Seriously, each one that has moved to there, has suffered from extreme theft. Generally, the stolen goods are then sold local and around the world, EXCEPT to America and EU. So, the fools that produce there get one decently sized market for a time and then accepts that. Yet, everybody that goes there loses.
Now, if they would move the engineering there, they will find that it becomes like what happened to Google (stolen by gov. plants inside of your company). At that point, any good stockholder would fire all of the top management, press charges against them for killing the company and then sell the company to Chinese gov.
Keep in mind that bulk of expense in geo-thermal is not the power plant, but the well.
And the transmission lines to tie it to the grid and the data lines for control and monitoring, and maintenance, and.. and.. and.. all those other things you keep conveniently forgetting.
Hmmm. Lets see. They drill and then run an oil well. What powered the oil well? Oh yeah, electricity. For most of the oil wells that have existed since late 1960s, they have power lines running to them, esp. for the low production wells. Interesting thing about power lines these days. You can now send IP over power. Neat tech. You should look it up. Regardless, the expensive part of geo-thermal is the well. For a normal shallow well, it accounts for about 55-60% of the costs. In an EGS system, it accounts for 90% or more. The next major expense is cooling for large systems (which is not the case for these small systems). The rest is low costs. The connection to the grid on wind generators is high because they typically located the wind generator out in the middle of a field and now have to carry a couple 100 MW of power from it. Maintenance, yes. Less work than is needed for oil wells. And this is not what I am forgetting. The fact is, that geo-thermal in shallow wells costs around $.03-05/kwH. Geothermal from an already established well, is much less than that.
And it's interesting that to 'prove' how viable it is, you link to a company that manufactures lasers and a company whose primary income stream seems to be drilling technology... seeing as how all there on their webpage about geothermal is a graphic showing how wonderful geothermal could be if someone would happen along and pay them for an 'engineered solution'.
I linked to foro because I happen to know that they consider geo-thermal as one of their main focuses. I have talked to them from some time. They have landed large money from the feds as well as other groups for doing deep wells . They will shortly have this in production for drilling cheap wells at 10-20'K.
A number of studies have already shown that this is economically feasible.
Yet... nobody seems in a hurry to actually build any. That says much more than any number of blue ribbon studies and pie-in-the-sky web pages proclaiming how great geothermal could be.
Odd that you say that. Geo-thermal outside of America and Europe is one of the fastest growing AE going. Most of Central America expects to be on 100% geo-thermal over the next 15 years. Iceland same. Indonesia. Phillipines. Japan expects to make geo-thermal about 10% PRIOR to the nuke over the next 15 years. My bet is that they will increase this greatly. Australia has 5 different EGS systems going in.
And all of this is without the massive subsidies that nuke, coal, oil, natural gas, corn-based ethanol, solar, and wind enjoy (in that order).
Look, at this time, you argue without any knowledge of the situation. Heck, I am betting that you back nukes or 'clean' coal, and would love dearly not to see this. However, America's problem is because we became dependent on a so few items and allowed them to be a monopoly. Time to spread the generation amongst different tech and avoid the nightmare.
A number of studies have already shown that this is economically feasible. In fact, since the majority of the shallow wells is in the west, and water is the limiter, the small 50-100 KW plants are very economical (air cooling). Keep in mind that bulk of expense in geo-thermal is not the power plant, but the well. These shallow wells power plants are less expensive than coal plants to run. The issue is how to make use of the old oil wells. There are several ideas being worked on in which the base of the well is expanded and a loop thrown in. Another approach is doing vertical EGS. But the one that holds a lot of promise for the west was doing the shallow well with small units, but add a solar thermal unit to raise the heat during the daytime. That allows for higher generation, while allowing geo-thermal to work all night.
I agree. However, neither Ford nor GM are really working towards electric. GM's volt was to be a serial which then moved to parallel. Why? because management wanted more parts on it. How stupid can you be. GM and Fords MBA's are their own worse enemies.
When we bailed out GM and Chrysler, i kept saying that we should break them up. Instead, we gave away chrysler and it is now being gutted, while GM closed divisions. All in all, the bail-outs were the worse possible ideas going. Total idiots.
Deserts are NOT worthless. They are extremely useful. In addition, their ecology is even more sensitive then others. And no, if you think that the deserts on our planet using current tech will approach potential from geo-thermal, well, you obviously have no sense of math or size.
First, we subsidize solar more than any other form of AE (which is still far less than nuke or oil or coal). Solar PV is a joke. It is only useful part of the time. You NEED either storage, or a means of filling it in. However, just about ever solar PV backers screams that it is not a big deal, but they do not want to spend any money on other AEs, while shutting down coal, nuke, etc.
It is insane to think that solar in our current tech level with PV and storage will replace our current infrastructure. Yet, you guys prevent other ideas from coming to fruition. That makes solar nut jobs. It is as bad as coal or nuke nut jobs. When somebody screams that one type of energy is going to solve all of our issues, it means that they have NO clue, but they are a fan boyz.
If geo-thermal had even 1/4 of the subsidies that solar does, solar would not even be produced. Right now, shallow well geo-thermal is competitive without subsidies against coal. Only hydro is cheaper. Add similar subsidies that solar gets and geo-thermal would bloom all over.
Derek, as has been shown there is a LARGE amount of heat down there. But what you speak of is about efficiencies, not capabilities. Right now, we sink oil wells all over the nation that at the bottom generates 95-150C. Many of these wells are no longer used for oil (they are abandoned), but they still have loads of heat down there.
By using smaller generators designed for waste heat, then you can generate loads of power. these are only 50-100 KW sizes, however just in Colorado, we have 30K abandoned wells and 30K active wells. If just half of the abandoned wells produced say 50KW, we would produce somewhere around 3/4 to 1 GW of energy. Considering that many of these wells are located close to the northern front range, that would increase the amount of energy that Colorado northern front range has by almost 50%. That is a cheap clean way to do this.
Incidentally, one of the issues that Colorado has is water. With these, they are air cooled. That is a huge plus.
How large of earthquakes? If you are talking about 6 on up, then it is MINOR chance. It is really only possible if you have unknown fault lines and inject into those. . Why do I say this? Because we have been injecting CO2 into the ground for decades. Now, if you look at the CO2 injection, you will find that there are LOADS of earthquakes from it. Down in Ms,Mi, Ak, and Lo, they are having constant 2-4's and they are believed to be caused by CO2 injection.
Actually, because electricity IS so cheap and is subsidized in many ways, is what allowed USA and now China to grow. The amount of pollution that comes from coal plants is incredible. The best thing that we can do, is raise the price of gas,diesel, while allowing electricity to remain at the current level.
I have been here pushing geo-thermal while the solar nut jobs push nothing but that. geo-thermal is by far the best bet to carry us for the next 50 years. We have loads of drilling companies that simply want to sink a hole and make money on it. Well, this is how you do it.
And as to not replacing gas, oil, give me a break. The bulk of oil used in America is for transportation. Electrics are coming. In a big way. Sadly, Detroit is way behind, rather than leading. To avoid having to bail out these idiots we should be encouraging a new breed of car makers. GM and Ford are dead within 5 years.
Sorry to heat that. I know others that got burned as well.
I worked for IBM watson (via Colorado) back in 1996 ( or was it 94?) when akers was fired and Gerstner was brought in. At the time, we were about to open source OS2. Gerstner killed that idea quickly, which bummed me out. However, while it damaged OS2, IBM was brought back to being a decent a company. I was gone by the time that Palmisano took over and glad that I was. That guy has gutted the company.
Lets see. They offshored a number of their tech jobs to people that were not ready for it. They moved hardware production offshore and then were forced to sell teh divisions to the same ppl that were stealing them blind on tech. As it is, I suspect that had Palmisano remained at IBM for another year or two, he would have sold Watson to China.
Sadly, rometty is not much different since she was at the core of the sell offs. The end of IBM was started 10 years ago.
be the next Gerstner. I just realized that she was fundamental to the offshoring of the company and the selling of the divisions as much as Palmisano. I predict that IBM is the next ATT and watson will be the next Bell Labs. Gutted for short sales in the market place.
is that bee keepers continue to transport them all over. It seems like the smart thing is to require that at the least they be in only one state. IOW, no transportation over state lines.
Assange who has operated as a fence for stolen property (as opposed to journalists who make intelligent discussions but do not release information that can and will get others murdered ), is gripping that American companies is destroying him. Yet, he points to a number of western nations. Well, there is an alternative. He should consider moving to China, Iran, north Korea, Venezuela, or even Somalia. There, he will be able to continue wikileaks. And I am sure that the host gov will not mind if he receives stolen property about that gov. and simply dumps on the net.
Hell, for somebody that takes such exception, you do not even have the courage or backbone to post your login. It says a lot about HR and yourself. And if you think that it was horrible that I spoke about HR, what exactly is your background that you can judge tech ppl? Are you an engineer or even a scientists? Nuts, even GD lawyers have enough brains to insist that all lawyers that work in IP have a science/tech/engineering background.
And to take this one step further, I had an old friend of mine that got his PdH in HR from NIU. He now works for a major 50 as their top HR. And he has commented many times that most of HR IS the bottom of the business world. And he would not presume to judge engineers/scientists/etc.
I still think that we should have a contest for new SHLVs. Namely a COTS-SHLV. Only the smart way is to offer it up for 2 SHLVs that lift 140-160 tonnes. They will get up to 5 billion to develop (grand total of 10 billion, which is a far far cry from the 20+ that will be spent on SLS for 70 tonnes). In addition, it must cost less than.5 B per launch for 2 launches a year. The 2 winners will have 4 years of 2 launches a year. That means a minimum of 4 billion dollars to each company. Likewise, whoever has the lowest launch costs, will have another 2 launches each year. That encourages the companies to put in true lowest bids and rewards them for such. Considering that it is putting up ~900 tonnes into space each year, that is a phenomenal amount. More importantly, it would mean that doing the moon and mars would be trivial.
That is the amazing part. When FH is successful, they will be able to put up say 50 tonnes of fuel. THat will likely start around 2014.
OTH, SLS is suppose to have a test launch in 2017 and costs a billion dollars a launch for 70 tonnes. As you point out, slim to no chance of either. It will certainly costs at least as much as STS did which was 1.5 billion in 2009 with 3 launches. With 1, it is going to cost a LOT more. However, lets assume that they do both. In addition, lets assume that FH jumps to 150 million a launch. 7-10 FH's can be launched for about the same costs as SLS. So, while SLS will put up 70 tonnes, SpaceX will put up 350-500 tonnes. Quit the jump.
Space is not about access. It is all about economics. Sadly, republicans see it in terms of jobs bills for themselves and not in terms of what is good for America.
Here are the rankings for top 10. You can buy the full lists. but even better is send off questions to HR at SNC, SpaceX, Blue Horizons, etc and ask them. HR ppl are fairly stupid about the engineering and science world. They could not tell a total loser from Einstein. The reason is that most of them were losers from the business world (HR and Marketing is where the dredges of business worlds go to). BUT, HR WILL have a list of the top schools that they employ. And yes, they will be happy to tell you that.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, each one that has moved to there, has suffered from extreme theft. Generally, the stolen goods are then sold local and around the world, EXCEPT to America and EU. So, the fools that produce there get one decently sized market for a time and then accepts that. Yet, everybody that goes there loses.
Now, if they would move the engineering there, they will find that it becomes like what happened to Google (stolen by gov. plants inside of your company). At that point, any good stockholder would fire all of the top management, press charges against them for killing the company and then sell the company to Chinese gov.
And the transmission lines to tie it to the grid and the data lines for control and monitoring, and maintenance, and.. and.. and.. all those other things you keep conveniently forgetting.
Hmmm. Lets see. They drill and then run an oil well. What powered the oil well? Oh yeah, electricity. For most of the oil wells that have existed since late 1960s, they have power lines running to them, esp. for the low production wells. Interesting thing about power lines these days. You can now send IP over power. Neat tech. You should look it up. Regardless, the expensive part of geo-thermal is the well. For a normal shallow well, it accounts for about 55-60% of the costs. In an EGS system, it accounts for 90% or more. The next major expense is cooling for large systems (which is not the case for these small systems). The rest is low costs. The connection to the grid on wind generators is high because they typically located the wind generator out in the middle of a field and now have to carry a couple 100 MW of power from it. Maintenance, yes. Less work than is needed for oil wells. And this is not what I am forgetting. The fact is, that geo-thermal in shallow wells costs around $.03-05/kwH. Geothermal from an already established well, is much less than that.
And it's interesting that to 'prove' how viable it is, you link to a company that manufactures lasers and a company whose primary income stream seems to be drilling technology... seeing as how all there on their webpage about geothermal is a graphic showing how wonderful geothermal could be if someone would happen along and pay them for an 'engineered solution'.
I linked to foro because I happen to know that they consider geo-thermal as one of their main focuses. I have talked to them from some time. They have landed large money from the feds as well as other groups for doing deep wells . They will shortly have this in production for drilling cheap wells at 10-20'K.
Yet... nobody seems in a hurry to actually build any. That says much more than any number of blue ribbon studies and pie-in-the-sky web pages proclaiming how great geothermal could be.
Odd that you say that. Geo-thermal outside of America and Europe is one of the fastest growing AE going. Most of Central America expects to be on 100% geo-thermal over the next 15 years. Iceland same. Indonesia. Phillipines. Japan expects to make geo-thermal about 10% PRIOR to the nuke over the next 15 years. My bet is that they will increase this greatly. Australia has 5 different EGS systems going in. And all of this is without the massive subsidies that nuke, coal, oil, natural gas, corn-based ethanol, solar, and wind enjoy (in that order).
Look, at this time, you argue without any knowledge of the situation. Heck, I am betting that you back nukes or 'clean' coal, and would love dearly not to see this. However, America's problem is because we became dependent on a so few items and allowed them to be a monopoly. Time to spread the generation amongst different tech and avoid the nightmare.
A number of studies have already shown that this is economically feasible. In fact, since the majority of the shallow wells is in the west, and water is the limiter, the small 50-100 KW plants are very economical (air cooling). Keep in mind that bulk of expense in geo-thermal is not the power plant, but the well. These shallow wells power plants are less expensive than coal plants to run. The issue is how to make use of the old oil wells. There are several ideas being worked on in which the base of the well is expanded and a loop thrown in. Another approach is doing vertical EGS. But the one that holds a lot of promise for the west was doing the shallow well with small units, but add a solar thermal unit to raise the heat during the daytime. That allows for higher generation, while allowing geo-thermal to work all night.
In addition, a number of studies, but one major one, have shown that this is not just feasible, but downright CHEAP. That study and others have lead to Potter Drilling as well as Foro Energy targeting DEEP geothermal and making it cheap.
I agree. However, neither Ford nor GM are really working towards electric. GM's volt was to be a serial which then moved to parallel. Why? because management wanted more parts on it. How stupid can you be. GM and Fords MBA's are their own worse enemies.
When we bailed out GM and Chrysler, i kept saying that we should break them up. Instead, we gave away chrysler and it is now being gutted, while GM closed divisions. All in all, the bail-outs were the worse possible ideas going. Total idiots.
Deserts are NOT worthless. They are extremely useful. In addition, their ecology is even more sensitive then others. And no, if you think that the deserts on our planet using current tech will approach potential from geo-thermal, well, you obviously have no sense of math or size.
First, we subsidize solar more than any other form of AE (which is still far less than nuke or oil or coal). Solar PV is a joke. It is only useful part of the time. You NEED either storage, or a means of filling it in. However, just about ever solar PV backers screams that it is not a big deal, but they do not want to spend any money on other AEs, while shutting down coal, nuke, etc.
It is insane to think that solar in our current tech level with PV and storage will replace our current infrastructure. Yet, you guys prevent other ideas from coming to fruition. That makes solar nut jobs. It is as bad as coal or nuke nut jobs. When somebody screams that one type of energy is going to solve all of our issues, it means that they have NO clue, but they are a fan boyz.
If geo-thermal had even 1/4 of the subsidies that solar does, solar would not even be produced. Right now, shallow well geo-thermal is competitive without subsidies against coal. Only hydro is cheaper. Add similar subsidies that solar gets and geo-thermal would bloom all over.
Derek, as has been shown there is a LARGE amount of heat down there. But what you speak of is about efficiencies, not capabilities. Right now, we sink oil wells all over the nation that at the bottom generates 95-150C. Many of these wells are no longer used for oil (they are abandoned), but they still have loads of heat down there.
By using smaller generators designed for waste heat, then you can generate loads of power. these are only 50-100 KW sizes, however just in Colorado, we have 30K abandoned wells and 30K active wells. If just half of the abandoned wells produced say 50KW, we would produce somewhere around 3/4 to 1 GW of energy. Considering that many of these wells are located close to the northern front range, that would increase the amount of energy that Colorado northern front range has by almost 50%. That is a cheap clean way to do this.
Incidentally, one of the issues that Colorado has is water. With these, they are air cooled. That is a huge plus.
How large of earthquakes? If you are talking about 6 on up, then it is MINOR chance. It is really only possible if you have unknown fault lines and inject into those.
. Why do I say this? Because we have been injecting CO2 into the ground for decades. Now, if you look at the CO2 injection, you will find that there are LOADS of earthquakes from it. Down in Ms,Mi, Ak, and Lo, they are having constant 2-4's and they are believed to be caused by CO2 injection.
You will note that Google is busy pushing Electric cars as well as electric trains and planes. So, yes, geothermal CAN if we do multiple things.
Actually, because electricity IS so cheap and is subsidized in many ways, is what allowed USA and now China to grow. The amount of pollution that comes from coal plants is incredible. The best thing that we can do, is raise the price of gas,diesel, while allowing electricity to remain at the current level.
I have been here pushing geo-thermal while the solar nut jobs push nothing but that. geo-thermal is by far the best bet to carry us for the next 50 years. We have loads of drilling companies that simply want to sink a hole and make money on it. Well, this is how you do it.
And as to not replacing gas, oil, give me a break. The bulk of oil used in America is for transportation. Electrics are coming. In a big way. Sadly, Detroit is way behind, rather than leading. To avoid having to bail out these idiots we should be encouraging a new breed of car makers. GM and Ford are dead within 5 years.
Sorry to heat that. I know others that got burned as well.
I worked for IBM watson (via Colorado) back in 1996 ( or was it 94?) when akers was fired and Gerstner was brought in. At the time, we were about to open source OS2. Gerstner killed that idea quickly, which bummed me out. However, while it damaged OS2, IBM was brought back to being a decent a company. I was gone by the time that Palmisano took over and glad that I was. That guy has gutted the company.
Lets see. They offshored a number of their tech jobs to people that were not ready for it. They moved hardware production offshore and then were forced to sell teh divisions to the same ppl that were stealing them blind on tech. As it is, I suspect that had Palmisano remained at IBM for another year or two, he would have sold Watson to China.
Sadly, rometty is not much different since she was at the core of the sell offs. The end of IBM was started 10 years ago.
be the next Gerstner. I just realized that she was fundamental to the offshoring of the company and the selling of the divisions as much as Palmisano. I predict that IBM is the next ATT and watson will be the next Bell Labs. Gutted for short sales in the market place.
was to return what America used to do and be before MBA's took over.
is that bee keepers continue to transport them all over. It seems like the smart thing is to require that at the least they be in only one state. IOW, no transportation over state lines.
Assange who has operated as a fence for stolen property (as opposed to journalists who make intelligent discussions but do not release information that can and will get others murdered ), is gripping that American companies is destroying him. Yet, he points to a number of western nations. Well, there is an alternative. He should consider moving to China, Iran, north Korea, Venezuela, or even Somalia. There, he will be able to continue wikileaks. And I am sure that the host gov will not mind if he receives stolen property about that gov. and simply dumps on the net.
Look, so you took insult to this. How many ppl in HR have you met that have a SINGLE clue about a technical ppl. FEW, if any. The ONLY time that I met anyone with even a tech background was a ex-CISer who was a failure in the tech world so became a star in the HR in the firm. THat is, until they realized that she was just as bad at HR as she was as a tech.
Hell, for somebody that takes such exception, you do not even have the courage or backbone to post your login. It says a lot about HR and yourself. And if you think that it was horrible that I spoke about HR, what exactly is your background that you can judge tech ppl? Are you an engineer or even a scientists? Nuts, even GD lawyers have enough brains to insist that all lawyers that work in IP have a science/tech/engineering background.
And to take this one step further, I had an old friend of mine that got his PdH in HR from NIU. He now works for a major 50 as their top HR. And he has commented many times that most of HR IS the bottom of the business world. And he would not presume to judge engineers/scientists/etc.
I still think that we should have a contest for new SHLVs. Namely a COTS-SHLV. Only the smart way is to offer it up for 2 SHLVs that lift 140-160 tonnes. They will get up to 5 billion to develop (grand total of 10 billion, which is a far far cry from the 20+ that will be spent on SLS for 70 tonnes). In addition, it must cost less than .5 B per launch for 2 launches a year. The 2 winners will have 4 years of 2 launches a year. That means a minimum of 4 billion dollars to each company. Likewise, whoever has the lowest launch costs, will have another 2 launches each year. That encourages the companies to put in true lowest bids and rewards them for such. Considering that it is putting up ~900 tonnes into space each year, that is a phenomenal amount. More importantly, it would mean that doing the moon and mars would be trivial.
That is the amazing part. When FH is successful, they will be able to put up say 50 tonnes of fuel. THat will likely start around 2014.
OTH, SLS is suppose to have a test launch in 2017 and costs a billion dollars a launch for 70 tonnes. As you point out, slim to no chance of either. It will certainly costs at least as much as STS did which was 1.5 billion in 2009 with 3 launches. With 1, it is going to cost a LOT more. However, lets assume that they do both. In addition, lets assume that FH jumps to 150 million a launch. 7-10 FH's can be launched for about the same costs as SLS. So, while SLS will put up 70 tonnes, SpaceX will put up 350-500 tonnes. Quit the jump.
Space is not about access. It is all about economics. Sadly, republicans see it in terms of jobs bills for themselves and not in terms of what is good for America.
Here are the rankings for top 10. You can buy the full lists. but even better is send off questions to HR at SNC, SpaceX, Blue Horizons, etc and ask them. HR ppl are fairly stupid about the engineering and science world. They could not tell a total loser from Einstein. The reason is that most of them were losers from the business world (HR and Marketing is where the dredges of business worlds go to). BUT, HR WILL have a list of the top schools that they employ. And yes, they will be happy to tell you that.
Google is your friend.
I would bet that dinosaurs would love to differ with you. So would neanderthals and a number of tribes.
So AC, I am guessing that you are from China's red army?