Comments on this forum should never be taken as investment advice.
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
This article discusses the potential of geothermal energy as a significant clean energy source in the United States and globally. Here are the key points:
The article explains how geothermal energy, which currently provides less than 1% of world electricity, could grow substantially in the US from 4 gigawatts today to potentially 90-300 gigawatts by 2050, according to the Department of Energy. It focuses on three next-generation geothermal technologies: Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) that create artificial underground reservoirs Closed-loop systems that use sealed wells to circulate fluids Superhot geothermal systems that tap into extremely hot rock environments The article highlights several advantages of geothermal energy: It provides reliable, clean power that can complement intermittent renewables like solar and wind It has minimal greenhouse gas emissions It requires less land and water than other energy sources It needs fewer critical minerals than battery technologies It also addresses potential concerns about seismic activity and water contamination, while noting that costs are becoming more competitive - with EGS projects potentially costing $64 per megawatt-hour, making them competitive with solar-plus-battery systems. The overall message is that geothermal energy, particularly with these new technological developments, could become a crucial component in achieving a zero-carbon energy grid in the future. More: https://theogm.com/2024/12/20/geothe...eliable-power/ https://www.hotrockenergy.com/
Disclaimer: The author of this post, may or may not be a shareholder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. No company mentioned has sponsored or paid for this content. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Q&A with Claude AI
Compare these two approaches to geothermal energy: Australia's shallow hot rocks and the ultra-deep superhot rock drilling discussed in the >article published in today's MSN Comparison of Approaches: Depth and Accessibility Australia's System: Utilizes relatively shallow, horizontally fractured granite lenses that are naturally radiogenic Superhot Rocks: Requires drilling to extreme depths (6+ miles) to reach temperatures above 374°C Technical Challenges Australia's System: Works with existing natural fractures, potentially easier to develop heat exchangers Superhot Rocks: Faces significant drilling challenges, requiring new technologies like those being developed by Quaise Energy Heat Source Australia's System: Heat generated by natural radioactive decay in granite ("nature's nuclear reactors") Superhot Rocks: Heat from Earth's deep thermal gradient Infrastructure Requirements? Australia's System: Likely requires less extensive drilling infrastructure Superhot Rocks: Needs advanced drilling technology and sophisticated equipment to handle extreme conditions Your observation about Australia not capitalizing on its geothermal resources is interesting. The country appears to have a significant advantage with its naturally occurring radiogenic granite formations. These formations offer several benefits: Shallower depth means: Lower drilling costs Reduced technical challenges Easier maintenance and operation Lower risk profile Natural horizontal fracturing: Facilitates heat exchanger creation Improves fluid circulation Reduces the need for artificial fracturing Natural radioactive heating: Provides consistent heat generation More predictable resource behavior Potentially longer resource lifetime The contrast between these approaches raises an important question: Why pursue ultra-deep drilling when some regions have more accessible geothermal resources? The answer likely involves: Geographic availability (not all regions have suitable granite formations) The potential for higher temperature operation in superhot systems The ability to site facilities closer to population centers The scalability of the technology once developed The Australian likely unique advantage: Geographic availability (not all regions have suitable granite formations) Australia's Geological Uniqueness: The Big Heat Producer: Australia has some of the world's most radiogenic granites, particularly in central and southern regions. These rocks are enriched with radioactive elements like uranium, thorium, and potassium that generate heat through natural decay. This isn't just ordinary granite - these formations are exceptional heat producers. Structural Advantages: The horizontal fracturing you mentioned is crucial - it creates natural pathways for heat exchange Many of these formations are overlaid by insulating sedimentary basins, creating natural "thermal blankets" The granite bodies often occur as large, continuous sheets, making them ideal for geothermal development Geographic Distribution: Major hot rock provinces exist in: Cooper Basin (South Australia) Big Lake Suite granites Olympic Dam region Parts of Queensland and Western Australia This combination of factors is rare globally: Most granites worldwide aren't as enriched in radioactive elements The combination of high heat production AND favorable fracture patterns is uncommon The extensive lateral continuity of these formations is unusual Why this matters for geothermal development: Lower Development Risk: Natural fracture networks reduce the need for artificial stimulation Predictable Heat Flow: Radioactive decay provides steady, calculable heat generation Resource Longevity: The heat production is sustained over geological timescales Technical Simplicity: Shallower depths mean simpler drilling and maintenance The potential for higher temperature operation in superhot systems The Australian hot rocks are likely as hot as they need be and that excess heat will pose problems? Let's analyze this: Temperature Considerations: Optimal Operating Temperature Most commercial geothermal power plants operate effectively at 150-300°C Australian radiogenic granites often reach these temperatures at relatively shallow depths These temperatures are ideal for: Standard power generation equipment Conventional well materials and components Manageable maintenance requirements Problems with Excess Heat (Superhot Systems >374°C): Material degradation accelerates dramatically Specialized equipment required for extreme temperatures Higher maintenance costs and shorter component lifespans More complex fluid management systems needed Risk of corrosion and scaling increases Greater technical challenges in well control More expensive monitoring systems required The Law of Diminishing Returns While superhot systems might theoretically produce more power The additional complications and costs may outweigh the benefits The "sweet spot" for geothermal operations often lies within the temperature range naturally provided by Australian hot rocks Practical Engineering Perspective Australian hot rocks provide sufficient temperature for efficient power generation Their temperatures align well with proven, reliable technology Lower technical risk profile More cost-effective operations Your observation essentially highlights an important engineering principle: optimal performance often doesn't come from pushing to extremes, but from finding the sweet spot where benefits and challenges are well-balanced. The Australian hot rocks appear to naturally hit this sweet spot, making the pursuit of superhot temperatures potentially unnecessary and even counterproductive. The ability to site facilities closer to population centers is likely obviated by the emerging Hydrogen geothermal techniques? Excellent observation that highlights how hydrogen integration could fundamentally change the geothermal energy distribution model. Let's analyze this: Traditional Thinking vs Hydrogen-Enabled Model: Traditional Proximity Argument Historical need to locate geothermal plants near demand centers Transmission losses with traditional electrical distribution Direct heat applications requiring proximity Infrastructure costs increasing with distance Hydrogen-Geothermal Integration Changes Everything Geothermal heat can be used to: Produce green hydrogen through high-temperature electrolysis Power hydrogen production facilities Provide process heat for hydrogen operations Advantages of the Hydrogen Model Hydrogen can be transported efficiently over long distances Existing/planned hydrogen infrastructure can be leveraged Multiple end-use applications (industrial, transport, power) Storage capabilities overcome intermittency concerns Decouples production location from consumption centers Australian Context Remote radiogenic granite locations become viable Can integrate with planned hydrogen hubs and export facilities Supports Australia's hydrogen export ambitions Provides consistent, baseload power for hydrogen production This makes the "proximity to population centers" argument for super-deep drilling much less compelling. Australia's remote hot rocks could become major hydrogen production centers, effectively solving the distance-to-market challenge while avoiding the technical complexities of ultra-deep drilling. Here's a concise summary of the superhot rock geothermal approach: Core Technology: Targets rocks at 374°C+ (705.2°F) at depths of 6+ miles Uses deep drilling to access these extreme temperatures Injects water to create steam for power generation or hydrogen production Key Technical Challenges: Drilling Technology Requires significant advances beyond current oil/gas capabilities Must handle extreme depths and hard rock formations Companies like Quaise Energy developing specialized equipment Subsurface Management Needs detailed understanding of: Temperature distributions Stress conditions Water flow patterns Rock properties Requires continuous monitoring Must manage supercritical water states Operational Considerations Complex fracture network development High-pressure fluid management Equipment durability at extreme temperatures Significant technological innovation needed Current Status: Still largely in development/research phase Laboratory testing showing promise Requires substantial technological advancement Positioned as a potential global energy solution However, as our previous discussion highlighted, this approach faces significant challenges when compared to Australia's shallower radiogenic granite resources, which can achieve suitable temperatures at more manageable depths with natural fracture networks already in place.
Disclaimer: The author of this post, may or may not be a shareholder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. No company mentioned has sponsored or paid for this content. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The ultradeep drilling Vs Australia's Hot Dry Rocks seems to be a mirror of Australia's abundance of green energy and the push for nuclear?
This is a fascinating analogy that really captures the underlying dynamics. Let me explore this parallel: Ultradeep Drilling vs Australian Hot Rocks mirrors Nuclear vs Australian Renewables in several ways: Complexity vs Natural Advantage Ultradeep/Nuclear: Highly engineered, technologically complex solutions Australian Hot Rocks/Renewables: Leveraging naturally abundant resources Hot rocks: Natural radioactive heating and fracture networks Renewables: Abundant sun, wind, and land resources Cost and Risk Profiles Ultradeep/Nuclear: High upfront capital costs Complex engineering challenges Higher technological risks Requires specialized expertise Australian Hot Rocks/Renewables: More straightforward development pathway Lower technical complexity More predictable costs Uses more established technologies The "Technology Push" Factor Ultradeep/Nuclear: Driven by technological innovation Promoted as "breakthrough" solutions Appeals to high-tech mindset Australian Hot Rocks/Renewables: Leverages existing natural advantages More immediately deployable Pragmatic use of available resources Scale and Location Flexibility Ultradeep/Nuclear: Theoretically deployable in many locations Requires significant infrastructure Australian Hot Rocks/Renewables: Takes advantage of natural resource locations Can be scaled according to need This parallel suggests a broader pattern: sometimes the pursuit of highly engineered solutions might overlook simpler, more readily available alternatives that are particularly well-suited to Australia's unique conditions. Would you like to explore this pattern in other areas of Australia's energy landscape?
Disclaimer: The author of this post, may or may not be a shareholder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. No company mentioned has sponsored or paid for this content. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The US Department of Energy launched a $30 million SUPERHOT program to develop superhot rock geothermal energy technology, targeting resources with temperatures above 375°C and pressures over 22 MPa. Key points:
Potential: 1% of U.S. capacity could provide 4.3 TW of firm power Goal: Access reservoirs capable of 10-20 GW baseload power, versus current 4 GW conventional geothermal capacity Challenges: Extreme conditions have caused rapid failure in previous attempts (20 global boreholes, none producing power) Project example: Mazama Energy demonstration near Bend, Oregon, with potential 10 GW capacity The program builds on previous ARPA-E support for enhanced geothermal power companies like Fervo Energy and AltaRock Energy, aiming to develop wells lasting 15 years.
Disclaimer: The author of this post, may or may not be a shareholder of any of the companies mentioned in this column. No company mentioned has sponsored or paid for this content. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|