Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
economist.com
Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
1–10 of 78 posts
Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#2Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#3Definitely confused the photo in this article for Maximilian from the movie "The Black Hole" (1979) for a moment there.
Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#4[flagged]
Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#5I wish the best for the geothermal industry, but the phrase “could outperform” is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Geothermal thermal has essentially zero growth, in the US, in the last 20 years. And there is basically no growth planned in the near future, or at least nothing on the EIA’s or FERC’s upcoming generation list.
I’m skeptical that geothermal will ever make a significant impact in the US. Though it might make a difference in much farther north places, where solar struggles.
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/browser/?tbl=T01.02#/?f...
Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#6I wish the best for the geothermal industry, but the phrase “could outperform” is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Geothermal thermal has essentially zero growth, in the US, in the last 20 years. And there is basically no growth planned in the near future, or at least nothing on the EIA’s or FERC’s upcoming generation list. I’m skeptical that geothermal will ever make a significant impact in the US. Though it might make…
Nuclear also has essentially zero growth, whichever turtle is fastest still wins.
Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#7Two hamsters on a treadmill could outperfom nuclear power 8-/
Nuclear is the biggest boondogle in electric generation history. And a huge fraction of that bloated cost is still hidden in externalities, as the overwhelming majority of all spent fuel is still sitting in "temporary" storage onsite with the reactor where it was used.
Geothermal aside, using money to increase grid storage is a vastly better investment than nuclear can ever be.
Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#8I wish the best for the geothermal industry, but the phrase “could outperform” is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Geothermal thermal has essentially zero growth, in the US, in the last 20 years. And there is basically no growth planned in the near future, or at least nothing on the EIA’s or FERC’s upcoming generation list. I’m skeptical that geothermal will ever make a significant impact in the US. Though it might make…
Yeah, I'm not sure large scale geothermal electrical production will ever be a thing outside some specialized locations like Iceland.
I do think geothermal has a part to play, specifically for heating and cooling of neighbourhoods and multifamily developments. The construction has to move a ton of dirt anyway, so might as well install some ground loops while you're at it. If you're forced to drill due to site conditions, the load is lower than pure electricity generation meaning the wells are not that deep. For private homes it's far too expensive to be much more than a curiosity, but amortized across a whole new neighbourhood or collection of apartment buildings it's very affordable. Especially in northern climates accessing the consistent ground heat source/sink that allows you to run heat pumps at max efficiency all year is a huge win and is a huge amount of electricity you never need to generate in the first place.
Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#9Two hamsters on a treadmill could outperfom nuclear power 8-/ Nuclear is the biggest boondogle in electric generation history. And a huge fraction of that bloated cost is still hidden in externalities, as the overwhelming majority of all spent fuel is still sitting in "temporary" storage onsite with the reactor where it was used. Geothermal aside, using money to increase grid storage is a vastly better investment tha…
The word temporary is only used to placate people who don't understand nuclear / nuclear waste (waste is a bad term) and who have been badly influenced by 70 years of misinformation from The Sierra Club and others.
None of this spent fuel is really that spent, has plenty of other use cases, and should be used. Also, storing it in concrete casks for 40 years is perfectly safe and has caused 0 harm.
The cost is largely due to regulatory hurdles that are slowly being eroded.
Re: Geothermal energy could outperform nuclear power
#10[flagged]
Geothermal, unlike nuclear, scales down well enough to be a plausible source for high latitude markets, where solar is disadvantaged. It's a niche, but one that could well sustain the technology even in a solar-dominated world. This is especially the case if it can benefit from cold winter conditions to improve efficiency (with solar taking up the slack in summer).