Thursday, August 20, 2009
Setback for Enhanced Geothermal Energy
Siting decisions are delaying current projects to extract heat from hot dry rock deep underground.
By Kevin Bullis
Hot dry rock found deep underground is one of the most abundant potential sources of clean energy. Drilling holes into the rock, fracturing it, and pumping water through it to extract the heat, and then using that heat to generate electricity, could supply the world's energy needs many times over according to an MIT report. In practice, however, harvesting that energy is proving a challenge, in part because developers have located the first projects in earthquake prone regions.
In 2007 a project in Switzerland that was drilling five-kilometer-deep holes to access hot dry rock had to shut down because it set off a series of small earthquakes. Earlier this year the New York Times called into question a similar project in Northern California. The Department of Energy has decided to review the project, and may not allow it to go forward.
Meanwhile, the New York Times reports today that the project has been delayed because a bit has failed to penetrate a layer of rock close to the surface. In the amount of time it should take workers to drill a hole 12,000 feet deep, they have only reached a depth of 4,000 feet.
These aren't the first setbacks for this approach to harvesting energy, which is known as enhanced geothermal energy. Here's what we wrote in a 2006 report on the Switzerland project.
Despite its simplicity, this concept has failed several times. In the 1970s, a pioneering project initiated by Los Alamos National Laboratory demonstrated that one could fracture rock and circulate brine to extract heat. But that project could never get enough brine in -- and therefore enough heat out -- to make the process competitive with conventional power plants burning fossil fuels such as coal or natural gas. Gunnar Grecksch, a geophysicist and hot-rock fracturing expert at the Leibniz Institute for Applied Geosciences in Hanover, Germany, says follow-on efforts in the U.K. and Japan failed for the same reason: the fracturing of the rocks was never sufficient. "Flow resistance is still the key problem," he says. "In none of these projects were the flow rates in the range you need for a commercial system."
Comments
Raser Technologies has opened a couple Geothermal plants that are generating power using "off the shelf" refrigerant equipment and low temp vaporizing refrigerant (instead of water). Take a look:
http://www.gizmag.com/raser-low-temperature-binary-geothermal-plant-goes-online/11612/
Unlike wind or solar it runs 24/7.....
www.PrometheusGoneWild.com
DennisBuller
08/20/2009
Posts:40
Take the concept a step further and find "dry - pretty hot - rock" deposits outside earth quake zones, drill your holes and then sleeve them with a material that can take the corrosiveness of ammonia, and you may be able to tap the ground more safely.
I suspect that buried salt domes located near or by hot dry rock formations could be hollowed out instead of fractured, and some heat pump solution could be deployed to transfer the heat for generating energy.
Anybody know what the ambient temps of a salt dome or abandoned salt mine typically are? You can sure grow mushrooms in them, so they have to be warm.
If you can find a gas that boils in the 90 degree range and condenses at say 60, then you may have the workings of a small thermal plant.
mkogrady
08/20/2009
Posts:206
low energy generation.
What the article is talking about is getting
high pressure, super heated steam from deep within the ground. This stuff is hot and a turbine can
be directly driven with it.
No heat exchangers/condensors required except to possibly cool the water for reinjection back into the ground.
The two systems just aren't comparable.
devassocx
08/21/2009
Posts:53
But you left out the projects that succeeded.
There are two enhanced geothermal projects now connected to the grid - Soultz in Germany, Landau in France. Landau is a commercial plant.
Small quakes are apparently common with drilling oil wells. That has been observed for 80-100 years. The tremors seem to be connected more with fracking than with drilling. In fact, the tremors a the Switzerland site occurred days after drilling was completed, IIRC.
You cite the MIT report, but you fail to mention that the report states...
<i>
With current technology, it appears feasible that the number and magnitude of these induced events can be managed. In fact, based on substantial evidence collected so far, the probability of a damaging seismic event is low, and the issue – though real – is often one more of public perception.
</i>
Additionally, there is no mention in your article about the many ongoing enhanced geothermal projects around the world. Did you intend this to be a 'hit piece' as opposed to informative?
Bob61984
08/21/2009
Posts:4
CRAIGL
08/28/2009
Posts:1