Geothermal Power Could Meet World’s Annual Energy Needs 250,000 Times Over
August 6th, 2007Amount of taxpayer money that the U.S. Government has allocated to this deep, “hot rock” geothermal research: $2 million.
Amount of taxpayer money flushed down the toilet of U.S. military operations in Iraq PER DAY: $200 million.
Via: Yahoo / AP:
Scientists say this geothermal energy, clean, quiet and virtually inexhaustible, could fill the world’s annual needs 250,000 times over with nearly zero impact on the climate or the environment.
A study released this year by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology said if 40 percent of the heat under the United States could be tapped, it would meet demand 56,000 times over. It said an investment of $800 million to $1 billion [Or the costs associated with fighting the Iraq war for five days—Kevin] could produce more than 100 gigawatts of electricity by 2050, equaling the combined output of all 104 nuclear power plants in the U.S.
“The resource base for geothermal is enormous,” Professor Jefferson Tester, the study’s lead author, told The Associated Press.
But there are drawbacks — not just earthquakes but cost. A so-called hot rock well three miles deep in the United States would cost $7 million to $8 million, according to the MIT study. The average cost of drilling an oil well in the U.S. in 2004 was $1.44 million, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
…
The United States led the way in demonstrating the concept with the Los Alamos geothermal project at Fenton Hill, N.M. The project begun in the 1970s demonstrated that drilling 15,000 feet deep was possible and that energy could then be extracted.
But the project came to a halt in 2000 when it ran out of funds. Meanwhile, the MIT report said, problems encountered in testing have been solved or can be managed — such as controlling how the water flows underground or limiting earthquakes and chemical interactions between water and rock.
Backers in the United States hope government funding will increase as oil and gas prices rise. But Steve Chalk, deputy assistant secretary for renewable energy, said the Department of Energy won’t spend more money beyond the $2 million it has already allocated to hot rock technology.
However, he said the MIT study, which was funded by the Department of Energy, serves as a basis for studying the idea further.
Major energy companies, including Chevron Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp. and American Electric Power, told the AP they are following the research but not investing in it.
“This is an interesting technology for Chevron and we are currently evaluating its potential,” said spokesman Alexander Yelland.
We’re literally being skinned alive over this bullsh*t. It’s lies multiplied by more lies and we’re all paying the price.
Since it’s obvious that this energy crisis is just a shakedown, where does it wind up?
Well it has to shit you to death that America spends billions upon billions for this little misadventure in Iraq when with a few well spent billions you could supply a hell of a lot of people with plenty of energy for their modern lifestyles at minimal environmental cost.
Ive always wondered why we don’t make more use of the
earths natural energy,and we need to do this now by utilizing the oil we still have,instead of just short shortsightedly plundering the oil for selfish use like motorsport and recreational shopping and travel.
“Evaluating its potential” Mr. Chevron? For what? The threat it proposes or the chance to bury it? 2 mil is chump change to these clowns.
We should be spending more money into researching geothermal, but I’m not sure if I buy MIT’s report completely. Let’s be honest, in science these days you start out by making huge exaggerated claims in your first studies on a subject to ensure more funding comes in to keep doing the research.
Let’s just say, I’m holding out for more realistic findings. They will come if we keep funding alternative energy(and I’ll echo everyone’s sentiments about Iraq), but right now these claims aren’t backed up by much. I hope in the future that changes.
Aussies are pretty active in this:
http://www.petratherm.com.au/hotrock/index.htm
and a good industry summary:
http://minister.industry.gov.au/index.cfm?event=object.showContent&objectID=1E87B531-911E-E1FC-CE28F15B0A1E9067
Not as simple as it first sounds, oil has got a lot more energy that steam, and it’s transportable. That’s why this tech has been overlooked till now.
I’ve been doing some research re off the grid heating and cooling. There are contractors in our area who install geothermal home and water heating, and cooling in one unit. Its too pricey for me. The unit that handles the functions starts at $8k, not including any duct work. Then there is the well or horizantal field for the piping. Cost for drilling the vertical well – about $5 k without rock. The unit is powered by 220 electrical circuits and you need at least two.
Although I love the concept, that the use of geothermal would end up sending me back to the grid for power made me real eyes that this was not for me or my pocketbook.
On July 22 you posted that Chevron was investing in a wave current generator. One could reason that Chevron IS legitimately interested in getting a market share of new forms of viable energy production. Likewise, if they’re not putting money into geothermal, then that probably means the energy source is not practical.
Harflimon summed up the situation accurately. These guys are probably making a lot of noise to score another grant (since that’s the bread and butter of these grad students). “Global warming” was the same thing. . . as was the next “ice age” environmentalists made a fuss over before that.
And if we’re bringing up huge wastes of Government spending, more money goes into the Social Security Administration than is spent on Iraq, and social security is nothing but an insane ponzi scheme.
At least in Iraq we get to test our weapons.
To be fair, NSF *did* kick in $20M for IDDP.
http://www.iddp.is/
Not only are the rocks hot, the water is already there.
:o)
“But there are drawbacks — not just earthquakes but cost. A so-called hot rock well three miles deep in the United States would cost $7 million to $8 million, according to the MIT study. The average cost of drilling an oil well in the U.S. in 2004 was $1.44 million, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.”
And as Kevin pointed out, there are the costs associated with the war. But what about building refineries, which cost billions of dollars? No mention of that here.