• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Is Canada Freezing out Geothermal Power?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Why Is Canada Freezing out Geothermal Power?

    Why Is Canada Freezing out Geothermal Power?
    We're a world leader at creating it -- just about everywhere except in our own country.
    By Mitchell Anderson 19 Nov 2010 | TheTyee.ca

    Mitchell Anderson writes about energy and the environment for The Tyee and others.

    Geothermal has been called the 'holy grail' of renewable energy.

    Canadians are some world's best at advanced exploration and drilling technologies. Not surprisingly, members of the Canadian Geothermal Energy Association (CanGEA) also produce more than 20 per cent of the world's geothermal energy. They just don't do it here. The almost complete absence of government support means that all of this green energy infrastructure in being installed somewhere else. That's right -- the total geothermal energy capacity in Canada is zero.

    That is a shame, considering that geothermal energy is a clean, continuous base-load power whose source is the virtually unlimited heat from our planet's interior. Unlike other renewables such as wind or solar, geothermal plants can operate 24 hours a day, rain or shine.

    While the upfront costs for geothermal can be considerable, it is ultimately very cheap energy. According to CanGEA chair and founder Alison Thompson, "it has the lowest levelized cost of any power source in the world, even coal."

    Canada's advantage

    Thompson points out the ironic reason Canadians are so good at geothermal is because there has been so much focus here on fossil fuel extraction. "I come from the oil patch. We have developed enormous expertise in advanced exploration and drilling techniques. These are exactly the skills you need to develop geothermal resources."

    So if Canadians are among the best geothermal experts in the world, why aren't they doing business here? "Most of our membership are die-hard Canadian entrepreneurs, but they are forced to operate in other countries because there is so little support for the industry here. We are just so frustrated that it doesn't need to be like this."

    A good example is seen south of the border. U.S. federal and state governments aggressively support the industry through loan guarantees, grants, tax incentives and a streamlined permitting process. Countries like New Zealand and Iceland have invested vast resources developing their geothermal with big payoffs.

    And here in B.C.? "The provincial government processes copious amounts of permits for oil, gas and mining development, while they only gave out four permits for geothermal in 2010 and that was after intense influencing from CanGEA," said Thompson. "These were also the first permits issued since 2004."

    US invests millions in geothermal mapping

    Support for exploration is another big gap. The U.S. Geological Survey has invested millions in mapping identified geothermal targets that so far total 30,000 MW of potential generating capacity. This is more than all the coal-fired plants in Canada combined. In contrast the Canadian Geological Survey invests virtually nothing in this type of work. "We are very disappointed in the level of exploration support from the government thus far, but remain hopeful that they will soon see the value in assisting this emerging natural resource," said Thompson.

    Canadian tax law is another obstacle that in some cases favours fossil fuels over clean energy. For instance, companies doing oil or gas exploration are able to write-off dry holes whereas geothermal companies are not. Likewise companies installing steam boilers for bitumen extraction can recover these expenses from their taxes while geothermal companies installing boilers for clean energy generation are out of luck. "Geothermal energy was never contemplated when they wrote these rules," said Thompson. "We'd like an equal playing field."

    And what could Canada do with a major investment in our abundant and completely undeveloped geothermal resources? CanGEA estimates that for $20 billion, we could install 5,000 MW of clean perpetual power, while creating 30,000 person years of manufacturing and construction employment and 9,000 permanent jobs. This could be achieved by 2015 if we start now.

    Interestingly, 5,000 MW of geothermal power would be almost six times larger than the generating capacity of the Site C dam, could be built in half the time, and would be 45 per cent more cost effective per unit of energy.

    And while $20 billion sounds like a lot of money, it is less than two thirds what the Canadian taxpayer will provide over the next 10 years in natural gas write-offs for Alberta oil sands operators -- some of the wealthiest corporations in the world.

    The 'holy grail' of renewables?

    This is only scratching the surface. The figures from CanGEA only deal with near surface conventional geothermal. The emerging field of enhanced geothermal technology may access ancient heat from far greater depths and has the potential to transform energy use by tapping into virtually limitless power anywhere on the globe.

    An instructional video on enhanced geothermal energy.

    This technology requires some of the same skills used in the controversial practice of hydrofracking. But instead of fracturing underground shale deposits to release trapped natural gas, enhanced geothermal tries to fracture hot granite formations at much greater depths to create closed loop water circulation for electricity generation. Some consider this the holy grail of renewables due to the vast amount of clean continuous power that could be tapped, if it can be made to work.

    A recent study found that enhanced geothermal could potentially supply all of Canada's electrical generating capacity. A similar report from MIT predicted the U.S. could realistically meet close to 10 per cent of it generating requirements by 2050 using this technology, and this clean capacity would be cheaper than either nuclear or carbon capture at coal plants.

    Of course drilling holes more than five kilometers down to make enhanced geothermal a commercial reality is very challenging, requiring great skill and experience. There is a good chance that the first team to pull off this historic milestone will be Canadian. It's virtually a sure thing they will be doing it somewhere else.

    [Editor’s note: The geothermal energy generation source discussed in this article is not to be confused with ground source pumps tapped a few meters underground and used for heating and cooling, which The Tyee reported on here.] [Tyee]

    Read more: Energy, Environment

    #2
    If a geothermal energy project made sense, it would have been done already. It is just that the value of energy produced does not justify the capital cost which is a concept all lefties can't understand. I have a nice south facing slope on my farm. Why not solar? Just the value of the power is less than the investment in the infrastructure. If only the government would subsidize... Nothing happens in Canuckistan without government involvement anymore.

    Comment


      #3
      This is the type of answer I was hoping for in my last thread about the best renewable power. Did anyone in government or elsewhere study all the options and conclude that wind and PV were the best options, or did geothermal and a host of others get ignored because special interests stood to make a lot of money off of solar and wind, so they got the subsidies?

      I agree with the author, we have the technology, to develop geothermal, and I often wonder if there is a way to extend/reuse existing dry or tapped out oil wells for geothermal.

      And on a positive note, I noticed that our solar lights in yard with about 1" of snow on top of solar panels were still lit up by midnight last night. Somehow, on a cloudy day, when the sun is nearly at the horizon at noon, and through the film of snow, they charged.

      Comment


        #4
        Twenty or thirty years ago on a full scale oil well drilling rig set up on the University of Regina grounds.

        I believed they drilled one hole into the Blairmore formation; and don't know if it was cased or not. One would think that at least two well bores would be required to run any significant project for heat recovery which I believe was contemplated for the campus grounds.

        As far as I know; nothing further has been done. That may be because the temperature was not as high as expected; the formation was not as productive as required or the water quality characteristics were determined to not be suitable. One other possibility could even be that somewhere in the past somebody used that formation for the disposal of whatever waste materials they wanted to get rid of. Happens all the time.

        That formation; I believe is the same as the City of Moose Jaw spa and kinda obnoxious hot springs tourist attraction.

        Comment


          #5
          The main point to be taken is that its going to cost a whole lot more than cost of drilling one borehole (which is exactly what most people would expect (ie. "one hole and free heat forever".)0

          Comment


            #6
            i inquired into geothermal heat years ago and the guy i talked to said you can extract enough heat from 42 degree fahrenheit water to keep a house warm but the heat exchanger system was cost prohibitive and also the electricity to run the system would be quite high. The other thing with these systems is they break down I was told that the best way to heat was a central boiler and pipe hot water to house and shop. A bale burner or wood boiler is the way to go because it is so cheap but you have to be there to feed it

            Comment


              #7
              Geothermal is a ****ing joke. Spend at least $25000 or more on a heat exchanger and digging in underground pipes or drilling wells. Sure you'll get heat but will spend more in electricity pumping the water. Lots of said systems around here and they haven't proved up to be cost effective nor adequate when it gets really cold. Everyone has a backup system like electric or lng. Sure if you live close to some true thermal areas like in Iceland then by all means.

              Comment


                #8
                A guy here installed a geothermal project on a new acreage build....the results were exactly what wiltonranch described. Electric backup needed in cold spells and a big power bill for pumping water and supplemental heat.

                Would vertical orientation prove better than horizontal? Would you need more linear feet/meters of pipe for one orientation versus the other. This guy's is horizontal, I'm thinking it would be cheaper to install.

                Comment


                  #9
                  We live in the middle of a continent, far above any real potential thermal heat . It's a lost cause to be economical at all here.
                  Chuck mention Iceland using geo thermal , and yes it can work in a geological thermal area . But it's a pipe dream here - no pun intended.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    The verdict was in on geothermal a long time ago. Sure it works; but when you hit the greatest heating load; you're all set up for the poorest heat output (because you've cooled your heat sink down and created lower differentials between your input source and your heat pump constrained by the freezing point of water.

                    That heat pump runs on electricity; and while it gives some multiple of improvement to heat gain; you're still using significant energy circulating water, compressing refrigerant gases and indirectly heating with electricity

                    Since all other options to keeping warm involve expending energy and paying utility bills too; it boils down to picking best from what is available. Cutting and splitting wood isn't free; and time has a value as does being tied down to keep the fire going. Same with "flax straw" biomass etc. Natural gas has always been about the best choice (if its available within a very short distance in Sask at least). and the convenience is worth every dollar. In fact too expensive for most people. Electricity will be most expensive along with diesel fuel and even propane in long run. Geothermal isn't first choice over natural gas at our latitudes. There isn't enough difference in your cooing sink to the freezing point of water and even circulating antifreeze means your're contemplating freezing up the ground solid around every below ground pipe.

                    If you're in Florida; then sure heat pumps of any kind work fantastic. Even air to air.

                    Up North its the exact opposite. Air conditioning is practically free with a properly installed system. Horizontal buried with a backhoe; or drilled holes with vertical poly pipe stuffed down certaily work somewhat; but you don't need to find out their limitations by trying to reinvent something that will dissapoint like almost every other attempt by other people.

                    Sure with super insulation and expert installation and oversizing it will work much better in all conditions; but spending that money on some other available option would have worked just as well at much less cost.

                    Peace of mind is worth a lot too; and knowing (or even suspecting)problems are coming at first really cold snap; when its next to impossible to fix is asking for it. So having a backup system is probably essential; and also costly and a waste of resources in most cases where an alternative would have worked better .

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Compared notes with neighbor this fall on geothermal. Have similar sized house and external heating requirements in the form of waterbowls for livestock. His house is less than 5 years old, well insulated and heated with 2 loops of pipe 6' deep. My house is 60+ years old, poorly insulated and heated with outdoor wood boiler. He thought his system was the cats ass. Asked him what his power bill was in a year - 6k+. Dropped my jaw. I get a little upset if mine goes over 3k in a year. So if paying double for power doesn't phase you, by all means go geothermal. Of course he was also bitching that his bill was too high - told him you pay for convenience.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        FWIW if you are living in an older house or even a newer one you are money ahead to invest in economical improvements which will reduce energy consumption. LED lights, extra insulation, well sealed double pane windows at the very least ( triple pane windows don't pay for the extra cost yet), high efficiency furnaces, on demand hot water heaters etc. No one is going to rush out and replace a perfectly functioning lower efficiency furnace until it craters but windows is a good start and changing light bulbs. When I put my house up 6 years ago I had an extra wrap of reflective insulation put on. Cost an extra $2500 but for the lifetime of the house I think it more than pays for itself. I lived in an old doublewide before and it burned as much propane as my house with more than twice the square footage. Even a styrofoam concrete basement can be efficient but cost over a wood one I wonder if it pays.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          For the record, I think we are talking two different concepts here. See this note in the article:

                          [Editor’s note: The geothermal energy generation source discussed in this article is not to be confused with ground source pumps tapped a few meters underground and used for heating and cooling, which The Tyee reported on here.]


                          The geothermal referred to in the article requires holes many kilometers deep, and no outside electric power source.

                          I've run the numbers on heat pumps, and efficiencies, and it really doesn't work around here, once electricity costs are factored in. Now, maybe if there was a way to store the solar energy with the heat pumps, and tie the systems together, that might make both make sense.

                          Temperature gradient of earth at the surface is 25 C per kilometer. We are drilling oil wells to 10km occasionally. So the technology does exist, even in the center of a continent with no tectonic plate activity. And like Oneoff noted, two holes are required.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View Post
                            For the record, I think we are talking two different concepts here. See this note in the article:

                            [Editor’s note: The geothermal energy generation source discussed in this article is not to be confused with ground source pumps tapped a few meters underground and used for heating and cooling, which The Tyee reported on here.]


                            The geothermal referred to in the article requires holes many kilometers deep, and no outside electric power source.

                            I've run the numbers on heat pumps, and efficiencies, and it really doesn't work around here, once electricity costs are factored in. Now, maybe if there was a way to store the solar energy with the heat pumps, and tie the systems together, that might make both make sense.

                            Temperature gradient of earth at the surface is 25 C per kilometer. We are drilling oil wells to 10km occasionally. So the technology does exist, even in the center of a continent with no tectonic plate activity. And like Oneoff noted, two holes are required.
                            Yes we're talking apples to oranges here. There is more tectonic activity on parts of the prairies than we know. Ideally if you could send cold down and bring up near boiling you'd be laughing. Cost to drill and case 2 deep holes you're in the millionish range. I'm no oil guy but I'd surmise you need a big triple to go that deep. How much pump would it take to lift that far down?

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Has a new tolerance level just been set for GMO's, or herbicides; insecticides; even man made chemical fertilizer; and now any renewable energy resource product.

                              Must one just create their definition of a "green" or organic product and then all your warts and flaws instantly become socially and environmentally acceptable to "feel gooders"

                              This last post just become the all time classic definition of hypocrisy at its extreme.

                              Comment

                              • Reply to this Thread
                              • Return to Topic List
                              Working...