[pablonite]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Roy', 'G')lad I don't live on this street!

[pablonite]

Viking frogmen chase Street View spymobile
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/10 ... w_frogmen/

[Graeme]

Google Map Reveals Massive Geothermal Potential Nationwide, “Effectively an Unlimited Supply” Says Chu

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')outhern Methodist University’s Geothermal Laboratory recently released a map that proves once again how much potential energy is locked beneath America. SMU’s resource map, which took years to develop with funding from Google.org, shows that there are enough technically recoverable resources throughout the U.S. to equal 10 times the amount of coal capacity in place today.

Other maps have shown similar data. Last year, SMU issued a map (also funded by Google) that showed massive geothermal potential under West Virginia, an area not typically seen as suitable for the technology. In 2007, MIT Researcher Jeff Tester analyzed deep “hot rock” resources, showing that the U.S has 100 GW of potential for Enhanced Geothermal Systems [EGS] — an emerging type of plant design in which a developer creates an artificial well by pumping water through deep rocks, rather than using direct steam from hot water reservoirs closer to the surface.

So big deal, right? Another map shows we have tons of resources. Why is this so different from the others?

Well, geothermal exploration can be a very risky business. It’s not uncommon for a developer to spend 3/5ths of capital on the exploration and drilling phase of a project. And if the resources aren’t there, that’s millions of dollars down the…bore hole.

This map and corresponding study gives the geothermal industry another great tool for evaluating resources, particularly in areas on the East Coast where developers haven’t ventured. SMU provides an explanation (and a good video of EGS starring Energy Secretary Steven Chu):

[kiwichick]

there are at least 6 companies working on geothermal power in australia

i'd expect first power output within 2 years

[Graeme]

Geothermal Energy’s Promise and Problems

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'G')eothermal energy is touted as one of the few renewable resources that could be used for base-load (round-the-clock) power generation: Earth’s heat is always on, and it’s not dependent on the vagaries of wind or sun. New research from Southern Methodist University—sponsored by Google’s philanthropic arm—suggests massive potential for geothermal power in the United States. But exploiting that resource will be slowed by the cost of the technology—and the fact that it can cause small earthquakes.


"We know that creating these EGS reservoirs involves making earthquakes. That’s just going to happen," Williams says. "The question then becomes, Are we going to be able to control the process of generating the microseismicity so that we don’t generate earthquakes that are magnitude 3.5 or 4.0 or something like that?" There will likely need to be geographic restrictions on development so that such a potential quake doesn’t occur near a large fault and possibly cause an even bigger quake. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering have launched an investigation, looking across many energy technologies; their report is expected in 2012.

After EGS was blamed for a 3.4-magnitude earthquake in Basel, Switzerland, projects in Europe and the United States have struggled to get off the ground. Karl Gawell, the executive director of an industry group called the Geothermal Energy Association, says that the scrutiny now placed on the issue suggests that projects won’t move forward without strong indications of safety. "You won’t see another Basel, Switzerland, at least not in the United States," he says.

For the moment, cost is also a primary barrier to widespread adoption. USGS’s Williams says traditional geothermal electricity is "in the ballpark" in terms of cost with other electricity sources. A 2009 report by the investment bank Credit Suisse quoted a conventional geothermal cost of 3.6 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour, below the 5.5 cents for coal. EGS is costlier. A 2007 report by consulting firm GeothermEx estimated the best possible cost for EGS systems in the future at 5.4 cents per kilowatt-hour and suggested that the technology won’t be truly cost competitive until 2050. "Until EGS is developed on a wide scale, initially it probably wouldn’t be competitive," Williams says. "Right now we’re looking at sort of slow but steady development."

[kiwichick]

is the USGS a vested interest ?

[Margarethe]

I like how Google lives up to its motto ''Don't be Evil'' by finding ways to contribute to the good of the environment among others. This potentially ground breaking data is yet another step people can take to solve some global issues. I wonder if I can see the map itself?

[prajeshbhat]

Here's a company that claims it can generate electricity economically from temperatures lower than 200 F.

https://matteranenergy.us/

No doubt the installation cost per KW is more expensive than 1000 MW coal power plant, but for off grid applications it is a good choice. They have developed a 2.5 kW prototype and installed it in some house. Check out their video.

[AgentR11]

Yeah... sounds awesome.

Lets do seismically significant development on the same continent that the Yellowstone caldera sits on.

This ends well.