Live data from Hacker News

The time has finally come for geothermal energy

newyorker.com

231–240 of 282 posts

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#231
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back then, it affected everyone in two ways, which were the things Greenpeace campaigned against: nuclear weapons, especially overland testing, and dumping waste at sea. Chernobyl took out Welsh farming for years, and in a few places decades, because it spread a thin layer of bioaccumulative poison over the whole of Europe.

Neither of these have anything to do with running a well-regulated nuclear power program. Chernobyl happened because of the apathy and incompetence endemic to any Marxist-Leninist system, not because a modern democratic state is incapable of regulating the nuclear power industry. Know what else spreads a thin layer of poison over the whole of the world? Coal power.

While I agree about the coal thing:

Democracy just as lazy and apathetic is whatever the USSR counts as; the point of capitalism (which is different to democracy) redirect the laziness into something more productive — this works to an extent, but depends on competition which is greatly reduced in the case of nuclear reactors.

That it's a different axis than democracy-communism is also why the not-at-all-democratic military reactors around the world seem to be doing fine.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it usefully dispatchable? Nuclear can be made dispatchable but it's not usefully dispatchable because the costs are fairly similar whether the plant is on or off. Like nuclear, I believe geothermal has high capital cost and low running costs, suggesting that it isn't usefully dispatchable. But that's too simplistic. A big limitation of geothermal is that rock has poor thermal conductivity. So once you remove h…

> I believe geothermal has high capital cost and low running costs Higher capital costs, but not nuclear high capital costs. > That means it's competing against batteries, which are also great for smoothing out daily cycles, and are very inexpensive. It likely would supplement batteries rather than compete against them. A battery buffer would allow a geothermal plant to slowly rise to load and fall as that load goes…

A very large battery storage site, like the top 10 currently running has an order of magnitude more energy storage than you suggest.

The largest under construction for go live in 2027 has another order of magnitude, 19000MWh and will deliver up to 1000MW.

Things are changing fast as battery prices drop and experience accumulates.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#233
post #120
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing which is needed too is spinning load, the grid depends on having enough inertia to maintain the frequency. Flywheels I assume would do that.

This is being done and it's called synthetic inertia. Just with capacitors and batteries instead of spinning motors.

To my knowledge Siemens is currently making a lot of money by adding spinning inertia to the grid because that is easier than getting the response time/power out of electronics.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I believe geothermal has high capital cost and low running costs Higher capital costs, but not nuclear high capital costs. > That means it's competing against batteries, which are also great for smoothing out daily cycles, and are very inexpensive. It likely would supplement batteries rather than compete against them. A battery buffer would allow a geothermal plant to slowly rise to load and fall as that load goes…

A very large battery storage site, like the top 10 currently running has an order of magnitude more energy storage than you suggest. The largest under construction for go live in 2027 has another order of magnitude, 19000MWh and will deliver up to 1000MW. Things are changing fast as battery prices drop and experience accumulates.

Is that correct only 1MW of power but 19,000MWh of storage? That would take over two years to drain it.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pumped hydro for long term storage. You are using long-term in an extremely vague way. Pumped hydro is not a solution for seasonal storage or yearly storage. Seasonal variation can be a problem in higher latitudes. For example we have a serious problem in New Zealand where our existing "green" hydro lakes are sometimes low and our economy is affected: creating national power crises during dry years. We use coal-bur…

Long term storage is definitely the weak point of moving to 100% carbon free electricity. Unfortunately geothermal does not cover this need. If we want to cover a dankelflaute with geothermal, we basically need enough geothermal to cover ~100% of our power needs. Pumped hydro is the best answer we have at the moment, even if it isn't a great answer. What will likely happen is that people will decide that "99% is good…

Powering an extended, worst-case-scenario month-long dunkelflaute entirely with gas rather than a realistic mix of options would only take 5% of Germany's current gas usage (coincidentally roughly equivalent to Germany's domestic gas production).

It's wild how much attention that gets compared to the 50% being used to heat buildings.

That is a problem for which we already have great solutions. We have German made heat pumps, that could be German fitted and run off German generated electricity, or worst case EU electricity imports.

Solve 10% of that problem and you have freed up enough gas and money to cancel out an apocalyptic scale dunkelflaute or three every year.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#236
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A very large battery storage site, like the top 10 currently running has an order of magnitude more energy storage than you suggest. The largest under construction for go live in 2027 has another order of magnitude, 19000MWh and will deliver up to 1000MW. Things are changing fast as battery prices drop and experience accumulates.

Is that correct only 1MW of power but 19,000MWh of storage? That would take over two years to drain it.

Well spotted, I've corrected to 1000MW (or 1GW).

The UEA are aiming for a longer than usual runtime, but only 19 hours, not 2 years.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear produces very dangerous substances. The long term cost to guard us from them for a million years and the risk that something gets out of control are extemly high.

Yes but a very small amount and it is nothing we don't know how to manage. > the risk that something gets out of control are extemly high Except this is false, you are just spreading misinformation. I suggest you confront your current knowledge to different sources and listen to the arguments of the proponents of nuclear energy before you make up your mind. Don't just repeat what you have heard.

"At present, atomic power presents an exceptionally costly and inconvenient means of obtaining energy which can be extracted much more economically from conventional fuels.… This is expensive power, not cheap power as the public has been led to believe." — C. G. Suits, Director of Research, General Electric, who was operating the Hanford reactors, 1951.

Safe, clean, too cheap to meter?

Some things never change.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pumped hydro for long term storage. You are using long-term in an extremely vague way. Pumped hydro is not a solution for seasonal storage or yearly storage. Seasonal variation can be a problem in higher latitudes. For example we have a serious problem in New Zealand where our existing "green" hydro lakes are sometimes low and our economy is affected: creating national power crises during dry years. We use coal-bur…

The way I understand it from people working in the field, is that the issue isn't really that lakes/rivers are running dry, but more that most hydropower is produced on the South Island while most consumption is on the North Island and the connection is woefully inadequate (typical NZ problem, never invest in infrastructure just keep bandaiding it). That said installing wind and solar (both of which are plentiful) wo…

The connection is not the issue.

  The issue is that we have insufficient extra generating capacity during a dry year. At the moment we don't have enough [gas] to fully use all our existing thermal plant in a dry year. There are no projects in the generation pipeline that would provide backup energy to cover dry years.
- https://www.mbie.govt.nz/dmsdocument/31240-factsheet-challen...

A lot more solar would help, but the government owned generators are knobbling private investment through dirty tactics (the details are not public - I got this from a planned utility scale solar farm that is being cock-blocked). Fundamentally the issue is that the generators make more money by preventing extra generating capacity coming online.

Don't blame "the conservative party": Labour were also completely useless when they were in power (admittedly National still isn't helping). Politicians rabbit on about infrastructure investment e.g. the link I gave that mentions the pumped hydro scheme backed by Labour and cancelled by National because it was uneconomic. Both parties wastefully "invest" in infrastructure, and both make stupid decisions to score political points rather than solve problems sensibly. It's nonsense to blame one party. Both parties are preventing utility scale solar installations (indirectly). And the minor parties are not helping either. The greens in particular are not a party to accept any compromise, so even they won't back solar.

Climate change isn't the cause here - your bias is showing.

Even Australian politicians and their regulator have managed to sort it out. New Zealand is just fucking it up.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the benefits of over-provisioning solar is that fun "wasteful" things that use a lot of energy become practical and non-harmful.

Agreed. I myself have always wanted a hobby smelting bauxite.

Agreed. I like the smell of fluorides in the morning.

Re: The time has finally come for geothermal energy

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear produces very dangerous substances. The long term cost to guard us from them for a million years and the risk that something gets out of control are extemly high.

Yes but a very small amount and it is nothing we don't know how to manage. > the risk that something gets out of control are extemly high Except this is false, you are just spreading misinformation. I suggest you confront your current knowledge to different sources and listen to the arguments of the proponents of nuclear energy before you make up your mind. Don't just repeat what you have heard.

In what world are you living that you not have heard about nuclear accidents? Here is a reading list for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_accident

With regard to nuclear waste. Here is an example, how it can went quickly out of control:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine

Post reply on HN