5 ms·

I wonder why not investment goes into tapping the geotermal potential. Is like having a free reactor ( since both work on transferring heat to water -> steam )

• dmurray 8y ago
  Most geothermal installations are near tectonic plate boundaries and require drilling only a few hundred metres or less. Being able to go down further would open up the possibility of using geothermal power in other regions, but it's very expensive.
• sametmax 8y ago
  Educated guess: it's very hard. A pipe that long would be subject to break down every time the earth moves a bit. Fixing said leak would requires stopping the use of the pipe completely. As 300 C is not that a huge temperature, the energy to pump the water may also cost a lot compare to the energy you get out of it. I'm not saying we should not try, but it seems a great challenge. And we don't have the motivation of creating an atomic bomb to drive it.
  • lb1lf 8y ago
    With only a very tenous grasp on the basics of fluid mechanics and thermodynamics, I'd suspect it is simply a lot more cost effective to drive a significantly larger volume of water through a significantly shallower (hence, lower temperature - but cheaper to drill, maintain and force water through) well to reap the same amount of energy. Assuming reasonable heat exchange efficiencies, you'd do as well with 1000m^3/hour at a 20 degree differential as you would with 100m^3/hour at a 200 degree differential. Or am I missing something?
    • sametmax 8y ago
      Yes, but if you can turn the water into steam you don't have to pump it back as much. So you leverage gravity in, density out. I have no idea if that evens out though.
• oh5nxo 8y ago
  City of Espoo is testing, 6+ km hole for energy, google for "Otaniemi drill hole" for more information.