U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-11-2012, 06:07 PM
 
14,986 posts, read 8,161,160 times
Reputation: 6589
Default Environmentalists wage war against clean energy

Even though 3 different government organizations have given the thumbs-up, the environmentalists are still scared. They'd rather see the United States covered in ugly solar panels and wind farms.

Quote:
The most promising renewable energy of all is making pro-renewable Greens frightened and angry. It’s geothermal energy, which taps into the natural warmth below Earth's surface, providing an abundant heat source.


Geothermal exploitation used to be about finding and retrieving hot water – but new technology allows water to be sent into deep fissures several thousand feet down, where it meets hot dry rock, and comes out piping hot.


The problem? New geothermal techniques requires hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and environmental crusaders have convinced themselves that fracking is evil. Thanks to misleading propaganda such as the movie Gasland, campaigners fear contamination of the water table and apocalyptic earthquakes.


Using today’s technology, geothermal plants in North America would have a power capacity of three terawatts – three times the nation’s current electricity production capacity.

Greens wage war on clean low-carbon renewable energy ? The Register

http://www.eenews.net/assets/2012/07...ment_gw_02.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-11-2012, 06:41 PM
 
2,844 posts, read 1,858,094 times
Reputation: 3477
Of course, heritage Institute card-holding members will not be any near contaminated water wells and earthquake epicenters. What creation science idiot says that "geothermal energy" is renewable? It's not. There is fixed amount of heat trapped by Earth crust. The question about Nuclear reaction at the Earth core is open. Large scale geothermal projects would play with things we don't quite understand. Never mind the fact that large scale removal of heat would disturb crust stress equilibrium and that might result in Earthquakes. Injecting water to be superheated is the same as playing Russian roulette with Earthquakes etc. not speaking of possible water pollution.

it's time for mankind to pull its head out of the delusional rear and to admit that there are NO renewable energy sources that 7 billion strong population of hairless monkeys can tap into. NONE. Earth energy fluxes are in equilibrium (that includes solar and wind), and 7 billions strong energy hungry vampires cannot redirect powerful energy streams onto themselves without disturbing that fragile equilibrium with impossible to predict results. There is no silver energy bullet. The only (and I'm not kidding) technological "solution", it is a "warp" drive to spread the plague elsewhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2012, 10:33 PM
 
21,338 posts, read 14,671,278 times
Reputation: 6785
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Of course, heritage Institute card-holding members will not be any near contaminated water wells and earthquake epicenters. What creation science idiot says that "geothermal energy" is renewable? It's not.
Strictly speaking that may be true but in the real world...... LOL



Quote:
http://web.mit.edu/mitei/research/st...nergy-full.pdf

The depletion aspect requires additional exploration and detail. Geothermal is often classified as a
renewable resource, but the time scale for its renewablilty is certainly longer than for solar, wind, or
biomass energy, which have daily and annual cycles. For instance, a fractured EGS reservoir is cooled
significantly during heat-mining operations over its normal project life of about 20 to 30 years, as a
result of heat-mining operations. If the reservoir was abandoned at that point, the rock would recover
to its initial temperature in 100 years or less (Armstead and Tester, 1987; and Elsworth, 1989 and
1990). With the time for full recovery of a former active reservoir approaching a century, one might
not categorize geothermal heat mining as a sustainable energy resource. However, as long as the
fraction of stored heat that is being mined in any year is a small fraction (<10%) of the total assessable
resource base, geothermal can be treated as fully renewable and, therefore, a sustainable resource.
Given that the U.S. geothermal resource base is about 14 million EJ, we would always be utilizing
much less than 10% annually of the total thermal energy, even if all of our primary energy came from
geothermal resources.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2012, 04:24 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
21,320 posts, read 26,134,564 times
Reputation: 8429
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
... New geothermal techniques requires hydraulic fracturing, or fracking,
'Clean energy'? maybe and maybe not.

But fracking is a huge ugly problem in many parts of the USA.

http://8020vision.com/wp-content/upl...acking_map.png

Toxic Chemicals Used In Fracking
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2012, 06:08 PM
 
14,986 posts, read 8,161,160 times
Reputation: 6589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
'Clean energy'? maybe and maybe not.

But fracking is a huge ugly problem in many parts of the USA.

http://8020vision.com/wp-content/upl...acking_map.png

Toxic Chemicals Used In Fracking
If you had bothered to read both articles I posted you would have seen this type of fracking does not use the same chemicals as is used with oil.

As the article says: (pay attention to the bold print)

Quote:
This is because the most successful political movement of the past few decades, environmentalism, has relied so heavily on apocalypse: on the suspension of rational risk assessments, and the stimulation of wild, runaway fantasies. The equivalent of running into a room screaming: "We're all going to die! So do as I say." As a political technique it has been very effective, but it leaves proponents in something of a cul de sac.

Last edited by plwhit; 08-12-2012 at 06:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2012, 06:14 PM
 
14,986 posts, read 8,161,160 times
Reputation: 6589
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Of course, heritage Institute card-holding members will not be any near contaminated water wells and earthquake epicenters. What creation science idiot says that "geothermal energy" is renewable? It's not. There is fixed amount of heat trapped by Earth crust. The question about Nuclear reaction at the Earth core is open. Large scale geothermal projects would play with things we don't quite understand. Never mind the fact that large scale removal of heat would disturb crust stress equilibrium and that might result in Earthquakes. Injecting water to be superheated is the same as playing Russian roulette with Earthquakes etc. not speaking of possible water pollution.
Agree, in a few tens of millions years the core will start cooling down and mankind will be out of luck....

-------------------------------------------------------------------
As a radioactive isotope decays, particles are ejected from its nucleus for the purpose of stabilizing the atom. Radioactive decay processes produce electromagnetic radiation (gamma rays, for example) which transmit energy from the nucleus to the environment. Additionally, the ejected particles have kinetic energy that ultimately converts to thermal energy as the particles are mechanically resisted by their environment. The crust, mantle, and core of Earth contain varying amounts of radioactive elements, the most important for heat production being Uranium-238, Uranium-235, Thorium-232, and Potassium-40, with half-lives of roughly 4.47 billion years, 704 million years, 14.1 billion years, and 1.28 billion years, respectively. From the half-lives of these isotopes and a comparison with the age of Earth, you can see that internal heat production via radioactive decay will likely persist at near current levels for quite some time to come.

Scott J. Badham
Department of Geology and Geophysics
University of Wyoming
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the same mentality as better not fly, the plane might fall out of the sky -or- better not drive you might get in an accident and pollute the environment with leaking gas or oil....

Quote:
it's time for mankind to pull its head out of the delusional rear and to admit that there are NO renewable energy sources that 7 billion strong population of hairless monkeys can tap into. NONE. Earth energy fluxes are in equilibrium (that includes solar and wind), and 7 billions strong energy hungry vampires cannot redirect powerful energy streams onto themselves without disturbing that fragile equilibrium with impossible to predict results. There is no silver energy bullet. The only (and I'm not kidding) technological "solution", it is a "warp" drive to spread the plague elsewhere.
It's hilarious that people make statements like "with things we don't quite understand" when it comes to fracking but are absolutely positively sure about things like global warming.....

Quote:
Earth energy fluxes are in equilibrium (that includes solar and wind)
And just where are the FACTS that show these "fluxes" are in equilibrium? Who determined this equilibrium?

Accredited sources please....

Last edited by plwhit; 08-12-2012 at 07:43 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 06:12 AM
 
Location: DC
2,578 posts, read 1,904,914 times
Reputation: 1082
Legacy geothermal generation units are not clean. Newer organic Rankin systems have fewer environmental problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
21,320 posts, read 26,134,564 times
Reputation: 8429
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
If you had bothered to read both articles I posted you would have seen this type of fracking does not use the same chemicals as is used with oil.
So you are arguing that there is 'good' fracking as well as bad fracking?

btw, I said nothing of chemicals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 10:27 AM
 
Location: ๏̯͡๏﴿ Gwinnett-That's a Civil Matter-County
2,117 posts, read 2,120,652 times
Reputation: 3385
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think wind turbines are magnificent structures and a symbol of strength, independence and hope. A couple years ago I was driving through Northern Indiana and I saw where there were thousands of turbines being installed in farm fields along the interestate. I broke out into tears. Literally.... tears of joy. I stopped and took pictures and video. Then on the way back I was driving through at night and all the little red beacons were lighting up the sky. I recorded it on video and watch it whenever I feel hopeless for our country.

I later came to find out that parts of those very wind turbines are manufactured locally here in GA and providing jobs in my area.

And solar panels are also a thing of beauty. I would much rather see these things than more questionable mining and drilling operations
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2012, 11:47 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
32,923 posts, read 26,410,850 times
Reputation: 14900
A huge amount of "Geothermal" energy can be recovered on a very small, household to small industry, scale by using "ground source heat pumps". These systems use the thermal mass of the ground to store or release heat depending on the season. In most cases more than three times the heat energy is transferred than the electrical energy used to power the unit.

I was interviewed for a position investigating geothermal energy complete with "fracking" the Hot Dry Rock heat source back in the '80's. Ronnie Raygun changes the Federal policies and my prospective job disappeared. Although there are relatively few places in the country where the geothermal reservoir is hot enough to generate electricity there are a lot more that could supply district heating. Given their proximity to some very hot magma I have wondered why, aside from political reasons, Hawaii has to burn oil to generate electricity.

In my opinion many of the “environmental” groups are shills for the existing energy suppliers and exist not to protect the environment but to protect existing business interests. They are mostly the deluded being led by the cynical or corrupt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top