8 ms·
Quaise Energy – Unlocking the true power of clean geothermal energy
- ilaksh 4y agohttps://patents.google.com/patent/US8393410 https://patents.google.com/patent/US8393410
- smoyer 4y agoAt what point do we need to worry about heart from the earth's core into the atmosphere at a faster than normal rate?
- marsven_422 4y ago
- macmac 4y agoHere in Denmark we have two large scale projects being built and several others in development. The projection is that 30% of district heating of can be provided by geothermals. https://innargi.com/en/project/ https://innargi.com/en/project/
- d--b 4y agoCan anyone with experience comment on how realistic that is? Both in term of drilling, and in terms of how much power we could extract per drill.
- jillesvangurp 4y agoDrilling the hole is the hard part and something this company is claiming they have a new solution for. It will be interesting to see if they manage to drill holes. Once you have that, the rest is easy. But drilling deep is hard. When I say hard, think expensive. The problem with geothermal so far has been not that it is impossible but that it is expensive to drill holes. Also pumping water in and out holes requires pumps and pipes and machinery that needs maintaining. So, there's a cost associated with that as well. And of course the amount of energy you can get out is proportional to the diameter of the hole. To scale you need to drill more holes. Which is expensive. That's why geothermal is mainly used in places where you don't have to drill very deep. So, technically feasible, maybe. But the real question is whether it will be economically feasible.
- mcculley 4y agoI don’t know how to reason on the magnitudes and indirect effects here. If we are using the temperature differential, don’t we have to vent that into the atmosphere? Does that heat eventually go into the atmosphere anyway?
- GlenTheMachine 4y agoAny use of energy eventually results in heat; that’s just the Second Law of Thermodynamics in operation. But this effect is orders of magnitude smaller than the greenhouse effect.
- mcculley 4y agoI am aware of the 2nd law. I am looking for data on the magnitudes involved. Every time there is a promise of very cheap energy, I wonder how we will deal with the waste heat.
- throwawayboise 4y agoThe waste heat will be radiated away to space. The premise of global warming is that CO2 (and other "greenhouse" gasses such as methane) cause more of the heat to be retained in the atmosphere.
- mcculley 4y agoYes, I am aware of the 2nd law and the greenhouse effect. I was asking about the magnitudes. It is okay if nobody has any idea about them.
- seiferteric 4y agoThe magnitude is the same as current power sources that they would be replacing i.e. 100's of MWs to 1-10s of GWs. The amount of heat being brought up would have to be about the same as you would otherwise be getting from coal, gas etc and so the same amount of heat would be vent to the environment.
- asimpletune 4y agoStupid question but is it possible to cool the earth’s core if this tech was scaled out and used massively?
- trophycase 4y agoThe short answer is no, the long answer is no, but the really long answer is that everybody pretends that it's 100% safe but I guarantee nobody predicted global warming occurring when fossil fuels first started being used. There will be secondary effects, we just don't know what they are yet
- makerdiety 4y agoNo one can predict anything when they don't have access to the larger model. Assuming the real world corresponds to big models rather than the small models and understanding people usually have.
- worik 4y agoGlobal warming was proposed in the early 19th century. A wee bit after fossil fuels started to be used, but still a long time ago. The present trumps the future. The past kicks us in the arse
- vmception 4y agoPeople predicted global warming occurring when fossil fuels started being used. A very simple reality left in the footnotes of newspapers at the time, and then tabled to giant research papers and committees as this was the only consensus that was able to be reached by fossil fuel addicted committees. "lets plan to form a commission in a few years, to do a study in a few years and look at the results in a few years for re-evaluation".
- ncmncm 4y ago"Secondary effects" is meaningless put up against well-known global catastrophe. Everything has secondary effects. New shoes means your old shoes go unused. Eating now makes you crap later. What matters is the magnitude of the effect: how much difference does it make? There will be no secondary effect of geothermal energy extraction even noticeable compared to the present unfolding global climate catastrophe. The latter is what deserves attention. Anything else is a petty distraction. Raising petty distractions from it is a fundamentally evil activity.
- huqedato 4y agoSound too good to be true. 2024: First full-scale hybrid drilling rig -> 2026: First Super Hot Enhanced Geothermal System rated to 100 MW... -> 2028: First powerplant. This false prophet reminds me of Theranos/Elizabeth Holmes. Always skeptical when hearing about such unicorns hunting for idiots' money.
- BenjiWiebe 4y agoWell we don't even have to wait very long to see if that prediction is accurate.
- thekoma 4y agoSounds promising. How realistic is the depth target of 20km really? Also, I would assume this infrastructure will be less applicable in locations with frequent earthquakes.
- ahyattdev 4y agoConsidering that the current deepest borehole in the world is 12km [1], 20km is a lofty goal. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Superdeep_Borehole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Superdeep_Borehole
- yonixw 4y ago> The deepest reached 12,262 meters (40,230 ft) in 1989 Hopefully those 30 years of technology will be of service
- ajross 4y agoMy response here is the same as what I say to proponents of new nuclear technologies: it's gotta work on a balance sheet, not just in a pitch deck. This isn't a new technology enabling new markets and new kinds of growth here, it's just... electricity. And even as a renewable option, it needs to be able to compete not just with fossil fuel generators with-all-the-externalities-factored-in, but with dams and windmills built with century-mature technology. That's just a tall order. Should this be a legitimate research topic? Absolutely. Would I put my money down as an investor on this being a win? No. Should we be throwing public money at this? Hell no, we should be building more turbines with that money. Start on the weird stuff only once we've picked the low hanging fruit.
- XorNot 4y agoGeothermal power is a non-nuclear baseload source of energy though. Unlike all others, it just sits there and makes electricity/heat without other inputs: we should absolutely be throwing public money at it, we should've been doing this all along. Geothermal that you can sink pretty much anywhere would be a gamechanger - it doesn't create local pollution, and it does produce waste heat: built in or neat town areas, you can make electricity and completely clean town heating that works all year round.
- foepys 4y agoWhen the Swiss tried to build a geothermal power plant, they had quite a few earthquakes which lead to the discontinuation of the whole project: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_seismicity_in_Basel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_seismicity_in_Basel Boring this deep does have significant risks, especially when we are pumping fluids in and out.
- stormbrew 4y ago> it's gotta work on a balance sheet, not just in a pitch deck. It shouldn't have to work on either of those things, because neither of those things take any account of externalities. This attitude that no energy project is worth doing if it's not profitable is how we're going to kill our entire civilization in a few decades. We need to be thinking longer term than "is it cheaper than coal right now?" when the cost of co2 emitting energy sources is literal death and destruction down the line.
- phs318u 4y agoAssuming the millimeter wave drilling technology does in fact hold up (I imagine it draws a LOT of power), the re-use of existing infrastructure (drill a hole at every power station site that boils water to drive a turbine, with existing transmission in place), is brilliant because that's a huge, huge cost avoided - and indeed could be stood up in far less time (barring government approvals) than most mega-scale alternatives. Full steam ahead! EDIT: tbh I did also think that this concept sounds like the opening plot for a b-grade disaster movie - "The Day The Earth Cracked Open".
- pfdietz 4y agoA concern I have with the mm-wave scheme is material agglomerating onto the drilling shaft, causing clogs or even causing it to get stuck.
- markbnj 4y agoYou'll be happy to know that movie has been made :). I watched it as a young kid and found it pretty scary. Years later I saw it again and it was of course laughably bad. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059065/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059065/
- phs318u 4y agoOh my! I think I saw that as a kid! Haha. Thank you.
- arnihermann 4y agoThere has been some effort on going to really deep depths in IDDP (Icelandic Deep Drilling Project) - see https://iddp.is/about/ https://iddp.is/about/ If I remember correctly, they were never able to hit their goals because of drilling down into magma chambers. The steam coming up was also of a different scale than regular geothermal steam, causing corrosion that has not been dealt with before. As far as I know, the main problem is coming up with casing materials that can withstand the extreme corrosive environment at scale and at cost, and for IDDP that's one of the main focuses.
- 14 4y agoFrom what I saw on an earlier post about this technology is that the mm wave drilling technique actually causes the bedrock walls of the bore hole to turn to a type of glass and then no casing is needed. I will try and find the source on that.
- robbedpeter 4y agoVitrification of the rock is what it's labeled in the pictures and some of the notes I've seen.
- 14 4y agoMMW systems can potentially‘case-while-drilling’using rock melt or can post-drill install rock melt liners for significant well cost savings over steel casing and cement. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/02/f7/mmw_drilling_peer2013.pdf https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/02/f7/mmw_drill...
- ncmncm 4y agoYeah, so drilling into magma chambers might not be the best approach. Iceland sits on a big magma chamber, so they would need to proceed differently. Still, they have a lot of practical experience with utility-scale geothermal energy extraction the rest of us ought to learn from.
- karmajunkie 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- worik 4y agoWhat an inadequate website for such bold claims. Here in New Zealand we found that geothermal is not "non polluting". There are a lot of unforeseen consequences with bringing deep water to the surface. Still much better than nuclear that makes our children pay for current consumption or coal that means we are paying for our ancestors consumption....
- worik 4y agoA wee bit of search foo.... https://nypost.com/2022/03/10/inside-the-mind-blowing-plan-to-dig-earths-deepest-hole-and-unleash-limitless-energy/ https://nypost.com/2022/03/10/inside-the-mind-blowing-plan-t... https://news.mit.edu/2016/paul-woskov-explores-new-path-through-earth-crust-0412 https://news.mit.edu/2016/paul-woskov-explores-new-path-thro...
- robbedpeter 4y agoIterating over past failures is how progress happens. There will be negative consequences from anything, but the reason for geothermal is that it doesn't have the negative consequences fossil fuels do, and it's cleaner than wind or solar. Also, I'll take localized pollution over global disruption any day.
- worik 4y agoHow is geothermal cleaner than wind or solar? In Taupo, if my memory serves, the geothermal fluid was found to have high concentrations of arsenic (?) that was seriously polluting rivers. The subsidence of surrounding land was a problem too They developed ways of re-injecting the fluid into the well which they hoped would fix both problems, and time will tell.
- loufe 4y agoFor anybody curious, they seem not to be the only player in this space. http://altarockenergy.com/ http://altarockenergy.com/ also seems to be partnered with MIT on this.
- uranium 4y agoThey also appear to be working with Quaise. Scroll down to "projects" and click on the mmWave picture. 'AltaRock Energy,” in partnership with Quaise Energy, is developing millimeter wave (mmWave) technology...'
- Blammar 4y agoIs the reason they have to drill down 20 km to 500C rather than say 7 km to 175C (presumably a far simpler task) is the equilibrium heat flow? That is, the water/steam cycle is extracting heat from the surrounding rock. That can only be extracted at a rate that matches the heat inflow, or ideally, ever so slightly less, so as to maintain equilibrium over decades over cubic miles of rock. Yes, I understand that larger temperature differences increase thermodynamic efficiency. But if the energy produced is constant, efficiency may not matter as much as ease of construction etc.
- go_elmo 4y agoInteresting point, what would explain it is non linearity. If you get 20% efficiency at 5 but 35% at 7km depth it might still be worth it. Would still have to outperform exponential drill cost with depth
- totalview 4y agoI hate to play the Cassandra again, but the deepest hole ever drilled by anyone was 7Km (edit: 12Km), a far cry from drilling 20Km holes everywhere on the earth. I’ve worked in oil and gas for over 10 years, including on the largest rotary drilling rig in North America, and it is insane what kind of machinery it takes to get 6,000 feet down and push a tool 15,000 feet out. Just as insane is convincing anyone that your drilling activities aren’t causing earthquakes, screwing up water tables, or leaking gas and other chemicals out of the ground. I still hope it works lol!
- D_Alex 4y ago>the deepest hole ever drilled by anyone was 7Km 12.2 km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Superdeep_Borehole https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Superdeep_Borehole
- tgsovlerkhgsel 4y agoAnd that was over three decades ago, you'd kind of expect technology to advance a bit in that time.
- idiotsecant 4y agoThe whole point is that microwave ablation of these materials does not require drilling mud and is self-stabilizing by the pressures and molten material generated, while also sealing the bore hole and preventing quite a lot of water table, H2S, etc contamination. In theory it should allow substantially deeper boreholes. The technology is real, and the required power density is surprisingly low. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286571247_Penetrating_rock_with_intense_millimeter-waves https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286571247_Penetrati...
- FounderBurr 4y agoVaporized into what? Something that you’ll have to keep heated to 5000c for 20km until you can vent it?
- scotty79 4y agoIt looks like one of those projects that are built to get billionaires to invest with the use of computer graphics. I hope it's more than that.
- beebeepka 4y agoMaybe it's my ignorance but I've always been a little terrified by this technology. I truly expect a major disaster within months, maybe a few years, after someone drills too deep at the wrong place. Plus, isn't it a bit shortsighted to suck up the planet's heat? Eventually something is gonna give. But that could be centuries from now so who cares, huh?
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago> Geothermal has the power density and scalability of fossil fuels This has the same vibe as hydrogen cars. Don't buy battery EVs, wait a decade and buy hydrogen cars that will be just as good as ICE! Or, I can just buy an EV today that's already better than ICE.
- davedx 4y agoWe never know which tech will be commercially successful until we try
- ZeroGravitas 4y agoThat's fine, just announce it as "we have X, Y and Z solutions to the problems caused by fossil fuels and are investigating A to see if it's even better". Don't take the Bill Gates route of talking down existing, proven solutions to talk up your speculative investment in some unproven tech or the fossil fuel approach of funding weird future research aa an excuse to spend lots of time talking about how amazing fossil fuels are.