3000-billion-tons-coal-norways-coastline
3000 billion tons of coal off Norway’s coastline
by R.J.Wideroe, J.D.Sundberg, originally published by Verdens Gang | Dec 28, 2005
Fifty years from now, oil producing rigs could be setting coal on fire far below the sea, rather than pumping oil.
Burning coal where it is is one way Norwegian oil company Statoil thinks that the vast coal-reserves on the Norwegian shelf can be utilized.
This summer, students from Norwegian University of Science and Technology analyzed data from 600 wells drilled on the Norwegian Shelf of the North Sea. They calculated that there are 3000 billion tons of coal off the Norwegian coast. Most of the reserves are located at Haltenbanken. This compares to today’s proven and recoverable world reserves of 900 billion tons of coal.
So if world reserves are about 250 years worth, that makes it about 750 years more for a total of about 1000 years worth of coal.
They are suggesting sub-surface gasification, which is an interesting idea. Then the gasses could be run through a F-T synthesis at the surface to make liquid fuels, if desired, or just piped off to burn in place of natural gas. (Such “producer gas” was commonly used in homes and such in the 1800s.)
Because it is not economical to recover that coal at present, it is not counted as part of “reserves”. It is part of “ultimate resources” that are typically ignored by “the end of the world” folks.
One can only wonder how much more coal is under the ground and water of the world.
As the next ice age Glacial happens, the depth of the North Sea will drop. I wonder if there will be a point in time when the water is low enough to mine, but the giant ice sheet has not yet covered the place. Or perhaps we can just tunnel through the ice with a tunnel boring machine…
The bottom line is that we’re drowning in energy resources. We don’t run out for thousands of years, or never; depending on coal or uranium as the item of interest.
Musings from the Chiefio 
The Norwegians have been mining coal for many years (>50yrs) inside the Arctic Circle on Svalbad.
There are huge reserves of coal in Antarctica. There is also likely to be large reserves of oil and gas. That is why so many countries such as China and Russia who have no nearby land association or history of occupation want a piece of the action and want to prevent countries such as Australia and New Zealand from exploring or exploiting their resources.
Argentina, with a most doubtful claim of short term occupation some 300years ago wants to annex the Falklands and South Georgia to access the potential oil and gas reserves.
There is and will be no shortage of oil and gas reserves in the next 1000yrs. By then technology advances will have perfected safe use of nuclear energy on a small (for personal use) and large scale.
Pingback: 3000 Billion Tons Of Coal For 3000 Years (And That’s Just In Norway) | The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)
…..AND THERE IS NO REASON FOR THE OIL PRICES TO BE SO HIGH, remember the sea of oil found at the brazilian coasts, and the sea of oil at the Gulf , etc.,etc. Any prohibition of oil exploration smell fishy and prohibiters all over the world most surely receive briberies for helping in keeping prices up.
That is why Herr Diesel, the inventor of the Diesel engine, that devilish apparatus which runs on almost anything, did not die but just “disappeared”.
Gotto disappear this guy too!:
Fact is, deep underground coal resources defined as in situ coal to 3000 metres depth, worldwide, could total 200 trillion tons – equivalent to about 30 000 years of present world total coal consumption. Nobody says the stuff can be hauled up to the surface to be burned – in situ gasification is going to the favored extraction method.
Here is an article mine covering this subject
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article38035.html
Don’t foreget the coal seam gas fracking process
adolfogiurfa says:
8 March 2013 at 1:28 pm
“That is why Herr Diesel, the inventor of the Diesel engine, that devilish apparatus which runs on almost anything, did not die but just “disappeared”.”
Diesel originally invented his motor to use peanut oil as fuel. He was basically looking for alternatives to expensive, and, before North Sea oil was discovered, scarce rock oil. Old European obsession.
More “potential” sources of fossil fuels have been discovered in the last 20 years, than in the previous 200. Why? We are looking for them now, where as 150 years ago, they were mostly just a nuisance.
Phil, we discover ca. 40,000 Exajoules of energy resources a year and consume globally ca. 480 Exajoule a year. (“Resources” include what is not economical to exploit at todays prices)
Diesels can also run quite happily on coal (in finely ground form), as can most Internal combustion engines. Works better in larger sizes where ash causes less of a wear problem, and even better if clean coal using a fluorine solvent process (carbon doesn’t dissolve but most other contaminents do, and can be recovered by fractions to produce valuable material revenue streams) but quite viable.
It is quite an historical curiosity that coal powered IC engines are not commonplace, it is basically down to very cheap liquid fuels compared to coal. But that is no longer the case, with coal now <25% of crude oil cost on an energy basis – were someone to develop a coal powered IC engine they would have a big market – and it would be more efficient than most coal powered plants – particularly because they could avoid the electrical distribution costs that account for close to half of cost of electricity and a lot of losses.
Dirk – Exactly right. Not exploitable at today’s prices is the reason Obama is claiming credit for more oil being produced since he has managed to make sure that today’s prices are now sustained at $100+/barrel. The additional production is not NEW findings or exploitations, but using more expensive extraction methods from previous finds.
Quote Chiefio:
“Yes, it is under water and nearly impossible to mine at present. But technology changes. Whenever it is desirable enough, we can send small robotic mining machines down to get it.”
This post at Master Resource:
Open-Ended Resourceship: Bring on 2012!
“The open-endedness of entrepreneurship is an implication of the fact that, in the words of Joseph Schumpeter, “there is no law of decreasing returns to technological progress.”
New knowledge and discovery open up the opportunities for more and greater discoveries from a rich, non-inventoried earth.”
http://www.masterresource.org/2011/12/open-ended-resourceship-2012/
A perfect place to test your your underground burning energy production methods;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia,_Pennsylvania
Coal, natures proof that carbon can be sequestered for millions of years.
Funny how the carbon cult keeps trying to reinvent the tree.(plants)
In an homage to George Carlin, on saving the planet, it was not plastic nature created us for, it was to release the carbon in a more gradual manner, than has been natures methods of the past.
Massive volcanic eruptions, or ever burning coal seams being a couple of the old ways.
Saw part of Ron Paul’s address to Canadian Conservatives, on the TV today, he is bringing the message to a fine point, debt.
Never mind your ideology, can you add?
Will catch rest on Utube when I have more time.
Find my patience and sense of humour somewhat shrunken, just filed mine and my wife’s taxes and dangerously close to violence.
Not sure I want to watch it fall as much as burn it down. The clueless and useless we pay for boggle my mind, I would like a non-mob violence correction, as I have seem the mob in action before.
But doubt that thieves and sycophants will magically change their ways.
As a lover of the ease and security civil society provides, I am alarmed when I feel like I do, if I am this cranky, where are my more excitable cousins at?
What value is civilization when theft is institutionalized?
Sorry straying way off topic, coal, ingenuity and human energy are in abundance, why are we so FUBAR here in North America?
What group madness makes us surrender in our success?
@John Robertson:
It is not an accident and is not something that “just growed”. It is a direct result of a directed organized process. Look up Marx “Communist Manifesto” and read the list of goals. Look at the relentless push of American Progressive / Socialists / Liberal doctrin toward the same ends. It’s that simple.
The “leadership” wants power. Distributed “self organizing systems” do not let them get power. Centralization in government control does.
The “followers” are greedy and vengeful and “want free stuff” that is promised by the “leadership” in exchange for power. (This, of course, is dressed up in “social justice” and other feel good terms for “steal the rich bastards stuff”…)
The rest is just a positive feedback loop that runs until you reach: Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, USSR, Maoist China, Greece ( in the ’40s, the ’60s or so, and now), UK Pre-Maggy (and increasingly now), Latin America, cyclically, since about 1940, etc.etc. etc. Oh, and the USA as of the election of Obama (who’s doctrine is entirely and 100% Socialist / Marxist – no doubt about it.)
Part of their “method” is that you must break the old systems to build the New Socialist Order and that Capitalism must end in a grand collapse; so it is absolutely no surprise that they work toward that grand collapse rather than toward “fixing things” or “making things work”. Why “make it work” if that slows the arrival of the collapse and rise of the revolutionary proletariat?
Unfortunately, it really does help to have “read their stuff” (it was required in the Econ program as it IS an economic system and we had to understand it.)
So it’s not just us, and not just North America. To fix it will require retreading a generation, firing pretty much every Sociology Department, and many other departments, and a top to bottom enema of the Education System. Oh, and firing about 3/4 to 7/8 of the Federal Government regulatory / departmental burden. I don’t expect it to happen.
I wish I could be more up-beat about it all, but history is full of examples. Rarely does anyone come “back from the brink”. Mostly they just stabilize in perpetual muddle / grind, or they go over the edge into complete collapse – then do a recovery with the next generation. See Latin America for several ‘perpetual muddle’ cases (Argentina for example), one cyclical / periodic (Brazil – period about 40 years), and one or two “recovered” in Chile and Peru – but they might end up doing a Brazil cyclical… Greece is also a ‘perpetual muddle’ but with a bit of ripple until recently. USSR was a collapse and reset. Maoist China was headed for collapse, and did an interesting thing. They moved from hard core Communist (usually and end stage) backward into “Third Way Fascist Socialism” (AKA “Market Socialism”). Jury still on on how that one will unwind. The UK was looking like a ‘reversal’ case ( like Chile / Peru ) but has instead ended up somewhere near “perpetual muddle” but with some cycle to it. So it goes.
Germany is a special case. West Germany absorbed East Germany. That gave the East a bit of a ‘reset’ and kind of delayed the maturation of the West. It is unclear what will happen longer term. Germany is often held up as a successful Socialism. In reality it had a “merger” in the middle with all sorts of muddy effects. It has ended up a sort of “3rd Way Market Socialism” that didn’t have a Fascist / Nationalist core. Yet now has started to reform the Holy Roman Empire (aka German Empire) via the EU and with a slow slide to central Fascist governance. That is looking more like a “slide to Fascist Socialism” every day…
Not sure how to classify France… Then again, who is?
;-)
The “Odd Duck” was always the USA. Thorn in the side of Global Socialism as we were happy, free, and productive. They have worked very very hard to “fix that” so we don’t keep making them look bad… Unfortunately, it looks like they are succeeding. Via “Public Education” and “Labor Unions”. Two key elements of Marxist / Socialist Doctrine, BTW…
FWIW, the basic idea is that:
Communism failed as it was trying to take on too much too fast and ran into entrenched global capitalism. Markets also are efficient, so needed – but centrally managed via tons of regulations, and not having markets was a problem.
Fascism / National Socialism failed as they were “Nationalist” and “Militaristic”. If only those two things were taken out, they would have worked well. Thus all the propaganda about how “bad” it is to be Nationalist and how being a Military Power is bad… Oh, and racist too… so push hard against racism…
The idea is to get the “International” as in Communism, but with the “3rd Way Markets” of Fascism, and minus the Nationalism and Military spending of both. Without the Nationalism and Racism of “National Socialism” (aka Nazis) in particular.
Then it will work, you betcha… “This time for sure!”…
What it misses is that Central Planning is inevitably worse than the “Emergent Behavior” from distributed capitalist decision makers. (Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand”) That “Capital Allocation” is always worse; with under investment when The People vote for themselves the largess of the public purse, and mal-investment via the Cronyism that is “Managed Market Socialism”. (See Solyndra et. al.) So at best you end up in “Muddle Through” with a good life only for those that have the right connections to The Party and Government…. Though it can be cyclical, so you can have a ‘good generation’ and then a cycle down. (See Brazil).
I still have some hope that a way can be found for “Distributed Central Control” to be worked out (but nobody is working on it…) and I may be the only person who’s thought of it. Like a cluster of CPU’s in a distributed system… Or that the Central Planners can learn to work like capitalist businesses work (in theory, nothing prevents it… then again, In Theory nothing prevents me from being a Billionaire… ) In reality we have about 100 years now of Socialism just not working in the end. Unfortunately, it can take 50 years to collapse in the non-war-like forms, so people being unaware of history think it is working… right up until it collapses into tyranny again…
So it goes.
E.M.Smith says:
9 March 2013 at 6:44 am
“Germany is a special case. West Germany absorbed East Germany. That gave the East a bit of a ‘reset’ and kind of delayed the maturation of the West. It is unclear what will happen longer term. Germany is often held up as a successful Socialism. In reality it had a “merger” in the middle with all sorts of muddy effects. It has ended up a sort of “3rd Way Market Socialism” that didn’t have a Fascist / Nationalist core. Yet now has started to reform the Holy Roman Empire (aka German Empire) via the EU and with a slow slide to central Fascist governance. That is looking more like a “slide to Fascist Socialism” every day…”
Yes. That’s how I see it as well; it’s obvious. The interesting thing is that this obvious truth is not mentioned or visible to our German media; neither do they recognize their own green/warmist fanaticism. The attempt to re-establish the Empire will fail. The ECB balance sheet has in 2012 exceeded the one of the Fed (I have found no graphs going further than mid 2012, so that’s pre QE3, also pre-OMT announcement). (The ECB had been buying PIGS debt directly before the announcement of OMT. OMT calmed down “investors” as it is the promise of eternal bailouts so they started buying PIGS debt again end of 2012. As soon as this “trust” is shaken yields will rise again, and OMT will have to be enacted, leading to rapid expansion of the ECB balance sheet again and a financing of the PIGS with the printing press. The PIGS have decimated their private sectors but not the public sectors; making them MORE inefficient; ACCELERATING their collapse.)
By now I have not found good economic blogs in Germany; neither are the official financial newspapers worth anything. But it helps to google for TARGET2 and especially ECB balance sheet from time to time. Our European QE measures are always performed in the dark and nearly not reported on.
Looks like the collapse of the Soviet Union to me in the PIGS. Germany OTOH is currently overheating. ZIRP is too cheap money for German economy. Eurozone gets more bizarre by the day.
@ Ron L.
“Diesels can also run quite happily on coal (in finely ground form)”
Fine flour (bread) has been known to explode and destroy the mills where it is being ground. I have seen this demonstrated in a waste-basket size container using a lit candle and a puff of air. It made a nice semi-controlled explosion. Perhaps any finely ground organic matter would work although the energy density might be low. Just thinking . . .
@ John Robertson
“Never mind your ideology, can you add?”
I see a “Billboard” in the making.
@DirkH:
Even Japan has gotten on the “print and buy bonds” wagon and presently “Short Yen / Long EWJ”: is doing great. Like all things with a life cycle longer than a couple of years, most folks seem completely oblivious to the bad endings…
@All:
OMT is “Outright Monetary Transactions” meaning the central bank directly buying things. ZIRP is Zero Interest Rate Policy. More explanation here:
http://news.sky.com/story/981851/omt-the-ecb-launches-its-bazooka
@John F. Hultquist:
The original Diesel development was with powdered coal. The engine blew up and nearly killed Diesel’s assistant (blinded in one eye IIRC). It’s not easy to get a Diesel to run on powdered stuff. And “ash” in “precision honed metal surfaces” is not a great way to prolong engine life.
I’d rather put a gassifier up stream of the engine and just burn filtered gas…
Yes, you can do “way cool things” with any flammable organic dust and a source of ignition… There are strict requirements for dust control and ignition control in grain dryers and elevators (at least, if you want them to not blow up…). We were probably more “sensitive” to the issue as it is dry here in California for about 3/4 of the year. In wet places a static discharge is not likely nor likely to be as disastrous; but out here you are just looking tor a “Boom!” if uncareful.
Nice picture of a Fuel Air Explosion (FAE) event here:
http://www.rotten.com/library/history/war/wmd/fuel-air-explosion/
using a more military like device.
A fun video of a DIY device using liquids. While they “talk down” gasoline, note that their detonating mix is 54% heptane that is, essentially, gasoline… It is impressively fast to detonate when they get to the ‘real time’ shot near the end.
Per OSHA: (my bold)
https://www.osha.gov/dsg/combustibledust/
Which kind of makes that whole “possession of explosives is a crime” attempt at control kind of stupid. “Make frosting, go to prison, it’s the law!” (Powdered sugar is used to make frosting. Available everywhere…) Heck, a fine misting spray head and sugar water into a drying space ought to make a very fine dust. Or just buy a sack of fine cake flour…
Oh Well…
An interesting paper on the advantages of using charcoal in a Diesel rather than coal (less abrasion)
Click to access Paper%20Coal%20vs.%20Charcoal-fueled%20Diesel%20Engines%20A%20Review.pdf
Interesting idea, though… running my Diesel on trees…
Pingback: ChWS – Charcoal Liquid Diesel Fuel | Musings from the Chiefio
BTW:
Some people say a man is made outta mud
A poor man’s made outta muscle and blood
Muscle and blood and skin and bones
A mind that’s a-weak and a back that’s strong
You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don’t you call me ’cause I can’t go
I owe my soul to the company store
I was born one mornin’ when the sun didn’t shine
I picked up my shovel and I walked to the mine
I loaded sixteen tons of number nine coal
And the straw boss said “Well, a-bless my soul”
You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don’t you call me ’cause I can’t go
I owe my soul to the company store
I was born one mornin’, it was drizzlin’ rain
Fightin’ and trouble are my middle name
I was raised in the canebrake by an ol’ mama lion
Cain’t no-a high-toned woman make me walk the line
You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don’t you call me ’cause I can’t go
I owe my soul to the company store
If you see me comin’, better step aside
A lotta men didn’t, a lotta men died
One fist of iron, the other of steel
If the right one don’t a-get you
Then the left one will
You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don’t you call me ’cause I can’t go
I owe my soul to the company store
@E.M. About that fuel explosion: It´s just a matter of pulling the choke out!; wanna spoil it? Add some ethanol.
@Adolfo:
Um, I think you will find that “if it burns, it can make a Flue Air Explosion”.
http://www.gordon-elias.com/blog/2324/norfolk-southern-train-derails-catches-fire-and-explodes-in-arcadia-oh/
Nice picture of fireball:
Adding some ethanol to a fuel mix just means you need more pre-heat and / or better dispersion.
Like I’ve said before, you can make a sack of flour into an FAE. Ethanol would be even more finely dispersed, so easier to make “go bang”. In a living room sized space, put a 5 lb ( 2 kg) bag of flour on top of a ‘tuna fish sized can” (old size, 6 fluid ounces) of explosive ( C4 was the ‘model’ I think…) Insert detonator and be far far away when it goes off.
The “tuna can” disperses the flour into the air space. It also provides the ignition source. The result will be the complete demolition of the structure. Something that would not be done with just the ‘tuna can’. Make that a gallon of ethanol and I’d bet you get the same result. (Would love to try it, but don’t have any C4, nor a building I can spare, nor a place that would not arrest me for trying it ;-)
For optimal results, calculate the amount of “flammable” that is stoichiometric to the air volume of the space you are intending to demolish… May want to allow a bit extra for poor dispersion / evaporation. That is, a 10% “rich” mix may work better… like in a cold car…
FWIW, I know of a way to do this without C4 (with “commonly available materials”) but I’m not keen on sharing that…
Then you have Africa, look at at the size of it. Uganda is said to have more oil than Saudi. That Tullow oil will be interesting in the future. Africa is a massive mine pit nobody has even bothered to touch much yet. I mean look at Congo, individual miners are bringing massive amounts of stuff, imagine if it was mined properly.
IIRC Tesla’s turbine was originally designed to be powered by coal-dust. Instead of feeding in steam, he planned to feed a coal-dust and air mixture through a one way valve (his “valvular conduit” was a one way air valve with no moving parts) into a combustion chamber. The combusted gases would then feed into the turbine, driving it. Obviously, the same design could also be used for gaseous fuels, or (with a carburettor or injector) for liquid fuels. I am not aware of anyone having reproduced his coal-dust model.
Yes, Tesla’s turbine was a very robust and simple thing. Just a stack of disks that worked by boundary layer friction. I constructed one to act as as a fan to move air and water for an air scrubber experiment. pg
The Fraudulent Global Climate Crisis Unmasked
The entire fraudulent climate crisis is explained succinctly in Power to the People:
http://tinyurl.com/a2ocxtq
Details and references for the rise of the fraudulent climate crisis (1945-2013) are here:
http://tinyurl.com/atf8w63
I deeply regret that I could not connect the dots earlier.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://www.omatumr.com
@P.G.Sharrow:
Where most folks ‘get it wrong’ is they make the gap between disks too large. It works on a boundary drag effect, so sub mm spacing is more efficient. Did yours work OK? I thought of making one once, and looked into it, but never moved on it. Looked like an easy way to use “wood gas”…
@Jason Calley:
I thought the valvular conduit was brilliant. I’ve sometimes pondered the idea of making a giant wall of them along the shore of ‘at risk’ places, such that folks could walk to the beach through the conduit, but a tsunami coming in would be slowed / hindered… Just need an at risk place with a sense of adventure and a few million tons of concrete to test it ;-)
@Sabertoothed:
The problem is often property rights. Nobody will sink a $Billion into some place where the people will then vote to confiscate it “for the nation”… See Venezuela for a place where that happened, and the Oil Majors have not invested since; so their oil sector is in decline (despite having more oil than anyone else…)
Similarly, the Sea Bed Minerals. More than the world can use. Technology developed. Then the Sea Treaty said the UN will tax anyone who harvests minerals. So not a mining operation in sight.
“Spread the wealth” means “equal in poverty”.
@ E.M. “I thought the valvular conduit was brilliant.”
Ingenious idea to use them for seawalls! It does seem like there should be more uses for a simple one way valve. I have wondered why they have not been used for intakes on a pulse jet. Actually, I considered the possibility of an outboard boat motor, a sort of underwater pulse jet. Imagine a fairly conventional combustion chamber with a one way intake. The hot gas output goes to a tee underwater. The forward arm of the tee has a one way valve, so every time the chamber fires, the gas squirts the water out of the rear arm of the tee. As the boat moves forward, the flow of water through the tee sucks more air and fuel into the chamber for the next BANG! and another pulse. You might need a trolling motor to get the darned thing started.
Speaking of Tesla turbines… I do not know if anyone has actually made real copies of his design. His patents show a series of rivets that hold all the disks in a more rigid assembly. Not only do they reduce disk flutter, they also (I think) may be needed for better starting torque. All the modern builders which I know of have left the rivets off as an “obvious improvement” to cut down disruption of flow. They may be right. On the other hand, maybe Tesla knew what he was doing when he designed them in.
I’ve seen on ‘toy turbine’ with cross shafts where the rivets ought to be. They found it gave much better starting and little negative at speed. Basically, they only helped.
Like the idea of a pulse jet. Ought to be easy to test… if it doesn’t blow up! ;-)
@E.M. & all: You all forget that Tesla was an Electric Engineer!. We are inclined to think in Fred Flintstone´s physics: We equate matter with Hard Stone/flints. Remember that solid “mass” it is an illusion! and when two solid discs approach enough we have its emission fields working, Ya know buddies, such a transparent thing around objects which make light refract…. See?
Wanna SEE what happens in between the discs of a Tesla turbine?, watch this:
Errata, please delete that video link.
This is the real one:
wrong again, sorry!
My understanding is that our atmosphere contains about 3,000 Giga-tonnes of CO2, so if you burned all that Norwegian coal there would be another 11,000 Giga-tonnes, more than tripling the amount of CO2. So how much would remain in the atmosphere?
This came up in a rather tedious discussion I am having with David Appell here:
http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2013/02/16/unified-theory-of-climate-revisited/#comment-4610
I would be interested to have some comments from y’all on the related “Arrhenius Revisited”:
http://diggingintheclay.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/arrhenius-revisited/
@GallopingCamel:
It think that no one has answered your question as no one knows.
We do not know how much CO2 would be removed by plants and weathering at those concentrations. Also over “how much time” likely matters. My guess would be that a lot would be ‘rain stripped’ out as carbonic acid (as today making Karst topography out of limestone) and washed into the oceans where it becomes a trivial influx. After a couple of hundred years, I’d guess the ocean equilibrium forces would dominate and the answer is “none”.
Like the digging in the clay article. Not much to say. Some of the assumptions are a bit narrow for a ‘proof’, but reasonable for a ‘sanity check’.