World's First Magma-Based Geothermal Energy System

Lucas123 writes: "The Iceland Deep Drilling Project (IDDP) announced it broke through to the Mantle and created a superheated steam pipe capable of producing power at the nearby Krafla Power Plant in Northern Iceland. The system was operational for several months until a malfunctioning valve forced its closure. The IDDP, however, plans to either reopen its first magma-based geothermal bore hole (PDF) — IDDP-1 — or drill another one at Reykjanes. While the IDDP-1 is not the first bore hole to reach the planet's magma, it is the first time an operation has been able to harness the mantle's heat to produce a steam pipe that could power a plant."

Comments

Is no one else concerned?

[Gothmolly]

Have we learned nothing from science fiction?

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[bondsbw]

There's nothing a well-placed nuke won't fix?

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[pushing-robot]

Obligatory.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not concerned at all. If anyone understands eruptions it's the people living on top of that one in middle of the Atlantic.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[rossdee]

That if you go down far enough from Iceland, you will reach the Centre of the Earth?

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[ackthpt]

They'll bring up the Balrog! Noozzz!

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Last_Available_Usern]

If gigantic seams that span the entire planet across the tectonic plates isn't enough to cause the planet to implode I doubt a few small holes will either.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Mashdar]

I for one greet our new Lavos/Ragnaros/Dolomite Robot overlord.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Delarth799]

Shush with you and your damn logic, we will have none of that around here!

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Anonymous Coward]

Eruptions? What about the Lava-Men?

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Too late, crack is everywhere. Meth, too.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Chris Mattern]

Actually, the first thing I thought of was this.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Gravis Zero]

Have we learned nothing from science fiction?

Of course we've learned. How do you think we keep coming up with these ideas?

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[MrBigInThePants]

It sounds like a joke till this works really well and then everybody starts doing it.... ...and then they get bigger and bigger with more and more exponentially.... ...and then we discover what the unforeseen negative side effects caused by the unbelievably massive scale we are implementing this are... ...but we are too balls deep to stop now because all our economies depend on it so heavily.... ...so we angst about it and the pollys flap their mouth parts but corporations just keep on truckin on with business as usual until.... ...disaster....

I seem to vaguely remember something similar happening recently with old dead trees or something but it can't have been important. Just as well we sorted that all out eh?!

PS: No I am not predicting doom I would just like those in charge to at least think briefly about where such things might go before we get there....for once.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Daniel Dvorkin]

We know a whole lot more about geology now than we knew about ecology when we started burning coal, and then oil, for fuel. Not to say it's not risk-free--no method of power generation is--but you can be reasonably sure that the people running the project have carefully estimated both the costs and benefits.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Rei]

Haha, actually it was accidental. When they broke through into a magma chamber, that wasn't the goal - they didn't realize they were that close, they were just trying to tap the hot rock near it. But after magma filled up the borehole a couple dozen meters, they decided to try to turn lemons into lemonade and produce steam... and it actually worked.

But yeah, I think a lot of people have a gross misunderstanding how drilling works. You're not creating some big open hole that magma can just shoot up. If you tried that, the hole would collapse before you got very deep at all. Your hole is full of "mud" that is at least as high pressure as the surrounding rock. The gas isn't going to suddenly come out of solution and trigger an eruption when you drill into magma, you're not reducing the pressure on it.

And I'm sure it's mentioned somewhere below, but whoever wrote this article is an idiot. The mantle isn't full of magma, it's solid. The crust is where magma is found They did not drill to the mantle, they drilled into a magma chamber.

The only thing I learned from the article was that they plan to try the same thing in Reykjanes. I fully expect people to freak out, given that's where three quarters of our population lives ;) Also, I didn't know the stats on the sort of power they were getting out of that well... 36MWe of 450C steam from a single geothermal well is bloody insane. Hopefully this will prove to be economical and thus an incentive to stop destroying all of our rivers one after the next for hydroelectric power. : Oh, and I'm not surprised to learn that Alcoa was helping. There's three aluminum smelters here, and even the smallest of them uses more power than all of the homes and businesses combined. They built the largest hydroelectric plant in Europe (in the middle of the formerly-largest-undeveloped-wilderness in Europe) just to power a single smelter.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[MickyTheIdiot]

"Inferno" is what I always think of when reading a geothermal story, too. One of the best serials featuring my favorite Doctor...

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Rei]

Snæfellsjökull's melting should make it easier to find the entrance!

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[webmistressrachel]

I was going to mod you into oblivion for being a troll, but I did due diligence first and looked at the homepage!

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have we learned nothing from science fiction?

Have we learned nothing from dwarf fortress?

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Idarubicin]

...same thing in Reykjanes. I fully expect people to freak out, given that's where three quarters of our population lives ;)

Is Reykjavik on the Reykjanes peninsula proper, or just next to it? (Sure, I'll give you Keflavik and Hafnarfjörður, but they ain't three quarters of the population. :D)

Besides, the bits where they would be drilling would presumably be near the existing geothermal power plants, in the middle of hundreds of square kilometers of lava fields. The worst that could happen to this terrain already happened, and relatively recently (mostly in the last ten thousand years, and sometimes within the last millennium) and it already looks it.

I suppose the Blue Lagoon could be destroyed, but...meh, tourists.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on now, its not obligatory if no one has heard of it before.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[dpilot]

I don't think you can really know where to start start before the Kalens of July.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[wasteoid]

Now I want a t-shirt that says, "Me am go too far!"

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Svartormr]

Don't worry. As long as they haven't found mithril yet we're safe. >:)

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Svartormr]

And considering Britain today is more a match for the alternate universe fascist Britain in "Inferno"....

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[MrBigInThePants]

So we know the effects of pouring trillions of tons of water into the ground per year cooling the magma layer over time by some amount and the effect this will have?

Interesting. Have not read that paper.

Again. Not being alarmist. Just thinking ahead and wondering - as any intellectually minded person does occasionally.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[mcswell]

.ereht saw I A.S.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can find quite a few papers on closely related topics, ranging from detailed papers trying to measure the heat flux out of the mantle to work towards estimates of the power balance in the Earth's core, to detailed surveys of geothermal potential of different regions which include not just the heat flux, but the potential issues with over extract that can render the plant at a particular place unsustainable.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[kerrbear]

Obligatory

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Anonymous Coward]

That if you go down far enough from Iceland, you will reach the Centre of the Earth?

No, the world will scream.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Rei]

I've seen different maps define it differently, but most maps of Reykjanes include all the way up to Mosfellsbær (to go any further is to be on Kjalarnes). But then again, when most people want to talk about closer to Reykjavík they talk about either Reykjavík or Höfuðborgarsvæði... so I'm not sure if technically it's part. Either way, it's close. There are known magma chambers that are considered a threat to Reykjavík if they went off.

These eruptions aren't little point effects. As the fact that they've poured out hundreds of square kilometers of lava fields should be pointed out. ;) Hafnarfjörður and parts of Reykjavík are on top of relatively young lava fields. Hraunbær (Lava Town) is just to my south. And thats just about flooding with lava, let alone ash and gas consequences. So yeah, it's a serious matter - it's just one unlikely to be affected for the worse by drilling.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[tmosley]

As a resident of the United States, near the border of the Yellowstone caldera, I want this tech brought here and applied on as large a scale as possible, to drain some of that slowly but ever building explosive force.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[GarethIwanFairclough]

I just don't see why this tech is needed when we have the technology to generate all the electricity and heat we need through nuclear fission. Eventually, fission will give way to fusion, but geothermal and 'renewable' energy technologies are just an unnecessary distraction IMO.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[brianerst]

There's a certain ahistoric view of energy development that drives me nuts (not necessarily your comment, but it triggers my rant...)

We have switched energy resources over the years not just because it was cheaper but because it was cleaner and more sustainable. We went from burning trees (deforesting entire countries and enveloping the land in smoke and soot), using animal power (leaving billions of metric tons of shit strewn throughout our cities, towns and villages) and using animal fat (nearly wiping out all cetaceans in under a century) to burning coal (land destruction was minimized vs trees), then petroleum (getting rid of the shit and the soot), then natural gas (lowering our CO2 emissions).

At every point since technology became an important part of human existence, we've ramped up the existing technology to pull as many people as possible out of abject poverty (mainly as a side-effect of economic development, but nonetheless). Then, when we realize that that technology is unsustainable (prices shoot up), we develop the next technology and ramp that one up - using the new-found wealth to clean up the old messes and finding new side-effects that are generally more benign than the last but that become bad due to the increased scale. Rinse, lather, repeat...

This is a nerd site - we'll figure out the next step eventually and use our expanded wealth and energy to clean up the bad effects of the previous technology. Our focus should be on accelerating that process - using price pressures (like carbon taxes) to encourage research and deployment of cleaner technologies. We also need to be ready to remediate the damage we've done so we can use some of our next tranche of new wealth to restore ecologies and species as best we can.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Reziac]

Like we might end up with a crack in the world?

It's been done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Reziac]

If you've got one coming up where it's not wanted, could drilling conceivably redirect it?

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Luckyo]

Nukes need scale to make sense. Iceland is among other things likely too small so that powering it with a nuclear plant would create a single point of failure in its power supply.

Then there's the fact that geothermal is very cheap and readily available in Iceland, while requiring little foreign expertise and fuel. Nuclear would require both.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[tangle001]

Well.. in my opinion, some humans and human organizations can't be trusted with radiation and to act in the interest of life and humans. No nukes.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Solandri]

Also, I didn't know the stats on the sort of power they were getting out of that well... 36MWe of 450C steam from a single geothermal well is bloody insane. Hopefully this will prove to be economical and thus an incentive to stop destroying all of our rivers one after the next for hydroelectric power.

The number of places where you can do this above sea level is vanishingly small. Iceland sits on a rift where two continental plates meet (theorized to be where an asteroid made a lucky hit and punctured the seam between the plates). Consequently there's very little rock you have to drill through to break through the Earth's crust and reach a good-sized magma pocket. It's also why geothermal is so viable there (it practically heats the entire nation).

They only had to drill 2 km down. For most of the world, the crust is thinnest under the ocean floor - about 6 km thick. And the floating deep ocean drilling platforms you have to use makes this idea economically unfeasible. Even a lot of oil is too expensive to be extracted from down there (for comparison, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill released about 4.9 million barrels of oil in 87 days, or about 0.65 barrels/sec. 1 barrel of oil contains a bit more than 6 billion joules of energy, so at a 50% conversion efficiency that's about 2 GWe from a single well). On land you're typically looking at a crust thickness of 30-50 km. Even if you limit your selection to shallow magma pockets like beneath active volcanoes (e.g. Yellowstone), the number of places on earth where a geothermal well would be viable is a few hundred, maybe a few thousand. Far short of what's needed to power the world.

For geothermal to become viable on a global scale, you have to hope the oil companies continue to advance the state of the art in drilling technology to the point where a 30 km bore hole is cheap and easy.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[MakerDusk]

I just don't see why this tech is needed when we have the technology to generate all the electricity and heat we need through nuclear fission. Eventually, fission will give way to fusion, but geothermal and 'renewable' energy technologies are just an unnecessary distraction IMO.

Not when you take the radioactive waste into account. Power for a year, dangerous waste for hundreds. The power company will be long dead before their waste is eliminated. You need to look at the long term picture.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[GarethIwanFairclough]

Nukes need scale to make sense. Iceland is among other things likely too small so that powering it with a nuclear plant would create a single point of failure in its power supply.

Nukes need scale to make sense? Citation?

If you're going to shoot down an argument for nuclear energy on the basis that it brings in a "single point of failure", how can you suggest that a geothermal plant would be better? A geothermal plant would need to produce a certain amount of power to remain economical. A large number of small plants which would bring the redundancy you desire, but would not be economical.

Then there's the fact that geothermal is very cheap and readily available in Iceland, while requiring little foreign expertise and fuel. Nuclear would require both.

Cheap & plentiful in Iceland =! Cheap & plentiful everywhere else that needs electricity. Also, I have not seen any numbers to suggest that geothermal is in any way cheap. To be honest, I haven't seen any numbers on it at all. I can see your point when it comes to fuel, though a reactor still wouldn't need all that much (certainly far less than any fossil fuel plant). However, I imagine that expertise would also be required for a geothermal plant. I suspect that rather more would be required than a nuclear plant given the (I assume) experimental nature of a geothermal plant. I have heard of a lot of nuclear reactors running, but I don't know of any geothermal plants. This leads me to my suspicion that rather more experts would be needed for a geothermal plant.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[GarethIwanFairclough]

Not when you take the radioactive waste into account. Power for a year, dangerous waste for hundreds. The power company will be long dead before their waste is eliminated. You need to look at the long term picture.

I disagree. The "waste" could well be a valuable commodity in the not so distant future. In fact, it could have been had certain reactor projects not been cancelled just as they were about to pay off. Rather good timing from those who cancelled it, no?

But while the waste is dangerous if not stored or used properly, it is far less dangerous than the waste produced by the alternative; fossil fuels. Nuclear power has a huge advantage on it's competitor there, it's waste is in one nice neat little package and it gets less dangerous as time goes by. Even better, there is far less of it. Can't say the same about gas/coal/oil, no matter which way you cut it.

In fact, we could just leave all the "waste" in the current "spent fuel pools". They're certainly doing no harm from where they are.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[Luckyo]

Not sure what's unclear. Nukes are generally larger reactors, because it makes sense to make them larger, and over time they have only grown because it makes them more efficient. If you look at reactors being built today, you see the clear trend - they are getting bigger. The new reactor type at Olkiluoto being built by Areva is 1600MW for example. That's a lot of power for a small island nation.

As for geothermal being cheap and you "not having seen the numbers", now would be the time to start googling instead of being lazy and telling others do the footwork for you.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[GameboyRMH]

Renewable energy is the best energy. No mining and consumption of finite materials needed, no radiation-related dangers, little to no reliance on sci-fi technologies needed. I think nuclear will make a good transitional power source though.

Re:Is no one else concerned?

[RockDoctor]

If you're going to shoot down an argument for nuclear energy on the basis that it brings in a "single point of failure", how can you suggest that a geothermal plant would be better?

Iceland already has multiple geothermal plants scattered around it's widely dispersed population and industry. It also has considerable hydroelectric, having suitable terrain.

Adding deep wells to reach higher temperatures would allow for increased power generation at sites that need it. I note that the site they've been working on is on the north coast, which is relatively sparsely populated, but does contain at least one major aluminium smelter. So I'd guess that they're looking to boost output there above what they can reliably get from local hydroelectric.

You're thinking, perhaps, of one power plant to supply the entire country? since the large majority of the Icelandic population live close to the coasts, and the interior is relatively lightly populated, that's not a model that is going to be efficient due to power line losses. Add in the inevitability of geological disturbances (volcanoes, earthquakes) and dispersed power production becomes inevitable.

sounds like poor engineering?

[ThorGod]

Am I the only one thinking an entire plant should be more redundant and resilient than the failure of a single valve?

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[MightyYar]

Your opinion is probably shared by many who didn't read TFA.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[Chris Mattern]

I read the TFA (both of them) myself, and didn't find any more details about the closing over the "failure of a single valve" than was in the summary. I will point out to the OP, that there may have very well been adequate redundancy and that the single valve failure mandated the shut down of the project not because it disabled it but because it removed the redundancy and they wouldn't operate without it.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[fahrbot-bot]

Am I the only one thinking an entire plant should be more redundant and resilient than the failure of a single valve?

FYI: The Death Star design team has a vacancy.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[CohibaVancouver]

The Death Star design team has a vacancy.

Look, the target area is only *two meters* wide. It's a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port. The shaft leads directly to the reactor system. Only a *precise* hit will start a chain reaction which would destroy the station. Plus, the shaft is ray-shielded, so they'll have to use proton torpedoes.

That's impossible, even for a computer.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[DigiShaman]

I can only imagine. The intense heat, highly corrosive environment will fail many valves that aren't stainless steel. Perhaps this one was? I don't know.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[fahrbot-bot]

The Death Star design team has a vacancy.

Look, the target area is only *two meters* wide. It's a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port. The shaft leads directly to the reactor system. Only a *precise* hit will start a chain reaction which would destroy the station. Plus, the shaft is ray-shielded, so they'll have to use proton torpedoes.

That's impossible, even for a computer.

Re-reading that dialog... Most of it sounds a little dirty.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[amicusNYCL]

The plant didn't shut down. The plant is still operating with 30 or something other wells drilled. The new pipe itself was shut down, because of a failure in one of the valves in the pipe. The pipe was never connected to the plant. It seems entirely possible that a linear structure like a pipe can be shut down by a failure of a single valve. It's not like they can route around the failed valve. They're investigating ways to re-open the sealed pipe in addition to drilling others.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's impossible, even for a computer.

It's not impossible. I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home, they're not much bigger than two meters.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[Hadlock]

Probably using the same Halliburton designed-and-tested valve technology as "too big to fail" deep water horizon.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only one thinking an entire plant should be more redundant and resilient than the failure of a single valve?

Maybe you are the only one who is thinking that this is supposed to be an operational power plant?

This is an experiment. It is only the second time anyone has drilled into magma for power, and it is the first time anyone has successfully generated power from the setup.

So yeah, before they call it an operational power plant, they need to have more redundancy and yadda yadda yadda. Which takes nothing away from the fact that this is a nifty breakthrough experiment.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[CanHasDIY]

The Death Star design team has a vacancy.

Look, the target area is only *two meters* wide. It's a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port. The shaft leads directly to the reactor system. Only a *precise* hit will start a chain reaction which would destroy the station. Plus, the shaft is ray-shielded, so they'll have to use proton torpedoes.

That's impossible, even for a computer.

Something something wamprats, something something dark side...

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[hamburger lady]

C-3PO: My God, you shoot small animals for fun? That's the first indicator of a serial killer, you freak!
Luke: There's two suns and no women! What the hell am I supposed to do?!

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[ksandom]

Thumbwars reference

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[dead_user]

You kidding me? Star Wars was nasty!

Get in there you big furry oaf, I don't care what you smell!
Luke, at that speed do you think you'll be able to pull out in time?
Put that thing away before you get us all killed.
You've got something jammed in here real good.
Aren't you a little short for a stormtrooper?
You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought.
Sorry about the mess...
Look at the size of that thing!
Curse my metal body, I wasnt fast enough!
She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, kid.
I thought that hairy beast would be the end of me.
Size matters not. Judge me by my size, do you?
There's an awful lot of moisture in here.
Thats okay, I'd like to keep it on manual control for a while.
Hurry up, golden-rod...
I must've hit it pretty close to the mark to get her all riled up like that, huh kid?
It's possible he came in through the south entrance.
And I thought they smelled bad on the outside!
Control, control! You must learn control!
Hey, point that thing someplace else.
I look forward to completing your training. In time you will call me master.
I never knew I had it in me.
There is good in him, I've felt it.
Hey, Luke, thanks for coming after me -- now I owe you one.
Back door, huh? Good idea!
She's gonna blow!
I think youll fit in nicely.
Rise, my friend.
I'm sure he wasn't on that thing when it blew...
Wedge! Pull out! Youre not doing any good back there!

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[Anonymous Coward]

C-3PO: My God, you shoot small animals for fun?

Small animals? They're not much bigger than two meters.

And they wreak hell with the moisture vaporators.

Re:sounds like poor engineering?

[DarthVain]

Based on Stormtrooper accuracy I'd wager.

I don't get it

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Can someone with a thermodynamics background please explain to me how we can extract energy from Japanese cartoons?

Re:I don't get it

[ceoyoyo]

With a match.

Re:I don't get it

[Iniamyen]

The title of your post is spot on here.

Re:I don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

I output a good deal of heat shucking my corn to Japanese cartoons.

Re:I don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

When manga is trapped in a pipe, the larger-than-life characters are placed under pressure. This creates heat, which then heats water and drives a steam turbine.

Re:I don't get it

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

I see that you're "aquisitionally challenged" yourself.

Re:I don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, you can achieve over-unity power generation by harnessing the phase change between hope and despair. It works best with adolescent girls.

Re:I don't get it

[gmuslera]

Its energy is over 9000!

Re:I don't get it

[Svartormr]

Build a very big treadmill for Godzilla just outside Tokyo--or maybe Kyoto. >:)

Re:I don't get it

[Mal-2]

Or French Zeuhl bands.

Christian Vander's drumming might be a reliable source of power though, and he's been able to do it for over 40 years.

Re:I don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude that is so damn easy!

You burn all the rarest of the rarest comic books in the center of Tokyo and invite all them geeks to watch in horror. You then run the tears those geeks generate through pipes under the fire to create steam and voila, Electricity!

Project Vulcan

[Dachannien]

I bet I can get them to pay me.... one million dollars... not to go through with this plan.

Re: Project Vulcan

[Anonymous Coward]

This article is written poorly. They are confusing mantle with magma from an active volcanic field. The real mantle, which they even state is at least 8km thick, is not liquid either.

Should be titled something like they drill into a magma chamber.

Poor science writing.

Re: Project Vulcan

[bob_super]

The crust under Iceland is really thin, it's a divergent continental plate boundary.

Re: Project Vulcan

[Anonymous Coward]

Not 1.2km thin. It's essentially impossible to have land above water and mantle 1.2km below, due to isostacy. I think the only place it could be that thin is at a mid ocean ridge.

Re: Project Vulcan

[Anonymous Coward]

Here is a legitimate article on mantle drilling at mid ocean ridges: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/03/110323-earth-mantle-drill-sample-first-science-nature-teagle/

How to make your very own Mars.

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Pump massive amounts of CO2 into atmosphere.

2. Pump massive amounts of heat from inside planet into atmosphere.

3. Wait for core to cool and solar winds to blow away atmosphere.

4. Strip-mine minerals, now that pesky endemic life has been removed.

Re:How to make your very own Mars.

[Anachragnome]

Steps 1 and 2 got me thinking of a possible solution (as they outline a potential problem as well!) to our CO2 accumulation in the atmosphere.

If one combines the idea of a "Space-elevator" with a thin-walled tube reaching from a base-station/pumping station all the way out of the atmosphere, degassing would take place. The base of the tube would extend into the earth, surrounded by a sleeve that is keep full of atmospheric CO2 and open to the atmosphere at ground level. As CO2 is heavier than other atmospheric gasses, this sleeve would prevent a mixture of gasses from being drawn into the "elevator".

Before you dismiss the idea offhand, let me point out that we already do this on a smaller scale, only it is used to prevent a catastrophic spontaneous degassing (is this a possible outcome of us enriching the atmosphere with CO2?!?). See linked article on degassing.

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

The diagram provided in the article is a suitable representation of what I just described, the low pressure area being space, and the high pressure area being the sleeve located at the base station/anchor.

Food for thought.

Re:How to make your very own Mars.

[cpt kangarooski]

The oxygen in the CO2 is atmospheric oxygen, not fossil oxygen. I'd just as soon not get rid of it.

Re:How to make your very own Mars.

[Anachragnome]

"... we already do this on a smaller scale, only it is used to prevent a catastrophic spontaneous degassing (is this a possible outcome of us enriching the atmosphere with CO2?!?"

Perhaps the recent eruptions of water on Ceres are a result of the same limnic eruption phenomenon seen at Lake Nyos. To be honest, this is somewhat worrying--could this same process occur, here on Earth, if we push the CO2 saturation level too high? A sudden degassing of the atmosphere, into space? Has this happened before, in the Earth's history?

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

Re:How to make your very own Mars.

[Anachragnome]

"The oxygen in the CO2 is atmospheric oxygen, not fossil oxygen. I'd just as soon not get rid of it."

Excellent point. I concur. Some way to crack the elements apart would be required, but even then the loss of carbon might not be a good idea, nor would it be retrievable.

But, there still remains the question of this happening spontaneously, without benefit of a space-elevator. Is it possible this process of limnic eruption could occur on a global scale (rather than a lake)? Perhaps a closer look at the evidence from Ceres would help answer that question.

Re:How to make your very own Mars.

[cpt kangarooski]

If you can crack it apart, then you can just bury the graphite in the empty coal mines and oil wells, if there's no better use for it.

But this is so energy intensive that's it's not likely to happen anytime soon.

As for a limnic eruption, that just gets CO2 out of solution from water. It doesn't get it off the planet. Earth's gravity is too strong for that.

Re:How to make your very own Mars.

[Anonymous Coward]

The atmosphere is 21% oxygen and 0.03% CO2, so that loss would be hardly noticeable.

Re:How to make your very own Mars.

[stjobe]

Perhaps the recent eruptions of water on Ceres are a result of the same limnic eruption phenomenon seen at Lake Nyos.

No, that's not possible at all. The eruptions on Ceres are water vapour, not water, and the current theory is that they are the result of warming on the side closer to the sun.

To be honest, this is somewhat worrying--could this same process occur, here on Earth, if we push the CO2 saturation level too high? A sudden degassing of the atmosphere, into space?

No. If you actually took the time to read the link you've posted twice now, you'd see that limnic eruptions can't occur in temperate lakes because the seasonal shift in water temperature mixes the water and prohibits a colder layer at the bottom building up CO2. Now think about the atmosphere - is it still, allowing this kind of build-up? No, there's weather and wind all the time.

Not to mention the differing levels of CO2 saturation between the lake and the atmosphere.

Has this happened before, in the Earth's history?

Has Earth lost its atmosphere due to "limnic eruptions" in the atmosphere? No. That's crackpot talk. The Earth is too big and its gravity too strong.

Has Earth ever lost its atmosphere? Possibly, but not after the impact(s?) that created the moon occurred, 4.5 billion years ago or so.

Re:How to make your very own Mars.

[Reziac]

Folks should also remember, what we lose to space is not replaced. We're not magically making more carbon, or oxygen, or whatever else. Do you really want to accelerate the existing natural loss?

Fracking bad herp derp

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a form of hydro-fracking; they're pumping deadly chemicals into the ground to break up the rock just like Big Oil does to recover natural gas. They're going to ruin their ground water when the sulfur and other dangerous contaminate it.

Re:Fracking bad herp derp

[Rei]

RTFA. The "deadly chemicals" used were precisely one chemical: that deadly dihydrogen monoxide stuff.

Fracking is not all a single process. At its most basic level, it's simply water injection. You *can* inject all sorts of other stuff in for various reasons (most of them oil-specific and totally unrelated to geothermal power prouction), but they're not fundamentally required for all fracking.

Re:Fracking bad herp derp

[Anonymous Coward]

Dihydrogen monoxide is a very deadly fracking chemical. Do your research before downplaying the dangers of Dihydrogen Monoxide.

Also, how do you know that's the only deadly chemical they're injecting into the Earth?? Big energy companies lie all the time!

!!FUN!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I was just reading up on this subject. Keep an eye open for spires of bright blue metal.

woohoo!

[SolitaryMan]

If only we can build enough of these, so they would cool the earth down and thus solve the global warming problem!

It's amazing what those cartoons can do!

[sandbagger]

Who'd have guessed, eh?

This to be BAD, real BAD

[Anonymous Coward]

They hydraulically fractured "fraced" the well... Two things the internet has taught me, kittens are cute and fracing is bad.

Re:This to be BAD, real BAD

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep. They're pumping dangerous fracking chemicals into a 1.3 mile deep bore hole, just like Big Oil does.

Careful! Don't let the gravity out

[Anonymous Coward]

Careful! Don't let the gravity out. It might deflate and flbrrbrrrt away.

1.3 miles?

[tomhath]

Iceland's National Energy Authority has created the world's first magma-based geothermal energy system after drilling 1.3 miles (2,100 meters) through the Earth's crust.

Could they have actually reached the mantle that close to the surface? I would believe they tapped into a volcano, but mantle doesn't sound right. Crust there is something like 15 km??

Re:1.3 miles?

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll have to ask a geologist if "magma" means "through the crust", it wouldn't surprise me if that's the case.

I can confirm, however, that it's the site of a volcano that had an active eruption in the 70s or 80s. (Wikipedia says 1975-84.) It's a cool place to visit (both the power station and the surrounding geological features.)

Joe

Re:1.3 miles?

[chmod a x mojo]

Iceland is currently rifting, so it is technically possible. From reading the article this isn't what has happened though.
From what the article states they simply drilled to near the magma chamber of a volcano. I say "near" because in all likelihood that is what they did; If they had actually pierced the magma chamber there is an extremely high probability that it would trigger an eruption, especially after adding volatiles ( water for steam in this case ).

Except for the said rifting, where the island is literally being torn apart from plates diverging, Iceland typically has eruptions somewhere in the middle of the scale from effusive ( think Hawaii, lava just kind of oozes or sprays out without producing huge plumes of ash) and the more violent explosive ( think yellowstone / mount st Helens / the classic huge cloud of ash and lightening volcanos ). Volatiles such as dissolved CO2 and H2O play an enormous part in controlling how violent an eruption is, basically more volatiles = more boom, and adding water to a magma chamber is not going to turn out pretty... do a quick search for Krakatoa to find out what happens ( supposedly anyways, it's what data suggest anyways) when you breach a magma chamber and add volatiles.

Source: I'm starting my 3rd year undergrad as a Geologist, and plan to go to grad school focusing on Vulcanology....

Re:1.3 miles?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like this is not a particularly advisable activity at any scale.

Re:1.3 miles?

[Rei]

So you think cooling down the magma (boiling water) increases the likelihood of an eruption? Do you think water will go through the pipe with enough pressure to break the pipe and rupture the surrounding rock, when they're controlling how much water they send down the pipe in the first place? You think dissolved gasses will come out faster somehow when they're doing nothing to reduce the pressure on the magma?

There's no logical reason why such a borehole should trigger an eruption. It should overall decrease the risk by taking heat out of it, making the magma more viscous if not outright solidifying it.

Re:1.3 miles?

[khallow]

Well when you drill, it's generally through something. I doubt the journalist intended to imply that the drill actually made it all the way through. And there should be a bunch of near surface magma bodies in Iceland.

Re:1.3 miles?

[rahvin112]

The pressures present where the crust and mantle meet are intense. When drilling wells you need a lubricant to assist the drill and prevent the hole form collapsing. Heaving drilling mud is typically used.

At the pressures that exist the mantle the drilling mud would be squeezed out (that is if it wasn't immediately baked solid) and you would need a much heavier denser liquid. It's been proposed that the only lubricant that would be heavy enough would be molten iron. So no, they didn't drill into the mantle.

Re:1.3 miles?

[Anonymous Coward]

Temperature gives you an indication of how much energy might exist in a system, but it doesn't tell you how that energy is distributed. It's uneven distributions of energy that cause effects like explosions.

In the case of the water pipe, you've got a hot pipe weakened by thermal expansion, high pressure steam being driven through it, and huge pressure from the rock formations around it resisting its expansion. If (when) it fails, that steam is going to leak into the rock and form bubbles of pressure within the rock. It's not taking heat out of the system unless it can escape - it's just adding pressure to it. If the additional pressure exceeds the 'spare' capacity of the rock formations penning in the magma, the rock gives way and you get an earth shattering kaboom,

Re:1.3 miles?

[dbIII]

I think the poster above is writing about a steam explosion. I'm a bit skeptical that there would be enough steam to do much.

Re:1.3 miles?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets see, 1000l/min over 100m**2 or 10e8l/s over 1km**2, which will produce a steam explosion. Krakatoa and similar were several orders of magnitude more water and surface area to heat it.

Little Iceland = Big Power Supplier!

[BoRegardless]

This could potentially be a boon for Iceland's economy for heavy electrical use industry.

Mantle or Magma Chamber?

[Capt.Albatross]

The IDDP's own reports on this project do not describe it as having reached the mantle. Other reports described it as having reached a magma chamber within the upper crust.

Re:Mantle or Magma Chamber?

[Anonymous Coward]

The IDDP's own reports on this project do not describe it as having reached the mantle. Other reports described it as having reached a magma chamber within the upper crust.

Yup. They reached a pocket of molten rock. They probably did not drill all the way through the crust to touch that big layer of mantle rock. Other stories are much better written.

Re:Mantle or Magma Chamber?

[rk]

The CW article kind of confuses the two. But they didn't bore down to the mantle. The original news announcement doesn't even contain the world "mantle".

Re:Mantle or Magma Chamber?

[rahvin112]

Stupid people associate Magma with the Mantle. The Submitter is clearly one of them.

There is no conclusive proof that we've ever obtained a piece of the mantle, fact is we don't know with certainty what's it's even made of (other than fluffy bunnies of course).

Magma deep

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

"the first bore hole to reach the planet's magma"

Jedediah Leland: *hic* It's Friday quittin' time *hic* and I'm drunk *hic*. The only bore hole that deep I know *hic* is the mouth of a [insert political party you hate here].

how does this work?

[Anonymous Coward]

They extract steam from the pipe. Where does the water get pumped in? I'm a PhD student in materials engineering, and I read the article, but I don't get it. Anyone?

Re:how does this work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you know how a 4-stroke engine works? Something like that I imagine, with liquid water instead of petrol and magma instead of spark plugs.

Re:how does this work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Drill a deep hole, close to some magma. Put two pipes down the hole. Pump cool surface water into one pipe, get superheated steam from the other (because the water got heated by the magma). Use the steam in a power plant. Profit!

Re:how does this work?

[masonc]

Once you have a borehole, you can put a concentric injector pipe to pump the water down and recover the resulting steam around it. Steam from hot rocks is being done all over, but boring into molten magma is new.
Magma has a habit of oozing out of chambers once there is a path to the surface, and can't be stopped once it starts. The magma is full of CO2 at high pressure and once depressurized, releases the CO2 and expands rapidly. I wonder how they will ensure they do not start an eruption? I would think there would be a significant risk of starting another problem like the Sidoarjo mud flow http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S....

About time

[nurb432]

This is one of those long-term sources of energy, like the sun, that will last forever, in practical terms, as when that power drys up, we are moving off planet anyway as we are in bigger trouble.

It's not the mantle

[Anonymous Coward]

Magma != mantle. It's a magma chamber beneath Iceland at a pretty good depth, yes, but it isn't the mantle, which is several kilometres deeper.

typically

[Mr_Nitro]

this tech will remain unexplored and unfinished for the next 100 years, when lifespan will have reverted back to mid 30' due to total pollution... nice...between magmatech and solar we could solve all probs, right here right now.... but no...head in the ass and keep marching...

But will it work elsewhere?

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's the billion dollar question: Does this technique work anywhere, or just geothermally active areas like Iceland and Yellowstone? Iceland has all the clean energy it needs already (and tons to spare - see the huge Bitcoin mine someone built there to take advantage of the cheap electicity)

Re:But will it work elsewhere?

[Rei]

Energy from magma chambers only works... wait for it... in places with magma chambers.

Any more easy questions?

If you want a "works everywhere" tech to watch, watch EGS. My favorite variety is a no-fracking variety where they branch off the well in the hot zone and use a conductive grout, turning the well into a giant heat exchanger. Totally closed, so it's non-corrosive and strata-indifferent - needs only heat. But of course, in the end it's going to be whatever's most economic that will take off.

Oh oh...here we go again!!

[hackus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:Oh oh...here we go again!!

[Reziac]

I see you beat me to it. Makes a person feel old, don't it?

Now that's dorfy!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't suppose these people were inspired by Dwarf Fortress, were they?

Thermal Mine Yellowstone!

[Camel Pilot]

We need a few hundred of these around the North American Hot Spot before the next time it blows its top.

Re:Thermal Mine Yellowstone!

[Anonymous Coward]

It'd work great but it would shut off the geysers...

Re:Thermal Mine Yellowstone!

[neghvar1]

It probably has been proposed, but I bet the EPA has prohibited it.

Re:Thermal Mine Yellowstone!

[Camel Pilot]

Geysers vs Extinction Event.... Hmmmm tough decision.

Actually the geyser represent a tiny amount of energy... we could always create fake geysers though :)
 

Re:Thermal Mine Yellowstone!

[Anonymous Coward]

Just imagine how much damn energy you could get out of that thing!

It'd need to be handled delicately, but it could be done.
And it is probably the safest way to dismantle a supervolcano.

Of course, then you have to think, "is it a GOOD thing to disable a supervolcano in the long run?"
Mind you, Yellowstone is pretty weak anyway. It has been getting considerably weaker every time it has popped.
It wouldn't even obliterate all of America. I'd be surprised if the effects even reached Europe or Russia.
There is more chance of the crust melting because neutrinos. God that film was stupid.

Re:Thermal Mine Yellowstone!

[tomhath]

Maybe not Yellowstone, but there are plenty of other active volcanoes that would do. Italy could probably get a bunch of power from Mt. Etna and Mt Vesuvius

No need to read tech news, just read Judge Dredd

[cptnapalm]

Between magma powered energy, government spy drones, the obesity problem with the corresponding fat acceptance demands and the militarization of the police, everything I learned about the future, I learned from reading Judge Dredd comics.

Tungsten

[neghvar1]

I assume if direct contact with lava/magma is expected, the pipes or tubes would be made of tungsten. Possibly with a carbon fiber lining.

It's just a matter of digging a hole

[Sla$hPot]

How hard can it really be?

Now take a huge strong tungsten cylinder, with thick walls and fill it with uranium 238.
Put a hook in one end and let it melt it's way down to reptilian depts.
Then add water.
Voila!

Re:It's just a matter of digging a hole

[Anonymous Coward]

oblig

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

More like, more Lagoon

[SuperKendall]

Since the Blue Lagoon is runoff from the existing steam power facility, more drilling means MORE Blue Lagoon, or something else like it...

And for the people freaking out from the Science Fiction angle of drilling to where man has not been before, you will probably not be happy that people at the Blue Lagoon are every day smearing mud on their faces imbued with minerals and micro-organisms from the magmic deep.

Besides, destruction of the Blue Lagoon would not deter tourists - we would still come for the tasty lamb and excellent hot dogs (oh, and the majestic scenery I guess).

Re:More like, more Lagoon

[MrBigInThePants]

I was not freaking out.

I was raising the question of what happens were we to scale this up to meet out energy needs.

For example: trillions of tons of water per year causing cooling...

Do you know for sure what will happen? I don't?

I bet you don't either....

Re:More like, more Lagoon

[SuperKendall]

I was not freaking out.

But you are now?

It sure sounds like you are now, especially since I never claimed anyone was freaking out.

Chill, like the lava man!

Do you know for sure what will happen? I don't?

Yes I do. Nothing but abundant free power. Do you know how much magma is in a magma chamber? And they have been ALREADY doing this for a very long time. So the answer is already known.

Find the Blue Lagoon, have a swim and relax...

Re:More like, more Lagoon

[MrBigInThePants]

blah blah.

I see now you are just a troll taking me out of context for the sake of it.

Have a good life...

Re:More like, more Lagoon

[Tokolosh]

Anthropogenic Global Cooling?

Saw that movie...

[TimOBrien8837]

"Crack in the World" (1965). Might be on YouTube. Not bad for its time.

Space elevator

[Anonymous Coward]

I was thinking about attaching a radiator to it and radiate the excess heat into space. Except that half the earth is constantly being exposed to radiant heat. I suspect you'd need a radiator stretching out past the moon to make a difference.

Paging Professor Steamhead

[Anonymous Coward]

"The World Will be Saved By Steam!" - Professor Steamhead Ninja High School

It's not like I'm saying ....

[dbIII]

A cocaine ravaged ex-DJ can get away with that shit as entertainment but everyone else is expected to be a bit less of a cowardly weasel.

Weight of things above

[dbIII]

there is an extremely high probability that it would trigger an eruption

Only in the movies :)
Sure - a steam explosion give you a lot of energy but compare that to the weight of rock and magma above the steam explosion. Unless the thing is already on some sort of "hair trigger" requiring just a very small energy input to kick it off then it wouldn't trigger an eruption. High school physics will give you that. The more advanced stuff will let you know where that trigger is.
I'm no geologist, I'm just a former engineer that knows more than I'd like about steam explosions in molten metal - but I'm looking at it in terms of forces and not history. A little bit of water differs a lot from letting the sea in, so that's where it differs from the historical outcome you are writing about.

UMM

[Anonymous Coward]

Because they are trying to make steam, not fracture rock.

two thoughts..

[Anonymous Coward]

1- the disaster has progressed further in the alternative nazi-britain earth and..

2- If they muck about with that pert plus looking crap that oozes up around the penetration site they will have green Richard Pryor looking dudes running around going HGHGHGHGHGHGHGH! like they are screaming through a ring modulator..

I would have to say..

[Anonymous Coward]

If it were that hot and close.. I'd tap that too..

Could be worse though

[Anonymous Coward]

We could alternatively be:
"Blasted out to the far side of the universe, We would all become un-people, un-doing un-things un-together.. Fascinating!"

The Silurians

[Anonymous Coward]

Would undoubtedly not be very happy to see us, so that is a bad idea, They even get pissy if you call them Silurians because apparently they are a product of the Eocene era. Call them Eocenes, they are still not happy... There is no pleasing them.. no smoke, no pancake.. just death and destruction and anger that the moon is the moon..

Meh.. not an eruption..

[Anonymous Coward]

it is either
1- an iconic guitar solo by one Edward Van Halen or..

2- "First things first!, Wheres your shitter? Ive got a turtle head poking out! .. IM not kidding, I got a crap on deck that could choke a donkey!.. Ohhhh It's SQuiddgy! Ohhh, Christ , its making me all emotional! "

Earth's magnetic field, atmosphere

[StripedCow]

If the magma near the surface cools down, and becomes solid, this may have implications for Earth's magnetic field. (Because, according to wikipedia, it is generated by the motion of molten iron alloys in the Earth's outer core).

Now, in turn, Earth's magnetic field is the reason we have an atmosphere.
So the conclusion is, if we use all of the energy in the core, we lose our atmosphere.

i remember that movie

[Anonymous Coward]

seems like there were dire consequences, but i don't recall how it ended

renewable?

[Anonymous Coward]

the headline is that it is the ultimate "renewable" energy source... well there might be a lot of it.. it might be practically inexhaustible, but how does the earth heat up it's core? how does it get renewed? Eventually, I imagine the core will cool down, not a practical problem for millenia most likely, but still, in principle my guess is calling it "renewable" is mistaken.

Artificial Hydrothermal System?

[bbsalem]

I suppose the claim to fame here is that the company created an artificial hydrothermal vent. They verified that they drilled into a magma chanber and I presume that they tried to inject fluids, water, into it and get steam back but that something plugged up their well. How is this basically different from any other hydrothermal well?

Not too far north of San Francisco Ca, is the Gyser's Hydrotermal plnat operated by PG&E. It uses an existing hydrothermal system which presumably is based on ground water being heated up to steam by hot rock at depth, whether magma or not, and there are many such resources around the world.

Drilling directly into a magma chamber would entail many risks. First, the system is under high pressure, second, to try to use the heat energy of a melt would probably require introducing steam which would be a high pressure product, third, the steam would react with the magma and leach out minerals that would probably be a problem for the well, if not clogging it with parcipitated minerals, then introducing corrosion problems to any equipment being used with the heat source.

It might be the case that taping a magma chamber directly and treating the melt with steam might be a way to enhance the natural process of hydrothermal deposition of economic ores. One geochemical model I remember reading about claimed that gold deposition may be done very rapidly from some hydrothermal regimes.

Re:No need to read tech news, just read Judge Dred

[Anonymous Coward]

DRONK!

Paper said they hit the mantle at 2100 meters

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that right. I thought the mantle was at least 40 - 60 miles deep going through the crust. What is the thinnest portion of crust on earth?

yeah, because we all love how

[Anonymous Coward]

much of a bully you both are.