Slashdot Mirror
Helium Leads to Geothermal Energy Resources
Roland Piquepaille writes "When we think about alternative sources of energy, we often forget the potential of geothermal energy resources. In fact, it has been estimated that accessible geothermal energy in the U.S. represents 90 quadrillion kilowatt-hours or 3,000 times the country's total annual energy consumption. So far, it has been difficult and expensive to locate good sources of geothermal energy. But now, two U.S. researchers have found a new method which doesn't require drilling. They are using the ratio of helium isotopes in surface waters to point to the best sources of geothermal energy."
We could just pray to find the geothermal sources.
Except that doesn't work.
Superstition is crap. Science works, bitches.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
...since pretty much all of Earth's helium results from alpha decay of radioactive metals.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
It'd be a good thing to not depend on Middle Eastern energy resources. I think more than just purely economic pressures should bring such a change. Maybe that's naive though.
I keep seeing this tag. Why? Most of the articles so tagged seem better-than-average for Slashdot, honestly.
This is, indeed, good news! This, plus wind-power, some recent excellent solar-power breakthroughs and throw in hydro, will no doubt drastically reduce the dependency on foreign oil. However, I am a bit hesitant to do the truffle-shuffle just yet because of the oil cartel and hits powerful hold on certain Washington big-wigs and other powerful old farts. Correct me if I'm wrong (which is most of the time), but weren't a few of the alternative power studies debunked by 'independent research' funded by big oil companies? I can't seem to recall off the top of my head...
Fighting over religion is like seeing whose imaginary friend is best.
it's not in iceland as one might guess, it's in the philippines
on leyte, near lake danao above ormoc city, called tongonan geothermal field, run by calenergy
it's a pretty weird place: gorgeous virgin mountain forest, everything is muddy and foggy and it rains all the time there, as it's basically nothing but humongous turbines plopped right over steam vents coming right out of the ground. there are communist NPA guerrillas in the area and the security of the place is pretty important, so there are guys with submachine guns at checkpoints everywhere too
but, notably, some of the streams running off from the area are a brilliant cobalt blue
so just a reality check: some of the problems associated with mining will be found with geothermal sources. mining often churns up lots of unhealthy metals from the earth, artificially. well, geothermal is basically that same process, but completely natural. so whereever you have geothermal energy sources, you have the potential to stir up nasty metals and deposit them on the surface, with or without man's involvement
not my blog, but some good pics and summary
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Actually Canada is the number one supplier of Oil to the U.S.
Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
Energy Information Administration: Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government
Isotopic ratios are a well known tool of geologists. Most of the hot springs of the American SW carry gases and water from below the crust, specifically from dewatering of the subducted Farallon Plate. This is an application of the tools to a hunt for hot water.
It relies on the heat signature of the surface waters. Any surface waters hotter than 200F are probably indicative of geothermal energy sources.
As a non-expert (see entire scope of knowledge about the field is based on wikipedia, cursory google search, and tv documentaries), is finding sources the major roadblock to widespread geothermal use? I would think so upon my basic knowledge.
a). It is eco-friendly, in that there are no toxic wastes or atmospheric wastes to speak of. Reduction in greenhouse gases is a plus. So there are no environmentalists protesting geothermal expansions like nuclear ones.
b). It is not as conditional as other eco-friendly power sources. With wind and tide power you are at the mercy of the conditions which is a major drawback considering the instancy with which grid fluctuations occur. Granted it is conditional upon the temperature of the earth, but geologic time scales are much more gradual than say meteorological time scales with wind.
c). Plants are fairly efficient. There is very little ancillary equipment needed, because the dynamo system usually runs off steam directly from the ground. Other forms of power, eg nuclear, coal, and oil, are ways of producing heat. With geothermal, the earth is already producing the heat for us. We are essentially utilizing energy that is produced no matter what, but would otherwise be lost.
I have come to see geothermal power as being a major possibility to easing our energy problems, especially upon news of this. I would be all too happy to see this overtake nuclear power as the solution to our energy problems. Now before I get a hundred posts about "if you're not serious about nuclear, then you aren't serious about energy reform," I understand nuclear's potential, vastly under-utilized potential, I think geothermal would be a much more optimal solution. Geothermal requires no mining, no relying on finite resources of naturally fissile material, and it produces no nasty radioactive waste.
I hope that this paves the way to a major increase in geothermal generation. I think it would be the most ideal solution we have available.
Disclaimer: I'm not an expert, and I do expect a ton of pro-nuclear flamage, which I hope I don't deserve, but I might.
I got a catholic block.
I've always thought OTEC was a pretty neat idea, but it's not terribly efficient, which really drives up the cost per kilowatt. Geothermal is much more promising due to the larger temperature differential, but the barrier is still the cost. It's not really about saving the environment as it is about saving money. Sad but true, that's the world we live in. At some point, the price of oil will rise enough to make geothermal (and maybe even OTEC) economical, but my guess is we still have a few decades to go.
Wind power seems to be doing a good job for our initial transition/weaning from oil, but more long-term strategies are still needed... so good for these guys.
DRM 'manages access' in the same way that a prison 'manages freedom'
FRANCE muslims take over french government, mass riots ensue, 1000s dead and injured
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_power
Of course, to completely replace oil, we would have to be able to use this energy for transportation. So, we still have some problems. Even so, if we drill ten miles deep almost anywhere, we will get useful geothermal energy. That means that we could use existing power plants because their generators are usually steam driven, or could be. We could get rid of our dependance on middle-east energy relatively fast. Canada could supply enough oil for our transportation needs until we can perfect the battery powered semi-trailer truck.
Largest by what metric? The Geysers outside San Fransisco puts out 750 MW(e).
I saw a property for sale in Idaho a while back. 77 acres, with a hot spring (140F at the surface). I love the idea of being able to go off-grid with my own power source, not because I'm any kind of tree-hugger, but because utility companies haven't been the best vendors I've ever dealt with.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
i can think of many larger vents by pure size, but they are untapped energy sources
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Amazingly, the money for alternative energy has been in solar and ethanol, but that is solely because the feds are pouring tax dollars/euros into that. Geo-thermal is PROBABLY the single brightest spot that feds should be concentrating on, but are ignoring. Points out how inefficient they are.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
No, I'm New Here
If our politicians had any sense they would come up with a national energy program that helps cultivate our own renewable energy sources. Geothermal is probably one of our best bets. Clean renewable cheap energy would be a boon to this country. Just think of how much of our own money would stay in this country instead of being sent to questionable regimes around the world. Of course a national energy program should also promote things such as power saving technologies.
Now for the bad news. Entrenched companies that make billions every year off of scarce resources have every reason to subvert any effort to make themselves obsolete. Think about it. If your one of these companies why not just buy up all the good ideas that might compete with you and sit on them. I guarantee you some of these companies have enough money to do it.
I think oil, gas, and coal business are scared of the concept of energy produced by non scarce resources that cannot be cornered and manipulated. I would love to see that day.
There are dozens of great alternative energy resources requiring millions in start-up money that are perfectly viable as far as the experts are concerned. Solar thermal has worked perfectly well and very large wind generators can convert great quantities of power like the enormous design we saw last week with the magnetic bearing. There are several fusion experiments that look quite promising and orbital solar is no fantasy. Geothermal is merely another one of these many very promising alternatives that is no doubt quite technically feasible and potentially disruptive but therein lies the rub. These things all require large-scale investments and the organizations that are in position to make those large-scale financial commitments have no real motivation to do so.
This is why low-cost solar panels are so intriguing. It's not because they represent the best alternative energy conversion technology. In fact, they're quite lame in many respects. Nonethless it's the most likely technology that can be implemented in a way similar to the way the internet was built: inward from the edge rather than outward from the center. That's what makes solar the center of attention and the only genuinely likely candidate for a disruptive alternative energy technology.
No doubt geo is good to go. No doubt indeed. My personal favorite fantasy geothermal solution has been to go into Utah and just burn/dig an enormous hole through the coal into the depths. I mean like a hole you can drive huge trucks down into corkscrew like around the edges spiraling into the darkness. Once you've excavated all the coal down to a few miles, you can tap the geothermal energy at the bottom of the pit. You could build a whole community into the walls of the place. Yeah, geothermal is cool. Anybody want to front me some cash to make it happen?
So?Most helium in the crust has escaped to space. The helium profile in the crust is dominated by steady-state production of helium-4 by alpha decay. This is mostly the case in the mantle as well but the mantle has some reserves of primordial helium which never escaped to space because it's buried more deeply, and that helium has an isotopic signature that includes helium-3 (the new helium from radioactivity is all helium-4). They're looking for the helium-3 using the helium-4 as a baseline.
Actually Canada is the number one supplier of Oil to the U.S.
They must have weapons of mass destruction.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I always wondered if it was possible to use the heat energy from active but somewhat stable volcanos. You would have a platform submerged in the lava pit and set up a system to run water through it to make steam and run the turbines. Is that feasible? What are the problems? I am guessing maybe the equipment might melt?
Your sig line is the first thing all day that has managed to elicit spontaneous laughter from me. :-)
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
They must have weapons of mass destruction.
Celine Dion?
home
What about a room full of scientists making really bad Papa Smurf impersonations?!?
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
The government of Canada has apologized for Brian Adams on several occasions
If you let all the smoke out, it will cease to function properly.
What?
I read about he He isotope method a few years ago, in relation to hot springs along the Rhine Rift system in Germany - the hottest springs have more Helium-3. Its not a new idea.
Alternatively, one could try to locate young faults in geologically inactive areas, young faults are potential sources of geothermal energy as they are often porous and can allow hot fluid from depth to flow to the surface. We used Ar-Ar dating to determine that a fault in Ireland last moved http://www.ria.ie/cgi-bin/ria/papers/100700.pdf
Look up "Ground Source Heat Pumps". They typically give about a 400% return on energy.
Deleted
My personal favorite fantasy geothermal solution has been to go into Utah and just burn/dig an enormous hole through the coal into the depths. I mean like a hole you can drive huge trucks down into corkscrew like around the edges spiraling into the darkness. Once you've excavated all the coal down to a few miles, you can tap the geothermal energy at the bottom of the pit.
You don't need to go to Utah to use geothermal. At least one home in New York City uses geothermal for heating, cooling, and hot water. This one is too expensive though, the asking price is almost $8M.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Little point looking into geothermal environmentalists will just shut it down.
They have shut down wind farms (Nantucket Sound ala Ted Kennedy, and Walter Cronkite)
They are trying to reverse hydro-power (dam removal in the northwest)
They have killed off nuclear (oh, just pick one)
At some point you just give up and keep buying oil.
Really I don't think the environmentalists (a) believe what they say, and (b) actually want to solve anything.
Most of their actions are either just about narcissism and having something to bitch about (usually yelling at society when they really want to yell at their Dad).
If I thought they actually cared and were working to get things done, I'd be more supportive, but close interaction which the people has turned me very very off to their message.
... called Celine Dion
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Isn't Yellowstone park just one great big fuck off source of hot water?
Yellowstone is a supervolcano. Forget about human emissions of greenhouse gases, GHGs, if Yellowstone were ever to erupt in a short tyme it would emit more GHGs than all the GHGs man has emitted since coming out of the trees.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I vaguely recall from several decades ago that earthquake researchers have been using this same method now for a couple decades. So this may not be all that new a discovery.
I was in a store a couple of days ago that had a rack of CDs by the checkout. The new Celine Dion CD was in the rack. The price sticker on each of the CDs covered the picture of her face on the CD label. The clerk denied responsibility.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
It seems like there are TONS of folks here who keep saying that the environmentalists will stop these projects, and the finally line is almost always, well, I guess that I will stay with OIL|COAL|GAS POWERED CAR|..... Worse, nearly all of you are ACs.
So, the real question is, who is trying to stop this? I do not see Environmentalists stopping any alternative energy (though some minor groups try to stop individual projects). But I do see LOTS of ACs here and elsehwere pointing at Environmentalists. Hmmmm.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The rivers and lakes around here are fed by glaciers, which grind up minerals and release them in the meltwater. The water is a brilliant turquoise. People come from all over the world to see the wilderness and drinking the water is supposed to be healthful or lucky.
Just because the water is a funny colour doesn't mean it's bad.
Hmmmm. Ok, so 125MW is bigger then 1Gw by your reckoning.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
That's a house using a geothermal heat pump for heating and cooling. My house uses that, and it cost under $400,000 and not $8 million (but it isn't in the heart of NYC, either) It generates no electricity, it just acts as a heat source or sink due to the constant temperature of the earth once you get a few feet down.
The type of geothermal being discussed for these power plants is used to drive a steam turbine and generate electricity. The 52F earth temperature that NYC house taps isn't going to generate any steam!
I'm with you on the solar. (beyond spirit, I own some myself) Also geothermal on the small scale, ground loop heat pumps should be about mandatory in most areas for new home construction, or encouraged with full tax credits I should say.
There's not enough geothermal power resources to ignore. Trivializing nothing is a waste of energy. Better to burn-up all that cheap Wa. state hydropower by keeping Spokane, Tacoma and Seattle lights burning brightly 24/7 ... and let Ca. weinerdudes freeze in their hot tubes.
We don't want Bush starting any plans on Canada to distract you guys from Iraq.
To Bush & Co.
Just because the majority of Canadians are unahappy about and dislike the current leader, please do not feel the need to liberate us nor give us your brand of democracy.
Thanks,
Canada
Is somebody going to suddenly start giving away power for free?
When you can generate your own energy big energy businesses will look at it as if you are stealing from them.
Solar is expensive and can't be built (on a large scale) just anywhere.
Those who build Off the Grid can have a payback period of as low as 7 years. The problem as you say is solar can't be built everywhere.
FalconShould there be a Law?
but drilling through that pressure cap (rock, etc) creates a the risk of releasing that pressure in a massive blast or blasts.
However I heard some years ago that Bush wants to allow oil companies to drill in Yellowstone for oil.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I've been watching the Discovery Channel on super volcanos. There is supposed to be a 80 mile magma chamber under Yellowstone. It's supposed to be near the surface so we wouldn't have to drill to deep. Why don't we tap into that bad boy?
We wouldn't have to set up shop in the park. I imagine that we could do it from outside and drill in. We can drill multiple well holes from one tap for oil, why can't we do the same here?
I doubt we would set off the volcano with our little taps. The would represent a small part of the total energy. An if we do set the fucker off, well at least we won't have to worry about the coming oil crises.
Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification
LETS INVADE!!
I'm a non expert too, so I'll debate your core assertions:
1) stuff from below is bad.
Well better tell that to the volcanos and under sea islands that spew crap into the air and ocean.
2) Salt water is corrosive and bad for power plants.
Better tell that to the navy--they have ships floating in it! and they pump it through their nuclear reactors.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
USGS simply can't predict when eruptions of the magnitude that you are talking about will occur. So they are never going to say something as alarmist as "Yellowstone is due to erupt". To draw that conclusion from a mere three data points was extremely irresponsible of whatever journalist was the source of this meme. In fact USGS says this about Yellowstone's potential for a catastrophic eruption (ref)
Thanks for the link. However I'm left wondering how much this was affected by the Bush admin, who has been cited a number tymes for altering science they didn't agree with even though they didn't have the qualifications, suppressing it, or totally ignoring science.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Hmmm ... mod points and up yourself, nice combination.
From what I read Google didn't invest in Nanosolar, the founders did.
FalconShould there be a Law?
1000MW / 19 plants = ~52MW per plant ...
This one have 125MW alone, DUH!
I am not saying that the technology used in the linked article is snake oil, it is simply not applicable to the electricity generation industry.
As TFA linked to specifically states "About twelve megawatts' worth of potential electricity is going up the stack" then "The heat would hit one side of it, produce steam, and we'd use that to turn a turbine and generate electricity" I think it directly applies to electrical generation. One of the companies in TFA, has this to say:
"(RED) will reduce greenhouse gases profitably through the development and ownership of energy recycling facilities. RED captures industrial waste energy to produce electricity and thermal power, often without burning any additional fuel or emitting any additional pollution. For industrial partners, RED reduces energy costs substantially, increases reliability, and offers the opportunity for emissions credits."
Effectively they are producing electricity. Do you see something wrong with what they say?
I guess what I'm saying is that, while there are many places where geothermal energy is appropriate, some circumstances would make it a poor choice.
Oh, I fully agree. As I've said a bunch of tymes while many look for the 1 big energy source, when what's really needed is a bunch of small sources. Use the energy sources that are available and appropriate in a given area. Use solar where the sun shines a lot, wind where it's windy, tidal in good coastal areas, and geothermal where it can be used. For those places without any good sources of energy, I can't really think of any such places maybe someone else can, hydrogen can be used as an energy carrier. Many say that it is dangerous and cite the Hindenburg, however there's a debate on exactly how the zeppelin caught on fire. Some thing it had nothing to do with the hydrogen, tha tit was the flammable material used. I don't recall where I put it but a week or 2 ago I read an article about how much liquid hydrogen is already being shipped around the world but it was in the billions of gallons if not "barrels".
FalconShould there be a Law?
If you tap into geothermal energy, be prepared for a massive fissure in the Earth's crust that can only be sealed by a 1,000,000 megaton nuclear detonation. Since that almost certainly exceeds the total nuclear stockpile of the United States (but not of the fictional submarine Seaquest), the whole planet will be hooped if we do this. Or we'll be forced to buy nukes from North Korea to make up the difference. Considering the enormous embarrassment that would be, I'll bet the administration will let the Earth be destroyed.
Have you worked out yet that the only reason the continents are 50m ABOVE sea level is that hot rock is lighter than cold rock ?
If anyone ever invades we'll turn her up to full power. Nothing would survive (except, perhaps, Celine herself, and cockroaches, and those tube worms that grow at the bottom of the ocean). So next time you foreigners think of invading, just imagine the horror and the agony of dying to the theme to Titanic...
Also she knows the brown note, but that's more of a tactical use whereas I'm talking about strategic deployment.
Ugh... no one is reading the article correctly... :-(
The article says FINDING geothermal resources no longer requires drilling. It also says and infers that USING those resources requires conventional power plants - which are all deep drilling powerplants...
That's right people don't read TFAs correctly. Not once do I see "conventional" anywhere in the article and I used my browser's "Find". Nor does it say "deep drilling" is needed. Once again using Find I don't find "deep drilling" either.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Can someone explain to me the reason why Celine Dion is always made fun of. I've really no idea...
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
If instead you leave them to have their beliefs and say, "hey, I don't follow that one myself, but it could work for them," they might start thinking that heretics, heathens, etc aren't so bad when you get to know them and don't really deserve to have rocks thrown at them and burn for eternity in the firey lakes that burn on sulpher.
Unlike you a lot of religionists, religious people, don't use reason and won't simply let non believers alone. History is filled with examples of this. Hebrews cleared areas they moved into, as did Christians and Muslims. Christians even persecuted other Christians and Muslims other Muslims.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Where is "here"? In locations solar isn't good wind may be, or geothermal may be, or...
Solar won't work very well during the winter and your electric heater would suck down the production from a whole field of solar panels anyway.
Even in cold climates solar hot water heaters can be used. The Department of Energy says Solar Water Heaters can be used in any climate. A Closed Loop - Glycol System uses glycol, to eliminate busted water pipes and such, to heat water.
FalconShould there be a Law?
it's in the philippines
Guess we should ready the troops (not much of an army/Navy over there, should be a cakewalk!)
If these deposits end up in Europe that could be a tad more difficult.
Cheers
Bob
It Seems I've developed an aversion to proprietary software
If we can generate enough electricity then our oil imports will indeed fall. Of course plastics are still a big problem
Actually plastic can be made without petroleum oil. Prior to 1934, when DuPont was given a patent on making plastic from oil, plastic was made from cellulose. Ever hear of Cellophane, the plastic wraps for food? As it's name suggest it was originally from plant cellulose. Thing is is DuPont was the US's first producer of cellophane. Another big company that made and used cellulose based plastic, cellulose acetate, was Kodak.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Yeah, but I differentiated the two... for water, for a small house, yes... but I think you can do that anywhere.
Sorry, my misunderstanding.
The detection method the article is talking about is for power generation on large scale which requires deeper drilling...
Deep drilling would be needed in many places but it's not needed in some. Good examples are at hot springs.
But, I wonder if it could lead to more efficient heating and cooling setups? The only problem I see is (unless you have a massive yard) I dont think it would matter...
Actually what makes the biggest difference for heating and cooling is insulation. With the right R value a building shouldn't need much energy to cool or heat it so it's comfortable to the occupants.
FalconShould there be a Law?
As for land areas... in the US, I dont think that is too big of an issue... desert land cant cost that much... well... renting it for power generation probably would. I know if I owned a plot of desert and a power company wanted to *rent* it from me (instead of buying it), I would factor into that rent the fact that they are going to make a bunch of money off generating power.
What the owner of land could do would be to rent to land for a royalty, say $.01 per kilowatt hour.
As for maintenance, there is always that... but that affects every form of power generation we have. Of course, these panels are *supposed* to be more durable...
PV panels today can last 20 years if not longer. The expensive part of a small, therefore not applicable, solar power system is the batteries, however if you're intertied you don't need batteries.
FalconShould there be a Law?
And their longevity ISNT something I considered... thanks for pointing that out... if a (conventional) solar panel lasts up to 30 years - but these new ones last up to 3... then there really isnt any savings at all... and even at 10 years, the savings gets minimized considerably...
Actually if these cells only last 3 years they are still cheaper. Sure at only 10% of the cost of others and only lasting a 10% as long it seems they would cost just as much over the 30 years however in 5, 10, or even 15 years tyme the price will drop even more, in inflation adjusted dollars Solar cells are dropping in price. And with increased efficiency the price per kilowatt will decline. The problem though is what happens to them once they are no longer any good.
FalconShould there be a Law?
[Tongue-in-cheek-mode-on]
I foresee a future where geothermal is the predominate energy source just like fossil fuels are now. After about 100 years or so the average temp of the earth's core will be a degree or two cooler overall thus affecting the earth's magnetic field as circulation of molten rock within the earch slows. That's right, we will have caused global cooling!
Oddly enough I've also been to the biggest geothermal plant, and it's neither in Iceland nor in the Philippines...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larderello producing 4,800 GWh per year (about 4 times more than the theoretical maximum of the 125 MW of tongonan)
It is amaing if it is feasible, but what is the effect of sucking 90 quadrillion kilowatt-hours of energy out of the earth? Have there been many studies into the effects? I think the only real solution to the problem is: * Get the bulk of energy from the sun. Its free + clean. All the energy from biomass, oil etc essentially came from the sun originally anyway! * Fusion. Not really dissimilar to solar energy, since the sun is a fusion reactor. If we cant get enough from the sun, then fusion could be a back-up. Any surplus energy could be beamed out to space using microwaves to prevent heating the earth up. Energy for vehicles could use any high density energy source that can be easily derived from the suns' energy such as fatty acids. Maybe an engine could be designed that metabolises fatty acids to generate electricity rather than directly combusting them. You'd still get CO2 but it would be neutralized byt its generation at the power 'plant'.
I don't know where I read or saw this. But I heard that someone saying the new space race is not for fun or just to show off power. It is much to do with finding hidden He3 isotopes in the moon crust. I don't know how to draw the structure of a such isotope, but it has been told, He3 can provide lot of power.
Who knows??? Think I am gonna see a 21st century gold (more sorta Helium) rush....
Nice one. As the parent of three teenage girls, I'd like to nominate Avril Lavigne.
Read the wiki again. In your initial posting, you called it a plant. A plant is composed of one or more wells, such as the Geysers have. Your plant is just a single well. The geysers is composed of multiple wells spread all over to keep it from dropping too much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coso_Volcanic_Field#Geothermal
When the Coso field was initially being developed, well locations were selected based on heightened mercury levels in the soil.
Just because it's a pretty glacier doesn't mean the glacier isn't grinding up a deposit of arsenic into its milk.
Considering those glaciers provide the drinking water for several cities and have for more than a century, I expect they're not grinding up significant quantities of arsenic.
On the other hand, she turned into a pop biatch after she got hitched.
If you view our planet and the heat energy it has stored in it as a battery, won't tapping into that energy source drain our planet of the heat it needs to stay alive? How much of the heat energy in our planet can we consume before it starts to cool Earth's core? What unforeseen side effects could this have on our planet's health?
The most ideal source of energy would be a source external to our planet. Which pretty much means solar energy. It seems that uncontrolled consumption of any terresterial source of energy is ultimately detrimental. All sources of energy are finite. Coal, oil, natural gas, wind, solar, and geothermal energy can all are energy reserves that are all stored in one form or another. They are not infinite, but far more solar energy exists than any other source of energy. I am far from being a scientist, but it seems that people advocate one form of energy over another because their preferred energy source is so superior to any other and seemingly has no shortcomings. According to them, if we all just starting using [fill in the blank] all of our problems would be solved. We must all be honest about the energy problems we face as a human race and focus on energy conservation, no matter where the energy comes from.
Third, we still have problems with maintenance, and need to rent a large amount of land to put the things on.
Solar panels are almost maintenance-free. Wiping the dust off occasionally boosts efficiency slightly. And if they track the sun, the mechanism might break down. From my experience with my solar PV panels, that's IT.
And you don't need land, you need flat roofs. Start with big warehouses in the Southwest.
=S
So true. As part of my solar PV installation, I got a net use meter. Instead of that pathetic stupid antique spinning disk that requires a stopwatch and a calculator, I've got an LCD showing instantaneous consumption in kiloWatts. So every time I walk in or out I check my consumption. Any time it's above 1 kW I try to figure out why. I soon realized the downstairs track lights eat 400 Watts, so I leave them off. It pointed out that when a vacuum cleaner brags about stupendous suction power, that means high electric consumption, so I don't leave it running while moving the furniture and changing attachments. It reminds me to activate standby and switch off my computer power strip. It shows that my Sub-Zero fridge is a beautiful piece of inefficient constantly-running crap. Etc. etc. If every house had one, consumption would take a quick dive.
It's still flawed:
=S
To be competitive with oil they have to be 1/10th the price of current cells (actually more like 1/15th or 1/20th if you count fairly, at an equal taxation rate) and last for fifty years, at full capacity.
Not really, if you include the massive subsidies petroleum gets, billions of dollars being spent daily in Iraq for instance, oil is way more expensive. If solar, wind, and other alternative sources of energy were to get as much tax payer money the costs of them would drop.
As you point out, large scale installations of solar cells could be an environmental nightmare when they start wearing out.
But then again computers, cellphones, and all of the other electric and electronic gadgets have the same problem or similar ones. A lot of the fighting in the conflict in the Congo is over coltan, a mineral cellphones are dependent on. Even oil shares blame for conflicts. The conflict in the Niger Delta is in a big part over oil.
FalconShould there be a Law?
It's easy to say that oil benefits from big subsidies, but how true is it? Iraq wasn't holding out on supplying oil -- they were desperate to do so. The war there certainly isn't making oil prices drop any.
Computers, cellphones and other electronic gadgets use electronic components and their associated nastiness in areas measured in square millimetres. Solar panels use them in areas measured in hectares. Fighting in the Congo or Niger isn't really an environmental nightmare. Dealing with large scale production of square kilometres of things we usually only make in chunks ten billion times smaller might be.
Even a perfect solar water heater wouldn't make you off grid.
As long as you depend on the grid for electricity you're not off the grid.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Ah, I see your problem; you are going to move the goalposts until either (a) you have defined away anything that can harm your argument, or (b) your opponent deems you worthless and goes on to other things.
Greenpeace are environmentalists.
You asked for an example.
You got one.
You don't like that and want to change the rules.
That doesn't mean you win; it means you are intellectually dishonest.
Which means we can all ignore you.
which is nothing more than a difference of opinion as to what we each consider deep. To me, 2 miles down - for a human/human machine - is deep.
Ok, yea I can see that.
FalconShould there be a Law?
It's easy to say that oil benefits from big subsidies, but how true is it? Iraq wasn't holding out on supplying oil -- they were desperate to do so. The war there certainly isn't making oil prices drop any.
No, Iraq wasn't holding out. It was UN sanctions, backed by the US, that was holding Iraq from exporting oil. If Saddam had been left to rule though he could have picked which companies could export the oil. Instead of picking US oil companies he could have used French, Russian, or even started an Iraqi oil company to export oil. Mind you, I'm not making out Saddam to be a saint. Actually I was against supporting him during the 1980s when the Reagan and Bush Sr admins did support him, all while he was using Weapons of Mass Destruction. As for oil prices, oil companies want high prices, the higher the price of oil is the more they make.
Fighting in the Congo or Niger isn't really an environmental nightmare.
It can be a nightmare environmentally, however the real nightmare is for those raped and murdered in the grab for control of the resources, whether oil or coltan.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Yes, so the war wasn't about securing oil, or making it cheaper, it was about securing it for US companies. Big difference. The price would be pretty much the same whether it was US companies or French companies doing the drilling.
I live in an oil boom town. Yes, oil companies make lots of money when the price is high, but not as much as the conspiracies would have you think. Much of the profits you'd get from high prices are eaten up by very expensive exploration and extraction techniques needed to increase production to meet demand and doing much of that in a very unstable political environment.
Sure, but the potential problem with solar cells with short lifetimes, which is what we were talking about, isn't so much a war for resources (that will happen anyway), it's the potential damage we could cause by making those cells and then having to dispose of them. After all, barring the odd oil spill and localized damage from drilling, the big problem with oil is carbon dioxide... it's not exactly a highly noxious substance, it's just we produce a whole whackload of it. Now scale up solar cell production to the same level (and with the requirement that they be completely replaced every few years). Solar cells have gotten a lot cleaner than they used to be, but we're still talking about a LOT of them.
The price would be pretty much the same whether it was US companies or French companies doing the drilling.
But it makes a big difference to both French and US companies who gets the money.
scale up solar cell production to the same level (and with the requirement that they be completely replaced every few years). Solar cells have gotten a lot cleaner than they used to be, but we're still talking about a LOT of them.
Solar cells last more than a "few years". You can find solar panels with warranties longer than 20 years. SunPower's panels have a 25 year warranty. As does some BP panels. Here are more panels with 20 or 25 year warranties. And those were just the first 3 results from googling "solar panels" warranty.
FalconShould there be a Law?
When you jumped into this thread we were discussing how new super efficient solar panels might be viable IF they last (at something near full capacity) for a reasonable amount of time. Pointing out that some other solar panels have long warranties isn't particularly useful since it says very little about the ones we're discussing. If you can find the warranty on Nanosolar's (as yet unverified) super efficient solar panels with any amount of Googling, colour me impressed (well, skeptical, actually). Otherwise, I think you've lost the thread of the discussion.
Hi,
I think that the UK government agrees with you that the meter has to be easily visible and inside: the kitchen is often cited (and indeed sited!) as the ideal location. From early next year our (retail) electricity supplier will have to supply us with such a meter for free if we ask for it.
Monitoring of individual circuits would be good, I agree.
Rgds
Damon
http://m.earth.org.uk/
Ok.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Due to the messy waste water byproducts. I recal this was in the 1990s.