Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth

There's a Vast Source of Clean Energy Beneath Our Feet. And a Race To Tap It. (nytimes.com) 193

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
The United States has enough geothermal energy to power the entire country. Some are trying to unlock it by using techniques from the fracking boom. From a report: Traditional geothermal plants, which have existed for decades, work by tapping natural hot water reservoirs underground to power turbines that can generate electricity 24 hours a day. Few sites have the right conditions for this, however, so geothermal only produces 0.4 percent of America's electricity currently. But hot, dry rocks lie below the surface everywhere on the planet. And by using advanced drilling techniques developed by the oil and gas industry, some experts think it's possible to tap that larger store of heat and create geothermal energy almost anywhere. The potential is enormous: The Energy Department estimates there's enough energy in those rocks to power the entire country five times over and has launched a major push to develop technologies to harvest that heat.

Dozens of geothermal companies have emerged with ideas. Fervo is using fracking techniques -- similar to those used for oil and gas -- to crack open dry, hot rock and inject water into the fractures, creating artificial geothermal reservoirs. Eavor, a Canadian start-up, is building large underground radiators with drilling methods pioneered in Alberta's oil sands. Others dream of using plasma or energy waves to drill even deeper and tap "superhot" temperatures that could cleanly power thousands of coal-fired power plants by substituting steam for coal. Still, obstacles to geothermal expansion loom. Investors are wary of the cost and risks of novel geothermal projects. Some worry about water use or earthquakes from drilling. Permitting is difficult. And geothermal gets less federal support than other technologies.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

There's a Vast Source of Clean Energy Beneath Our Feet. And a Race To Tap It. More

There's a Vast Source of Clean Energy Beneath Our Feet. And a Race To Tap It.

Comments Filter:

  • In the way that magnetic-confinement fusion is always 30 years away, hot dry rock geothermal power is always 10 years away. Why is that?

    Is it because much of the hot dry rock resource is in the Mountain West, where water is scarce, both as a heat-exchange fluid to extract the heat and also to cool the condensers for the steam power plant?

    Could CO2 sequestered from natural gas power plants be piped in and serve as a heat-exchange fluid?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by RobinH ( 124750 )
      Wouldn't the heat exchange fluid be closed loop? And why condense it? The steam that drives the turbine you just pump back down underground to warm up again. Why pump cold water underground? That's just making the hot rocks do more work.
      • Im not physicist, but I think you need to cool down the water in a sealed system to get the water to flow back down on its own reducing energy needs to fuel the cycle.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mspohr ( 589790 )

          Yes, the big energy change is the transition from liquid to gas and back again. Pumping steam isn't very efficient.
          It's kind of a basic problem with all thermal energy generating systems (coal, NG, nuclear, etc.). They all waste energy (and use a lot of water).

      • Apparently, fracking in inherently leaky. Very leaky. I doubt we could call it a closed loop, well at least not the kind that doesn't need a constant supply of water.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tragedy ( 27079 )

          There's a reason these rocks are dry in the first place. Water heated to those temperatures is probably not going to naturally flow into a network of cracks. I'm not sure they'll be able to get it to flow so much as cycle. Force water in under high pressure, then wait for it to come back under even higher pressure, then repeat. Basically an artificial geyser.

    • At least part of the reason it's perpetually 10 years away is that the well-oiled fossil fuel lobby works hard to ensure even the smallest step toward alternative power generation faces a long, hard uphill battle.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kisai ( 213879 )

      Probably not.

      Basically there are 4 problems I see with geothermal, and 3 are not unsurmountable.

      A. Water access, This is actually pretty easy to solve and can partially solve "sea level rise" and "clean drinking water" problems. Step 1, pump sea water in affected areas to a bore hole, this will vaporize the water and leave behind contamination in the bore hole. Step 2A, route steam through as many steam turbines as possible. Step 2B. Condense off the remaining steam to save as clean drinking water (additio

    • And yet there are nuclear reactors in the Mountain West, which I hear also require a few metric shitloads of water for cooling and turning turbines.

      Even in the desert southwest! Amazing!

    • Fact is that several different approaches have been done and they work. Now, the companies are simply moving into production.

  • Thorium based reactors? (Score:3)

    by ctilsie242 ( 4841247 ) on Monday August 28, 2023 @12:40PM (#63803630)

    What would be nice if there were a race for thorium reactors and other reactor designs that are idiot-resistant. Ideally designs that don't need river water or cooling areas, but can be air cooled, perhaps easily trucked in assembled, and decommissioning can just be scramming the reactor and trucking out, ideally a breeder reactor design so the fuel can keep being used.

    This way, it doesn't really matter what geography is present, inexpensive energy is possible regardless of location.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by taustin ( 171655 )

      China and India are both working on thorium reactor designs (and China just licensed the first operation commercial reactor a few weeks ago).

      You exaggerate the advantages - they are not air cooled, they are either light water reactors (the convention design) or molten salt (the more practical design for thorium).

      And thorium reactors must be breeder reactors, since thorium isn't fissile. It has to be irradiated with neutrons to (eventually) turn it into U-232, which is. (What else can be bred in them is anot

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        THTRs are gas cooled. But not very reliable. Germany wrecked both prototypes it built.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by clonan ( 64380 )

        Just a quick clarification.

        Yes, they MUST be breeder reactors, but they can be set up to breed only what they need and not require any external neutron source after the initial startup.

        In addition, you can breed a small excess of U-232 then use that to start a second reactor, rinse and repeat.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        China, India and a few other countries are trialing burning thorium in heavy water CANDU reactors.

  • I thought were against fracking because it could create seismic issues and affect aquifers.
    Is fracking suddenly safe if you aren't using it to force natural gas to the surface?

    • Yeah, this is CleanFracking(TM), brought to you by the same people who gave us, "Oh look, my tap water is on fire!" & "Arrgh!!! The tap water! It burns my skin & eyes!"
  • Why does anyone beleive this will ever become reality? What would you do with the existing industry it would replace? Someone think they will just roll over and die volontarily?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by taustin ( 171655 )

      It already is reality is some places, like Iceland where 2/3 of all houses are heated with energy from geothermal plants.

      Politics is complicated and dangerous, but ignoring reality is far more so.

  • ...but *PART* of the solution. Yes, we need to end the reliance on finite, non-renewable sources of energy (fossil fuels). But there is not one sole renewable source of energy that is the end-all solution. Geothermal can help in parts of the country (and world) that can take advantage of it, just like solar, wind, tidal, nuclear (uranium or thorium), etc. There's more than enough energy available for capture with the proper investments and tools if we can get over a host of hurdles, including government

    • RTFS, chump

      some experts think it's possible to tap that larger store of heat and create geothermal energy almost anywhere

  • FTA: Some worry about water use or earthquakes from drilling.

    Uh huh. And where were all of these people who worry about earthquakes when the fracking boom was gearing up?

    Also, fracking creates tons and tons of contaminated wastewater – which is injected into the ground.

  • I have almost zero knowledge about geology, and a limited understanding of the requirement for power production and transport. Still, it feels like a lot of what's in the summary could lead to worst outcome than the alternative of not breaking earth's crust open to drain it. I really hope, if this is a viable source of energy, that it will really be "clean", and that it won't be pursued blindly at the expense of well, everything that could be impacted by deep drilling and stuff like that.

  • Headline says "and the race to tap it". That's copied from the article headline.
    But the article makes no mention of a "race" or who the race participants are or why they are "racing".

    This is what it's about though, the "Enhanced Geothermal Shot" https://www.energy.gov/eere/ge... [energy.gov]

  • What happens when we alter the heat signature of our planet significantly? How will it impact inner flow of materials? How might that impact volcanoes or tectonic plate formation? We don't know.

    Just like we don't know about seeding clouds, or altering atmospheric particle levels. But we've done both for a while. China for sure altered weather for the Beijing Olympics. And CA tries to regulate particles released/created from vehicles... which is also connected to cloud formation, which would alter wea

    • There are lots of reasons not to do this. Worries about changing the heat signature of the planet are not on that list.

      The Earth's crust is a paper thin layer of cold rock floating atop a huge ass blob of molten rock and iron. It's the like the surface layer of your hot chocolate vs. the entire rest of your drink. We'd barely scratch a pin prick in the scummy layer atop the molten rock blob.

      Earthquakes, toxic water sludge, and the difficulty of digging deep enough to matter are some of the problems here.

  • Hooray for... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Spinlock_1977 ( 777598 ) <Spinlock_1977 AT yahoo DOT com> on Monday August 28, 2023 @01:54PM (#63803900) Journal

    ... subterranean geological instabilities.

    Someone will make the argument that there's so much energy down there we could never consume enough to make a difference. But here's the thing - much like aquifers, pulling heat from a specific location will affect subterranean structures in the immediate vacinity, and we have little experience with how that might play out.

    • True, and on the other hand we do have experience with how fracking plays out in geologically unstable areas — it increases seismicity measurably, significantly, and immediately.

  • Did Zach Snyder teach you nothing about Krypton with "Man of Steel"?

  • Doesn't bringing thermal energy to the surface of the Earth create another warming problem for our environment? I'd rather see the solar energy that we already encounter utilized instead.

    • If we get a republican in office, prepare for solar to be dumped in a large dumpster fire. Solar = liberal ideals, for many republicans. (It doesn't make sense, but it doesn't have to.)

  • Beneath my feet? (Score:3)

    by PPH ( 736903 ) on Monday August 28, 2023 @04:04PM (#63804298)

    My feet are propped up on the sofa. So would that source be my TV set?

  • The United States has enough geothermal energy to power the entire country.

    {Does comical, slapstick math using fingers}

    Well, that's handy! An entire country has enough to power an entire country!

  • U.S. Geothermal production is pathetic and has hardly changed in the last 15 years. "Race" does not describe what is going on here at all unless it is a race by some word salad producers to consume funds from investors/suckers. Environmentalist have repeatedly blocked geothermal energy plans and the industry seems to have thrown in the towel.
  • Yes, North America has multiple super volcanoes, with America having 3 active ones. We should not only tap these for the massive energy, but also to thicken the crust around them, esp Yellowstone.

  • ⦠Albertaâ(TM)s oil sandsâ¦

    You know, whenever you use the phrase âoeoil sandsâ, youâ(TM)re repeating petroleum industry propaganda. In Alberta, the resource was so dirty and of such poor quality, it was originally referred to as âoetar sandsâ.

    The (successful) effort to rebrand âoetar sandsâ to the less filthy-sounding âoeoil sandsâ is reminiscent of how âoeglobal warmingâ has been replaced with the more politically acceptable âoeclimate changeâ.

Slashdot Top Deals

Aren't you glad you're not getting all the government you pay for now?

Close