World's biggest wind farm given go-ahead off Britain

[Old Rocks]

UW Researchers’ Lithium Discovery Could Boost CO2 Storage Prospects | News | University of Wyoming

April 24, 2013 — Researchers at the University of Wyoming Carbon Management Institute (CMI) discovered a vast new lithium resource near Rock Springs during a geological carbon dioxide storage site characterization project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Lithium, a key component of batteries and electronic devices, has become highly sought after as nations -- including the U.S. -- transition to greener technologies. Wind, solar and smart grid technologies all employ lithium-ion batteries to store excess energy for later use.

Presently, the U.S. imports more than 80 percent of the lithium used domestically. In addition to making CO2 storage cheaper, the potential new lithium resource discovered by CMI could have a major impact on the global market, transforming the U.S. from a significant lithium importer to an independent lithium producer.

“We’re excited about this discovery and the prospect of creating a completely new industry in Wyoming,” says Shanna Dahl, CMI deputy director. “More work must be done to fully assess the potential, but our research is very encouraging at this point.”

Preliminary analyses of fluid samples collected from a well drilled on the Rock Springs Uplift -- a geological feature in southwest Wyoming -- suggest that reservoir brines from a 25-square-mile area of the uplift could contain 228,000 tons of lithium: enough to meet annual U.S. demand.

To help put this number in perspective, the lithium reserves at Silver Peak, Nev. -- the largest domestic producer of lithium -- total 118,000 tons in a 20-square-mile area. In a best-case scenario, the 2,000-square-mile Rock Springs Uplift could harbor up to 18 million tons of lithium, equivalent to about 720 years of current global lithium production.

Coupled with electrical generation from the very hot brines, this could be economically feasable.

 

[elektra]

Lucky? You know nothing of Geothermal power.
Google

As long as the systems are as closed looped as possible, effluent from the system can be minimized. That being said, as any "sustainable" source touted by the "something from nothing" crowd, geothermal has downsides, but for Iceland, it is a good fit as it reduces the imports of coal and oil it needs for power production.

I work in Geothermal plants, closed loop systems are opened for maintenance, most use fracking to inject the brine back into the wells.

In Iceland, my link which I will use for another thread, specifically states the power or steam pressure in Iceland is about half of what it was, so that geothermal source is no longer as it was.

Every Geothermal is unique in its chemistry and problems. Being thee most expensive form of Energy it was never a good idea. It is expensive because that steam is not like steam from a teapot, it is and can be very corrosive, destroying pipes. Further geothermal is and can be very volatile, think volcano, mini eruptions, shaking pipes, tremendously, stress corrosion cracking, high cycle fatigue. intergranular attack scc. So geothermal goes through a lot of pipes and components.

So for Iceland, it sucks, you know it has also lowered the water table which may result in contamination spreading to the fresh water wells. Anyhow, like I said, another thread, GEOTHERMAL TOXIC RADIOACTIVE ELEMENTS DANGER TO THE PUBLIC sounds like a nice start.

Aren't most of the plants going to a split system, where a 2nd material is used for the actual power generation, which limits the corrosive loop's size?

Any power generation has downsides, and geothermal is no exception. But unless Iceland wants to nuclear geothermal is still cost effective for them based on the shipping which would be required for them to go full fossil.

That being said Iceland is a wind power playground, but they still need other things for base-load.

Iceland, yes geothermal uses a secondary loop, all thermal plants do. Typically it is called a heat exchanger. That component is does suffer damage but I don't think it is bad, my company has inspected the heat exchangers at Calipatria at the Salton Sea. There the biggest problem is te pipes from the wells, as well as the wells. I could look into the details of Iceland, but from what I have read they suffer the same problems. Once you drill a well, and begin to use the brine or steam, it begins to lose energy. So they constantly must drill new wells, run new pipes, sometimes or most times over a mile of new pipe for each new well. At the Salton Sea, they drill new wells everyday, all year long.

Geothermal is simply extremely expensive, they would be much further ahead going nuclear.

I have a Master's in Chem E, so i have been around a few heat exchangers. I can also imagine the fouling issue on the "hot" side of the exchanger.

Don't some sites inject the waste water back into the stratum to replenish the water supply in the originally drilled heat source?

You are 100% correct, as far as I know all Geothermal sites inject (frack) to replenish the source. At the Salton Sea they must, to dispose of the Toxic Brine, after the steam is flashed off the Brine is even more concentrated with a bunch of toxins, like arsenic and cobalt 60. I know the PH is very important to prevent the solids from precipitating out, which they do anyway. Salton Sea geothermal is a nasty process.

 

[martybegan]

As long as the systems are as closed looped as possible, effluent from the system can be minimized. That being said, as any "sustainable" source touted by the "something from nothing" crowd, geothermal has downsides, but for Iceland, it is a good fit as it reduces the imports of coal and oil it needs for power production.

I work in Geothermal plants, closed loop systems are opened for maintenance, most use fracking to inject the brine back into the wells.

In Iceland, my link which I will use for another thread, specifically states the power or steam pressure in Iceland is about half of what it was, so that geothermal source is no longer as it was.

Every Geothermal is unique in its chemistry and problems. Being thee most expensive form of Energy it was never a good idea. It is expensive because that steam is not like steam from a teapot, it is and can be very corrosive, destroying pipes. Further geothermal is and can be very volatile, think volcano, mini eruptions, shaking pipes, tremendously, stress corrosion cracking, high cycle fatigue. intergranular attack scc. So geothermal goes through a lot of pipes and components.

So for Iceland, it sucks, you know it has also lowered the water table which may result in contamination spreading to the fresh water wells. Anyhow, like I said, another thread, GEOTHERMAL TOXIC RADIOACTIVE ELEMENTS DANGER TO THE PUBLIC sounds like a nice start.

Aren't most of the plants going to a split system, where a 2nd material is used for the actual power generation, which limits the corrosive loop's size?

Any power generation has downsides, and geothermal is no exception. But unless Iceland wants to nuclear geothermal is still cost effective for them based on the shipping which would be required for them to go full fossil.

That being said Iceland is a wind power playground, but they still need other things for base-load.

Iceland, yes geothermal uses a secondary loop, all thermal plants do. Typically it is called a heat exchanger. That component is does suffer damage but I don't think it is bad, my company has inspected the heat exchangers at Calipatria at the Salton Sea. There the biggest problem is te pipes from the wells, as well as the wells. I could look into the details of Iceland, but from what I have read they suffer the same problems. Once you drill a well, and begin to use the brine or steam, it begins to lose energy. So they constantly must drill new wells, run new pipes, sometimes or most times over a mile of new pipe for each new well. At the Salton Sea, they drill new wells everyday, all year long.

Geothermal is simply extremely expensive, they would be much further ahead going nuclear.

I have a Master's in Chem E, so i have been around a few heat exchangers. I can also imagine the fouling issue on the "hot" side of the exchanger.

Don't some sites inject the waste water back into the stratum to replenish the water supply in the originally drilled heat source?

You are 100% correct, as far as I know all Geothermal sites inject (frack) to replenish the source. At the Salton Sea they must to dispose of the Toxic Brine, after the steam is flashed off the Brine is even more concentrated with a bunch of toxins, like arsenic and cobalt 60. I know the PH is very important to prevent the solids from precipitating out, which they do anyway. Salton Sea geothermal is a nasty process.

It's the same concept that people have been trying to explain to the renewable crowd, you can't get something from nothing.

 

[martybegan]

UW Researchers’ Lithium Discovery Could Boost CO2 Storage Prospects | News | University of Wyoming

April 24, 2013 — Researchers at the University of Wyoming Carbon Management Institute (CMI) discovered a vast new lithium resource near Rock Springs during a geological carbon dioxide storage site characterization project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Lithium, a key component of batteries and electronic devices, has become highly sought after as nations -- including the U.S. -- transition to greener technologies. Wind, solar and smart grid technologies all employ lithium-ion batteries to store excess energy for later use.

Presently, the U.S. imports more than 80 percent of the lithium used domestically. In addition to making CO2 storage cheaper, the potential new lithium resource discovered by CMI could have a major impact on the global market, transforming the U.S. from a significant lithium importer to an independent lithium producer.

“We’re excited about this discovery and the prospect of creating a completely new industry in Wyoming,” says Shanna Dahl, CMI deputy director. “More work must be done to fully assess the potential, but our research is very encouraging at this point.”

Preliminary analyses of fluid samples collected from a well drilled on the Rock Springs Uplift -- a geological feature in southwest Wyoming -- suggest that reservoir brines from a 25-square-mile area of the uplift could contain 228,000 tons of lithium: enough to meet annual U.S. demand.

To help put this number in perspective, the lithium reserves at Silver Peak, Nev. -- the largest domestic producer of lithium -- total 118,000 tons in a 20-square-mile area. In a best-case scenario, the 2,000-square-mile Rock Springs Uplift could harbor up to 18 million tons of lithium, equivalent to about 720 years of current global lithium production.

Coupled with electrical generation from the very hot brines, this could be economically feasable.

If the Engineering can be done, and if some Lobby group doesn't delay or squash the work by asking for a 5000 page environmental impact statement, and then fighting the statement when they don't agree with it.

 

[Old Rocks]

And zinc and lithium. But injected back into the heat source, these are not a problem. The problem here is that the very ignorant Elektra does not like the fact that geo-thermal is a far cheaper source for electricity than is nuclear. And far less dangerous.

 

[Old Rocks]

UW Researchers’ Lithium Discovery Could Boost CO2 Storage Prospects | News | University of Wyoming

April 24, 2013 — Researchers at the University of Wyoming Carbon Management Institute (CMI) discovered a vast new lithium resource near Rock Springs during a geological carbon dioxide storage site characterization project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Lithium, a key component of batteries and electronic devices, has become highly sought after as nations -- including the U.S. -- transition to greener technologies. Wind, solar and smart grid technologies all employ lithium-ion batteries to store excess energy for later use.

Presently, the U.S. imports more than 80 percent of the lithium used domestically. In addition to making CO2 storage cheaper, the potential new lithium resource discovered by CMI could have a major impact on the global market, transforming the U.S. from a significant lithium importer to an independent lithium producer.

“We’re excited about this discovery and the prospect of creating a completely new industry in Wyoming,” says Shanna Dahl, CMI deputy director. “More work must be done to fully assess the potential, but our research is very encouraging at this point.”

Preliminary analyses of fluid samples collected from a well drilled on the Rock Springs Uplift -- a geological feature in southwest Wyoming -- suggest that reservoir brines from a 25-square-mile area of the uplift could contain 228,000 tons of lithium: enough to meet annual U.S. demand.

To help put this number in perspective, the lithium reserves at Silver Peak, Nev. -- the largest domestic producer of lithium -- total 118,000 tons in a 20-square-mile area. In a best-case scenario, the 2,000-square-mile Rock Springs Uplift could harbor up to 18 million tons of lithium, equivalent to about 720 years of current global lithium production.

Coupled with electrical generation from the very hot brines, this could be economically feasable.

If the Engineering can be done, and if some Lobby group doesn't delay or squash the work by asking for a 5000 page environmental impact statement, and then fighting the statement when they don't agree with it.

A lobby group funded by Peabody and the rest of the coal companies that are presently about bankrupt.

 

[elektra]

UW Researchers’ Lithium Discovery Could Boost CO2 Storage Prospects | News | University of Wyoming

April 24, 2013 — Researchers at the University of Wyoming Carbon Management Institute (CMI) discovered a vast new lithium resource near Rock Springs during a geological carbon dioxide storage site characterization project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Lithium, a key component of batteries and electronic devices, has become highly sought after as nations -- including the U.S. -- transition to greener technologies. Wind, solar and smart grid technologies all employ lithium-ion batteries to store excess energy for later use.

Presently, the U.S. imports more than 80 percent of the lithium used domestically. In addition to making CO2 storage cheaper, the potential new lithium resource discovered by CMI could have a major impact on the global market, transforming the U.S. from a significant lithium importer to an independent lithium producer.

“We’re excited about this discovery and the prospect of creating a completely new industry in Wyoming,” says Shanna Dahl, CMI deputy director. “More work must be done to fully assess the potential, but our research is very encouraging at this point.”

Preliminary analyses of fluid samples collected from a well drilled on the Rock Springs Uplift -- a geological feature in southwest Wyoming -- suggest that reservoir brines from a 25-square-mile area of the uplift could contain 228,000 tons of lithium: enough to meet annual U.S. demand.

To help put this number in perspective, the lithium reserves at Silver Peak, Nev. -- the largest domestic producer of lithium -- total 118,000 tons in a 20-square-mile area. In a best-case scenario, the 2,000-square-mile Rock Springs Uplift could harbor up to 18 million tons of lithium, equivalent to about 720 years of current global lithium production.

Coupled with electrical generation from the very hot brines, this could be economically feasable.

Old Crock? You are against fracking for oil but for fracking with C02?

From the "great" Old Crock's link, to funny once again, to save the earth from C02 we "frack".

UW Researchers’ Lithium Discovery Could Boost CO2 Storage Prospects | News | University of Wyoming

If the brines remained in the reservoir formations during injection of liquid CO2, the resulting pressure increase could fracture the reservoir rocks and allow CO2 and other substances to escape. Removing brines from the reservoirs makes room for injected liquid CO2 while keeping pressures at safe levels and maintaining the integrity of the confining rocks.

 

[martybegan]

UW Researchers’ Lithium Discovery Could Boost CO2 Storage Prospects | News | University of Wyoming

April 24, 2013 — Researchers at the University of Wyoming Carbon Management Institute (CMI) discovered a vast new lithium resource near Rock Springs during a geological carbon dioxide storage site characterization project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Lithium, a key component of batteries and electronic devices, has become highly sought after as nations -- including the U.S. -- transition to greener technologies. Wind, solar and smart grid technologies all employ lithium-ion batteries to store excess energy for later use.

Presently, the U.S. imports more than 80 percent of the lithium used domestically. In addition to making CO2 storage cheaper, the potential new lithium resource discovered by CMI could have a major impact on the global market, transforming the U.S. from a significant lithium importer to an independent lithium producer.

“We’re excited about this discovery and the prospect of creating a completely new industry in Wyoming,” says Shanna Dahl, CMI deputy director. “More work must be done to fully assess the potential, but our research is very encouraging at this point.”

Preliminary analyses of fluid samples collected from a well drilled on the Rock Springs Uplift -- a geological feature in southwest Wyoming -- suggest that reservoir brines from a 25-square-mile area of the uplift could contain 228,000 tons of lithium: enough to meet annual U.S. demand.

To help put this number in perspective, the lithium reserves at Silver Peak, Nev. -- the largest domestic producer of lithium -- total 118,000 tons in a 20-square-mile area. In a best-case scenario, the 2,000-square-mile Rock Springs Uplift could harbor up to 18 million tons of lithium, equivalent to about 720 years of current global lithium production.

Coupled with electrical generation from the very hot brines, this could be economically feasable.

If the Engineering can be done, and if some Lobby group doesn't delay or squash the work by asking for a 5000 page environmental impact statement, and then fighting the statement when they don't agree with it.

A lobby group funded by Peabody and the rest of the coal companies that are presently about bankrupt.

LOL, most of these lawsuits come from Enviro-twits like you.

 

[elektra]

And zinc and lithium. But injected back into the heat source, these are not a problem. The problem here is that the very ignorant Elektra does not like the fact that geo-thermal is a far cheaper source for electricity than is nuclear. And far less dangerous.

Less dangerous than Nuclear, in the USA, prove that old crock, where is you link? And something as heavily subsidized as Geothermal is not cheaper is tax payer paid and free for the investors. As I showed in my U.S. Geothermal thread (thanks for that one Old Crock).

But go ahead and post the link to your source that proves Geothermal is safer than Nuclear power, it should be a great link, Old Crock does not open his mouth without links so this should be real exciting, as easy as, PIE.

 

[elektra]

And zinc and lithium. But injected back into the heat source, these are not a problem. The problem here is that the very ignorant Elektra does not like the fact that geo-thermal is a far cheaper source for electricity than is nuclear. And far less dangerous.

Yes, cheaper U.S. Geothermal is selling electricity at $96/MWh, while I can buy Nuclear generated electricity at $21/MWh?
That fourth grade math is not as easy as PIE, Old Crock, is it?