Sign-In  or  Create a Free Account
Sign-in with:
 
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
 

Enhanced Geothermal: Frack or Friction?

By Stephen Lacey, Editor
October 29, 2010   |   8 Comments

Do you like this podcast?

 
 

Dear Listeners -- While the written companion article for each episode of the Inside Renewable Energy podcast remains below, the associated audio files have necessarily been removed. We apologize for the inconvenience, and appreciate the support you gave to our podcast production.

Thank you,
RenewableEnergyWorld.com

8 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 8
October 28, 2010
Certainly the potentil for geothermal far, far exceeds that of solar and wind. Nor will it destroy large tracts of the environment as solar and wind do. But the prime reason that a viable geo system would immediately make all solar and wind obsoelte is that it can produce quality power, not the unreliable and practically valueless power of solar and wind.
Wind and solar added to the grid will vastly increase the cost of power simply because they will drastically increase the cost of the power produced by the conventional plants that neither solar nor wind can ever displace. This is the dirty little secret that solar and wind supporters are suppressing
in their one-sided, narrow and totally unrealistic arguments.
It's also time for media outlets like this one to get a whole lot smarter about what is a good renewable and what isn't. There is also a crying need for nuclear in this country to replace carbon spewing coal plants. The arguments that nuclear is not "renewable" and therefore faulty, belong in an elementary schoool. Since the supply of nuclear fuel will easily outlast the 60 year lifespan of a nuclear plant, the fact that the fuel source is not renewable is totally irrelevant. And the cost of nuclear will not lower the standard of living of those who use it. Compared to the cost of even solar thermal, nuclear comes out cheaper all around
and can produce quality power, leading to much greater savings, and totally replace coal baseload power plants, something neither wind nor PV nor solar thermal can ever do. Perhaps we need more discriminatory abilities on these
media sites and a rejection of knee-jerk support for anything and everything that calls itself renewable. Actually, coal is rnewable. So is oil.
Comment
2 of 8
October 29, 2010
Much more reliable than fracking, take a look at the Norwegian company Rockenergy.no. They drill a series of wells in stable hot dry rock to create a heat exchanger, which lasts for 50 years and is profitable after only 4 or so. Fracking is subject to problems with instability of the fractures, often only lasting a few years.
Comment
3 of 8
October 29, 2010
Hi:

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/features/online/957/2007-–-year-electric-car

kent beuchert, theBike, Googling your name produces some interesting results, I will give you that...LOL...

.....Bill
Comment
4 of 8
October 29, 2010
EGS shows much promise, but the problem with EGS is induced seismicity. There have been documented swarms of microquakes (< magnitude 3) associated with the high-pressure rock fracturing process inherent to EGS. From a public risk and permitting perspective, induced seismicity is to EGS as high-level radioactive waste disposal is to the nuclear power industry. It will be an uphill climb through the permitting process to demonstrate that the public is safe from seismic activity associated with EGS.

While I support further development of EGS technology, I find the DOE's funding of geothermal technology development to be extremely lopsided. DOE handed out $150 million for EGS research, much of which will go to firms like Halliburton to drill wells that are kilometers deep. Meanwhile, from what I can tell, the DOE has not allocated one single dollar toward the development of Underground Thermal Energy Storage (UTES), a technology which is widely used in Europe to store heat and cold on a seasonal basis using wells that are only tens of meters deep. UTES is an enabling technology that has been shown to be capable of providing up to 90% of space heating needs heat from the solar fraction at a multi-family residential development near Calgary and to reduce electricity costs for cooling large buildings by 60% to 90%, yet UTES is essentially unheard of here in the USA.

DOE has not funded UTES development since the aftermath of the 1973 oil embargo. Meanwhile, the technology has taken off in Europe, where it has been demonstrated to be effective and commercially viable. While DOE should continue to support EGS development, it needs to stop ignoring UTES, the shallow, low-temperature geothermal technology that is ready to be deployed NOW in the US, creating jobs, reducing emissions and promoting energy independence.
Comment
5 of 8
October 29, 2010
Underground thermal storage is a technology pilot-projected in Europe that works well, with the side benefits. Collection can be put under asphalt streets to melt snow in winter and to cool and maintain road qualitty in summer.

The U.S. government is instead giving money to big subsidy-seekers for capital-intensive exploration that might not otherwise be done. Some of these subsidy-seekers are in the news today, as research into what happened in the Gulf proceeds.

The Swiss terminated this kind of exploration, on concerns about ground movement. I wonder if there are other safety issues that should be considered as well.

Using heat sources close to the surface is a technology with a long track record. The cost and risk of going deep do not seem justified. Sun, wind, and bio-mass can contribute heat for a storage method already tested.

In natural heated water reservoirs, there are often minerals that lead to plaque issues inside the pipes. In areas where rain water can be used, this could be less of an issue, and new materials and interior pipe designs are ameliorating this issue anyway.

Some of the materials that cause plaque may be in demand anyway. Ways will be designed to harvest the plaques.
Comment
6 of 8
October 29, 2010
Seismicity is the hot topic in EGS. Induced micro earthquakes, as stated by Mr. Worthington above, could cause concerns to public safety. However in isolated places, like the Outback of Australia, I think this is a moot point. Obviously, EGS power plants would need to be designed to withstand this induced seismicity. Further research needs to be conducted to understand the basic cause and effect of injecting water to purposefully fracture deep bedrock.

One area of research that is going to see major growths is seismology. Developing techniques, like shear wave splitting, are improving greatly to model aspects like fissure densities and crack distributions. These technologies rely on micro earthquakes, which are an absolute given in EGS. Therefore, this type of seismic analysis has the potential to provide the most information about the subsurface and its dynamic nature.
Comment
7 of 8
November 2, 2010
The problems with seismicity, sub-surface contamination, gas liberation, etc. are teething problems in this infant technology. The real problem with EGS and traditional geothermal is that of scale. It is not feasible in 99% of the cases to build a 1 GW EGS or traditional geothermal power plant as a single coordinated unit - the heat resource is too widely scattered. That means that the costs will always be greater than for a conventional power plant, regardless of fuel.

The commercial projects going forward in Europe today are primarily traditional ones, and almost half of them don't even find geothermal water. Typically, these projects produce 0-5 MW electrical net (after electricity needed for pumps, etc.) and 15-40 MW thermal used for district heating locally. There are substantial governmental supports that result in roughly Euro 0,25 ($0.35) per kWh cost to the distribution system. THAT is not an economic benefit! However, there are other advantages,: no foreign currency requirement, a significant CO2 reduction, and security of supply.

The solution to the scale part of the geothermal problem is to go deeper. This means go down to where the "local" heat available is enough to yield the necessary energy at conditions to produce GigaWatt energy consistently for many decades. Depending on base-rock conditions, it will take 3-5 GW of thermal energy to yield 1 GW electrical. That's a lot of energy - compare it with the current geothermal efforts and you'll see what I mean. There is one company that is proposing a solution this size. It's called GEOCOGEN, located in Switzerland; you can read about it on the website, GEOCOGEN.net. There are significant challenges for anyone with the underground portion of such a project. The above-ground portion of the project is virtually a conventional power plant, so existing technology is sufficient.
Comment
8 of 8
November 3, 2010
@kent beuchert,alias,theBike,
Get a life! Better yet, get a different job. The BIG OIL companies that are paying you to blog against global warming are not our friends and neither are you.
Geothermal power plants have over 95% avaiable power production 24/7. Solar thermal with thermal storage is dispatchable power, making it more valuable than Photovoltaic since it is available at the peak of demand.
America needs every type of renewable power to reduce our foreign oil imports, which are the biggest part of our trade imbalance.
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

Stephen Lacey

View Stephen Lacey's Profile
About: I am a reporter with ClimateProgress.org, a blog published by the Center for American Progress. I am former editor and producer for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, wh... more »

Advertise With Us

Second Wind Inc. Talesun Solar USA, Ltd. Festo SunHedge Planet Solar Inc Rotork plc SolPowerPeople, Inc.
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