Slashdot Mirror


Google Funding the Next Big One?

wdavies writes "According to this New York Times article, Google is funding a controversial deep drill geothermal project north of San Francisco. Apparently the company, AltaRock, omitted to disclose that the same deep drilling caused a major quake in Basel, Switzerland when it was last used. Given the notorious geological instability of the Northern Californian coast, this strikes me as kind of dumb — and given the known likelihood of this technique producing earthquakes, somewhat EVIL."

12 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Unfair Blame to Both Google And AltaRock by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yes, Google's given these guys $6.5 million. But the United States federal government has given them $200 million--especially the Department of Energy. If you're a United States citizen, you should be aware that you are also funding "the next big one."

    Also the article says it's "nearly the same" drilling technology as the one that caused the quake in Basel while the summary says it's the same. It seems it's not the same though. The article goes on to say:

    Officials at AltaRock, with offices in Sausalito, Calif., and Seattle, insist that the company has learned the lessons of Basel and that its own studies indicate the project can be carried out safely. James T. Turner, AltaRock's senior vice president for operations, said the company had applied for roughly 20 patents on ways to improve the method.

    I don't know about Basel but I'm certain these guys know they would face serious legal/criminal action if they didn't know for sure it was safe.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Unfair Blame to Both Google And AltaRock by mini+me · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, but unlike Google, the government's motto is "Do evil." At least I'm pretty sure it is.

    2. Re:Unfair Blame to Both Google And AltaRock by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Forgot to add ... why aren't they drilling in some desert area... some abandoned nuclear test site? Sure, the power transmission losses will be larger, but so will the safety (especially compared to SF)

      First of all it's "north of San Fransisco" and by North they mean it's actually North of Santa Rosa. And it looks to be about 20 miles north of that up near Clear Lake. And if you go to their project site and look at the map at the bottom, you'll notice in the past week there's been 3.0 or larger earth quakes in that region. The 3.4 they had in Basel looks to be just another daily occurrence in those parts.

      If you look where they're drilling, there's not a whole lot of homes around there. I'm not sure what the radius of destruction is from the epicenter for a "big one" but I don't think it's massive enough to hit a lot way out there. I could be wrong. But you know, I bet if they see a 3.4 like Basel, they shut it down if the government doesn't first. I do like the interactive map on their site so you can see the earthquakes relative to their drilling.

      Who knows? They could have determined that unstable areas are safer for drilling since the region around you is having 3.0+ earthquakes all the time? Not like you're going to screw anything up if the plates are shifting constantly anyway, right?

      Also, the government funded stuff is all over the place (Utah included) so don't worry, they want this energy source available to all and non centralized. I'm not sure what your motivation is here or why the summary labeled this as pure evil Personally, I'm interested in what this could do for non-polluting energy. I think in order to get the drilling permits and convince backers it was safe enough for America you would have to show a lot of proof. But I'm not a seismologist. Looks worth a shot to me though.

      Lastly people take risks in the name of discovery and production. It happens every time a human leaves Earth's gravitational pull, it happened in the early days of a lot of technology until it was perfected. I'm not arguing we should risk human lives, I'm just pointing out that we might be blowing a risk out of proportion that, since non of us are seismologists, none of us really understand. Is it like drilling a pinhole through a one inch slab of marble or drilling the pinhole through one millimeter thick pie crust? I highly doubt they'd be wasting their time if they didn't know the ground would remain stable long enough for their tunnel to remain intact. It looks like they're taking precautions and claim to have refined the process to make it safer at least.

      --
      My work here is dung.
    3. Re:Unfair Blame to Both Google And AltaRock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      And the locals, man, don't get me started.

      Apparently they have mod points, and they are angry.

    4. Re:Unfair Blame to Both Google And AltaRock by Curlsman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Born and raised in California, earthquakes tend to be boring:
      Magnitude 3.x is what the news programs talk about in between the weather and highway traffic.
      4.x tends to be somebody says something fell over.
      5.x is when you start to notice...

      Loma Prieta was 6.9 and the epicenter about 60 miles from my home, about the same distance to the houses that collapsed and burned in San Francisco. It's not the distance but the local ground conditions that made the difference: the only thing that happened at my house was an empty soda can fell over. In the Marina District, the landfill (from the 1906 earthquake) turned to jello, something like that happened in Oakland to the freeway, and my house on a natural slope was fine.

      Besides, there is no "if" about a coming large quake, only "when", and to a lesser extent where: most likely the northern end on the Hayward fault. Santa Rosa would be the San Andreas fault.

  2. Under Pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It seems to me that the only thing a large drill may do is release the pressure that's building up. It's not going to "cause" an earthquake per se, it's going to release one before it happens natually, which will likely be less intense than if it had been allowed to build up pressure in the first place.

  3. Is Google EVIL now? by iCodemonkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does this mean google is now a super-evil corporation(TM). Will we have James Bond types trying to bring it down? (disclaimer: not enough sleep, lack of coffee and to much TV are my excuses)

    --
    Deja Moo: The feeling you've heard this bullsh*t before.
  4. 3.4? by macshit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apparently (it's hard to say for sure, since all the stories I found were kinda sensationalist) the project in Basel caused a magnitude 3.4 quake.

    That's an extremely small earthquake.

    Big trucks going a construction site also rumble and shake the ground when the go past. People bitch, but it's not considered a reason to stop construction projects (except perhaps in very exceptional circumstances).

    Frankly the furor seems to be more the "OMG they're doing something we don't understand which doesn't involve overeating and reality television! Stop them!" sort than it does a well-grounded and considered opposition.

    --
    We live, as we dream -- alone....
    1. Re:3.4? by e9th · · Score: 5, Informative

      Without significant fault lines? This article seems to suggest otherwise.

  5. Heady questions by StreetStealth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In fact, technologies like this could be useful in doing controlled release of earthquakes, such that you can pick the time it can occur so people are ready for it.

    This is a really interesting idea, the kind of stuff that makes for thoughtful sci-fi and even more thought in real life. What if we could tell the Big One was coming in the next decade but had the technology to loose its destruction at a time of our choosing?

    How would such a thing be done? How would you convince the populace and governing bodies that it was necessary? How could you make absolutely sure it was necessary?

    How would insurers decide to react? Where would everyone go? What about those refuse to leave? Are there temporary measures that could improve structural stability for 24 hours? What about people who couldn't afford them?

    What are the potentials for abuse? How would the specifics of the release be affected by politics? If there were a way to control where the greatest damage would occur, how would it be chosen? Who would choose? Would the people in the way have a say? What kind of legal liability would those involved at different levels have?

    A controlled quake release could save thousands, even tens of thousands of lives. But once there's an element of human control to unexpected disaster, all bets are off as to how our civilization deals with the responsibility.

    --
    Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
    1. Re:Heady questions by adolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You asked...

      What if we could tell the Big One was coming in the next decade but had the technology to loose its destruction at a time of our choosing?

      Then folks would be ready for it, just like OP said.

      How would such a thing be done?

      RTFA.

      Where would everyone go?

      Vacation.

      What about those refuse to leave?

      Give them video cameras, clean water, some canned goods, and a P38.

      Are there temporary measures that could improve structural stability for 24 hours?

      Yes. Tape the windows, close the doors. Remove things from shelves. And avoid doing this in dry season or rainy season, whichever is worse for the upper layers of the crust.

      What about people who couldn't afford them?

      Help them.

      How would insurers decide to react?

      They'd act like cowardly children with solid cherry desks, country club memberships, a trophy wife, and a new German car, just like they do any other time something expensive happens.

      How would the specifics of the release be affected by politics?

      Poorly. Just as every other case where a politician gets involved.

      If there were a way to control where the greatest damage would occur, how would it be chosen?

      Whatever's cheapest.

      Who would choose?

      Maps. And clinical, heartless engineers.

      Would the people in the way have a say?

      They had a say when they elected the government.

      What kind of legal liability would those involved at different levels have?

      Who cares? If we can print enough money to bail out the economy, we can print enough to cover everyone's ass in a man-made Teh Big One.

  6. Their Fatal Mistake by rally2xs · · Score: 5, Interesting

    was drilling in La La Land. They should have drilled in Montana, the Dakotas, anywhere where people are semi-reasonable about things. This project will be stopped, bet on it. It will join the power line that was stopped from connecting a large solar farm to San Diego, the LNG seaports that were stopped from being built anywhere along the left coast and wound up in Mexico, the area where they refused to build powerplants for about 10 years and not only caused themselves rolling blackouts but made their competitive position in the electricity market so weak that Enron could easiy butt-F them, as well as their being one of 5 states with diesel fuel standards so stringent that it is impossible for anyone to import or build a diesel car clean enough to be sold there, and on and on. California as a political entity is non-viable, it's just taking a while to totally collapse...