Lol

[Charles Stucker]

Best Argument I’ve Heard to Take Global Warming Seriously - One Man's Blog

this is a variant on Pascale's Wager
The problem is that if we assign a probability to the different possibilities based on estimated human action and Solar activity, then we may decide that the expected cost/return of doing nothing is a better bet than that of taking action.
What we need most is a good model of the sun's current activity cycle; if it is about to heat up then we are probably in trouble whatever we do. If it is going to cool for the next thousand years, then we have little to worry about. It's probably out there somewhere, but the physicist with the data hasn't though of applying it to climate predictions. Once you have that in hand you can decide if Global warming is a serious threat or not. If it is a threat decisions can be made about what can be done to effectively respond. If not, then we can keep watch on the sun and return to typical environmental concerns.

 

[Oddball]

Best Argument I’ve Heard to Take Global Warming Seriously - One Man's Blog

this is a variant on Pascale's Wager....

That's our Midcan't!

He just mindlessly posts the opinions of others that align with his, so he doesn't have to go through the bother of having an independent thought.

 

[FactFinder]

I'm all for a cleaner environment.

I am not for draconian measures implimented under the guise of man made global warming which is a ruse and a sham intended to create an entirely new and dangerous wealth making mechanism for a select few...

Bingo....

 

[Old Rocks]

In the last eleven years we have had ten of the warmest on record. At a time when we had both a solar minimum and a strong and persistant La Nina, 2008 turned out to be the eighth warmest on record in the last 150 years.

The anthropogenic increase in GHGs has completely over rode the slight decrease in TSI. We have an increase in atmospheric CO2 of nearly 40% due to the burning of fossil fuels. The TSI has declined only a small fraction of 1%.

This summer, we saw the oceans the hottest that they have ever been recorded. Those figures are from NASA, NOAA, and various governmental agencies in Europe.

Ice is melting far more rapidly in both Greenland and Antarctica than the climatologists predicted. And the North Polar Cap will be gone in the summer by mid-century, at the latest, not 2100 as previously predicted.

Yes, the IPCC predictions are completely off. It is going to progress far more rapidly than their very conservative predictions.

 

[logical4u]

My local weatherman can't tell me with any reliability whether or not it'll rain, er...um...I mean snow, next week.

But change his name to "climatologist" and he can tell me what the weather is going to be next year!

By examining previous data, Ben Franklin made pretty shrewd deductions about weather a year in advance, which helped make Poor Richard's Almanac a hit back in the 18th century.

Climatologists predict a general climatic pattern, not a specific weather event, so the math is actually a bit more deterministic. However Solar activity is the Number One determinant in the climate and I know of no way to control solar output.

"Man can", just ask Al.
It just takes taxes and absolute belief in politicians. Ask them, they will tell you.

 

[FactFinder]

In the last eleven years we have had ten of the warmest on record. At a time when we had both a solar minimum and a strong and persistant La Nina, 2008 turned out to be the eighth warmest on record in the last 150 years.

The anthropogenic increase in GHGs has completely over rode the slight decrease in TSI. We have an increase in atmospheric CO2 of nearly 40% due to the burning of fossil fuels. The TSI has declined only a small fraction of 1%.

This summer, we saw the oceans the hottest that they have ever been recorded. Those figures are from NASA, NOAA, and various governmental agencies in Europe.

Ice is melting far more rapidly in both Greenland and Antarctica than the climatologists predicted. And the North Polar Cap will be gone in the summer by mid-century, at the latest, not 2100 as previously predicted.

Yes, the IPCC predictions are completely off. It is going to progress far more rapidly than their very conservative predictions.

Whoooaaaaaaa hold on...let me get my boots on.

 

[dilloduck]

In the last eleven years we have had ten of the warmest on record. At a time when we had both a solar minimum and a strong and persistant La Nina, 2008 turned out to be the eighth warmest on record in the last 150 years.

The anthropogenic increase in GHGs has completely over rode the slight decrease in TSI. We have an increase in atmospheric CO2 of nearly 40% due to the burning of fossil fuels. The TSI has declined only a small fraction of 1%.

This summer, we saw the oceans the hottest that they have ever been recorded. Those figures are from NASA, NOAA, and various governmental agencies in Europe.

Ice is melting far more rapidly in both Greenland and Antarctica than the climatologists predicted. And the North Polar Cap will be gone in the summer by mid-century, at the latest, not 2100 as previously predicted.

Yes, the IPCC predictions are completely off. It is going to progress far more rapidly than their very conservative predictions.

Do you wear a robe and carry a sign that says "the end is near" ?

 

[Oddball]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TDqvD34hEA]YouTube - Gloom Despair[/ame]

 

[logical4u]

So you say. And so says James Watt. Just because the scientists at all the governmental agencies that study oceanagraphy say that the ocean heat content is at record levels right now, doesn't mean a thing to you does it?


Watts gets swatted : Pharyngula

Watts gets swatted
Category: Environment
Posted on: July 31, 2009 4:29 PM, by PZ Myers

That crank pseudoscience site, Watt's Up With That, got thoroughly reamed out with the video below (just the fact that the chief crackpot, Anthony Watts, would show up on Glenn Beck's show is indictment enough, though). Watt was not too happy with his public evisceration, however, and scurried off to get it taken down. Here it is, reposted. Enjoy — it's a very good takedown of the climate denialist claims.

Old Crock goes off half cocked, your a moron, go to the geothermal thread where you state your own source is incorrect.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energy/81192-geothermal-energy-for-the-future-2.html

Old Crock goes off half cocked, old crock does not even read his links, old crock sourced a scientific america article and cherry picked the headline, old crock assumed the content of the article was a confirmation of the headline, it was not. Too funny.

So old crock goes off half cocked here posting another link, yea, were suppose to follow the link, read the article, check the sources only to find out Old Crock did not read the article at all, only the headline.

In the Geothermal thread I cited a industry expert, Old Crock posted his three sources showed my source as incorrect, only one problem, one of Old Crocks sources was my industry expert, when citing a report one should read the report, Old Crock did not, one should also take a look through the sources and people who contribute to the reports and articles.

So go ahead and follow Old Crock's links, read the article and check the sources, than come back and tell Old Crock about what he posted.

Have some issues with the truth, there, old man? What I posted says that, for many places, it cost the same, per kw, to build a geothermal plant as it does to build a dirty coal plant. That for most places it is cheaper to build a geothermal plant than a 'clean coal' plant.

Geothermal plants are great. They can only be built close to fault lines where magna is relatively close to the surface (or volcanic vents). It is true the costs are comparable for "those areas". What about the areas hundreds of miles away from geothermal pockets? There are limits to wind, solar, tidal, hydro units (they are not reliable generators in "most" areas); there is a need for baseline plants (plants that generate 24/7 in large amounts), baseline plants away from geothermal pockets are steam driven (heated by coal or nuclear reaction). Most people do not understand our electricity cannot be stored. It must be made (converted), constantly. It becomes more difficult to transmit over increasing distances, that makes production in limited areas, unreasonable.
Environmentalists want to declare all the progress we have made as terrible and "poluting", but very few want to live without all the wonders electricity provides (pumping clean water to our homes and "waste" away from our homes). They want other people to sacrifice without demonstrating how living without the "modern conveniences" is beneficial to anyone.

 

[Old Rocks]

Logical4u

Geothermal plants are great. They can only be built close to fault lines where magna is relatively close to the surface (or volcanic vents).

Wrong, completely wrong.

It is true the costs are comparable for "those areas". What about the areas hundreds of miles away from geothermal pockets? There are limits to wind, solar, tidal, hydro units (they are not reliable generators in "most" areas); there is a need for baseline plants (plants that generate 24/7 in large amounts), baseline plants away from geothermal pockets are steam driven (heated by coal or nuclear reaction). Most people do not understand our electricity cannot be stored. It must be made (converted), constantly. It becomes more difficult to transmit over increasing distances, that makes production in limited areas, unreasonable.
Environmentalists want to declare all the progress we have made as terrible and "poluting", but very few want to live without all the wonders electricity provides (pumping clean water to our homes and "waste" away from our homes). They want other people to sacrifice without demonstrating how living without the "modern conveniences" is beneficial to anyone.

3.1. What is the official government estimate of potential geothermal electric resources in the U.S.?

3.2. Are there other examples of how geothermal resources are utilized?

3.3. How much energy is geothermal electricity capable of supplying to the U.S?

3.4. Where are geothermal resources located?

3.5. "How much electricity can geothermal supply worldwide?"



3.1. What is the official government estimate of potential geothermal electric resources in the U.S.?

The heat of the Earth is considered limitless; its use is only limited by technology and the associated costs. Technology development and further studies are expected to show even greater potential, but here we have cited the first part of a new assessment released in September 2008 by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). (1) The report focuses on 13 western states and breaks the geothermal estimate into three categories:

Identified Geothermal Systems: The resource is either liquid or vapor dominated and has moderate to high temperature. The resource is either producing (the reservoir is currently generating electric power), confirmed (the reservoir has been evaluated with a successful commercial flow test of a production well), or potential (there are reliable estimates of temperature and volume for the reservoir but no successful well tests to date).
Undiscovered Geothermal Resources: Geothermal resources were assessed for the same 13 states in which the identified resources are located. The assessment was based on mapping potential via regression analysis.
Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS): Resource probability in regions characterized by high temperatures but low permeability and lack of water in rock formations.
The assessment estimates power generation potential as follows:

Identified Geothermal Systems: 3,675 MWe (95% probability) to 16,457 MWe (5% probability)
Undiscovered Geothermal Systems: 7,917 MWe (95% probability) to 73,286 MWe (5% probability)
EGS: 345,100 MWe (95% probability) to 727,900 MWe (5% probability).
The USGS assessment evaluates geothermal resources in the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. The assessment identified 241 moderate-temperature (90 to 150°C; 194 to 302°F) and high-temperature (greater than 150°C) geothermal systems located on private and public lands in these states. Geothermal systems located on public lands closed to development, such as national parks, were not included in the assessment. Electric-power generation potential was also determined for several low-temperature (less than 90°C) systems in Alaska for which local conditions make electric power generation feasible.

Although the assessment only accounted for large-scale geothermal power production, the USGS is also in the process of updating information about direct use, small power, oil and gas co-production and geopressured resources and the potential energy contribution of those portions of the geothermal resource base are not included in the estimates above.

The USGS assessment is the first new national geothermal resource assessment since 1979, when USGS released its last geothermal resource estimate, Circular 790. A new component of the 2008 assessment is the inclusion of production potential of EGS techniques. For more information on the USGS assessment, please visit USGS Release: Substantial Power Generation from Domestic Geothermal Resources (9/29/2008 5:06:28 PM).

In 2006, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) prepared an analysis of the future geothermal potential in the U.S. The report estimated that geothermal systems could produce 100 GWe in the next 50 years with a reasonable investment in R&D. The report, The Future of Geothermal Energy, is available at http://geothermal.inel.gov/publicat....energy.gov/geothermal/future_geothermal.html



3.2. Are there other examples of how geothermal resources are utilized?

Distributed generation: Distributed generation facilities such as those at Chena Hot Springs in Alaska, the Burgett greenhouse in New Mexico, and the Oregon Institute of Technology are examples of small-scale electricity produced to cover the electricity needs of each facility. Energy not being used by the facility is sold back to the grid.
Figure 15: Chena Hot Springs, AK, Gains Distributed Generation Begins in 2006



Geopressured resources: Geopressured resources are deep reservoirs of high-pressured hot water that contain dissolved methane. The Department of Energy built a demonstration plant in Texas which produced electricity from geopressured resources, pictured below. Preliminary testing (Phase 0) of Well No. 2 took place during 1979, reservoir limits testing during 1980 (Phase I), and long-term testing (Phase 11) was conducted during 1981–1983. The plant was dismantled after being deemed a success.( 2)
Figure 16: Geopressured Demonstration Plant in Texas



Co-production geothermal fluids: Usable geothermal fluids are often found in oil and gas production fields. The Southern Methodist University Geothermal Energy Program has identified thousands of megawatts of potential energy production from hot water being co-produced with oil and gas. There are presently two geothermal co-production demonstrations underway supported by the U.S. DOE, at the Rocky Mountain Oil Test Center in Wyoming and the Jay oil field in Florida. ( 3)
Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS): EGS involves developing tools and techniques that will allow geothermal production by artificially creating permeability in hot rock and introducing water (or another working fluid) to extract the heat. While reaching the full potential of EGS may take a decade or more to realize, there are many aspects of EGS that are already being applied. In California at The Geysers field—the oldest geothermal field in the U.S. and the largest geothermal venture in the world—operators have expanded the capacity of wells by injecting millions of gallons of reclaimed wastewater into the geothermal reservoir. Some experts call the Geysers wastewater project the first large-scale EGS project. There are several EGS projects that are already, or will soon, produce power:
Soultz project, in France, a 1.5-MW EGS plant already in operation
Landau project, in Germany, a 2.5-MW operational plant
Paralana, in Australia, a 7–30-MW plant in drilling stages
Cooper Basin, in Australia, a 1-MW showcase plant will be operational in 2008 and a 250–500-MW plant in drilling stages, expected to have the first 50 MW EGS plant operating as early as 2011–2012
Desert Peak, in the U.S. ( Nevada), in planning stages, the expansion of an existing natural geothermal field
In October of 2008, the U.S. Department of Energy selected four new cooperative projects with the U.S. geothermal industry for EGS systems demonstrations in the U.S. which it hopes will lead to technology readiness by 2015. For more information on the DOE effort visit: Geothermal Technologies Program: Enhanced Geothermal Systems. Also, the International Partnership for Geothermal Technology provides information about efforts to developed advanced technologies for EGS and related areas. You can visit their web site at: IPGT | International Partnership for Geothermal Technology.

Figure 17: Soultz, France, 1.5-MW EGS Power Plant





3.3. How much energy is geothermal electricity capable of supplying to the U.S?


In 2006 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) released a report, Geothermal—The Energy Under Our Feet, which estimates domestic geothermal resources. The report estimates that 26,000 MW of geothermal power could be developed by 2015, with direct use and heat pumps contributing another 20,000 MW of thermal energy. The report suggests that by 2025 more than 100,000 MW of geothermal power could be in production, with direct use and heat pumps adding another 70,000 MW of thermal energy. (4)

As the report concludes, “these estimates show the enormous potential of the U.S. geothermal resource.” For power production, the report includes specific estimates of the potential for identified resources, deep geothermal co-produced fluids and geopressured resources, and EGS. In addition, the report examines the potential for geothermal direct use and geothermal heat pumps.

The report does not include hidden or undiscovered geothermal systems, which the USGS report estimates have substantial energy potential. Nor does the report specifically examine small power systems (distributed generation).

For more information on the NREL report, please visit http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/pdfs/40665.pdf.

Geothermal Energy Association

 

[Sinatra]

Logical4u

Geothermal plants are great. They can only be built close to fault lines where magna is relatively close to the surface (or volcanic vents).

Wrong, completely wrong.

It is true the costs are comparable for "those areas". What about the areas hundreds of miles away from geothermal pockets? There are limits to wind, solar, tidal, hydro units (they are not reliable generators in "most" areas); there is a need for baseline plants (plants that generate 24/7 in large amounts), baseline plants away from geothermal pockets are steam driven (heated by coal or nuclear reaction). Most people do not understand our electricity cannot be stored. It must be made (converted), constantly. It becomes more difficult to transmit over increasing distances, that makes production in limited areas, unreasonable.
Environmentalists want to declare all the progress we have made as terrible and "poluting", but very few want to live without all the wonders electricity provides (pumping clean water to our homes and "waste" away from our homes). They want other people to sacrifice without demonstrating how living without the "modern conveniences" is beneficial to anyone.

3.1. What is the official government estimate of potential geothermal electric resources in the U.S.?

3.2. Are there other examples of how geothermal resources are utilized?

3.3. How much energy is geothermal electricity capable of supplying to the U.S?

3.4. Where are geothermal resources located?

3.5. "How much electricity can geothermal supply worldwide?"



3.1. What is the official government estimate of potential geothermal electric resources in the U.S.?

The heat of the Earth is considered limitless; its use is only limited by technology and the associated costs. Technology development and further studies are expected to show even greater potential, but here we have cited the first part of a new assessment released in September 2008 by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). (1) The report focuses on 13 western states and breaks the geothermal estimate into three categories:

Identified Geothermal Systems: The resource is either liquid or vapor dominated and has moderate to high temperature. The resource is either producing (the reservoir is currently generating electric power), confirmed (the reservoir has been evaluated with a successful commercial flow test of a production well), or potential (there are reliable estimates of temperature and volume for the reservoir but no successful well tests to date).
Undiscovered Geothermal Resources: Geothermal resources were assessed for the same 13 states in which the identified resources are located. The assessment was based on mapping potential via regression analysis.
Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS): Resource probability in regions characterized by high temperatures but low permeability and lack of water in rock formations.
The assessment estimates power generation potential as follows:

Identified Geothermal Systems: 3,675 MWe (95% probability) to 16,457 MWe (5% probability)
Undiscovered Geothermal Systems: 7,917 MWe (95% probability) to 73,286 MWe (5% probability)
EGS: 345,100 MWe (95% probability) to 727,900 MWe (5% probability).
The USGS assessment evaluates geothermal resources in the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. The assessment identified 241 moderate-temperature (90 to 150°C; 194 to 302°F) and high-temperature (greater than 150°C) geothermal systems located on private and public lands in these states. Geothermal systems located on public lands closed to development, such as national parks, were not included in the assessment. Electric-power generation potential was also determined for several low-temperature (less than 90°C) systems in Alaska for which local conditions make electric power generation feasible.

Although the assessment only accounted for large-scale geothermal power production, the USGS is also in the process of updating information about direct use, small power, oil and gas co-production and geopressured resources and the potential energy contribution of those portions of the geothermal resource base are not included in the estimates above.

The USGS assessment is the first new national geothermal resource assessment since 1979, when USGS released its last geothermal resource estimate, Circular 790. A new component of the 2008 assessment is the inclusion of production potential of EGS techniques. For more information on the USGS assessment, please visit USGS Release: Substantial Power Generation from Domestic Geothermal Resources (9/29/2008 5:06:28 PM).

In 2006, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) prepared an analysis of the future geothermal potential in the U.S. The report estimated that geothermal systems could produce 100 GWe in the next 50 years with a reasonable investment in R&D. The report, The Future of Geothermal Energy, is available at http://geothermal.inel.gov/publicat....energy.gov/geothermal/future_geothermal.html



3.2. Are there other examples of how geothermal resources are utilized?

Distributed generation: Distributed generation facilities such as those at Chena Hot Springs in Alaska, the Burgett greenhouse in New Mexico, and the Oregon Institute of Technology are examples of small-scale electricity produced to cover the electricity needs of each facility. Energy not being used by the facility is sold back to the grid.
Figure 15: Chena Hot Springs, AK, Gains Distributed Generation Begins in 2006



Geopressured resources: Geopressured resources are deep reservoirs of high-pressured hot water that contain dissolved methane. The Department of Energy built a demonstration plant in Texas which produced electricity from geopressured resources, pictured below. Preliminary testing (Phase 0) of Well No. 2 took place during 1979, reservoir limits testing during 1980 (Phase I), and long-term testing (Phase 11) was conducted during 1981–1983. The plant was dismantled after being deemed a success.( 2)
Figure 16: Geopressured Demonstration Plant in Texas



Co-production geothermal fluids: Usable geothermal fluids are often found in oil and gas production fields. The Southern Methodist University Geothermal Energy Program has identified thousands of megawatts of potential energy production from hot water being co-produced with oil and gas. There are presently two geothermal co-production demonstrations underway supported by the U.S. DOE, at the Rocky Mountain Oil Test Center in Wyoming and the Jay oil field in Florida. ( 3)
Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS): EGS involves developing tools and techniques that will allow geothermal production by artificially creating permeability in hot rock and introducing water (or another working fluid) to extract the heat. While reaching the full potential of EGS may take a decade or more to realize, there are many aspects of EGS that are already being applied. In California at The Geysers field—the oldest geothermal field in the U.S. and the largest geothermal venture in the world—operators have expanded the capacity of wells by injecting millions of gallons of reclaimed wastewater into the geothermal reservoir. Some experts call the Geysers wastewater project the first large-scale EGS project. There are several EGS projects that are already, or will soon, produce power:
Soultz project, in France, a 1.5-MW EGS plant already in operation
Landau project, in Germany, a 2.5-MW operational plant
Paralana, in Australia, a 7–30-MW plant in drilling stages
Cooper Basin, in Australia, a 1-MW showcase plant will be operational in 2008 and a 250–500-MW plant in drilling stages, expected to have the first 50 MW EGS plant operating as early as 2011–2012
Desert Peak, in the U.S. ( Nevada), in planning stages, the expansion of an existing natural geothermal field
In October of 2008, the U.S. Department of Energy selected four new cooperative projects with the U.S. geothermal industry for EGS systems demonstrations in the U.S. which it hopes will lead to technology readiness by 2015. For more information on the DOE effort visit: Geothermal Technologies Program: Enhanced Geothermal Systems. Also, the International Partnership for Geothermal Technology provides information about efforts to developed advanced technologies for EGS and related areas. You can visit their web site at: IPGT | International Partnership for Geothermal Technology.

Figure 17: Soultz, France, 1.5-MW EGS Power Plant





3.3. How much energy is geothermal electricity capable of supplying to the U.S?


In 2006 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) released a report, Geothermal—The Energy Under Our Feet, which estimates domestic geothermal resources. The report estimates that 26,000 MW of geothermal power could be developed by 2015, with direct use and heat pumps contributing another 20,000 MW of thermal energy. The report suggests that by 2025 more than 100,000 MW of geothermal power could be in production, with direct use and heat pumps adding another 70,000 MW of thermal energy. (4)

As the report concludes, “these estimates show the enormous potential of the U.S. geothermal resource.” For power production, the report includes specific estimates of the potential for identified resources, deep geothermal co-produced fluids and geopressured resources, and EGS. In addition, the report examines the potential for geothermal direct use and geothermal heat pumps.

The report does not include hidden or undiscovered geothermal systems, which the USGS report estimates have substantial energy potential. Nor does the report specifically examine small power systems (distributed generation).

For more information on the NREL report, please visit http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/pdfs/40665.pdf.

Geothermal Energy Association

Another Old Rocks posting fatality...

 

[Sinatra]

Ah, a little peer-reviewed reading for you all - to counter the silly Associated Press "earth not cooling" quickly put together story recently...


Craig Loehle
National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc.
Reprint available from NCASI (PDF)

Abstract

Global satellite data is analyzed for temperature trends for the period January 1979 through June 2009. Beginning and ending segments show a cooling trend, while the middle segment evinces a warming trend. The past 12 to 13 years show cooling using both satellite data sets, with lower confidence limits that do not exclude a negative trend until 16 to 22 years. It is shown that several published studies have predicted cooling in this time frame. One of these models is extrapolated from its 2000 calibration end date and shows a good match to the satellite data, with a projection of continued cooling for several more decades.

CONCLUSIONS
Analysis of the satellite data shows a statistically significant cooling trend for the past 12 to 13 years, with it not being possible to reject a flat trend (0 slope) for between 16 and 23 years. This is a length of time at which disagreement with climate models can no longer be attributed to simple LTP. On the other hand, studies cited herein have documented a 50–70 year cycle of climate oscillations overlaid on a simple linear warming trend since the mid-1800s and have used this model to forecast cooling beginning between 2001 and 2010, a prediction that seems to be upheld by the satellite and ocean heat content data. Other studies made this same prediction of transition to cooling based on solar activity indices or from ocean circulation regime changes. In contrast, the climate models predict the recent flat to cooling trend only as a rare stochastic event. The linear warming trend in these models that is obtained by subtracting the 60–70 yr cycle, while unexplained at present, is clearly inconsistent with climate model predictions because it begins too soon (before greenhouse gases were elevated) and does not accelerate as greenhouse gases continue to accumulate. This model and the empirical evidence for recent cooling thus provide a challenge to
climate model accuracy.


Loehle, Craig. 2009. Trend analysis of satellite global temperature data. Energy & Environment 20(7): 1087-1098.

Global satellite data is analyzed for temperature trends for the period January 1979 through June 2009. Beginning and ending segments show a cooling trend, while the middle segment evinces a warming trend. The past 12 to 13 years show cooling using both satellite data sets, with lower confidence limits that do not exclude a negative trend until 16 years. It is shown that several published studies have predicted cooling in this time frame. One of these models is extrapolated from its 2000 calibration end date and shows a good match to the satellite data, with a projection of continued cooling for several more decades.

Copyright © 2009 by Multi-Science Publishing Co. Ltd. All rights reserved. Article posted on this website with permission.


NCASI Health Monitor

 

[logical4u]

Logical4u

Geothermal plants are great. They can only be built close to fault lines where magna is relatively close to the surface (or volcanic vents).

Wrong, completely wrong.

It is true the costs are comparable for "those areas". What about the areas hundreds of miles away from geothermal pockets? There are limits to wind, solar, tidal, hydro units (they are not reliable generators in "most" areas); there is a need for baseline plants (plants that generate 24/7 in large amounts), baseline plants away from geothermal pockets are steam driven (heated by coal or nuclear reaction). Most people do not understand our electricity cannot be stored. It must be made (converted), constantly. It becomes more difficult to transmit over increasing distances, that makes production in limited areas, unreasonable.
Environmentalists want to declare all the progress we have made as terrible and "poluting", but very few want to live without all the wonders electricity provides (pumping clean water to our homes and "waste" away from our homes). They want other people to sacrifice without demonstrating how living without the "modern conveniences" is beneficial to anyone.

3.1. What is the official government estimate of potential geothermal electric resources in the U.S.?

3.2. Are there other examples of how geothermal resources are utilized?

3.3. How much energy is geothermal electricity capable of supplying to the U.S?

3.4. Where are geothermal resources located?

3.5. "How much electricity can geothermal supply worldwide?"



3.1. What is the official government estimate of potential geothermal electric resources in the U.S.?

The heat of the Earth is considered limitless; its use is only limited by technology and the associated costs. Technology development and further studies are expected to show even greater potential, but here we have cited the first part of a new assessment released in September 2008 by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). (1) The report focuses on 13 western states and breaks the geothermal estimate into three categories:

Identified Geothermal Systems: The resource is either liquid or vapor dominated and has moderate to high temperature. The resource is either producing (the reservoir is currently generating electric power), confirmed (the reservoir has been evaluated with a successful commercial flow test of a production well), or potential (there are reliable estimates of temperature and volume for the reservoir but no successful well tests to date).
Undiscovered Geothermal Resources: Geothermal resources were assessed for the same 13 states in which the identified resources are located. The assessment was based on mapping potential via regression analysis.
Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS): Resource probability in regions characterized by high temperatures but low permeability and lack of water in rock formations.
The assessment estimates power generation potential as follows:

Identified Geothermal Systems: 3,675 MWe (95% probability) to 16,457 MWe (5% probability)
Undiscovered Geothermal Systems: 7,917 MWe (95% probability) to 73,286 MWe (5% probability)
EGS: 345,100 MWe (95% probability) to 727,900 MWe (5% probability).
The USGS assessment evaluates geothermal resources in the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. The assessment identified 241 moderate-temperature (90 to 150°C; 194 to 302°F) and high-temperature (greater than 150°C) geothermal systems located on private and public lands in these states. Geothermal systems located on public lands closed to development, such as national parks, were not included in the assessment. Electric-power generation potential was also determined for several low-temperature (less than 90°C) systems in Alaska for which local conditions make electric power generation feasible.

Although the assessment only accounted for large-scale geothermal power production, the USGS is also in the process of updating information about direct use, small power, oil and gas co-production and geopressured resources and the potential energy contribution of those portions of the geothermal resource base are not included in the estimates above.

The USGS assessment is the first new national geothermal resource assessment since 1979, when USGS released its last geothermal resource estimate, Circular 790. A new component of the 2008 assessment is the inclusion of production potential of EGS techniques. For more information on the USGS assessment, please visit USGS Release: Substantial Power Generation from Domestic Geothermal Resources (9/29/2008 5:06:28 PM).

In 2006, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) prepared an analysis of the future geothermal potential in the U.S. The report estimated that geothermal systems could produce 100 GWe in the next 50 years with a reasonable investment in R&D. The report, The Future of Geothermal Energy, is available at http://geothermal.inel.gov/publicat....energy.gov/geothermal/future_geothermal.html



3.2. Are there other examples of how geothermal resources are utilized?

Distributed generation: Distributed generation facilities such as those at Chena Hot Springs in Alaska, the Burgett greenhouse in New Mexico, and the Oregon Institute of Technology are examples of small-scale electricity produced to cover the electricity needs of each facility. Energy not being used by the facility is sold back to the grid.
Figure 15: Chena Hot Springs, AK, Gains Distributed Generation Begins in 2006



Geopressured resources: Geopressured resources are deep reservoirs of high-pressured hot water that contain dissolved methane. The Department of Energy built a demonstration plant in Texas which produced electricity from geopressured resources, pictured below. Preliminary testing (Phase 0) of Well No. 2 took place during 1979, reservoir limits testing during 1980 (Phase I), and long-term testing (Phase 11) was conducted during 1981–1983. The plant was dismantled after being deemed a success.( 2)
Figure 16: Geopressured Demonstration Plant in Texas



Co-production geothermal fluids: Usable geothermal fluids are often found in oil and gas production fields. The Southern Methodist University Geothermal Energy Program has identified thousands of megawatts of potential energy production from hot water being co-produced with oil and gas. There are presently two geothermal co-production demonstrations underway supported by the U.S. DOE, at the Rocky Mountain Oil Test Center in Wyoming and the Jay oil field in Florida. ( 3)
Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS): EGS involves developing tools and techniques that will allow geothermal production by artificially creating permeability in hot rock and introducing water (or another working fluid) to extract the heat. While reaching the full potential of EGS may take a decade or more to realize, there are many aspects of EGS that are already being applied. In California at The Geysers field—the oldest geothermal field in the U.S. and the largest geothermal venture in the world—operators have expanded the capacity of wells by injecting millions of gallons of reclaimed wastewater into the geothermal reservoir. Some experts call the Geysers wastewater project the first large-scale EGS project. There are several EGS projects that are already, or will soon, produce power:
Soultz project, in France, a 1.5-MW EGS plant already in operation
Landau project, in Germany, a 2.5-MW operational plant
Paralana, in Australia, a 7–30-MW plant in drilling stages
Cooper Basin, in Australia, a 1-MW showcase plant will be operational in 2008 and a 250–500-MW plant in drilling stages, expected to have the first 50 MW EGS plant operating as early as 2011–2012
Desert Peak, in the U.S. ( Nevada), in planning stages, the expansion of an existing natural geothermal field
In October of 2008, the U.S. Department of Energy selected four new cooperative projects with the U.S. geothermal industry for EGS systems demonstrations in the U.S. which it hopes will lead to technology readiness by 2015. For more information on the DOE effort visit: Geothermal Technologies Program: Enhanced Geothermal Systems. Also, the International Partnership for Geothermal Technology provides information about efforts to developed advanced technologies for EGS and related areas. You can visit their web site at: IPGT | International Partnership for Geothermal Technology.

Figure 17: Soultz, France, 1.5-MW EGS Power Plant





3.3. How much energy is geothermal electricity capable of supplying to the U.S?


In 2006 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) released a report, Geothermal—The Energy Under Our Feet, which estimates domestic geothermal resources. The report estimates that 26,000 MW of geothermal power could be developed by 2015, with direct use and heat pumps contributing another 20,000 MW of thermal energy. The report suggests that by 2025 more than 100,000 MW of geothermal power could be in production, with direct use and heat pumps adding another 70,000 MW of thermal energy. (4)

As the report concludes, “these estimates show the enormous potential of the U.S. geothermal resource.” For power production, the report includes specific estimates of the potential for identified resources, deep geothermal co-produced fluids and geopressured resources, and EGS. In addition, the report examines the potential for geothermal direct use and geothermal heat pumps.

The report does not include hidden or undiscovered geothermal systems, which the USGS report estimates have substantial energy potential. Nor does the report specifically examine small power systems (distributed generation).

For more information on the NREL report, please visit http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/pdfs/40665.pdf.

Geothermal Energy Association

Another Old Rocks posting fatality...

And that could possibly make power for approximately 100 good sized cities, where does the power come from for the rest of the country?

 

[Old Rocks]

Wind, solar, wave, slow current, and nuclear.

 

[logical4u]

Wind, solar, wave, slow current, and nuclear.

All of those with the exception of nuclear make up less than 15% of our nation's power. There is a reason the the steam plants (mostly nuclear and coal-fired), make up the nation's 'baseline' (plants that run 24/7/365): they are reliable and relatively, inexpensive. If you 'regulate' them out of existance, electrical energy costs will skyrocket and the people living on fixed incomes are the ones that will suffer. They will not be able to afford (or it will be even harder to afford) running their air conditioners in the summer or electric heat in the winter.
Funny, those that claim to care the most, hurt the weakest without thought.

 

[dilloduck]

Wind, solar, wave, slow current, and nuclear.

All of those with the exception of nuclear make up less than 15% of our nation's power. There is a reason the the steam plants (mostly nuclear and coal-fired), make up the nation's 'baseline' (plants that run 24/7/365): they are reliable and relatively, inexpensive. If you 'regulate' them out of existance, electrical energy costs will skyrocket and the people living on fixed incomes are the ones that will suffer. They will not be able to afford (or it will be even harder to afford) running their air conditioners in the summer or electric heat in the winter.
Funny, those that claim to care the most, hurt the weakest without thought.

Poppycock-----when people can't afford electricity we can just tax the have some more. This will be successful until no one has money.

 

[Sinatra]

Nuclear power NOW.

Bring those other "alternative" energies up to speed over the next few decades.

But nuclear power NOW.

I am so sick and tired of the long standing liberal refusal to embrace nuclear energy. Power more of those plants up and we would cut more CO2 than all that Cap n Trade BS...

 

[logical4u]

Wind, solar, wave, slow current, and nuclear.

All of those with the exception of nuclear make up less than 15% of our nation's power. There is a reason the the steam plants (mostly nuclear and coal-fired), make up the nation's 'baseline' (plants that run 24/7/365): they are reliable and relatively, inexpensive. If you 'regulate' them out of existance, electrical energy costs will skyrocket and the people living on fixed incomes are the ones that will suffer. They will not be able to afford (or it will be even harder to afford) running their air conditioners in the summer or electric heat in the winter.
Funny, those that claim to care the most, hurt the weakest without thought.

Poppycock-----when people can't afford electricity we can just tax the have some more. This will be successful until no one has money.

Is that the "trickle up poverty" policy that our gov is currently working?

 

[dilloduck]

All of those with the exception of nuclear make up less than 15% of our nation's power. There is a reason the the steam plants (mostly nuclear and coal-fired), make up the nation's 'baseline' (plants that run 24/7/365): they are reliable and relatively, inexpensive. If you 'regulate' them out of existance, electrical energy costs will skyrocket and the people living on fixed incomes are the ones that will suffer. They will not be able to afford (or it will be even harder to afford) running their air conditioners in the summer or electric heat in the winter.
Funny, those that claim to care the most, hurt the weakest without thought.

Poppycock-----when people can't afford electricity we can just tax the have some more. This will be successful until no one has money.

Is that the "trickle up poverty" policy that our gov is currently working?

yuppers---tax the rich----feed the poor---til there ain't no rich no more.
works great I hear.

 

[Old Rocks]

Wind, solar, wave, slow current, and nuclear.

All of those with the exception of nuclear make up less than 15% of our nation's power. There is a reason the the steam plants (mostly nuclear and coal-fired), make up the nation's 'baseline' (plants that run 24/7/365): they are reliable and relatively, inexpensive. If you 'regulate' them out of existance, electrical energy costs will skyrocket and the people living on fixed incomes are the ones that will suffer. They will not be able to afford (or it will be even harder to afford) running their air conditioners in the summer or electric heat in the winter.
Funny, those that claim to care the most, hurt the weakest without thought.

Wind, at present, is on the par with dirty coal for cost. Without the downstream costs of coal.

Solar will soon be the cheapest of all, and capable of generation in any part of the nation.

Wave is being worked on right now off of the coast of Oregon, and looks good.

Slow current is a brand new technology, and looks like a real winner.

Horses once made up the baseline of this nations transportation. Somehow, we manage to do without them now.