Slashdot Mirror


Pouring Water Into a Volcano To Generate Power

Hugh Pickens writes "Until recently, geothermal power systems have exploited only resources where naturally occurring heat, water, and rock permeability are sufficient to allow energy extraction. Now, geothermal energy developers plan use a new technology called Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) to pump 24 million gallons of water into the side of the dormant Newberrry Volcano, located about 20 miles south of Bend, Oregon, in an effort to use the earth's heat to generate power. 'We know the heat is there,' says Susan Petty, president of AltaRock Energy, Inc. of Seattle. 'The big issue is can we circulate enough water through the system to make it economic.' Since natural cracks and pores do not allow economic flow rates, the permeability of the volcanic rock can be enhanced with EGS by pumping high-pressure cold water down an injection well into the rock, creating tiny fractures in the rock, a process known as hydroshearing. Then cold water is pumped down production wells into the reservoir, and the steam is drawn out. Natural geothermal resources only account for about 0.3 percent of U.S. electricity production, but a 2007 Massachusetts Institute of Technology report projected EGS could bump that to 10 percent within 50 years, at prices competitive with fossil-fuels. 'The important question we need to answer now,' says USGS geophysicist Colin Williams, 'is how geothermal fits into the renewable energy picture, and how EGS fits. How much it is going to cost, and how much is available.'"

42 of 321 comments (clear)

  1. Not just that by aglider · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why not throwing the waste there instead of the landfill?

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    1. Re:Not just that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think this would be a great idea if it could work. The problem would most likely be polution. There is also the political issues of the fact that burning trash would emit CO2. I personaly think AGW is a load of crap, but I do recognize that some people would feel it important enough to bring the government down on this practice.

      The other problem is that wouldn't want everything that goes into a landfill being burned and put into the atmosphere, quite a lot would be toxic. I think that if you started seperating what's OK from what's bad, you'd end up with a pile of landfill waste, a pile of recyclable items, and a very small if not nonexistant pile of volcano fuel.

      Plus there shouldn't be any need. If what I've read is correct, the energy created by the (inactive)volcano would far surpass our ability to extract energy.

    2. Re:Not just that by Hentes · · Score: 3, Informative

      The same reason you don't burn them: air pollution.

    3. Re:Not just that by Gordonjcp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why not use the volcano as a heat source for gasification and thermal depolymerisation then?

    4. Re:Not just that by oiron · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Forget AGW - though I don't agree with you on that (that's another discussion)

      The real problem is that when you indiscriminately burn junk like plastics and other long-chain polymers, you end up with dioxins and furans. Those are some seriously toxic chemicals coming out of that mix. It's essentially burning an unholy mess of everything known to man that we ever throw out. Any of those toxins get into the water supply somewhere, you've got SERIOUS problems!

      And why burn the compostable solids, anyway? We've got a better use for them; really composting, and then using the compost as manure for our gardens and farmlands...

    5. Re:Not just that by QuantumRiff · · Score: 4, Informative

      Newberry crater isn't like a volcano in the movies.. the caldera at the top has two lakes, a resort, campgrounds, etc. There is also a very large obsidian lava flow (100 feet of glass rocks, its pretty cool).. It also has awesome views from the top. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newberry_Volcano

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    6. Re:Not just that by Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In fact, there are very few places in the world (I believe it's seven) where there are exposed, persistent lava lakes. They're very rare. I believe the list is Erta Ale (Ethiopia); Nyiragongo (Congo); Erebus (Antarctica, offshore island) ; Saunders (South Sandwich Islands); Villarrica (Chile); Kilauea (Hawaii); and Marum (Vanuatu). It's one of my dreams to someday climb the volcano on Saunders and see the lava lake at the summit; as far as I am aware, nobody has ever done so (its existence is inferred from the presence of a persistent steam cloud and satellite thermal imaging, but it's a very remote, inhospitable location; to even get there, you have to charter an oceangoing yacht and do a difficult landing in an inflatable boat, timed to the waves, onto rocky cliffs, in the middle of the South Atlantic).

      No, drilling into a magma chamber doesn't trigger an eruption. A tiny borehole isn't nearly enough of a weakness (remember also that it's not so much a "hole"; it's a tube full of "mud" with roughly the same density as the surrounding rock, so the pressure is equalized). They accidentally drilled into a magma chamber in Krafla (Iceland) at one point. The magma filled up the bottom couple dozen meters of the bore before semi-solidifying. Not sure what to do, they tried starting injecting water, and it actually worked; they're now producing steam from it and are considering drilling more such holes intentionally (they had previously tried to avoid the magma).

      --
      The *special* hell.
  2. They're going to frack a Volcano? by aoeu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What could possibly go wrong . . .

    --
    All your database are belong to U.S.
    1. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by lightknight · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Part of me agrees with you; however, another part of me thinks that until we try, we'll never know whether our fears are just that, fears.

      So I, for one, think we should consider it.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    2. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by fafaforza · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wouldn't want a profit driven corporation in charge of something like this. They'll have an interest in making it work no matter if there are warning signs or risks.

    3. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by semi-extrinsic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This reminds me of one of the stories about the Manhattan Project. Before the first (Trinity) test, Enrico Fermi began offering anyone listening a wager on "whether or not the bomb would ignite the atmosphere, and if so, whether it would merely destroy New Mexico or destroy the world." They still went through with it.

      --
      for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
    4. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by JWW · · Score: 4, Funny

      Look at it this way. It's a low emissions way to generate power which will help combat global warming.

      OR

      It will set off the volcano and release particles into the atmosphere which will combat global warming.

      It's all good!

    5. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by tgd · · Score: 5, Funny

      What could possibly go wrong . . .

      Michael Bay is inspired for a new movie?

    6. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by Jawnn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At least you can sue the corporation when they fuck up. good luck with the government

      You mean... there's a difference?

    7. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by flyingfsck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, if the sea cannot cool down and underwater volcano, what makes you think that pumping a little pissant stream into one will do anything?

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    8. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by poity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't understand why many on slashdot are against this. We mock anti-nuclear power alarmists for blowing fears out of proportion, yet here we are saying "Oh no we shouldn't do this because there might be a catastrophe"

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    9. Re:They're going to frack a Volcano? by Rennt · · Score: 3, Informative

      He was joking. The possibility was first raised by Edward Teller, but it was ruled out long before the test by showing radiative losses exceeded energy production. The story goes that Oppenheimer mentioned it passing to Arthur Compton, who had the bad judgment to mention it to the Whitehouse. After that the scientists never heard the end of it

      It's akin to a scientist at the LHC taking bets about ending the world through creation of a black hole.

  3. Water shortages? by acoustix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I didn't RTFA, but with our projected water shortages coming in the future do we really want to be pumping millions of gallons for energy? Surely there's a better way to get usable energy.

    --
    "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
    1. Re:Water shortages? by fafaforza · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They could use salt water. Desalinating water is still fairly expensive, as far as I know, so that might not take away from the availability of drinkable water. Though what effect the salt would have on the process would have to be studied.

    2. Re:Water shortages? by tomhath · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The volcano is right between two decent sized lakes so there's plenty of water available.

      As far as water "shortages", it's really a water distribution problem. There's plenty of fresh water flowing down rivers into the ocean. But people like to live in desert climates like Phoenix and Las Vegas where they don't have to worry about rainy days messing up the golf they play on irrigated fairways.

  4. Head to Hawaii... by TrailerTrash · · Score: 5, Informative

    They've been there, done that:

    http://www.punageothermalventure.com/

    A 30 MW plant producing heat and energy from the world's most active volcano. An 8 MW addition was just approved, and the utility (HELCO) is looking to expand even further:

    http://www.hawaii247.com/2012/01/06/helco-announces-plans-to-expand-geothermal-energy-on-the-big-island/

    If there is an area that has a shot at 100% of their electricity from non-petroleum sources, it's the Big Island, with abundant wind, solar and geothermal options.

  5. yea by unity100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    sue, and do what, exactly ? gain a $5 bn award in damages ? after a volcano erupts, kills a few thousand, poisons a few more million mildly through what it releases ?

    what happened when bp fucked up the entire mexico gulf ecosystem ?

    1. Re:yea by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And no one's gone to the trouble of modeling what happens when you chill down part of a lava dome. Does it harden, then blow sky high? Does it pressure masses underneath the caldera to cause nice earthquakes? Do you get a nice fissure opening up somewhere else to flow the lava into new and vulnerable areas? How long before the solidification means you have drill new spots? How are you going to stabilize the old spots? I don't think there are any lava-eating bacteria to help save the day here. There is nothing we have that's going to repair a newly active caldera. Look at what St Helens did, just a few miles up the road. Talk about playing with matches....

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    2. Re:yea by yahwotqa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's nice, but the bar for "enough" is set too high.

    3. Re:yea by unity100 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      - 1) There's now incentive to stop really harmful activities

      there is ?!?!!?! do you think gulf spill was the first dumbfounding disaster in corporate history ? what makes it any different now ?

      - 2) Those private businesses that cause harm pay compensation for their harm

      will that bring back 2000 or so dead people ?

      - 3) Those businesses go away, if they cause enough harm.

      did exxon mobil go away ? did pfizer go away after poisoning hundreds of thousands in india ? have bp gone away ?

    4. Re:yea by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      there is ?!?!!?! do you think gulf spill was the first dumbfounding disaster in corporate history ? what makes it any different now ?

      No, nor will it be the last. One also has to consider the size, frequency, and duration of such accidents. For example, the Deepwater Horizon spill was stopped in a few short months. BP could have in the absence of regulation and liability, just ignored the spill (leaving it permanently on) and moved on.

    5. Re:yea by oiron · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why should those companies go away? Shouldn't the punishment fit the crime (I don't consider any of the above serious crimes FYI either because they weren't that serious or didn't happen as in the case of Pfizer)? Or should we execute you when you jaywalk?

      Entire ecosystems destroyed, livelihoods (for fishermen, for example) ruined, 200000 people poisoned in Bhopal,...

      That's JAYWALKING ?

      Union Carbide at the very least deserves execution (i.e., revocation of the corporate charter, maybe imprisonment of the top management on manslaughter charges).

    6. Re:yea by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And no one's gone to the trouble of modeling what happens when you chill down part of a lava dome. Does it harden, then blow sky high? Does it pressure masses underneath the caldera to cause nice earthquakes? Do you get a nice fissure opening up somewhere else to flow the lava into new and vulnerable areas? How long before the solidification means you have drill new spots? How are you going to stabilize the old spots? I don't think there are any lava-eating bacteria to help save the day here. There is nothing we have that's going to repair a newly active caldera. Look at what St Helens did, just a few miles up the road. Talk about playing with matches....

      Are you making the question in the rhetorical sense because you know for a fact that no one is doing just that, or are you asking the question because that is what you are assuming?

    7. Re:yea by khipu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Somebody has to drill for oil, and they are going to create oil spills, that's just a fact of life. We (humans) try to do the best we can when weighing costs and benefits, and when we get it wrong, we try to correct it. But doing nothing because it might be too risky is just as bad as not regulating things at all.

      I suspect BP and Exxon both had a much harder time getting new contracts, but in the end, there are few companies that can do these kinds of jobs. So what alternative do you suggest?

    8. Re:yea by khallow · · Score: 4, Funny

      I recommend you find a new pet peeve to be peeved about. I'm not changing my lingo for that weak a jibe.

  6. Re:Renewable energy is a myth. by lightknight · · Score: 4, Funny

    From what we have observed of the universe, yes, that does appear to be the long term diagnosis.

    In the short-term, though, I'm more worried about the Sun undergoing its projected expansion phase (in a few billion years), or human beings accidentally finding a way to stop the Earth's dynamo (that one actually keeps me up at night).

    --
    I am John Hurt.
  7. Re:stop messing with nature! by semi-extrinsic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sounds like someone took The Day After Tomorrow a little too seriously...

    Seriously, though, any method of producing energy will necessarily have a negative impact on something. Here in Norway, we have a lot of "clean" hydropower, but that has always faced opposition from environmentalists worrying about salmon and other fish, and from the native Sami people in the north. If you want to reduce global CO2 emissions, you are inevitably going to damage something else in some way. It is always a tradeoff, trying to find the least total negative impact.

    --
    for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
  8. Pouring water into volcanos... by nxcho · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...is also useful to generate cobblestone, especially on some pvp maps.

    --
    When asked why, the answer is almost always: "It's 2014".
  9. I heard the same thing about the German V2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There were apparently theories that the upper atmosphere was uncombined hydrogen
    and oxygen, and that there was a chance a V2 going high enough would set it off.
    Lotta nerve there.

    1. Re:I heard the same thing about the German V2 by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      There were apparently theories that the upper atmosphere was uncombined hydrogen and oxygen, and that there was a chance a V2 going high enough would set it off. Lotta nerve there.

      They also must have thought that all those countless meteors must be really polite to respect the "no smoking" warnings every time they are flying throught that layer.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:I heard the same thing about the German V2 by jo_ham · · Score: 3, Informative

      Photodissociation.

      It happens all the time in the upper atmosphere due to high energy UV from the sun. The chemistry of the stratosphere is esoteric due to the low pressure and high energies involved.

      It doesn't mean that *all* of the water vapour makes it up into the stratosphere to be split by this process, so there's plenty in the lower layers to form clouds.

  10. Not again? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The results of that review have not yet been announced, but the type of geothermal energy explored in Basel and at the Geysers requires fracturing the bedrock then circulating water through the cracks to produce steam. By its nature, fracturing creates earthquakes, though most of them are small.

    I live near The Geysers, where "treated" sewage water is pumped into the ground in order to keep geothermal production up at the powerplant, which is perpetually over budget and under production, and which has produced a superfund site where they formerly buried the spray-off from the turbine wheels in drums. The turbines are produced by Halliburton — I've seen the red Halliburton truck dragging one up Bottle Rock Rd. on a massive flatbed. Failure all around... the one bright spot is that there is a process for making claims for damage due to the euphemistically-named "microseismicity" as it is generally accepted that the pumping causes quakes.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Not again? by dj245 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The turbines are produced by Halliburton — I've seen the red Halliburton truck dragging one up Bottle Rock Rd. on a massive flatbed.

      Sorry but no. Most of the Geysers turbines were manufactured by Toshiba Corp (sorry, PDF), with the exception of 2 turbines which were manufactured by GE (these may be retired now). New or replacement turbines are definitely competitively bid, since my company bids on them. Halliburton doesn't make steam turbines. If indeed you have seen Halliburton at the geysers, they must have been a transportation contractor or something like that.

      As for the "superfund site", I can't find anything on this that is less than 15 years old. And this report from 1983 says there is nothing hazardous at the Geysers. I'll agree it is a very old report and standards have changed since then, but the only other EPA document available is in 1995- they seem to have capped some wells that had the potential of a hydrogen sulfide explosion. Hardly the "drums full of toxic chemicals" that you are implying.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  11. Volcano God want ... by PPH · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... virgins! Not cold shower.

    Volcano God plenty angry now. Flatten peasants' puny city.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Volcano God want ... by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Funny

      You are recruiting in the right place.

      If the volcano gods want attractive virgins I think you are out of luck.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  12. Well... by denzacar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When the person representing the corporation in charge says something like this:

    "We know the heat is there," said Susan Petty, president of AltaRock.
    "The big issue is can we circulate enough water through the system to make it economic."

    And the expert seismologist says something like this:

    We've been monitoring [The Geysers] since 1975.
    All the earthquakes we see there are [human] induced.
    When they move production into a new area, earthquakes start there, and when they stop production, the earthquakes stop.

    Well... You kinda have a reason to fear.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  13. Icelanders have some experience by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 3, Interesting

    During the Westmann Islands eruption, they froze the leading edge of the lava flow to divert it from blocking a harbor. The lava just goes somewhere else.

    They estimate that geothermal fields are good for 50-100 years.