Comments on: Geothermal Power vs. Conventional Power Sources

By: babushka

babushka — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 08:50:02 +0000

i didnt understand a thing...kidding..i understood alll

By: Bruce Peterson

Bruce Peterson — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 05:50:28 +0000

Geothermal power requires hot rocks near the surface of the Earth. Water has to pumped against the steam pressure into the hot rocks. If the depth is too great, then the energy required to run the water pumps is greater than the energy provided by the resulting steam.

Sites suitable for geothermal power ARE limited.

However, there is a large area in central Australia suitable geothermal power. Long power tranmission lines, with their associated losses, would be required to utilize these sites.

By: xoc

xoc — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:14:07 +0000

Coal power stations use water. The coal is burnt to turn the water to steam, which drives turbines. It is about time water was valued more reasonably.

There are plenty of locations for geothermal power generation in Australia. Geodynamics (GDY) are investigating one as we speak, and have others on the back-burner.

By: Ag Au OZ

Ag Au OZ — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 05:21:18 +0000

Power bills to rise by up to 17.6%
November 30, 2007 - 2:10PM

Victorian power bills will rise by up to 17.6 per cent in the new year because of the drought.

What a load a crock - plain outright rip off
I thought water put fires out and in Victoria we burn coal for power, not water, whats the drought got to do with burning coal ?

Piss's me off this type of stuff, just like soon we will be paying a carbon tax so some fat cats can trade the credits at the expense of the consumers, its tax city this country, more tax to come no doubt now we have a Labor Gov

By: Alan

Alan — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:37:25 +0000

Build a road and it will soon fill with cars.Anybody for double glazing?

By: Pier Johnson

Pier Johnson — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:58:50 +0000

What many thoughtful replies that you can read above my from various geothermal geniuses.

Their expression reminds of the days of Geocities/dorky-neighborhood

By: rick

rick — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:28:21 +0000

Re: "not enough viable places for a geothermal plant, unless your country is Iceland," this is simply wrong.

Developing Enhanced Geothermal Systems permits geothermal projects virtually anywhere, based on the fact that temperatures increase in the earth with depth.

Of course, we don't want energy at any cost, so then it becomes an effort to find where EGS makes economic sense. A report issued earlier this year in the U.S. found that w/appropriate levels of funding--about the cost of a single "clean coal" plant, or US $800 million to $1 billion--to refine existing technology 100 GW of EGS can be online there within 50 years at or below market prices.

Oz is ground-zero for modern EGS efforts - how come you don't appear to know this?

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:18:53 +0000

OK, So what are the recommended eothermal companies (mutual funds?) that are in the best positon to invest in? All aloha from Honolulu, Dan

By: Coffee Addict

Coffee Addict — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:06:29 +0000

I would expect investments in proven alternative energy projects to earn low to average returns. This is reasonable given a low to average level of risk they present to the investor.

Extracting thermal power from thick crust areas is yet to be fully proven as a viable mass energy source. Government involvement is required to prove proof of concept because there will be few (if any) enforcable intellectual property rights for the innovators.

A key risk area for investors is the ability of people to quickly and radically reduce current energy consumption without greatly changing their lifestyles (eg. cars that return 3L/100 km, )

By: Colin

Colin — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:50:07 +0000

There's simply not enough viable places for a geothermal plant, unless your country is Iceland.

Its not a viable alternative power in any sense of the word, because not enough pre-condition environments exist.