Interesting.  Pump cold water down to heated rock where it is converted to steam and rises in an adjacent hole as geo-thermal energy.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/03/07/1069437/this-geothermal-startup-showed-its-wells-can-be-used-like-a-giant-underground-battery/

Noel

My understanding was that were issues raised some time ago about the effects of the water eventually cooling the geothermal area with possibly unknown negative effects.

I also wondered about possible seismic events similar to that experienced by fracking, and the article also mentions such concerns.

In my area, where fracking became a "thing" for a while, we've had several incidents of loud explosions, and reports of tremors. The authorities have expressed repeated cluelessness about possible causes.

 

Well, I suppose there will be some negative aspects to that type of geothermal application.  But will the positive outweigh the negative?  I suppose we'll have to wait and see like we have done with every new step forward for the past several thousand years or more.

Noel

Well, we had better come up with something to replace all the fossil fuel energy, because wind and solar will require mining, fabrication, construction, and money on a massive and unprecedented scale to achieve the dream of net zero 2050.  It is all but impossible to achieve in just 25 years without forcing billions of people to endure misery and shortages the likes of which most people have never experienced.

I believe that nuclear power and natural gas are the answer.  These will be the transition power sources until renewable energy technology matures and improves to the point where it can effectively replace fossil fuels.

https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2021/10/Kalghatgi-Net-Zero-Challenges.pdf

Dave

Please do not let this degenerate into a debate about Geothermal vs Nuclear vs Gas vs Cow 💩 generation of electrical power.  The 🔒 will then follow!

11 hours ago, charliearon said:

Please do not let this degenerate into a debate about Geothermal vs Nuclear vs Gas vs Cow 💩 generation of electrical power.  The 🔒 will then follow!

Cow chocolate?  You got something against chocolate milk? 😁  Oh, in before the 🔒.

I'm still a fan of the Quaise technology in regard to geothermal. Conventional drill to chomp up the easy stuff, then you switch to a gyrotron and allow its beam to vaporize the tricky stuff.

20 KM in 100 days should be achievable. And no need to chose an area of the planet where the crust is thin. 500C at 20km. 

When you are no longer limited by geology, and choosing a thin region of the crust, you open up drilling near every population and industrial center on the planet. 

 

Quote

Based on breakthrough fusion research and well-established drilling practices, we are developing a radical new approach to ultra-deep drilling. First, we use conventional rotary drilling to get to basement rock. Then, we switch to high-power millimeter waves to reach unprecedented depths.

 

First rig expected next year. Lets hope its successful. 

 

https://www.quaise.energy/

Edited March 12, 20233 yr by martin-w

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something about drilling 20km holes in the ground to access geothermal energy, but couldn't this dangerous?  I mean, if we start drilling thousands of holes this deep into the crust, what are the potential consequences?

The average depth of oil and natural gas wells is 6-7 thousand feet, about 2km.  We're talking 10 times that.

Just curious.

Dave

58 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

I mean, if we start drilling thousands of holes this deep into the crust, what are the potential consequences?

 

Shouldn't think so. I recall that the gyrotron vitrifies the rock, turns the wall of the hole into a very hard shell.

Less likely to be issues like earth tremors I would have thought, given the extreme depth.

Its not like the Earths crust will be like Swiss Cheese, nobody is saying this should be our one and only method of energy generation. As always, a mix is optimal. 

However, you can never rule out completely unforeseen issues. The test hole will provide more data when complete. 

0.1% of the Earths heat, could satisfy our power needs for 2 million years. 

They mention in the video below, how, at the moment we deliberately drill in geologically unstable areas, tectonic boundaries, because that's where geothermal energy is available, but when you have the luxury of drilling anywhere, that's not the case and you move away from those instabilities. 

Its actually decommissioned fossil fuel plants they have in mind, that already have the steam generators available. Converting those plants would be very cost effective. 

Edited March 12, 20233 yr by martin-w

 

I doubt all the deep geothermal holes they drill into the earth wouldn't cover the equivalent area of all the shots I have had in my life that poked deep holes into my flesh in both civilian and military life.

Noel

1 hour ago, birdguy said:

I doubt all the deep geothermal holes they drill into the earth wouldn't cover the equivalent area of all the shots I have had in my life that poked deep holes into my flesh in both civilian and military life.

To be accurate, it would be more like inserting an IV catheter for every injection you ever had and then leaving the catheter in place for several decades.

Edited March 12, 20233 yr by dmwalker

Maybe someone should inform Germany and Austria about this geothermal thing, because they are about to start drilling for natural gas, which is a fossil fuel, and burning it will produce more carbon emissions.

One step forward, two steps back it seems.

Dave

21 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

Maybe someone should inform Germany and Austria about this geothermal thing, because they are about to start drilling for natural gas, which is a fossil fuel, and burning it will produce more carbon emissions.

Since they have generally banned fracking in Europe, they may feel it's not worth the risk, especially because of the Swiss experience referred to in the artlcle:

"The field suffered a serious blow in 2009, when an early commercial effort in Basel, Switzerland, appeared to trigger a series of small earthquakes, including a magnitude 3.4 event, which reportedly caused several million dollars in damages"

A magnitude 3.4 earthquake is pretty mild.  Noy likely to cause any damage except maybe for a 100 year old outhouse in a run down condition.

It's hard to believe a 3.4 earthquake could cause several million dollars worth of danger.

Noel

Edited March 12, 20233 yr by birdguy