Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Isit a viable
option in an oil-
induced energy
crisis?
Overview of Policy to Off-set Loss In Oil
Imports
A Two-Stage Approach:
Short Term (Several Years to a Decade) -
Expand Use of Known Geothermal Resources
Using Currently Available Technologies
Long-Term (Several Decades?) – Develop,
Improve & Implement Technologies to Tap into
Deep Geothermal Resources
Supplement These Efforts By Providing Gov’t
Subsidy, Clean Air Credits and Tightening
Pollution Regulations
Overview of Policy Cont’d
Short Term Highlights & Achievable Goals:
Replace Current Oil Uses for Spacing
Conditioning
Provide Gov’t Subsidy to Minimize Capital
Expenditure
– Justifiable Given the Environmental Benefits
Develop Last of Known Shallow Geothermal
Sources Capable of Electricity Generation
– Expansion of Electricity Generation up to 19 GW
Overall, Offset Lost Energy 2-10% of Current
Oil Imports
Overview of Policy
Long-Term Highlights & Achievable Goals:
Develop, Improve & Implement Technologies
to Tap into Deep Geothermal Resources –
Magma and Near Core Fluids
Capable of Replacing All Electricity Needs in
U.S. and All Energy for Space Conditioning
Summary of Conclusion
ShortTerm:
Not a Viable Option to Replace 25%
Loss in Oil Imports. Perhaps 2-10%
Could Be Replaced in a Few Years to a
Decade.
Long Term (Likely Decades):
Capable of Replacing All Electricity
Needs, Including All HVAC Applications
What is Geothermal Energy?
Emission of Low
Quantities of
Greenhouse
Gasses
Homegrown
Decreases
Dependency On
Foreign Energy
Benefits of Geothermal Power
Reliability1:
Plants Have Very
Little Down Time -
Avg. Availability is
90% or greater
60-70% for Coal and
Nuclear Plants
Benefits of Geothermal Power Cont’d
Another Aspect of
Resource Reliability
“Old Faithful” in
Yellowstone National Park
Plants Have Been In Use
in Italy Since 1913, New
Zealand Since 1958 and
in CA Since 1960
Benefits of Geothermal Power
Pros:
Clean Resource – Very Little Emissions or
Overall Environmental Impact
Domestic Resource – Not Susceptible to
Geopolitical Conflict
Economically Sound Alternative – The Fuel Is
Free, Rate / KWh Likely to Be Competitive
Pros / Cons of Such a Policy
Cons:
Capital Cost - Significant Initial Investment will be
required by Consumers and Industry
Duration - May Take Decades to Replace
Significant Quantity of the Lost Energy
Uncertainty - Replacing More Than a Few Percent
of the Lost Energy Relies on Technological
Advances, Both in Production and Usage
Mitigation of Policy Negatives:
Additional Policy Considerations and Justifications:
Gov’t Subsidies to Off-set Capital Costs
– Justifiable because of significant potential for
environmental savings
Provide Increased Clean Air Credits and
Reduced Rates for Users of Geothermal Energy
– At the Same Time, Increase Rates for Heating Oil
and Other Fossil Fuel Users
Conclusion
Short Term (Several Years to a Decade):
Not a Viable Option to Replace 25% Loss in Oil
Imports. At Best, a Valuable Supplement to
Replace a Few % of the Lost Energy.
Some Valuable Side Effects:
Production of Clean Energy
–These Policies Are in Concurrence With
Goals of Most Pollution-related Statutes
Less Reliance on Foreign Sources of Energy
Reliable and Renewal Energy Source
Conclusion
Long Term (Likely Decades for Technology
to Provide an Economically Feasible Option):
Biggest Impact in Electrical Generation
Sectors – the Potential Exists to Provide All
Energy Requirements in the U.S.
Energy Consumption for Space Heating and
Cooling Could Also Change Dramatically