This article was almost surely placed because it came out that the tech firms were using accounting techniques to obscure their impact:

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
9 points

this is one i dont understand. if we down drill far enough anywhere , we get free heat. nuke plants cost billions… we cant drill a few miles for billions of dollars? what am i missing?

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Actually making it work means not just drilling a hole, but drilling two holes and then connecting them with a network of cracks which doesn’t leak too much. This lets you circulate water through a huge volume of rock and engage in depletionary extraction of the accumulated heat. This wasn’t really possible before the advent of fracking, and even then, it required a bunch of additional research to figure out how to make it work in the kinds of igneous rocks you find in the craton instead of the sedimentary rocks you find oil deposits in.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

uh, ok. so we drill 2 big holes and link them for billions of dollars. what am i missing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

You’re not missing anything. Nuclear is looking more and more like it won’t be economically feasible going forward. If modern geothermal provides a cheaper way to feed dispatchable electricity into the grid, in more places, then that might very well be the last link in making a zero-carbon grid possible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The thing I heard is that geothermal energy is actually only renewable on geological timescales, i.e. not really “renewable”. It’s just that there are very large reserves, so it’s not immediately obvious. But I can’t find a link rn.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Green Energy

!energy@slrpnk.net

Create post

everything about energy production

Community stats

  • 1.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 671

    Posts

  • 3.2K

    Comments