West Virginia Is Geothermically Active 239
sciencehabit writes "Researchers have uncovered the largest geothermal hot spot in the eastern United States. According to a unique collaboration between Google and academic geologists, West Virginia sits atop several hot patches of Earth, some as warm as 200C and as shallow as 5 kilometers. If engineers are able to tap the heat, the state could become a producer of green energy for the region."
Re:Warm River Cave (Score:4, Informative)
Collaboration? (Score:5, Informative)
Although very generous, I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Google's grant to SMU a "collaboration", or to only mention Google and omit any mention of USDOE and other entities that have been funding this research at SMU and elsewhere for many years. For example, this this report from 2006 [inel.gov], which points out the potential of the thermal hotspot in West Virginia...
It doesn't have the cool Google Earth graphics, however.
Re:Are they sure? (Score:5, Informative)
5km is a bit too deep for coal fires.
In any case, 200C at 5 km is also quite deep for economically viable hydrothermals. That is "deep drilling" territory which is quite expensive. As the article notes Nevada has it at sub-2km, so does most of Europe along the Alps fault line.
Re:Welcom heavy metals (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, it would never dawn on a mining state to be interested in obtaining lithium, Rare Earths, etc. Nor would they or the EPA know how to handle this correctly.
They know, but they don't care.
Skipping the sarcasm, the drilling will likely be a binary system, and would be a good way to obtain minerals, elements since it is a by-product. Then what is left can be re-injected back in. Basically, it turns a well from a energy producer into a energy and mineral producer.
It doesn't work that way. What comes out of the earth is usually heavily contaminated and it's not cost-effective to try to separate it. Separating the metals takes a lot of big stuff that you don't want to build next to a geothermal hotspot because they're seismically active. When you start pumping stuff into the ground you increase the seismic activity. In order to pump the stuff into the ground at all you'll need to add water, which is going to have to be pumped in.
I live near to (formerly right next to) The Geysers, the most geothermally active spot on the planet. There is a geothermal plant there which is perpetually over budget and under-producing power compared to expectations. The turbine blades build up with heavy metals including arsenic. When there's enough to interfere with efficiency the turbines are suspended over an open pit and pressure-washed. The water is permitted to evaporate off the pit, and when it's full enough they pour a concrete cap on the pit, build the walls higher, and start again. This is an EPA-approved plan.
Before the EPA got involved they were filling up drums with the stuff and burying it in a field on Butts Canyon road. Then we started having cows born with two heads and stuff like that. They dug it up, put in a plastic liner, and reburied it. In another few decades we can have the same problem all over again.
When the steam started to run low due to overuse we started pumping sewage into the ground to add steam pressure. This worked, but seismic activity was multiplied by a factor of two or three. A massive lawsuit resulted in a payback program for local homeowners who can show seismic damage.
In short, the only kind of geothermal even suitable for use is heat pipe heating/cooling. It's not useful for large-scale power generation. We simply do not have the scruples necessary as a species to do geothermal power correctly. Also, the EPA is a bad fucking joke with no teeth, and suggesting that the EPA will protect us is preschool-level naivety.
Re:Gotta Love the URL (Score:2, Informative)
That is actually pretty accurate. Energy companies have been raping WV for a long time and she just let's them.
Re:Earthquakes (Score:3, Informative)
If they are setting off earthquakes they would be releasing tension which would have only amounted to a larger earthquake at a later date.
Re:Welcome heavy metals (Score:4, Informative)
Transmission losses ARE a big deal NOW since most lines are made of aluminium and consumers may be 1000km from a power source. There's also weird stuff with harmonics I don't understand that means it's best not to try to push those electrons too far if you want to get some use out of them.
Re:Geothermal Ain't Green (Score:4, Informative)
The ultimate energy source, for which we all hope, is to master controlled fusion. We're not there yet. So we look to other sources to fill the need as fossil fuel supply dwindles. Together, solar, wind and geothermal may be able to bridge the gap. If, as some suggest, fusion will forever be illusive, then I'm afraid we're already screwed.
As to your question, IIRC, at current consumption rates, we would barely make a dent into the stored heat inside the Earth; however, you are correct, if we continue to grow consumption and suck heat out indefinitely, it will eventually make a difference, but that is hopefully far enough out into the future that it permits us to perfect fusion.