Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

SpaceNut · 2022-09-11 15:18:41

Here is a present for post 19 of Calliban

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geotherma … ed_Kingdom

http://www.gtenergy.net/what-is-geother … in-the-uk/

https://www.geoscience.co.uk/geothermal-in-the-uk

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-11 17:09:51

For SpaceNut re #26

Thank you for finding and posting the links and images showing (and reporting on) geothermal energy opportunities in Great Britain.

The estimates of meeting ALL of UK's heating needs were particularly encouraging.

20% energy need was estimated as a potential above and beyond heating, but I (suspect anyway) think that estimate may be conservative.

It appears the UK is particularly well situated due to the thinness of the crust below the islands.

There is a ** lot ** of ** real ** work already done, and ** real ** results to study.

***
For SpaceNut .... can any of that work translate to New Hampshire?

(th)

SpaceNut · 2022-09-11 18:16:29

I saw depths of 500 to 2500 meters I think for temperature rise due to granite mass.

Most searches give heat pump data (HVAC) and not thermal heat sources

https://surgeaccelerator.com/how-deep-f … l-heating/

In summary, geothermal depth breaks down as follows:
Installation    Minimum Depth Maximum Depth
HVAC Horizontal Loops 5f 6f
HVAC Slinky Loops    5f 6f
HVAC Vertical Loops    100f 400f
Binary Cycle Plants 0.5mi 2mi
Dry Steam Plants 0.9mi 2.4mi
Flash Steam Plants 0.32mi 2.2mi
Enhanced Geothermal Systems 2mi 4.3mi
Geothermal types and Minimum and MInimum Depths
References
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/ency … al-energy/
https://www.irena.org/geothermal
https://www.britannica.com/science/geothermal-energy
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/geo … -found.php
https://www.nrel.gov/research/re-geo-el … ction.html
https://dandelionenergy.com/geothermal- … -questions
https://geothermal-energy-journal.sprin … 017-0074-z
https://data.openei.org/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/en … ower-plant
https://www.energy.gov/eere/geothermal/ … generation
https://www.achrnews.com/articles/13176 … s-of-thumb
https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/9/4/250/655598

1920 https://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/0701/report.pdf

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-11 19:57:14

For SpaceNut re #28

thanks for that impressive study list!

I'm surprised to see steam mentioned in this context at a depth of only a third of a mile, but that might be near a thermal vent such as at Yellowstone National Park.

I just hope I can find the time to follow some of those links!

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-12 10:18:53

FriendOfQuark1 wrote back to refresh my memory of the estimated cost of a geothermal well ...

I had mis-remembered $12,000 ... the correct figure is $12 million (USD).

However (from my perspective) a well that costs $12 million today and delivers reliable power and hot water for 1000 years is (probably) justifiable.

I'm hoping Calliban will develop a design able to perform well for 1000 years, at a (comparatively modest) price of $12 for parts and labor.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2022-09-12 18:37:25

A well is just one of the means for thermal energy storage for a heat pump use and as you noted it's not an energy creator.

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-12 18:58:58

For SpaceNut re #31

Thanks for helping to move this topic along in void's absence.

I hope his fishing excursion is both enjoyable and refreshing.

***
Following up on your point about a heat pump not being an energy generator ...

I am hoping to follow the links you provided a day or so ago, in hopes the links reveal work done to confirm that energy can be created by dropping a well far enough into the Earth.

The "magic" distance (from my perspective) is deep enough to boil water.

FriendOfQuark1 sent me a longish reply about his investigation of geothermal well technology.

His email contained a temperature that I've asked him to clarify. It would make a big difference if the measurement is Fahrenheit or Centigrade. In fact it would make ** all ** the difference.

My concept is that if water (under boiling but preferably even lower) is brought into a region of the Earth's crust where temperatures are ** above ** boiling, then the water ** should ** be lifted from liquid to gaseous state.

In the gaseous state, the water molecules will be under pressure to lift to the surface and perform useful work, after which they would (presumably) give up energy and return to liquid state, for return to the well.

This would (if i am understanding the concept correctly) provide a continuous cycle of flow able to sustain energy production and heat delivery for as long as the Earth supplies energy.

It would be helpful to know what the $12 million buys. It needs to cover the cost of drilling, excavation of tailings, installation of wall pipe, and installation of such other equipment as is needed to insure a successful operation for many years of uninterrupted service.

When I asked about a 1000 year projected lifetime, FriendOfQuark1 explained that the way money works, the initial $12 million becomes inconsequential if the asset is ** indeed ** long lived. I don't understand the explanation, and don't expect to so won't try, but apparently the longevity of the asset is what gives it value.

I'm hoping Calliban will take an interest in this scenario, but in the mean time, I'll try to persuade FriendOfQuark1 to see if he can pull a few more details from the Texas company that estimated the cost of the well.

(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-09-13 03:42:12

Mars was very active in the past it is thought to be not active today but Quakes have been measured on at an estimated at magnitude 5, this quake was discovered by NASA’s InSight lander, the surface of Mars has warm spots.
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap990602.html

NASA's InSight Reveals the Deep Interior of Mars
https://mars.nasa.gov/news/8996/nasas-i … r-of-mars/

Like Earth, Mars heated up as it formed from the dust and larger clumps of meteoritic material orbiting the Sun that helped to shape our early solar system. Over the first tens of millions of years, the planet separated into three distinct layers – the crust, mantle, and core – in a process called differentiation. Part of InSight’s mission was to measure the depth, size, and structure of these three layers.
Each of the papers in Science focuses on a different layer. The scientists found the crust was thinner than expected and may have two or even three sub-layers. It goes as deep as 12 miles (20 kilometers) if there are two sub-layers, or 23 miles (37 kilometers) if there are three.
Beneath that is the mantle, which extends 969 miles (1,560 kilometers) below the surface.
At the heart of Mars is the core, which has a radius of 1,137 miles (1,830 kilometers). Confirming the size of the molten core was especially exciting for the team.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-09-13 03:45:17)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-13 13:24:25

For Mars_B4_Moon re #33

Thank you for finding and posting results from Insight studies!

SearchTerm:Interior of Mars
SearchTerm:Insight lander study of interior of Mars

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-13 17:22:25

This is a follow up on the list of resources found and published by SpaceNut ...

https://www.nrel.gov/research/re-geo-el … ction.html

Geothermal Electricity Production Basics
Geothermal power plants use steam to produce electricity. The steam comes from reservoirs of hot water found a few miles or more below the earth's surface.
Flash steam power plant with bottoming binary unit in Nevada. Photo by Dennis Schroeder, NREL
The steam rotates a turbine that activates a generator, which produces electricity. There are three types of geothermal power plants: dry steam, flash steam, and binary cycle.
Dry Steam
Dry steam power plants draw from underground resources of steam. The steam is piped directly from underground wells to the power plant where it is directed into a turbine/generator unit. There are only two known underground resources of steam in the United States:
The Geysers in northern California
Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, where there's a well-known geyser called Old Faithful.
Since Yellowstone is protected from development, the only dry steam plants in the country are at The Geysers.
Flash Steam
Flash steam power plants are the most common and use geothermal reservoirs of water with temperatures greater than 360°F (182°C). This very hot water flows up through wells in the ground under its own pressure. As it flows upward, the pressure decreases and
some of the hot water boils into steam. The steam is then separated from the water and used to power a turbine/generator. Any leftover water and condensed steam are injected back into the reservoir, making this a sustainable resource.
Binary Steam
Binary cycle power plants operate on water at lower temperatures of about 225-360°F (107-182°C). Binary cycle plants use the heat from the hot water to boil a working fluid, usually an organic compound with a low boiling point. The working fluid is vaporized in a heat exchanger and used to turn a turbine. The water is then injected back into the ground to be reheated. The water and the working fluid are kept separated during the whole process, so there are little or no air emissions.
Currently, two types of geothermal resources can be used in binary cycle power plants to generate electricity: enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) and low-temperature or co-produced resources.
Enhanced Geothermal Systems
EGS provide geothermal power by tapping into the Earth's deep geothermal resources that are otherwise not economical due to lack of water, location, or rock type. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that potentially 500,000 megawatts of EGS resource is available in the western U.S. or about half of the current installed electric power generating capacity in the United States.
Low-Temperature and Co-Produced Resources
Low-temperature and co-produced geothermal resources are typically found at temperatures of 300F (150C) or less. Some low-temperature resources can be harnessed to generate electricity using binary cycle technology. Co-produced hot water is a byproduct of oil and gas wells in the United States. This hot water is being examined for its potential to produce electricity, helping to lower greenhouse gas emissions and extend the life of oil and gas fields.
Additional Resources
For more information about geothermal technologies, visit the following resources:
NREL's Policymakers' Guidebook for Geothermal Electricity Generation
NREL Geothermal Research
Low Temperature and Coproduced Resources
U.S. Department of Energy
Enhanced Geothermal Systems
U.S. Department of Energy

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-13 17:27:04

From FriendOfQuark1, by email, I received a clarification on how geothermal energy can be gained even if the water available is below boiling at sea level.

The method uses a vacuum artificially created to allow the hot water to boil. The energy required to create a partial vacuum is (of course) subtracted from the net energy delivered to the surface. However, according to FriendOfQuark1, this system has been tested at several locations around the Earth.

An issue that may (has) come up is earthquakes. If nearby humans (neighbors) conclude that earthquakes are happening because a geothermal well is in operation, they can (and have) force the operation to cease.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-13 18:06:21

Google came up with several citations when I asked about geothermal projects that have succeeded on Earth ...

Indonesia is home to three of the ten biggest geothermal power plant installations in the world, followed by the US and Philippines with two each. Power Technology lists the ten biggest geothermal power projects in the world, based on operational capacity. The Geysers Geothermal Complex, California, US – 1.2GW
The top 10 biggest geothermal power projects in the world
www.power-technology.com/analysis/feature-top-10-biggest-geothermal-power-plants-in-the-world/

also:

Success Stories | Geothermal Rising :: Using the Earth …
https://geothermal.org/our-impact/success-stories
The Geysers Geothermal Complex in California is the largest geothermal installation in the world. Geothermal energy has a wide variety of uses from large power plants, to district heating and cooling, to use in single family homes, …

and finally ...

What is the success rate of geothermal drilling?
There does appear to be a strong learning-curve effect in geothermal drilling, as each resource is developed. While the rate of success for the first well drilled in a field appears to average 50 percent, the success rate averaged over the first five wells drilled is 59 percent.
Success of Geothermal Wells: A Global Study
www.ifc.org/ << link shortened in Google snippet
Search for: What is the success rate of geothermal drilling?

(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-09-14 05:35:55

Huge volcanic eruptions: time to prepare

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02177-x

Being able to affect volcanic behaviour directly might seem inconceivable, but so did the deflection of asteroids until the formation of NASA’s Planetary Defense Coordination Office in 2016. Numerous examples from geothermal exploration show that it is technically possible to penetrate magmatic bodies in the crust with little collateral damage. In 2024, researchers plan to drill into a magma pocket at the Krafla test bed in Iceland, to provide a ‘long-term magma observatory’ and test sensing equipment to potentially improve volcanic prediction. Research should also be undertaken to assess if it is possible to manipulate the magma or surrounding rocks to moderate eruption explosivity — one such project, Magma Outgassing During Eruptions and Geothermal Exploration, has funding from the European Research Council to 2026.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-09-14 05:36:53)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-14 07:38:49

For Mars_B4_Moon re #38

Thank you for this (to me ** very ** interesting) link >> report on serious study of possible easing of pressure on the Earth's production of thermal energy from nuclear fission in the core.

This initiative is related to the possibility of pulling excess energy out of the core by dropping geothermal wells in sufficient number and with sufficient capacity to meet the energy needs of the entire population.

For SpaceNut .... FriendOfQuark1 ** might ** be interested in working on a $12 million geothermal proposal.

What I have ** not ** seen is any indication that Calliban is thinking about my proposal to drop a well to supply power and heat to properties such as Windsor Castle.

There are said to be numerous properties scattered around England and the region, where a robust geothermal system could supply all the needs of the property, and potentially of nearby villages as well.

I'd like to see any such design able to survive for 1000 years, or to be maintained easily, or both.

(th)

Calliban · 2022-09-14 08:01:57

tahanson43206 wrote:

From FriendOfQuark1, by email, I received a clarification on how geothermal energy can be gained even if the water available is below boiling at sea level.
The method uses a vacuum artificially created to allow the hot water to boil. The energy required to create a partial vacuum is (of course) subtracted from the net energy delivered to the surface. However, according to FriendOfQuark1, this system has been tested at several locations around the Earth.
An issue that may (has) come up is earthquakes. If nearby humans (neighbors) conclude that earthquakes are happening because a geothermal well is in operation, they can (and have) force the operation to cease.
(th)

TH, this is how a low-pressure steam turbine works at any thermal powerplant. The pressure in the condenser is typically around 70mbar, at which saturation temperature for water is around 30°C. So you could run a steam power plant using a heat source which is beneath the ordinary boiling point of water at 1bar. The steam system will operate entirely under vacuum. The problem is efficiency will be low. And the volume throughput of steam needed to generate a unit of energy gets progressively bigger. This means that your boilers, steam pipework, turbine and condenser, start to get bigger and bigger for each unit of power you generate. So capital costs go up, which pushes up the price of power. There are other problems too. Your maintenance costs and operating costs are a function of plant size. The plant itself has energy costs - heating during start up, pumps to return condensate, the energy cost of pumping water across the condenser tubes, etc. These parasitic energy costs will eat a progressively greater portion of your net energy as efficiency goes down.

Collectively, this is why there was such a strong emphasis on increasing efficiency as part of the Gen 4 nuclear renaissance initiative. If efficiency is 40% rather than 30%, then immiediately, the same plant is generating one third more power and all capital and operating costs are reduced by a third on each unit energy generated. When you take into account the fact that internal plant energy demand may account for 10% of the gross electric power generated, then a 10% improvement in efficiency results in a 40% increase in power onto the grid and a 40% reduction in cost per kWh. This is why no one builds sub-atmospheric steam engines as a serious venture, although I personally find the idea fascinating.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-09-14 08:09:44)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-14 08:07:07

This is for SpaceNut ....

The name for a new topic might be: Millennium Geothermal Enterprise

What I have in mind is taking geothermal activity to the next logical level.

The Earth is producing more thermal energy due to nuclear fission than it can release without explosive uncontrolled activities.

Something that Mars_B4_Moon (or possible SpaceNut) just posted showed that there are people on Earth who are thinking seriously about reducing the severity of volcanic eruptions by trying to syphon off gases before they cause dislocation of great masses of regolith.

A similar undertaking would be to sink geothermal power wells in great numbers at all suitable locations around the world.

In recent posts I saw some concern that such wells might ** cause ** earthquakes, but I would ** think ** that drawing thermal energy out of the crust would reduce the need for dislocation of the crust due to upwelling thermal energy from the core.

When you are ready, I'm hoping we can establish a topic dedicated to this process.

As it happens, we have two members who could play crucial roles in helping to bring about an alternate future in which human energy needs are at last partially met by geothermal energy sources.

I ** think ** that Calliban has the engineering training and background to produce a plan/design for a long lived geothermal energy production system.

On the ** other ** hand, I do NOT ** know ** that.

Likewise, I ** think ** that FriendOfQuark1 could manage a $12 million geothermal project, but again, I don't ** know ** that.

The only way we can find out if these gentleman can operate at this level is to give them a chance.

This forum is a great place for exploration of this altrnate future.

(th)

Calliban · 2022-09-14 08:30:54

TH, I probably could, if I had infinite time.

In theory, if you don't care how much money you spend up front and intend to reap slow benefits over 1000 years, many things are possible. But I would suggest that we are probably heading into a world where the opposite is going to be true. Cost of capital (interest rate on borrowed money) is going to increase. This will make short term profitability more important, rather than less important in the future.

The problem with generating geothermal electricity in the UK is that reaching temperatures for good steam quality (>200°C) requires very deep wells, on the order of several miles. Drilling that deep is expensive. The only solution that might make deep geothermal viable is a solution that makes vertical drilling cheaper, so that is where investigation shoujd focus. For energy to be useful to people it must be affordable to them.

For direct heating, we need temperatures of at least 60°C and as a source for heat pumps, any large heat sink with a temperature upwards of 10°C is potentially useful. For direct heating, the resource is much easier (and cheaper) to tap than for electricity and as Louis used to say, a kW is still a kW. If shallow geothermal can provide a large chunk of the world's space heating needs, then that is a chunk of energy that no longer needs to be provided by electricity or fossil fuel.

Another concept that might be of interest for geothermal energy, is the idea of a hybrid powerplant. This would consist of a fossil fuel or nuclear power plant, in which geothermal (or solar) energy provides some of the heating needed. In a coal powerplant, there are three parts to a boiler. There is the economiser at the top, which heats the water to roughly normal boiling point, there is the boiler proper in the middle and the superheater, which takes wet steam at 300°C and heats it to 500°C, which dries it and heats it to sufficient quality to allow it to enter the HP turbine. A hybrid boiler would use geothermal heat at 200°C to heat the steam from 100°C to 200°C. The coal would heat the economiser and superheater. In a nuclear powerplant, water would be preheated to 200°C by a seperate heat exchanger before entering the steam generator.

In the hybrid powerplant, geothermal or solar provides maybe 10-30% of the heat needed to raise high quality steam. This means that a coal powerplant generates the same power with perhaps a quarter less fuel burned. Or it means that a 3000MWth nuclear reactor, generates 1200MWe of power, instead of just 1000MWe. In both cases, the secondary plant must be scaled up of course. For the geothermal well, producing say 600MW of heat at 200°C, incorporating this output into a fossil or nuclear generating system allows a much greater proportion of the heat to be converted into valuable electricity. This makes drilling a deep geothermal well a lot more affordable. Given how much it costs to build and commission nuclear powerplants these days, there coukd be a lot of value in an innovation that allows a 1000MWe reactor to generate 1200MWe of power.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-09-14 08:51:50)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-14 08:49:37

For Calliban re #42

Thank you ** very ** much for picking up on this subtopic!

May I inquire if you have any expertise in financing large projects? Most humans on Earth do NOT, but I want to dot my "i's" and cross my "t's" before continuing.

FriendOfQuark1 cannot do engineering, and he does not claim that ability.

However, you have often expressed opinions about financing, so I'm unsure of your background in that field.

What I'm looking for is a qualified engineer to design a competitive geothermal well (or perhaps a family depending upon terrain).

Since I am sure you could not have had the time to read all the posts that have been flowing through the forum recently, I'll add that FriendOfQuark1 got a price of $12 million (USD) for a geothermal well. I don't know the specifics, and in any case that was a while ago, so things will have changed. Technology will have improved, and knowledge of terrain will have improved as well.

I am interested in seeing this already well established technology greatly expanded at the maximum possible rate.

The opportunity of the transition underway right NOW in the UK is one that I am hoping will not be missed.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-14 10:35:32

As a follow up .... for anyone who might be interested in investigating ...

Is there an inventory of properties owned by the Monarchy?

Is there a way to evaluate the potential of these properties for a geothermal well to provide heat and power?

The ideal would be to meet all the current and likely needs of the property, while having enough left over to replenish the savings account.

In this case, there should be no need to borrow money from outside lenders. The Monarchy should be able to borrow money from itself.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-15 08:58:00

Here is a YouTube video that covers geothermal energy status reasonably well, as far as I can see.

The video ** may ** be provided by the company that is offering hot gas drilling...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61mz4vr1EeE

The graphics show the nature of the problem to be solved fairly well, and the video makes clear the reward for those entities that can put everything together to achieve a long lived energy (and heat) production facility.

#renewable #energy #geothermal
How This Hole Keeps Generating Energy
262,185 views Apr 28, 2022 Visit http://brilliant.org/Ziroth/ to get started learning STEM for free, and the first 200 people will get 20% off their annual premium subscription.
Imagine if there was a way to get nearly endless supplies of clean energy for heating and electricity anywhere in the world. It could help reduce our dependence on unstable gas supplies, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Well, deep geothermal may be the answer! Using new fusion inspired plasma drills, a spin-off from MIT hopes to advance current drilling technologies to unlock supercritical geothermal heating reserves anywhere in the world!
Sources:
https://newatlas.com/energy/quaise-de...
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-enviro...
This video was sponsored by Brilliant
#renewable #energy #geothermal

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-15 09:07:34

The default attitude of the NewMars forum seems (to me at least) to be to enjoy discussion but never actually do anything useful in the real Universe.

At the very least, the forum provides a way for individual members to contribute to a store of knowledge/advice/insight about issues of significance for the Mars project.\\

However, the forum is most definitely ** not ** limited to just endless discussion.

We have tools for collaboration, including:

The forum FluxBB database where posts are stored, and where they may be found
Links to outside resourses
The Zoom meeting service, which can accelerate progress greatly, when there is progress to be made
The Dropbox file storage facility, which provides for "permanent" storage of work products for future use

Most of all, we have the collective wisdom and creative thinking of the members ...

I'd like to enlist all of that in bringing to existence a geothermal well in some location on Earth were one does not exist at present.

My concept of this installation would include:

Production of electricity and thermal energy for heating sufficient to earn a steady income, that will increase over time with inflation.

A very long life, due to excellent design, planning, information gathering before installation, installation and ongoing maintenance.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-09-15 13:56:12

This is a follow up to #45

The comments about the video go on for some length...

This one seemed (to me at least) worth quoting, because the writer asserts that existing oil and gas wells might be converted to geothermal use.

Another item mentioned by writers in the comments section is that heat may "run out" in (about) 100 years, because rock is such a poor conductor of heat.

Deks Roning
Deks Roning
1 month ago (edited)
If I may, all oil and gas wells on Earth can actually be converted into Geothermal power plants for electricity and district heating/cooling.
There are many abandoned oil/gas wells (including coal mines) that can be used for such a purpose... and oil rigs in the North sea are especially usable because the geothermal gradient there is far higher (aka, hotter temperatures at shallower depths of bore holes which automatically provide high enough temps for electricitiy and heating production [combined]).
Additionally, A LOT of the said oil/gas wells already reach down 6 to 12 km... which are deep enough for electricity production.
The Geothermal facility which was newly constructed in Cornwall UK was said it will produce about 3 MW of electricity and 12 MW of heating/cooling - and this is with a well of about 4.5km depth - which is not bad, but its also shallower than many oil/gas wells).
It was also said that converting oil/gas wells to geothermal would cost HALF as much vs what it would cost to decomission them - and heck, why not? The infrastructure is already there.
Plus, all of the equipment, people and their skills are DIRECTLY transferrable to Geothermal sector.
While it is also accurate that for new geothermal power facilities the drilling costs are what account for 30-50% of the costs, what most people fail to realize is that utility scale geothermal power plants tend to pay for themselves in up to 10 years time (typically around 7 years maximum), after that, they are virtually free to run.
They also have no running fuel costs, have reliability and efficiency ratios of 90-100%, and levelized cost of Geothermal has been holding steady for over a decade now at $70 per MWh (whereas most running costs of Geothermal are between $14-$36 per MWh).
Essentially, Geothermal has all advantages of Nuclear, but none of its drawbacks (such as high running operational costs and production of nuclear waste - even new SMR's are ridiculously inefficient and will be producing 2-30 times more volume of nuclear waste than existing nuclear power plants - and their levelized costs are projected to rise exponentially in the coming decade - plus, standard operational costs of Nuclear are $156 per MWh - over DOUBLE of Geothermal).
Also, when properly maintained, Geothermal power plants can last over 100 years (as is evidenced by the Geothermal facility in Italy/Larderrelo)... and Geothermal brines tend to contain vast quantities of Lithium and other mineral resources.
It was said that the handful (about five or eight) of Geothermal plants in USA alone can provide the entire nation with many times more Lithium that it would ever know what to do with (and if we factor in other mineral resources in the brines, the payoff of the geothermal facility can be much faster than what I said above - similar ratios are for the Geothermal facility in Cornwall).
So, technically speaking, there is no need to make new wells because we have a vast amount of unused oil/gas infrastructure (even used ones) which can already be converted to Geothermal for both electricity and heating/cooling purposes.
But, I agree that Quaise' efforts at drilling 20km into the Earth would provide for much higher temperatures... but in that case, I would imagine that 20 km depth would provide for much higher temperatures than 400 degrees Celsius.
At any rate, the biggest problem plaguing Geothermal are not higher costs of drilling or our ability to access Geothermal resources for sustainable electricity and heating/cooling... its BIGGEST problem is LACK OF FUNDING.
Compared to any other energy source on Earth, Geothermal is the LEAST funded energy source on the planet.
And when we factor in how much money is given in subsidies to fossil fuels... you can tell that governments and corporation priorities do NOT lie where they should be.
Already, back in 2006, MIT released a study saying that we already had the technology at the time to access enough geothermal power to sustain Human civilisation for 200 years worth of... and that with improved technologies we can access enough Geothermal to sustain us for 2000 years.
The oil and gas industry has been digging deep bore holes ranging from 6-12 km depth for 100 years now... its not an issue of accessing Geothermal... the issue is lack of funding and willingness to shift our attention to Geothermal.
10

(th)

Calliban · 2022-09-15 15:22:12

The author (Deks Roning) of this comment is certainly eagre to talk up the prospects of geothermal energy. I agree the topic is worthy of more research, but he overstates that matter. It is true that since the original experiments at Rosemannowes in Cornwall in the 1970s, a lot has changed. Back then, offshore and deep drilling were not used as extensively as they are today. So we it is reasonable to expect that the costs associated with drilling will have declined. Other parts are more questionable.

'While it is also accurate that for new geothermal power facilities the drilling costs are what account for 30-50% of the costs, what most people fail to realize is that utility scale geothermal power plants tend to pay for themselves in up to 10 years time (typically around 7 years maximum), after that, they are virtually free to run.'

This is misleading. All powerplants have a capital amortisation period, after which the only costs are maintenance, operation, fuel and profit. The payback time will depend on what is charged for power. A geothermal plant is basically a steam plant, with the boilers containing a geothermal heat exchanger. The geothermal plant will have a much greater capital cost than a conventional coal burning plant, due to the extra drilling cost and lower efficiency, but will have no fuel cost. So essentially, we are balancing a higher capital cost against lower operational costs.

'levelized cost of Geothermal has been holding steady for over a decade now at $70 per MWh (whereas most running costs of Geothermal are between $14-$36 per MWh).'

That is a thoroughly worthless statement. The LCOE will depend upon where the plant is built and will vary enormously depending upon the quality of the local resource. Most geothermal plants are built where there are shallow heat resources, which is why development has been extensive in Iceland. But we cannot take LCOE values for an Icelandic plant and apply them to a plant in the UK, which is tapping a much deeper resource. The economics of the plant will be completely different depending on where it is built.

'It was also said that converting oil/gas wells to geothermal would cost HALF as much vs what it would cost to decomission them - and heck, why not? The infrastructure is already there.'

Most of those deep wells are either out at sea (North Sea, Carribean, GOM) or far from demand (Alaska, West Africa, etc). They are also designed for a completely different purpose - oil and gas retrieval. Would the hot water from these wells contains hydrocarbons? Also note that the flowrate requirements of a well accessing concentrated hydrocarbons will be different to a geothermal well carrying hot water. So it is unlikely that many of them would be useful for this purpose, though I agree it is worth looking into.

'Essentially, Geothermal has all advantages of Nuclear, but none of its drawbacks (such as high running operational costs and production of nuclear waste - even new SMR's are ridiculously inefficient and will be producing 2-30 times more volume of nuclear waste than existing nuclear power plants - and their levelized costs are projected to rise exponentially in the coming decade - plus, standard operational costs of Nuclear are $156 per MWh - over DOUBLE of Geothermal).'

A nuclear powerplant is a steam plant, essentially very similar to a geothermal powerplant, but efficiency is around 33% for a PWR vs 20% for a geothermal plant with a boiler temperature in the low 200s °C. The technologies are both similar. So why the heck are 'standard operational costs for Nuclear are $156 per MWh' whilst 'geothermal are between $14-$36 per MWh'? If this is true, then we are being ripped off. The solution is not to pursue a less efficient energy technology. It is to find out how we are being ripped off and put an end to it.

Regarding SMRs, a 2x increase in waste volume is possible compared to a 1000MWe PWR. This could happen due to lower burnup of fuel due to increased neutron leakage. But this is a small problem. The waste volume produced by nuclear reactors is tiny. A 30x increase is ridiculous and rather doubtful.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-09-15 15:57:11)

Calliban · 2022-09-15 16:22:27

Regarding running out of geothermal heat. The average geothermal heat flux for Earth land mass is 65mW/m2, or 65kW/km2. That is the rate at which heat can be removed if you plan to use the area sustainably. A better strategy would be to aim to empty the area within the realistic lifetime of the steam plant, ~50 years. You then up sticks and build a new plant on a fresh site.

This article examines the prospect of a geothermally assisted coal burning powerplant.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a … 0414002039

From the abstract: '...Thermodynamically, GAPG system was found to increase the power output of the plant by up to 19% under the booster mode whilst in fuel saving mode the coal consumption reduced by up to 0.3 million tonne/year decreasing the Green House Gas (GHG) emission by up to 15% (0.6 million tonne/year). Economic analyses showed that for a typical HDR resource with a reservoir temperature about 150 °C located within a 5 km radius from the power plant, the GAPG system becomes economically competitive to the stand-alone fossil fuel based plant when minimum carbon tax and RECs rates of 40 $/tonne and 60 cents/kW h are introduced.'

Geothermal power generation is more promissing if it is integrated into a hybrid cycle that uses fossil fuel or biomass combustion to boost the conversion efficiency of geothermal heat into electricity. In the case of biomass, this would be especilly interesting because such plants are usually quite small due to the difficulty of transporting biomass to the plant. Using geothermal heat allows the plant to be 20% bigger, which increases efficiency and allows benefits from scale economies. A steam plant running on a 150°C geothermal resource will have thermal efficiency of 20% or less. However, is that same resource is used to preheat water entering a biomass boiler, efficiency up to 40% is achievable. This means the same geothermal well generates twice as much power in a hybrid plant and tge steam plant benefits from greater economy of size.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-09-15 16:38:07)

SpaceNut · 2022-09-15 18:33:18

I see lamenting in post #46 that with our vast collective thinking that it would appear that none of us can create a business from our thoughts and most of that is the luck of chance and gobs of money that would allow for the use of geothermal from volcanic sources to generate and endless supply of free power once it constructed.

Which makes me wonder why we are not tapping into the plume for Yellowstone national parks sleeping giant.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2022-09-11 15:18:41

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#27 2022-09-11 17:09:51

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#28 2022-09-11 18:16:29

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#29 2022-09-11 19:57:14

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#30 2022-09-12 10:18:53

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#31 2022-09-12 18:37:25

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#32 2022-09-12 18:58:58

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#33 2022-09-13 03:42:12

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#34 2022-09-13 13:24:25

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#35 2022-09-13 17:22:25

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#36 2022-09-13 17:27:04

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#37 2022-09-13 18:06:21

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#38 2022-09-14 05:35:55

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#39 2022-09-14 07:38:49

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#40 2022-09-14 08:01:57

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#41 2022-09-14 08:07:07

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#42 2022-09-14 08:30:54

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#43 2022-09-14 08:49:37

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#44 2022-09-14 10:35:32

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#45 2022-09-15 08:58:00

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#46 2022-09-15 09:07:34

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#47 2022-09-15 13:56:12

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#48 2022-09-15 15:22:12

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#49 2022-09-15 16:22:27

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

#50 2022-09-15 18:33:18

Re: Planetary Cores and potentials for geothermal power.

Board footer