Alaska Looks To Volcanos For Geothermal Energy

Iddo Genuth writes "Alaskan state officials have recently announced their intention to begin funding the exploration and surveying of Alaska's largest volcanoes in hopes of utilizing these as a source of geothermal energy. They say this volcano could provide enough energy to power thousands of households, and according to some estimates, Alaska's volcanoes and hot springs could supply up to 25% of the state's energy needs."

Comments

Heat + Air = Hot Air?

[gbulmash]

While very neat, if we did tap geothermal resources nationwide to get up to supplying 25% of our electrical needs within a few decades, we'd still be behind Iceland. According to Wikipedia, Iceland generates 26.5 of its electricity from geothermal power. Strange to think that a place called Iceland has so much available heat for power generation.

Going a bit astray, has anyone seen the episode of Science Channel's "Eco-Tech" featuring the rooftop windmills designed by Aerotecture? Pretty cool.

Re:Heat + Air = Hot Air?

[LaskoVortex]

if we did tap geothermal resources nationwide to get up to supplying 25% of our electrical needs within a few decades

I'm of the opinion that the human race will eventually get close to 90% of its energy needs from geothermal sources. Wind and solar probably can't deliver the wattage. What people don't realize and what they don't want to believe, is that the world is not filled up with oil in the middle. Instead, its filled with molten rock, and beyond that, molten metals. And there is a lot of it in there. All you need to do is invest in shunting sea water a few miles into the earth and harvesting the energy as it boils out. Other than the initial investment, it wouldn't take coal or oil--both of which WILL run out.

Re:Heat + Air = Hot Air?

[davester666]

Yeah, once core starts to cool, we can just nuke it to warm it back up. Finally, a good use for our nuclear arsenal!

And to access these geothermal reserves, they would still have to drill down to gain access to them, and if they just "happen" to hit oil, so much the better.

Re:Heat + Air = Hot Air?

[Dahamma]

Oh come on, someone modded this *informative*?

Calling geothermal energy a "temporary fix" is about as useful as calling solar energy a temporary fix. Really, I don't think it's too shortsighted to consider an energy source that could provide power for millions (geothermal) vs billions (solar) of years as more than "temporary". Especially considering how we will have used up the relatively scarce (geologically speaking) oil resource we are looking to replace in the scale of hundreds of years. Hell, I'd be happy to see people think 50 years in advance, imagine what we could do with nuclear power if we'd invest for results with a payoff that far away...

Re:Heat + Air = Hot Air?

[BazilBBrush]

I was going to mod him down but there wasn't a suitable category - say like 'Missing The Facts'.

First off, like how much heat energy is actually present beneath the mantle? A. Big number.
Secondly, how long it will take for the magma / iron + whatever core to cool to a point where the magnetic field decreases enough? A. Another big number.

It scares me that people with so little perception of physical reality make comments as if they understand.

Just a point for you too re nuclear power. It may outlast us but Uranium reserves are not infinite either.
Now if we could only get Fusion happening...

All in all geothermal is a great idea - as mentioned in Iceland, and I think the Kiwis (New Zealand) harvest a bit for sparks and even the UK for hot water if I am not mistaken.

No not available everywhere but whatever helps...

Re:Heat + Air = Hot Air?

[EdIII]

That's cute. Ummm, what on Earth (no pun intended) are you talking about and how did you get modded informative?

We will probably never get *any* energy from the Earth's core at all. The crust of the Earth alone is 3-5 miles thick under the oceans and 15-35 miles thick on the continents.

Now, the Earth's core is thought to have at least half to ninety percent of it's energy generated from nuclear decay. That means we CANT draw all that energy off at once, even if we could draw it all in the first place. We would be rationed. There is also tidal forces to consider as well. The orbit around the Sun and the Moon for example can generate large amounts of energy in the Earth's core too.

Drilling even 20,000 feet is an ACCOMPLISHMENT. To my knowledge, and I have been on drilling rigs and know people in drilling companies, we have never broken 50,000 feet commercially. So ANYTHING we do is going to be in the CRUST, and not the mantle and certainly not the core. To get to the mantle of the earth on a continent we would have to drill in excess of 75,000 feet. I am pretty sure that at that depth concrete won't do it to create a stable pipeline and you will need some pretty neat material to withstand those stresses and keep a hole open.

Furthermore, the Sun provides an incredible amount of energy. Off the top of my head I think it is near 400 watts per square meter or approximately 1.8*10^17 WATTS total at any given time. That's a lot. 90%+ of the energy present in the crust of the Earth comes from the Sun. The core is providing a negligible amount of that power and most is probably received through direct volcanic activity and not emissions. Don't quote me on that, it's just a guess.

Considering that, in 2005 we required nearly 500 quadrillion BTUs of energy for the whole planet. Nearly 700 quadrillion is projected to be required in 2030. So let's just top that off at a nice quintillion BTUs. After multiplying that by .293 to convert to WATTS we get 293 quadrillion WATTS of energy. That is also PER YEAR. How much of that can be provided by the energy received from the Sun in the crust? 100%.

So basically the Sun can give us all the energy we will need for one year in one day and probably be done before breakfast is over.

We would have to use ALL the energy from the crust of the Earth FASTER than the SUN can replenish it BEFORE we could even begin to siphon off energy from the core.

So yes, you are correct that the energy at the Earth's core is not unlimited, nor is energy unlimited in the Sun or from any orbit. However, for a VERY LONG TIME we would only be able to suck a small droplet of blood of what is sure to be a gargantuan beast of energy. To say we could ever consume enough energy to surpass the energy provided by the Sun at any one moment is just fantastic, awesome, and up there with the Tooth Fairy.

You may also want to consider that the 293 quadrillion BTU requirement represents an INCREDIBLE amount of waste and inefficiency with our processes. I bet that by the time we get to 2075 (if we are not dead already) it will be because we figured out how to survive on far less than that.

Re:Heat + Air = Hot Air?

[ThePeices]

yes, it is definitely possible to 'deplete' a geothermal resource, but it will recover given enough time ( lots of time ). For example the Wairakei geothermal field here in New Zealand has depleted somewhat because they oversized the geothermal plant when it was built and it has been running for 60 years! ( but we forgive them, it was built in 1958, and it is the second oldest geothermal power plant in the world ). The wikipedia article on geothermal power describes depletion in more detail

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_power

Re:Heat + Air = Hot Air?

[pimpimpim]

Hmm, but for a drill like that, you'd need a drill made out of Unobtanium. With the current funding it will take years to develop! And the crew has to consist of at least a woman, a scientist, an astronaut, and a guy who dies.

Geyserville, CA

[cathector]

i was surprised to read that The Geysers, just north of San Francisco, claims to be "the largest complex of geothermal power plants in the world". i guess "largest" is open to interpretation. But here's another startling claim: "The Geysers satisfies nearly 60 percent of the average electricity demand in the North Coast region from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon border".

who knew ?

Iceland vs Greenland

[yorkshiredale]

Anyone else noticed that Iceland is quite a green and verdant place, while Greenland is a large lump of ice?

Don't need no stinking volcano...

[TapeCutter]

The CSIRO in Australia has been investigating the practicality of producing electricity from granite deposits since the early nineties. Also since the nineties the same organisation has been saying that Australia could produce all it's power and then some from either solar or wind.

The problem for the last 11yrs in this country has been purely political as we stood stubbornly by the US. Because of this misdirected loyalty our power generation remains 90+% derived from coal and we have seen many innovations payed for by taxpayers sold off to private companies in the EU and elsewhere.

Now that our breadbasket (the Murry-Darling basin) is regularly producing half of what it did just a couple of decades ago people are starting to pay attention.

Re:Volunteers?

[n dot l]

So, how many virgins per minute does it require to keep going?

This is Slashdot. Your question is making people...uncomfortable.