North of the Hot Zone

The Washington Energy Services newsfeed gave a brief plug to the June GEA event in Seattle.

Seattle will have the opportunity to highlight its clean energy credentials next month when it hosts a major event for the geothermal energy industry.
The Geothermal Energy Association (GEA) will hold a Technology, Finance and Development Workshop in the city on June 3…. Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and a variety of other local officials are expected to be on hand at the event.

The link to the article is here.

For more information on the GEA Workshop, try this link

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

Dear Readers,

We would like to apologize for the loss of images to this blog.  Unfortunately a web programmer attempting to work on a different website (www.geothermalinnovation.org) inadvertently accessed North of the Hot Zone and erased the images and some of the links.

We are trying to correct this problem, but as some of the entries were original research it will take some time.  We are actively soliciting an intern who will work on this problem as part of a larger geothermal internship.

if there are any images or data referred to on this blog that you would like to have resolved sooner, please contact Lawrence Molloy directly at Lawrence@northofthehotzone.com

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

Electric Utilities’ Roles in Promoting Geothermal Technologies

August 11-12, 2008
2320 California Street – Everett (Snohomish County Public Utility District)

Map to location pdf is here Traffic can be heavy heading North across the county line.  Plan accordingly.  Bus Service from Seattle is the Sound Transit 510, Schedule is here.  Carpooling can be good time to catch up with people you know.

The topics are salient to where Washington State is vis a vis geothermal.  SnoPud is to be commended for appropriately framing and hosting the event.  Link to SNOPUD Press Release is here. 

August 11

9:00 Registration

9:30 Opening Remarks: Steve Klein, General Manager SNOPUD and Congressman Phil Inslee US House of Representatives

9:45 Panel Discussion: “Geothermal Potential In the Pacific Northwest” Susan

• Petty, AltaRock Energy, Inc, Chair
• Curt Robinson, Geothermal Resources Council
• John Martinsen, SNOPUD
• Kermit Witherbee, Bureau of Land Management
• Bill Lum WA State Department of Ecology

11:15 Break

11:30 “Developing, Building and Operating Geothermal Power Plants” Guy Nelson, Team Leader, Utility Geothermal Working Group

12:15 Luncheon Presentation: “Geothermal Technologies and Utility Leadership Roles in Promoting Rural Development; Dan Bowers, USDA

1:30 “Geothermal Heat Pumps: Benefits and Issues”, Paul Bony, ClimateMaster

2:00 Panel Discussion: “Utility Perspectives” Craig Collar, SNOPUD Chair

• Craig Collar, Snohomish PUD
• Marilynn Semro, Seattle City Light
• Jerry Brown, Palo Alto Utilities
• Garth Larson, PacifiCorp

3:30 Break

 

3:45 “Risks and Rewards of Including Renewables in a Utility’s Resource Portfolio” Brian Walshe, ALTERA Energy

4:15 Products and Services Panel, Guy Nelson, Utility Geothermal Working Group

• John Pierce, WSG&R
• Susan Petty, AltaRock Energy
• Paul Bony, ClimateMaster

5:15 Adjourn for the Day

August 12

7:30 am Continental Breakfast

8:00 “A Tale of Two Buildings” Guy Nelson, UGWG

8:30 “GHP Analytical Tools” Katherine Johnson, Market Development Group

9:15 Geothermal Technologies in Waste Heat Recovery Applications, Guy Nelson, UGWG

9:45 Breakout Sessions: “How Do We Get More Cost-Effective Geothermal Projects Into the Market?”

• Utility Perspective
• Regulatory/Government Perspective
• Customer Perspective

10:45 Break

11:00 Reports from the Breakout Sessions

Noon Adjourn

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

This blog is part of a short project known as "Geothermal Washington".  the goal is to explore and comprehend the potential of geothermal energy in Washington State.  This project is supported, in part, by Climate Solutions.  The beginning of 2008 has seen a flurry of interest around geothermal in Washington State.  The Op/Ed and Brown Bag has initiated the discussion and enquiry into geothermal. 

Current media interest is high.  McClatchy Newspapers picked up the topic and the article by Les Blumenthal was run in the Tacoma Tribune, Bellingham Herald, and Seattle Times.  The Columbian had an editorial that was picked up in the State Editorial coverage by the Seattle Times.  Several blogs have picked up on the coverage.  It has also been mentioned that the Skagit Paper is writing a story.  Real Change’s editor have a story but it has not run.  The Daily journal of Commerce has assigned its environmental reporter to cover the topic.

General interest in the blog was initially high following the launch (several hundred) , but has trailed off significantly to barely registering double digits in daily activity. 

This project has initiated some interesting thinking on geothermal in Washington State.  The rational thinking quickly points to the Cascades and its potential.  Interest in Eastern Washington has been higher than expected and given its land status speaks to a long term proposition that ‘farmers’ will track now that they see what wind has been.  One Spokane blogger extrapolated the analogy of Nevada as the Saudi Arabia of geothermal to Eastern Washington being the "Kuwait" of geothermal given our respective northern positions.  The Rain curtain that masks the hot springs with the constant low cooler flows has led to a lot of nods in comprehension.  The transmission value of geothermal on the western Cascades is quickly realized as an important proposition for planning and development in the State.

Senator Adam Kline has expressed interest in running a study bill.  The State Geology Survey has offered to act as the report submitting State Agency.  The short legislative session offers little promise of success.  But the goal here is to begin the conversation on geothermal in Washington State.   In this case, a broad list of stakeholders is being welcome to participate in helping the State understand this resource.

Outside of Washington State, geothermal energy moves apace.  The GEA announced that the 2,936 MW of installed geothermal capacity in the U.S. is soon to be matched by an additional 3,368 MW under development.  The next step of Geothermal Washington is to engage the national and industrial tipping points that will accelerate the development of geothermal. 

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
1 Comment »

The NW Energy Coalition Conference Room was overflowing with over 25 attendees for a brown bag on Geothermal Energy in Washington State.  Staff from Snohomish PUD, King County, Seattle City Light and the Snohomish Tribal Nation were in the audience. Geothermal Reservoir Engineer Susan Petty covered the technical aspects, economics and environmental impacts of hydrothermal and EGS (Enhanced Geothermal Systems).  She then fielded questions about the current industrial practice. The full presentation will be posted later this week. 

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
1 Comment »

The U.S. Geothermal Developable Resource Estimate  from the Western Governor’s Assessment.  Washington State is at 4.8%.  Some geothermal engineers believe that the precipitation and biomass of the western slope of the Cascades may mask the surface hydrothermal waters which indicate a higher resource below.

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

Please join us for an introductory discussion and Q&A session on the environmental and energy aspects of geothermal power in Washington state. It will be held on January 17^th at the NW Energy Coalition office.

What: Lunch talk on geothermal energy potential for WA state

Who: Geothermal engineer Susan Petty & Lawrence Molloy will host this presentation and Q&A session

When: Thursday, January 17^th, Noon to 1:30pm

Where: NW Energy Coalition Office -  811 1^st Ave, Suite 305 Seattle

Who should attend? Individuals interested in renewable energy, utility staff, decision makers, climate advocates

BACKGROUND

Geothermal energy shows excellent promise as a reliable, low-carbon, and cost effective source of power.  It is already developed in over a dozen countries and the United States is the leader with 3,000 MW of developed power. While Washington state and Washingtonians are committed to renewable energy, we have yet to get a clear understanding of the potential for geothermal energy. Washington is considered a 2^nd tier state (compared to the hot zone of Nevada, California, Oregon and Idaho) with the potential for up to 600 MW statewide with current geothermal technology. Washington state has strong potential, yet nothing has been sited, permitted or developed. Today, hydroelectric power provides 70% of Washington’s electricity, and coal, nuclear and natural gas account for most of the remainder.Geothermal energy, "the forgotten renewable," is beginning to receive more attention as other forms of renewable energy are receiving broad public and technical consideration.  A recent MIT/Dept. of Energy study shows that it may be far more promising than once thought. Theoretically capable of providing abundant low-carbon energy, the geothermal resource in Washington State is poorly understood.  Like any natural resource, harvesting it has environmental impacts.  This brownbag will focus not only on the energy and carbon aspects, but also related environmental issues such as water and land impacts.

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

This fall, before the Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee, the President of Iceland’s testimony outlines the U.S. geothermal potential with special attention to the Western United States.  Iceland’s geothermal utilization is well known.  They are also very open to sharing and cooperating on this effort.  They are working with Glitnir on promoting Icelandic investment in geothermal energy.

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

Released in the Spring of 2007, this study extensively covers the technology and geologic potential of geothermal energy in the United States. A summary of the report is here.

“This environmental advantage is due to low emissions and the small overall footprint of the entire geothermal system, which results because energy capture and extraction is contained entirely underground, and the surface equipment needed for conversion to electricity is relatively compact.”Government-funded research into geothermal was very active in the 1970s and early 1980s. As oil prices declined in the mid-1980s, enthusiasm for alternative energy sources waned, and funding for research on renewable energy and energy efficiency (including geothermal) was greatly reduced, making it difficult for geothermal technology to advance.Although geothermal energy is produced commercially today, and the United States is the world’s biggest producer, existing U.S. plants have focused on the high-grade geothermal systems primarily located in isolated regions of the west.

The full MIT Report is large (14 MB), but can be found here. Highlights to the report are linked here. Other recommendations:

• More detailed and site-specific assessments of the U.S. geothermal energy resource should be conducted.
• Field trials running three to five years at several sites should be done to demonstrate commercial-scale engineered geothermal systems.
• The shallow, extra-hot, high-grade deposits in the west should be explored and tested first.
• Other geothermal resources such as co-produced hot water associated with oil and gas production and geo-pressured resources should also be pursued as short-term options.
• On a longer time scale, deeper, lower-grade geothermal deposits should be explored and tested.
• Local and national policies should be enacted that encourage geothermal development.
• A multi-year research program exploring subsurface science and geothermal drilling and energy conversion should be started, backed by constant analysis of results.

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

The latest market numbers for 2000-2005.  A series of plants came on line, including Salton Sea. From the World Power Generation Report.

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

From an article by staff at the Geothermal Energy Association.  The point of comparison was Average Power Plant Emissions according to EPA 2000.  Sulfur dioxide for geothermal is 1/10th of coal, but can be on par with natural gas.   (Click on the table to enlarge.) The CO2 emissions numbers are interesting, showing the release of gases associated with the water.  They approach an order of magnitude of gas production. (10X less!)

Tags: Best of, Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

Some key characteristics of geothermal energy distinguish it from all other energy sources, both conventional (e.g. fossil) and other renewables (e.g. solar, wind, biomass). They are as follows:

Geothermal resources are “hidden,” requiring major speculative expenditures for exploration to identify and prove resources as commercially viable.Geothermal energy is available at relatively very low density (BTU’s per pound of produced energy bearing material, for both water and steam) compared to other mineral energy forms such as coal, gas, and oil.Geothermal energy is characterized by relatively fixed ongoing fuel costs since, once accessed, a geothermal resource continues producing energy into the future without ongoing fuel costs.  

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

The geothermal resources map of the United States below shows the estimated subterranean temperatures at a depth of 6 kilometers. Yellow or red indicates boiling water. To determine the Earth’s internal temperature at any depth below the capabilities of normal well drilling, multiple data sets are synthesized. The data used for this figure are: thermal conductivity, thickness of sedimentary rock, geothermal gradient, heat flow and surface temperature.  The numbers are in Celsius! 

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

The Department of Energy has been working on this issue.  It has proposed a series of national geothermal goals.  Some of the goals are:

1. characterize the entire hydrothermal resource base by 2010;
2. sustain double digit annual growth in geothermal power; direct use and heat pump applications;
3. demonstrate state-of-the-art energy production from the full range of geothermal resources;
4. achieve new power or commercial heat production in at least 25 states; and,
5. develop the tools and techniques to build an engineered geothermal system (EGS) power plant by 2015.

Funding Priorities

1. discovery and definition of geothermal resources;
2. expand the GRED program funding;
3. develop new exploration technologies;
4. support state-based programs to expand knowledge of the resource base and its potential applications;
5. improve drilling technology;
6. demonstrate geothermal applications in presently non-commercial settings;
7. develop and demonstrate Enhanced Geothermal Systems techniques.

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

• Engage the tribes at the beginning, especially the elders
• Don’t rely on old geologic data
• Fully evaluate and consider surface and near surface water impacts
• Don’t oversell geothermal in terms of production or cleanliness
• Recognize that the technology is not standardized
• Commit to a closed-loop system

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

Geothermal is not without its challenges and impacts. With a coordinated and respectful investment in geothermal technology, policy review and siting, it is believed that costs can be reduced by 2 cents per kWe. Here is a list of challenges today:

· Waste and process waters· Steam and viewshed impacts· Redrilling every 3-5 years· High O & M cost (this will come down measurably, but not drastically)· High initial drilling costs (design goal was 50% reduction, only achieved 20%)· Neglected for 20 years in national energy policy· The geothermal intelligentsia were on the verge of becoming a legacy· A whole heap of technological challenges remain· The interface of some near surface sources and sacred waters

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

From Economist Yoram Bauman, extracting from the DOE’s data and reports. According to DOE’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy section FAQ on geothermal. (link is <http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/faqs.html>)

Q: How much does geothermal energy cost per kilowatt-hour (kWh)?A: At The Geysers, power is sold at $0.03 to $0.035 per kWh. A power plant built today would probably require about $0.05 per kWh. Some plants can charge more during peak demand periods.[Note that the $0.05 per kWh estimate looks pretty optimistic in light of the data below and elsewhere.]Q: What does it cost to develop a geothermal power plant?A: Costs of a geothermal plant are heavily weighted toward early expenses, rather than fuel to keep them running. Well drilling and pipeline construction occur first, followed by resource analysis of the drilling information. Next is design of the actual plant. Power plant construction is usually completed concurrent with final field development. The initial cost for the field and power plant is around $2500 per installed kW in the U.S., probably $3000 to $5000/kWe for a small (<1Mwe) power plant. Operating and maintenance costs range from $0.01 to $0.03 per kWh. Most geothermal power plants can run at greater than 90% availability (i.e., producing more than 90% of the time), but running at 97% or 98% can increase maintenance costs. Higher-priced electricity justifies running the plant 98% of the time because the resulting higher maintenance costs are recovered.

This from an MIT study, p. 6-3 <http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/future_geothermal.html>.

Exploration, production, and injection well drilling are major cost components of any geothermal project (Petty et al., 1992; Pierce and Livesay, 1994; Pierce and Livesay, 1993a; Pierce and Livesay, 1993b). Even for high-grade resources, they can account for 30% of the total capital investment; and with low-grade resources, the percentage increases to 60% or more of the total.[It's also clear from this study that researchers expect costs to fall as we learn more about the technology, etc.]

These two figures from the Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook: once again demonstrating geothermal’s solid placement vis-a-vis the other low-carbon, climate-friendly options.

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

In September of this year, Glitnir, one of Iceland’s largest investment houses, released the most extensive state-by-state market analysis of the geothermal potential in the United States.  The chart from their analysis on Washington state is here.  (Note: this data is a rehash of the Geopowering the West analysis here).  Significant to this market analysis was their projections of an $11 Billion industry by 2025.  Glitnir’s announcement is here.Glitnir announced a geothermal sector approach specific to the United States.  From their announcement:

Glitnir projects an annual U.S. geothermal electricity market of $11 billion by 2025 from about $1.8 billion now, with geothermal potentially providing up to 20% of California’s electricity needs, 60% of Nevada’s and 30% of Hawaii’s.  The industry is expected to draw about $40 billion in financing over the next 18 years.

Coverage of their September announcement is here, here and here.Glitnir’s openness towards this market is reflective of the Icelandic approach, as was evidenced by the President of Iceland’s testimony here (link to his exact part of senate testimony). 

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

(click map to enlarge)This map outlines the geothermal potential of Washington state. The North American Geothermal Map was produced by the Southern Methodist University Geothermal Lab.  The databases are referred to as: the Western Geothermal Database and the U.S. Regional Database, SMU Geothermal Lab, Dallas, Texas.  Maria Richards, Database Manager, mrichard@smu.edu, 214-768-1975. See even more maps from SMU.  For a discussion on data.

Tags: Best of, Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
No Comments »

Geothermal power is a form of renewable energy using heat from deep inside the earth.  In geothermal power plants, steam, heat or hot water from geothermal sources provide the energy that spins the turbine generators and produces electricity. The used geothermal water is then returned down an injection well into the reservoir to be reheated, to maintain pressure, and to sustain the reservoir.There are many geothermal technologies. Hydrothermal is the most common today, and accounts for 90% of the electrical production from geothermal. Hot dry rock is another geothermal technology, as are enhanced geothermal systems.  These geothermal technologies offer enormous potential for electricity production nationwide. In this process, energy is extracted by circulating water through man-made fractures in the hot rock. Heat can then be extracted from the water at the surface for power generation, and the cooled water can be recycled through the fractures to pick up more heat, creating a closed-looped system.  The capital cost of geothermal development is expensive, and drilling accounts for two-thirds of those costs.  Yet, as we overcome some of these technology challenges and make the process more standardized, it is believed that geothermal can supply up to 20% of the United States electricity needs by 2050.  It’s important that innovation and investment in initial steps happen now.The current production of geothermal energy from all uses places it third among renewables, following hydroelectricity and biomass, and ahead of solar and wind. Despite these impressive statistics, the current level of geothermal use pales in comparison to its potential. The key to wider geothermal use is greater public awareness and technical support.Geothermal in Washington StateThe Geothermal Energy Association estimates the near-term power production potential of Washington at 50 MWe (megawatts electric), with a longer-term, higher-cost projection of 600 MWe for sites at Mount Baker and Wind River in the Cascades.In 2006, the net generation of electricity in Washington was 108 million megawatt hours annually. At 600 MW Washington could generate 5.2 million megawatt hours annually through geothermal – nearly 5% of the annual total. At 50 MW Washington could generate 438,000 megawatt hours annually.The typical geothermal power plant operates at full capacity about 95% of the time. This means that 300 MW of developed geothermal in Washington could produce about 2.5 million megawatt hours of electricity – enough to provide about 265,000 average homes with electricity.Geothermal - BenefitsClean. Geothermal power plants, like wind and solar power plants, do not have to burn fuels to manufacture steam to turn the turbines. Generating electricity with geothermal energy helps to conserve non-renewable fossil fuels, and thus reduces emissions that harm our atmosphere. There is no smoky air around geothermal power plants — in fact, some are built in the middle of farm crops and forests, and share land with cattle and local wildlife.For ten years, Lake County, California, home to five geothermal electric power plants, has been the first and only county to meet the most stringent governmental air quality standards in the U.S.Easy on the land. The land area required for geothermal power plants is smaller per megawatt than for almost every other type of power plant. Geothermal installations don’t require damming of rivers or harvesting of forests — and there are no mine shafts, tunnels, open pits, waste heaps or oil spills.Reliable. Geothermal power plants are designed to run 24 hours a day, all year. A geothermal power plant sits right on top of its fuel source. It is resistant to interruptions of power generation due to weather, natural disasters or political rifts that can interrupt transportation of fuels.Flexible. Geothermal power plants can have modular designs, with additional units installed in increments, when needed to fit growing demand for electricity.Keeps Dollars at Home. Money does not have to be exported to import fuel for geothermal power plants. Geothermal “fuel’” - like the sun and the wind - is always where the power plant is; economic benefits remain in the region and there are no fuel price shocks.Helps Developing Countries Grow. Geothermal projects can offer all of the above benefits to help developing countries grow without pollution. And installations in remote locations can raise the standard of living and quality of life by bringing electricity to people far from “electrified” population centers.For more details, view some of the websites on our links page (LINK TO THIS)

Tags: Uncategorized by Lawrence Molloy
Comments Off