Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Unsubstantiated Claims Draw Response from Reykjavik Energy

Do you like this opinion & commentary?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 

The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.

2 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 2
June 17, 2009
This is just another PR rescue attempt by the GEA, the extremely active and effective shill for the geothermal industry. If they had worked in a geothermal plant, they would know that geothermal energy is profoundly depletable (one need only to review public files in the CDOGGR website, or read a collection of papers about the Geysers' Units 15, Bottlerock, CCPA 1 and 2, and Coso, where they have recently recived approval to suck water from a nearby lake in order to prevent bankruptcy). This is due to geothermal reservoirs being convective heat systems, and the crustal heat flow being touted as so immense is based on conductive heat flow. The time scales for heat transfer between the two heat flows are a couple of orders of magnitude different, which means geothermal systems are inherently limited when being produced at high rates over 20-30 years versus the 100,000s of years of conductive heat flow required to create the reservoir.

Additionally, the weak defense of the environmental impacts sounds like a repeat of 30 years ago, when Union Oil maintained that the H2S coming from the Geysers natural vents was more than that from the power plants! The impacts of boron from cooling tower drift and the vast changes to the landscape and subsidence caused by the production only became evident in later years in the Geysers. Don't buy this GEA mis-direct! The impacts of geothermal energy are real, have to be dealt with, and add considerably to its expense.
Comment
2 of 2
June 19, 2009
US "Shills" should look so good! Compared to carbon fuel, whats a little boron? I am sure parasitic plumes, if they exist, can be captured, managed, and wrestled to below safe standards. My suggestion is, lets simplify everyone's name, so I know who is saying what. No more common suffixes, punctuation marks. If we get past the names and impolite accusations, only some of which are probably true, we can get on to the business of conquering energy,
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Leslie Blodgett

View Leslie Blodgett's Profile
About: Leslie Blodgett edits the Geothermal Energy Association's weekly newsletter. She has been involved in the production of many of GEA's recent reports and worksh... more »

Advertise With Us

Dow Solar Rich Hessler Solar Business Development Prudent Living, Inc. AREDAY 350 Media SolSolution Stoel Rives LLP
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters