2 ms·
That 14 TW is just what leaks out naturally. But earth is an excellent insulator. Drilling down deep, all the energy extracted would be in addition to the 14 TW
by ncmncm 4y ago
That 14 TW is just what leaks out naturally. But earth is an excellent insulator. Drilling down deep, all the energy extracted would be in addition to the 14 TW, and really as many TW as you could ever use.
The main problem with geothermal is that it is quite a bit more expensive than solar and wind, with an "opex" renewables don't have: regular overhauls of the steam turbines. So, a bet on geothermal would be a bet that storage built after there is enough renewable generation to charge it from will not also be cheap. Not a good bet: storage is, for the most part, just E = mgh and E = Fx, requiring only mid-20th-century engineering. (That is not to say more exotic methods won't also be used. Synthetic ammonia, good for fuel and fertilizer, is also a good storage medium. And, better battery chemistries surface all the time, with megafactories for certain of them already under construction.)
Just now, most storage schemes you read about have not had the professional engineering treatment, so are over-complex and expensive. When actually built out, much cheaper, simpler, and more reliable versions of those things will be used. (But Energy Vault's will not be. I predict they will pivot to something orbital soon, to string the saps along.)
Drilling for geothermal might get a lot cheaper, using the tech described in the article, but you still have the steam turbines. That new gadget that turns heat radiation directly into electricity with no turbine might eliminate that expense and make geothermal competitive, but it also might turn out too expensive to use.