German mechanical engineer here. Greatly appreciate the in-depth video as always. I wanted to point out some big potential drawbacks of geothermal energy you did not include in the video. 1. Geothermal energy is not boundless as the video suggests. Following the first law of thermodynamics, a natural occurring geothermal reservoir (or aquifer as it is known in the field) or a man-made one thanks to EGS, is bound to lose temperature over time due to the fact that we pump out more heat than we reinject. This inevitably causes a decrease in the aquifers temperature, which in turn causes a diminished steam production which then reduces the amount of generated electricity by turbine/generator. Some sources suggest that the average aquifer requires roughly 30 years until the original temperature is reached again. 2.Scaling/ Fouling. This is probably one of the greatest technical problems with geothermal plants nowadays. Since the water used for direct steam generation or secondary cycle heat transfer is coming from ca.3-4 km underground, it is saturated with different minerals, the most common being SiO2 (quartz) and CaCO3 (limestone). The chemical nature and type of the minerals is highly dependent on the location of the geothermal plant, but you can research them further if you'd like. Rapid changes in pressure and temperature along the pipes leads to the precipitation of these minerals (Scaling/Fouling) and unfortunately quite frequently to the failure of vital mechanical components such as pumps and heat exchangers. This leads to frequent halts of electricity production in most geothermal power plants. Sorry for the long comment, I just feel passionate about the subject since it was the topic of my thesis!
@robertsmith46815 жыл бұрын
Not an engineer here, nor do I play one on tv, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn express last night. Now that this is out of the way I do wonder, regarding point 1) simple solution is to alternate production between sites, more or less like farmers don't plant crops in the same field year after year. Leave things to warm back up and then restart production. If you have enough sites that you can rotate in and out of production you should be sustainable. For point 2) Best but also horribly expensive way to deal with this is to have all your piping in a closed loop and not use ground water as a heat exchange fluid. What I could "envision" is something that would look a bit like a large tunnel boring machine that would have all the hardware on board, tilt it at an angle, let it dig, once it reaches layers of rock hot enough the outer casing ends up acting as a kind of heat sink and all your power generation hardware is inside the machine, all that is needed is to run cables so you can connect the power generated to the grid. When the rocks the machine is sitting in invariably cool down, it's able to start the digger head again, dig itself a bit deeper and start production again. Hard to explain what I have in mind but I think you can get the general idea.
@Max-ej8pe5 жыл бұрын
Great comment!
@NickHorvath5 жыл бұрын
@@robertsmith4681 You don't need anything so complicated to achieve a closed drill loop. The technology already exists to steer an oil drill pipe. All you would have to do is steer the two wells to connect in a kind of U or V shape. www.quora.com/Can-oil-drilling-bits-be-steered is a good explanation
@Acolyte475 жыл бұрын
@Feeds Ravens that sounds incredibly inefficient and like you would lose more energy than you'd generate.
@rogerwilco25 жыл бұрын
Thank you.
@panzerkampfwagenvitigeraus3443 жыл бұрын
Real Engineering: "We can use Earth's heat for energy" Kurzgesagt: *Dyson Sphere*
@magictoffee70663 жыл бұрын
To be fair a dyson sphere gives way more energy
@ariesleo73963 жыл бұрын
@@magictoffee7066 nah it dose not even conpare with a black hole generater (or black hole bomb)
@magictoffee70663 жыл бұрын
@@ariesleo7396 True
@pugsly8102 жыл бұрын
@@magictoffee7066 but needs more material that it requires than there is of said materials on earth
@alexwang9822 жыл бұрын
@@ariesleo7396 we don’t have any black holes nearby
@haloclips53874 жыл бұрын
In my country of new Zealand about 16% of electricity comes from geothermal. With plants running at full capacity around 95% of the time.
@goatfromhell6664 жыл бұрын
I love you guys
@thomasjuniardi35593 жыл бұрын
Since my country Indonesia mentioned in this video, I like to comment about that. Yes we had some of the biggest Geothermal Energy potential (23,6 GW in 2019), but sadly we could only harnessed about 8,9% of it for electricity. Most of the Geothermal site are located in remote location, deep in the mountains far from the city where we can consume it. It would take a massive investment to drew powerline from Geothermal Plants to the city, we still figuring thing how to storage and distribution hopefully by the end of 2024 we could push it above 10%, progress is very slow 😔
@evosagara3 жыл бұрын
@Darren Munsell more population means more risk
@haloclips53873 жыл бұрын
@Darren Munsell what makes you think kiwis are horrible? Sure some of us are, but I would say that most are fairly decent. At least in my experience. 😀
@BobJones200013 жыл бұрын
@@haloclips5387 Ignore click baiters, They wouldn't have even visited NZ, and using low population as a negative in an energy debate is clearly out of touch with the reason this video needed to be created.
@major6003 жыл бұрын
I have been to Bath. It blew my mind that the humble, little channel seen at 4:16 still functions ceaselessly as a drain even though it was built so long ago by the Romans.
@buckroger64563 жыл бұрын
It's pretty amazing. Shame we don't build stuff to last like that anymore.
@GuiSmith3 жыл бұрын
@@buckroger6456 And yet we do. Think of modern skyscrapers. They’ll be around for centuries. Concrete roads, minus our massive vehicles, would survive for a millennia or more. Think of all the wood-core homes that are already 50+ years old made with the same sort of technique as new construction. The older forms of those homes have stood for a century or more themselves too. We do build stuff to last, honestly some of it could last even more so, it’s just that almost everything is under more tension, weight, and stress. Or it’s something metallic that wears down because it stretches. Metal’s malleable strength is also its eventual undoing.
@alphaadhito5 жыл бұрын
Captions: *English (Ireland)*
@mohamedzein45805 жыл бұрын
م
@sebastianelytron84505 жыл бұрын
*English (or something resembling it, good luck understanding)*
@sjwtard37095 жыл бұрын
@anonym Hello to you too.
@FPVsean5 жыл бұрын
Because we in Ireland speak a very high, understandable grade of English B)
@Firefoxfifty5 жыл бұрын
@@FPVsean It's just Cork and Kerry People they can't understand.
@MrAlexRadic5 жыл бұрын
Real engineering can you do a video on the next generation of nuclear power plants and their efficiencies. The recycling an re-usability of nuclear waste is really interesting in terms of safe and long term nuclear energy and energy sustainability, but people are so scared of the word there is little media coverage on it. cheers.
@danielhebard18655 жыл бұрын
Say it louder for the people in the back. Good Lord, sometimes I feel like the only person who realizes that nuclear is the ONLY solution, and our time to ramp up nuclear power is running short. Maybe the couple dozen comments on every science and energy video are the only people who are aware of this problem America faces, but I'd like to believe there are more of us. We need to pressure our local governments to give greater thought to nuclear power if we are to move away from fossil fuels without kneecapping ourselves.
@boggless27715 жыл бұрын
Yes!
@ALegitimateYoutuber5 жыл бұрын
Nuclear is honestly our best opinion for a future power supply. Granted we'll still need quicker acting plants to help quickly adjust the grid to demand. Those will probably be gas power plants. Though I guess in time you could make some stuff that can provide stable but quick power to replace those. I just don't get why we don't go the nuclear route when we know it's safe, to the point nuclear is safer than even solar and wind some how. Plus the long term cost is actually really really good, since they last so long and the method of producing power is efficient for power generation and cost of fuel per kilowatt is really good.
@Chazz1555115 жыл бұрын
Yes, please im on board with you guys! Nuclear is the only realistic option at this point.
@laur-unstagenameactuallyca15875 жыл бұрын
YES PLS
@WomanSlayer694202 жыл бұрын
why not just put the lava in buckets for fuel
@SwayzePGM2 ай бұрын
I love the comment section
@magnvss3 жыл бұрын
When "right below our feet" means kilometres under, you understand there is a reason this old dream is so hard to achieve.
@Professor-Scientist3 жыл бұрын
True but we're mpre capable now than ever. Electric cars where invented decades ago but only now we execute.
@darnit19443 жыл бұрын
It took 63 years from flying with paper and wood biplane to going to the moon. Our technology is advancing at an exponential scale.
@ArkBlanc2 жыл бұрын
It's only "a dream" because capitalism is a bitch and investors are cowards.
@Yamyatos5 жыл бұрын
Most opposition to nuclear energy is based on ignorance. Change my mind. Edit: To summ up most answers for those mentioning Chernobyl and others. Just like a plane crash, these examples are easy to point out sources of a couple tens of thousands of deaths. What people always forget mentioning is the estimated 4+ million deaths _a year_ from air pollution. That's one part of the ignorance i was talking about. A couple accidents costing a couple tens of thousands of lifes cant realistically ever outnumber the lifes we lose each year by polluting the air as we do. Then there is also climate change, which is a hard to grasp concept for some, but way worse than a couple tens of thousands of deaths by itself (and potentially irreversable if we keep continuing). Then there is the fact that newer types of reactors can pretty much make a meltdown more or less impossible, not even talking about using thorium. Keep in mind that nuclear energy was - and still is - a very new energy source in terms of progress. The only real problem would be the waste. However, it's better to be able to contain and store waste, compared to just pumping it into the atmosphere. Keep in mind that radioactive elements with short halftimes are the dangerous ones, but gone in a couple years. These with millions/billions of years of halflifes are basically not very dangerous, since they dont radiate a lot. So the most problematic ones are those with halflifes that make them radiate dangerous amounts, but still stick around long enough to cause problems. Still, in comparison this is a smaller problem to deal with than air pollution and greenhouse gases by far. Also renewable energy sources are neither renewable, nor completely green and it's not possible to sustain the planet by them alone, not to mention all those batteries needed.
@KainYusanagi5 жыл бұрын
Just like how most opposition to vaccines is based on ignorance. I mean, hell, the fucking quack who started the whole shitstorm wasn't even saying vaccines were bad in general, just that HIS vaccine formula was superior to the current MMR vaccine. Basically, he was flogging his own product to make money. -_-
@mike44905 жыл бұрын
Isnt the only problemb the nuclear waste?
@musman98535 жыл бұрын
@@mike4490 there isnt even all that much. just stick it under a mountain.
@caorusso49265 жыл бұрын
@@mike4490 isnt that much, we have deposits of nuclear waste prepared to receive the waste. Nuclear is the best solution to mankind
@esleynopemos34705 жыл бұрын
Most, yes. Not all, but most. The risks are greatly exaggerated in the public consciousness because of a handful of well-known disasters, while in fact nuclear plants are probably safer than most oil or coal plants. However, part of the reason nuclear power plants *are* so safe is *because* the public is so paranoid about them.
@garret19305 жыл бұрын
Real Engineering: probably the most famous example of a hot spring in bath england. Japan: NANI!!
@Raveneye20005 жыл бұрын
I know, right?!
@umaikeruna4 жыл бұрын
No, he meant most famous amongst people in the Roman Empire.
@rossbroomfield51994 жыл бұрын
Iceland be like "what about us"
@averagesauceenjoyer72093 жыл бұрын
@@rossbroomfield5199 icelander do hot tube in the snow
@averagesauceenjoyer72093 жыл бұрын
@@rossbroomfield5199 a simple water cup will radiate steam there
@mikycarney57793 жыл бұрын
"I told you harvesting the core was suicide" Superman's dad
@kenlittle57064 жыл бұрын
While much of the interest is in heating we must also remember that a huge portion of our energy use is cooling. A drill/well wouldn't have to go down far enough to capture heat. In any geographic area that is burdened by cooling costs, using the shaft as a heat exchanger can work backwards without the excessive depth required to reach a heat source. We're only talking about 30-40 feet.
@danieltakawi9919 Жыл бұрын
I can't remember his name but a man built a greenhouse slightly underground & used underground air tunnels in different ways to heat the greenhouse in the winter & to cool his own house in the summer. It was somewhere on KZfaq I'm sure one could find the video again.
@fidjeenjanrjsnsfh5 жыл бұрын
Tap the Yellowstone. Either get renewable energy or 2012. A win-win scenario.
@xspager5 жыл бұрын
Doom or energy boom!
@keithedwards99535 жыл бұрын
How about you try a smaller active volcano first?
@xspager5 жыл бұрын
@@keithedwards9953 DOOM OR ENERGY BOOM 🤘
@vintageguitarz15 жыл бұрын
Idiot, Yellowstone is an ACTIVE VOLCANO!! IT'S OVERDUE TO ERUPT!!
@w8stral5 жыл бұрын
@@keithedwards9953 Both Iceland and Hawaii are tapped .... idiot. Same goes for 2 volcanoes in California. Mt. Baker in Washington state is active and the forest service has put geothermal drilling up for sale
@desmondsolomon28095 жыл бұрын
Lived in North Texas. There are shale reserves up there. So fracking is pretty popular. Pretty much once the fracking started we got earthquakes as far down as Dallas. Usually around 3+ magnitude. So the drilling isn’t just an issue for the acquisition of geothermal energy resources. It’s something we’ve already allowed for the tapping of natural gas reserves.
@ro_dri_go82553 жыл бұрын
"Around the Pacific ring, this tech is common." Meanwhile, me in Peru: What's the name of that?
@ohlordethan41704 жыл бұрын
Hey! Can you teach us how Thorium reactors work? I see they are more abundant in nature and produce more electricity pet ton, while having little waste compared to Uranium
@albertusvanlubeeck91614 жыл бұрын
Uranium doesn't actually need to leave a lot of waste. For safety reasons uranium/plutonium fuel is very low yield. This leads to "waste" being generated. To get rid of said "waste" all you need to do is put the waste through a reprocessing system. Thorium is good as well, as it moves straight through the process without needing a re-enrichment process to take place.
@computerolegy23364 жыл бұрын
@@albertusvanlubeeck9161 It also is not radioactive by itself, it requires plutonium in order to activate, and also can be deactivated by intercepting the two elements with water. Thorium produces more energy per volume of the element than Uranium.
@flodjod4 жыл бұрын
waste of time
@flodjod4 жыл бұрын
@Quartinium 40 years old technology that has not advanced 1 step, it has not been proven its been a total fail has a half life of at least 500 years , you going to put it in your spare room, i doubt it, your another nimby
@flodjod4 жыл бұрын
@Quartinium it was a failure do you know what gives coporate america its jollies its not war its money thorium was a fail on the money scale, nobody except boffins want to even look at it.. the reactor isnt the problem its the spent fuel fgs where do you people get educated
@exdeegaming48725 жыл бұрын
Wendover: planes RealLifeLore: Toyota corolla Real engineering: *Rock.*
@jacksonthesyndicalist27715 жыл бұрын
Wait I’m not an engineer but isn’t this how we awake the Balrog?
@christinearmington4 жыл бұрын
Jackson Porter 😱
@npsit14 жыл бұрын
Servant of Morgoth? Yeah.. We don't need those!
@ThrillaWhale4 жыл бұрын
The humans...dug too deep.
@SignatureEdits4 жыл бұрын
bahahahaha
@nautilus59224 жыл бұрын
nah this is how krypton blew up in man of steel
@jdam73313 жыл бұрын
In Costa Rica, over 10% of our energy comes geothermal and growing Nevertheless this is mostly for volcanic nations or at least for now
@averagesauceenjoyer72093 жыл бұрын
the earth is made of material that is not passing the heat to elements near so much (rocks) If some areas were made just of metals. it would be insanely hot ! This is why I say that we should directly farm the gravitational energy by some way.
@averagesauceenjoyer72093 жыл бұрын
That's the source of the sun itself but what you gonna do people laugh at you. it's an einstein problem he said gravity is not a force everyone is worshipping him now.
@yudhahardiansyah79923 жыл бұрын
I mean geothermal power plant is just a nuclear power plant simplified, they use reactor that already exists which is earth core
@rcpmac3 жыл бұрын
Earth's core is molten iron, not a nuclear reactor
@jam_herobrine16425 жыл бұрын
Supposing how Minuite pysics made a thing about how to make a lava moat and how to power it, the main solution was geothermal... Coinidence... I THINK NOT!
@mr.normalguy695 жыл бұрын
Please do a video on Thorium based energy, it’s are very underrated and not many people know about it.
@Raveman5405 жыл бұрын
Specifically Molten Salt Reactors. What's better than just using Thorium as fuel? Using it and all of the "nuclear waste" in short-term storage as fuel. Two birds, one stone, IMO
@infantjones5 жыл бұрын
In my experience thorium isn't underrated but rather has its benefits massively exaggerated by people in science-adjacent circles online.
@Piccodon5 жыл бұрын
Not only thorium, but a whole raft of different Molten Salt Reactors, that can use not only Thorium, but also nuclear waste and plutonium. The process heat is high enough for making liquid hydrocarbon fuel, and removing CO2 from air or ocean. The nuclear energy supply is next to endless.
@infantjones5 жыл бұрын
@Danijel Mornarić Only if it was as profitable as oil, coal, gas, and to a lesser extent solar. Profitability is the main drive for what power sources are propagated typically, not safety, reliability, etc.
@brian24405 жыл бұрын
infant jones I also find it interesting that those who support thorium are largely unaware of the fact that the USA has actually used thorium in commercial reactors in the past, but the costs of using the fuel were greater than its benefits of production. Shippingport 1977 Reactor 3 Ft Vrain 1984 Reactor 2 Both of these reactors were Light Water Breeder Reactors that did not significantly outperform conventional PWRs. So when these people point out the benefits of a LFTR, what they fail to recognize is that the considerable benefits are largely based on characteristics that thorium itself does not necessarily provide.
@zatar1233 жыл бұрын
Breaking up a lot of underground rocks, no matter how you do it, is a rather risky thing to do. Geothermal energy is worth looking into. But we need to be careful about what can go wrong. Earthquakes, sinkholes, and unexpected contamination of groundwater, are all things that have to be carefully considered and allowed for.
@TomTom-xp2jb4 жыл бұрын
Finally, someone is talking about this planet saving energy source!!! Engineers rock!!! 🇨🇦
@harukrentz4352 жыл бұрын
JOKE ON CANADA THE ONLY COUNTRY LOCATED IN THE RING OF FIRE NOT TO OWN GEOTHERMAL PLANT.
@Rutaraki5 жыл бұрын
didnt expect to be seeing Real Engineering handing out YangGang pamphlets
@jamesbizs5 жыл бұрын
Farnsworth McGuillicutty lost a bit of my respect tho 😂🤷🏻♂️. Not as bad as Bernie bros, but they are catching up. Mister $1000 a month for everyone... imagine investing that money into the modern nuclear reactors. But no no let’s give everyone free money lol. The easiest way to get elected and stay elected, is to give out free shit.
@retovath5 жыл бұрын
@@jamesbizs his recent environmental policy actually directly calls for 50 billion in funding for gen 4 nuclear reactors. Yang even specifically calls out Thorium powered reactors.
@MrWhiteVzla5 жыл бұрын
I have notice that a lot of non-Americas like Yang more than actual Americans. Most of his ideas are good. But in the US some of his proposals are seen as anti-American (i.e. universal income to combat automation), or simply not "enticing enough" by American voters. The US electoral system is a reality show/race after all. It's the by-product of FPTP and the electoral college. So I'm looking forward to watch two old angry white men fight for the presidency next year. It will make great TV!
@migkillerphantom5 жыл бұрын
@@retovath the thing that puts me off about the thorium crowd is trivializing the chemical engineering aspects of having a liquid nuclear fuel dissolved in a salt and needing to be continually filled up while removing waste. All the talks are about the same basic conceptual stuff, they treat the biggest and hardest parts of practically pulling something like this off as a footnote - when in reality it would probably constitute by far the biggest expense in such a design.
@MrWhiteVzla5 жыл бұрын
@@Adamsnadler214 Same excuse was given to increasing the minimum wage. However, once it was done, the evidence didn't support the claims of inflation and cost increasing in the areas where the change was in effect. That's the problem with basic economics logic, it's, well, basic.
@TheLiamster5 жыл бұрын
Where is all the geothermal energy? Answer: it’s underground.
@theophrastusbombastus80195 жыл бұрын
That is what the government wants you to think. Pompeii never forget
@tatotiteta5 жыл бұрын
@@theophrastusbombastus8019 lol just sacrifice chicken to the volcano and boom... explosion energy and pompei all over again
I am only scared that this will accelerate the marsification of Earth. Basically Earth turning Mars like
@fencserx94235 жыл бұрын
You failed to mention that Geothermal has a problem of spotted cooling in areas that we pull energy from. So it’s not like a standard generator where you reinsert fuel or other renewables which are almost/if not all ultimately powered by the sun
@justinchiang86264 жыл бұрын
*Shows Andrew Yang when talking about smart politicians* Very epic
@scottiedunnavan38344 жыл бұрын
Yeah whip cream in my mouth guy
@meferswift4 жыл бұрын
@Thunder Life i will never vote for him.
@seaweed92944 жыл бұрын
@HEAV¥HAND lol you wish
@meferswift4 жыл бұрын
@HEAV¥HAND just like asian family unit.
@MountainMetal3 жыл бұрын
He is NOT very smart.
@discontinuuity5 жыл бұрын
That "nuclear" power plant is a coal/natural gas plant in Romania. Note the smokestacks. Cooling towers are used in all kinds of power plants.
@BienestarMutuo4 жыл бұрын
The planet is a big nuclear fission reactor. geothermal is extract heat from that reactor, why not use a direct nuclear reactor?. Nuclear reaction 8.000.000 times more energy dense that fuel or gas. dont fear nuclear radiation, that is a fear induced by energy cartels. Thunder lighting is a fission process that split atoms. Read all the details and sources here: mutualwelfare.org/what-do-we-really-know-about-nuclear-energy/
@doxielain22314 жыл бұрын
@@BienestarMutuo Talk to us when you figured out how to deal with the waste.
@BienestarMutuo4 жыл бұрын
@@doxielain2231 do you know the sell price of the nuclear "waste", the truth will shock you
@nexonim37774 жыл бұрын
@@doxielain2231just curious how dangerous do you think most nuclear waste is?
@raydyfetch34 жыл бұрын
@@doxielain2231 but burning biogas and coal creates greenhouse gasses too, plus, a bomb that destroyed an entire city was only around 2 metres long, a nuclear reactor probably won't create all that much waste. (I could be wrong because I don't know about this, this is just a a suggestion)
@tiavor5 жыл бұрын
The seismic risk is not the only risk. In Germany there is a city where they punctured a waterproof layer of stone that lead to water floing into lime stone and that then expanded and lifted the city center over a meter up, damaging many houses.
@patrickradcliffe38374 жыл бұрын
Remember Krypton!
@jhyland874 жыл бұрын
8:16 "... a non-toxic and degradable material is pumped down..." Yeah, I think we've all heard that one before ;-)
@xenuno4 жыл бұрын
Ya the companies say that in product brochures and when the EPA wants a detailed composition list of such material, they claim it's a trade secret, thereby relieving themselves of any need to disclose. I guess they get away with it because energy is considered a national security issue. The EPA has always been under the thumb of vested interests.
@y__h3 жыл бұрын
It's basically fracking isn't it?
@jhyland873 жыл бұрын
@@y__h Yes, lol. That _is_ fracking.
@rcpmac3 жыл бұрын
Says the uninformed skeptic
@jhyland873 жыл бұрын
@@rcpmac No... Says almost every organization/company that does fracking, lol.
@JoaoPedro-qp9cw5 жыл бұрын
I like how Andrew Yang is shown when you say "some smart politician" (Not being ironic)
@JoaoPedro-qp9cw5 жыл бұрын
@KanadianSpaceProgram yes, though I don't want it to happen ASAP just because. It needs to be well planned so it will actually solve problems (especially with the welfare system, that should be replaced). Besides, Yang has many proposals, all detailed in his website, it's just that UBI is the most famous.
@zac93115 жыл бұрын
Yangs a different kind of candidate, its genuinely exciting stuff
@JewTube0015 жыл бұрын
@Johusep Lopez Prohibition argument only makes sense when applied to other addictive drugs and foods. guns are a tool aren't something you're urged to consume on the regular. it's also harder to produce guns and ammunition compared to brewing beer or moonshine. additionally black market firearms and only so cheap and plentiful in the states because it has a saturated white market to feed directly off. which is why black market guns are rare in britain and australia.
@jengleheimerschmitt79415 жыл бұрын
I just listened to his talk at the New Hampshire ACLU. ...he had a very clever idea to save money on incarceration, by paying people to not go back to jail. He didn't mention numbers, but it looks like the Federal cost is around $100 per day. So, let's offer criminals, I don't know, $60 per day to not get arrested again? See, we'd save $40 per day! I can't imagine how this could possibly not be a good idea as long as you don't think about it for ten seconds. What a brilliant mind. I just have to decide what kind of candy bar I want to steal to start collecting my money. An idea so blitheringly stupid, only an intellectual could take it seriously. I'm sure the rest of his economic ideas are equally well thought out, and not designed just to supply a cozy-feeling answer to people seeking such.
@dan_loup5 жыл бұрын
I probably would put my efforts into coming up with a way to convince Trump to do it, given how fractured the left got due letting the far left people take control of it. "Just imagine, taking the power of HOT GLOWING MAGMA to solve all the power problems. the left keeps doing those shitty bird killing turbines while completely ignoring the power just under their feet. the HOT BRILLIANT FUTURE POWER. the one that can bring a LOT of jobs"
@garygenerous89825 жыл бұрын
So basically with EGS you are fracking for water rather than shale oil...
@falstaff08085 жыл бұрын
Doing a bunch of that fracking along the West African and Mediterranean shorelines to power desalinization plants to water the New Saharan Wetlands.
@tibetloga5 жыл бұрын
@@falstaff0808 Unintended consequences. Here's one, if they succeed in turning the Sahara green, the Amazon Rain Forest will die.
@Will-be-free5 жыл бұрын
@@tibetloga Why do you think that? Evaporation from "Green Sahara" would increase the moisture in the atmosphere.
@tibetloga5 жыл бұрын
@@Will-be-free It's not the moisture, it's the dust. The soil in the Amazon is thin, which is why when they cut down the forest and plant soy beans, it's only good for a while, then the soil plays out. Without the fertilizing dust blown across the Atlantic ocean from the Sahara, the plants will wither and die from lack of nutrients. When the Sahara was a tropical rain forest with the largest freshwater lake in the world, the Amazon Rain Forest didn't exist. That may have been as recent as five thousand to seven thousand years ago. The number of "lost" civilizations being detected by space borne ground penetrating radar in the Sahara is shocking, and exciting.
@nommchompsky5 жыл бұрын
Fracking for heat. With normal fracking you need to heat the area to soften the bitumen, this is the other way around. Which I'm sure will come with its own fun list of unintended consequences
@jarichards99utube3 жыл бұрын
THANK YOU..! for telling people about EGS (Heat Mining). Most people have NO IDEA this energy IS AVAILABLE with EXISTING technology. BRAVO...!!!
@ian55014 жыл бұрын
We could do better with conserving what we already have. I live in Northern Virginia, surrounded by massive data centers. The smart thing would be to use the cooling requirements of the data centers as a source of heat for the thousands of homes nearby. Unfortunately smarts are hard to find at the moment.
@randomcamera7462 жыл бұрын
that is a cool idea
@adrianthoroughgood1191 Жыл бұрын
There is a company that builds distributed data centers where they put the computers in your house so they heat they give off heats your house. They pay for the electricity and internet usage so you get free heat.
@bobjackson47205 жыл бұрын
They have had geothermal power stations in New Zealand for about three decades, I understand their output is gradually failing.
@robertsmith46815 жыл бұрын
Normal when you think about it, there comes a point where you're going to start creating a cooler "bubble" around where you're sucking out all the heat. So they will either need to dig a bit deeper, or shut down for a bit to let things warm back up.
@robosergTV5 жыл бұрын
@Sandcastle • that's not how it works. The process of reheating is slow, it takes ~30 years to reheat again. You suck the heat out of the local patch, not from the core of the planet
@KokkiePiet5 жыл бұрын
That is not really an issue if the amount of energy produced in that 30 years is the same as a coal fired plant, as for that 30 years you did not burn coal and empty a big coal mine.
@thomas.025 жыл бұрын
@Feeds Ravens i'm repeating a comment i read before coming across yours: the chemicals may be corrosive to plant hardware but not harmful to the environment, e.g. all the minerals from the rocks say calcium carbonate aren't harmful, but they may crystallise and essentially create millions of tiny daggers that scrape away at the turbine blades. obviously the high pressure and temperature required for geothermal doesn't help the wear and tear.
@aleksandersuur94755 жыл бұрын
How fast it's falling depends on how fast you are pumping heat topside, that is how much power you are pulling from it. It's not an infinite energy source by any means, it's a mas of hot rocks with only so much heat trapped in them, once you cool them down you are done. Rock is a poor thermal conductor so it's not going to heat back up any time soon.
@GeFlixes5 жыл бұрын
So this is not a technical issue but mainly a political one. Political problems can be solved with awareness - and videos like this increase the awareness for issues. Keep up the good work!
@donlausch8922 жыл бұрын
Thank you for creating a video on geothermal. Usually, a serious discussion about renewable energy sources completely bypasses geothermal. With newer techniques beyond what is mentioned in the video, perhaps geothermal can be given the respect it deserves.
@raheen75703 жыл бұрын
I never would’ve thought a real engineering video would me help with a science project yet here I am
@maxpower197115 жыл бұрын
2:51 The earth’s crust is thin in Yellowstone specifically because it is a MASSIVE volcano.
@dlwatib4 жыл бұрын
It's a "hot spot" underneath the continental plate that burns a hole up through the plate. There is a similar hot spot in the Pacific that created the Hawaiian islands. In both cases the plates drift above the hot spot, leaving a long trail of volcanoes, only the latest of which is active.
@davirastarson29974 жыл бұрын
no its a massive volcano because its crust is thin
@HalNordmann4 жыл бұрын
Fun fact: Massive geothermal generators in Yellowstone could prevent a supervolcano there (and probably diminish the local geysers).
@WarrenGarabrandt4 жыл бұрын
@@HalNordmann OR, by cooling the rocks above the hot spot we increase the pressure required to break through, allowing greater volumes of magma and pressure to build before eruption can happen. Thus making the eventual volcanic eruption larger and more damaging than it would have been without our interference.
@carsonyoder62944 жыл бұрын
Warren Garabrandt Once it reaches a critical level we could close off the geysers and openings that vent the pressure with tens of thousands tons of concrete. This would result in absolute inhalation of any living organisms including the 60 species of animals and over 300 species of birds of which some are endangered species.
@infantjones5 жыл бұрын
Main conclusion I'm coming out of this video with is that nuclear is still the best option for our primary source of electricity. Wish you would do a video on the topic.
@robertsmith46815 жыл бұрын
Maybe we can use portable nuclear to run massive boring machines that would dig large scale geothermal wells ?
@21335186z5 жыл бұрын
True, better fission reactors until we can master fusion ones. Also people should get government subsidies for more efficient home appliances.
@rjfaber19915 жыл бұрын
There is no single "best option". If we really want to address carbon dioxide emissions from electricity production, we'll need a variety of different solutions: Solar power can do a good job at providing residential buildings with sufficient electricity, which can take some load off a mains powered by hydro-electric, geothermal, wind or osmotic power where applicable, and nuclear power everywhere else.
@infantjones5 жыл бұрын
Note that I specified it as our best primary source, not the only source.
@bhatkat5 жыл бұрын
Seeing as the sun is actually a sizable nuclear reactor which would have long ago cooked our little planet into a lifeless desert without our magnetic field I'd agree. So what is the one energy source that is entirely non nuclear?
@Intrafacial863 жыл бұрын
*California:* _pumps water underground to capture geothermal energy_ *Californians:* _suck up all the water for their infinity pools_ *California:* |\___/| (•°ô °• )
@shadowstorm19894 жыл бұрын
1) Fracking fluid is not toxic. While not pleasant, it's actually safe to consume directly. 2) Shale oil fields occur at much deeper depths than aquifers. Even at their closest, aquifers are separated from shale oil by hundreds of feet of impenetrable air/water tight rock.
@serruredelespace5 жыл бұрын
Sam from Wendover Productions would probably use a plane to drill
@nddragoon5 жыл бұрын
or a toyota corolla
@serruredelespace5 жыл бұрын
@@nddragoon Or a cargo plane filled with Toyota Corollas *mindblow*
@plasmaburndeath5 жыл бұрын
Well planes would be needed to help transport workers to and from jobsite. :)
@serruredelespace5 жыл бұрын
@@plasmaburndeath And the Toyota Corollas would be used to move workers and things on the power plant
@plasmaburndeath5 жыл бұрын
@@serruredelespace precisely sir. And don't forget Aerial drones will survey, monitor, defend and provide real time information of each site 😎😎😎😎
@skaltura5 жыл бұрын
geothermal is not really renewable - it is more akin to a battery. When all that heat in the earth's core is gone, it is gone. Iron core could slow in spinning too weakening the magnetosphere.
@michaeldunn17545 жыл бұрын
That's like saying solar isn't renewable because eventually the sun is going to die. Sure, it's not infinite, but it's close enough that it doesn't matter.
@JewTube0015 жыл бұрын
technically the sun is akin to battery as well, and will run out one day.
@skaltura5 жыл бұрын
That's not the same thing in the least. Sun is producing constantly more energy, and will produce it no matter what, for billions of years to come. Earth's core is not magically getting more energy from nowhere, afaik there is no such reaction going which would generate more. Some from gravitational pull yes? It is insanely much energy there is inside earth, but what happens when we start to draw significant amounts out of it? It is a bit the same as getting out liquidified dinos out of the ground, i am sure when oil industry started it seemed infinite supply as well - turns out it is not *that* infinite. Energy demand grows constantly. Fortunately this can be alleviated, using ground heat to heatup buildings is quite common where i am. During summers those buildings are being cooled by AC and if you pump that heat back into the ground instead ground will act like one giant battery in this case and it might actually be net positive amount of energy put into the ground. Do the same with geothermal power plants where possible, "remote cooling" is starting to become a thing, where centralized heating using waste energy of power plants has been a thing for a long time, over here i hear they are starting to offer summer time cooling by pumping cool water into the same pipes.
@michaeldunn17545 жыл бұрын
@@skaltura "what happens when we start to draw significant amounts out of it?" This assumes that peak demand represents a "significant amount". I would hazard a guess that it does not. Your analogy of fossil fuels is poor, because fossil fuels can only exist in the crust of the earth, which is a REALLY small part of the earth. I think you're vastly underestimating just how much mass exists in the mantle. According to the National Geographic Society, the Earth has been emitting heat for about 4.5 billion years, and will continue to emit heat for billions of years into the future because of the ongoing radioactive decay in the Earth's core. Nothing we do is going to measurably change how long the Earth continues to radiate heat.
@dmechanicodude39604 жыл бұрын
In central Illinois, we use geothermal differences to make more energy efficient hvac systems. It would be interesting juxtaposition to look at the differences between the power plants and these hvac systems.
@Lormenkal643 жыл бұрын
Decentralized generation of geothermal energy is the future
@neurofiedyamato87635 жыл бұрын
I have always been a fan of geothermal power and been curious why it haven't caught on yet. Thank you for making this video! It only have increased my support for geothermal.
@Rhen56565 жыл бұрын
would be cool to see a video on nuclear energy, Gen 4 reactors in particular. Ideally without the "nuclear is evil" narrative.
@FirstArchon4 жыл бұрын
thats not a narrative thats reality
@huntera1234 жыл бұрын
Well that would be a first for modern greens.
@FirstArchon4 жыл бұрын
@@huntera123 idk about you but when i say green energy i don't mean fallout :P
@huntera1234 жыл бұрын
@@FirstArchon When I think of "green", the reality of huge wind turbines filling the world's open spaces doesn't seem compatible. Turbines that have huge carbon footprint, are intermittent, require industrial infrastructure in formerly open spaces, and hurt huge areas of the environment.
@FirstArchon4 жыл бұрын
@@huntera123 they will always be more green than poisoning the entire planet with radiation
@cccpsra4 жыл бұрын
Honestly harnessing geothermal by drilling looks like the exact plot of Krypton's explosion. Start building an interstellar ship - one of us will become Superman
@35usmcDave4 жыл бұрын
Ayon De finally someone said it.... throughout this whole video I was thinking, “you know.... krypton showed us exactly why not to do this”. Lol
@darthwader44722 жыл бұрын
Wouldn't bringing heat up from underground faster than it's "natural" speed cause an increase in the equilibrium temperature of the biosphere, i.e. exactly the problem already caused by the greenhouse effect?
@sunbingfa48722 жыл бұрын
Same question. But maybe insignificant in scale?
@HMAKmusic5 жыл бұрын
That is exactly what we need! We are using geothermal heat in Sweden to upward our houses
@philmanke76422 жыл бұрын
You do need to "upward" something.!.!.!..
@abz9985 жыл бұрын
"Safe additives"... Until someone finds a cheaper toxic alternative.
@kjta67165 жыл бұрын
nah just ask them to drink it after all its (non toxic)
@dathanneal31154 жыл бұрын
And why don't frackers use this safe additive if it is so effective?
@artificernathaniel32874 жыл бұрын
Safe additives is usually fine grade sand, which is pretty cheap
@almondpotato94834 жыл бұрын
@@dathanneal3115 Because they don't want to risk diluting or damaging their precious oil. Since, for geothermal, we're just using water, biodegradable additives are a better and cheaper option.
@dathanneal31154 жыл бұрын
@@almondpotato9483 I barely remember what my point was lol but thanks for the info
@projjwalray-63413 жыл бұрын
Is this source of energy really limitless though? If we keep tapping heat over a long time (say next 200 years) at a global scale, wouldn't it lead to eventual cooling of our plant's body? And when that happens, what side effects can we expect? Massive earthquakes, change in earth's magnetic field or something else? In other words we can be looking at catastrophic consequences!
@HarD45452 жыл бұрын
yeah that's what i've been thinking. if our planet's core cooling down, it may change the way the magnetic field & tectonic plates behave
@howard64332 жыл бұрын
Nah, global warming should heat it back up.
@polivarz61912 жыл бұрын
@@HarD4545 I'm pretty sure any coming effect from human Geothermal installations is negligible compared to volcanism and natural tectonic activity. Add to that the total mass and temperature of the earth, that a lot of the earth's core heat also comes from friction and gravity, as well as radioactive delay, And I doubt we can expect any effects on the century or even millennia scale. Current estimates for the earth's core have its dynamo effect ending in 3 billion years, while the sun expanding would likely make Earth uninhabitable within a similar timeframe. For perspective, anatomically modern humans are thought to have existed for 300 000 years, great apes for 15 million years. Cooling from geothermal plants is like worrying the about draining the sea with a bucket - our effect is tiny, and much bigger forces already in motion today will shape its future.
@highflyerl233 жыл бұрын
Unless renewables become a way to get really really rich, then only will there be support for them
@duchi8825 жыл бұрын
*For some reason* This reminds me of Dr. Stone's latest episode
@PAWTeamUnited5 жыл бұрын
Woah a fellow man of culture
@officer_baitlyn5 жыл бұрын
@@PAWTeamUnited why hello there
@PAWTeamUnited5 жыл бұрын
@@officer_baitlyn General Kenobi
@fokjohnpainkiller5 жыл бұрын
Is it as good as people say? How many episodes are out as of now?
@cloudincus40525 жыл бұрын
@@fokjohnpainkiller Its very light on the science. However it is a good watch. I guess it tugs at the part of your dreams and what if's you have ever dreamnt would happen if you lived through the end of the world as we know it.
@me1337je5 жыл бұрын
This is all nonsense. If you'd read Dante, you'd known the centre of the earth is actually cold.
@HostileLemons5 жыл бұрын
Funny joke
@HostileLemons4 жыл бұрын
@Anonymous Logic dictates it will be hot given we have volcanoes and plate tectonics alone. It dosent take a genius to work out the center of the earth will also be hot. Its illogical for trillions of tonnes of pressure at the center to not form heat.
@lukashagel56674 жыл бұрын
With seismic waves we can eventually know the layers in our core and this is how we know how its looking and how warm it is.
@pjkempen74134 жыл бұрын
Random potential doomsday thought but if we over-exploit geothermal energy from the earth's molten core, might it be possible to cause the earth's core to cool, reducing its temperature and motion and potentially weakening the dynamo that generates the magnetosphere and protects us from solar radiation, allowing life to exist at all?
@randomcamera7462 жыл бұрын
No, we wouldn't speed up this weakening at all, and the Earth itself will be long uninhabitable before its core cools. It will last billions of years.
@MR-ub6sq Жыл бұрын
Correct. And in the Bible Paul put his words like this: "For it is written, I will Destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world ? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. ... Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is Stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called : But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;" (1 Cor. 1:19-21, 25-27)
@pjkempen7413 Жыл бұрын
@@MR-ub6sq 🤣lol what are you even doing here? Stop using these tools of human wisdom to indulge earthly hubris and abandon your possessions and loved ones and like your 'messiah' told you and rid us of your stupidity and having to deal with your bronze-age apocalyptic blood cult.🖕
@MR-ub6sq Жыл бұрын
@@pjkempen7413 What were you going to do about it if I didn't stop?
@pjkempen7413 Жыл бұрын
@@MR-ub6sq 8====D~~~~
@doggedout4 жыл бұрын
We have a large, close to the surface super volcano over here called Yellowstone. Always wondered why we didn't exploit that more than we do.
@HalNordmann4 жыл бұрын
And tapping into the energy would at least delay the supervolcano.
@rollinbodda44053 жыл бұрын
Its protected by preservation regulationsfrom geothermal Also alot of research would need to be done to prevent the magma cavity from depressurizing potentially causing an eruption or pressurizing causes an eruption or producing earthquakes compromising surrounding rock causing an eruption or the lack of knowledge about volcanoes especially so called supervolcanoes accidently causing an eruption...
@kevinyaucheekin13193 жыл бұрын
@@HalNordmann Or if your f..k it up in enginnering terms you could prematurely spark off a Vei 7 volcano. In Iceland a geo thermal energy project did spark of a volcano.
@rfldss895 жыл бұрын
It would have been worth mentioning geothermal energy used directly to heat homes and buildings. You don't have to drill down as low since you don't need as much of a temperature differential, and it still lightens the load on the electric grid. In fact, it's actually a lot more efficient to use roof top solar panels to power a pump in a home geothermal system than to use the power from the panels directly to heat the water.
@darked895 жыл бұрын
That depends on the location imho. Fluid temperature of the thermal solar panels should be way higher than the ground temperature few meters below. So given a large enough thermal solar panel size one can skip the heat pump on a good sunny winter day.
@KimberlyRPeacock5 жыл бұрын
70 percent of home energy use is space conditioning and hot water generation. And you need not use old geothermal technology use a heat pipe and a solar thermal stirling engine as a Hybrid.
@cransonsnord95085 жыл бұрын
That is occurring all over the world for those lucky or mostlikely Rich enough to afford that. Also I would not like to live so close to molten magma. That heat comes with a price the steam is laden with corrosive minerals and chemicals which rust, oxidize and corrode any type of piping or radiator systems you use. We put distilled water in the radiator of our cars for this reason.
@darked895 жыл бұрын
@@KimberlyRPeacock This is fine if one lives in sunny Spain. In the North the winters often are cold and dark. If we do not want to burn the stuff and want to use a heat pump as more efficient than direct electric heating, then some shallow-(ish) geothermal is an option.
@KimberlyRPeacock5 жыл бұрын
@@darked89 I would argue it works well in the north as well, even in arctic regions. Combined power and heating, and here we are talking temp differential for the power generation and heating store the water which is your heat storage medium namely as its inexpensive at just slightly above 100 F and store in in a receiver underground where temp is say 50F. Connect to heat pipes so you are not sending energy to pump, then use the temp differential between ambient and that and use both thermal electric generators and Stirling engines to generate electricity and even compress to raise temp above receiver temp if needed. In summer you have a sun that nearly never sets and your store that energy in your water reservoir. It will take a lot of volume but you can make it inexpensive if you have a few homes sharing such.. However for a town or city the volume would be the issue I suppose. Probably better to store in magnesium hydride than water just because its 78KJ per mol H2 and use the sun and solar concentrators to get up to 300C in summer to release the H2 at atmospheric pressure.
@axeldaval34105 жыл бұрын
08:30 EGS is just like fracking, how can you even consider it. I know you talk about the similarities but : The issue with fracking isn't the fluids used, but the damage it does to the ground. In electronic repair work, the best work is the one that cannot be spotted post-repair. This concept is applicable everywhere esle. The most relaible path for any activities, is the one that doesn't leave any traces. EGS leaves plenty.
@JamesTTierce5 жыл бұрын
Whatever you think you know about fracking, I suggest you ignore. I highly consider finding some objective view points on it from reputable folks. It is not nearly as damaging as it is portrayed. Incidents are incredibly rare. it has become a buzzword that few understand. Its so poorly understood that those against it use this to their advantage. Go look at Anti-fracking diagrams and depictions. They wont show any scale or key details are left out such as bed rock. Yes theyll show the fracking "damaging" the water table yet will not show bedrock and the fact that fracking is done below it(theyll show the fracking above the water table. it is absurd.)
@axeldaval34105 жыл бұрын
@@JamesTTierce I'll go read about it, maybe you have a point
@expressionoffreedom71654 жыл бұрын
I would consider the possibility that if drilling caused an earthquake...it may have released the pressure that was inevitably going to get worse before it was released. Its not like drilling adds that much energy, so the whole thing was inevitable.
@bulvinescatologist23743 жыл бұрын
"Rattler Energy" power plant works on any gas presser or liquids makes power. 72 psi at 180 F in a 2 inch pipe going in to the head comes out a 4 inch at 2 lbs. at 18 F makes 63 KW. Can handle up to 600 psi. They make a 250 KW, 500 KW, 1 MW & a 5 MW.
@spyiro20075 жыл бұрын
like Kirk Sorensen said "any argument for geothermal energy, if thoroughly explored will lead to nuclear energy"
@diegosanchez8945 жыл бұрын
Kirk: the thorium man!
@KimberlyRPeacock5 жыл бұрын
Simply not true.
@cransonsnord95085 жыл бұрын
Nuclear energy is not renewable according to Dr. Helen Caldecot and I agree with her when you bring into account the exploration and production of uranium which is extracted for EACH nuke generator crushes one hundred and eighty nine MILLION tons (let that number sink in) for the two grams of fissionable material needed to run the generator for ONE YEAR! Each plant and we are nearing 666 nuclear generators in the world with 16 more on the books to be built! It may be cost effective now that we have oil and gas but when we run out and we will, that's a lot of solid granite rocks to crush by hard labor! ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY NINE MILLION TONS!
@KimberlyRPeacock5 жыл бұрын
@@cransonsnord9508 But that nuclear power plant in the sky is.
@diegosanchez8945 жыл бұрын
@@cransonsnord9508 it's not people crushing the rocks with hammers, plus Kirk is a supporter of thorium which is more abundant and more efficient. And like, renewable sources also need sources, especially wind power which requires a lot of steel, and since the life of a windmill is less than 15 years you have a lot of mining for iron to do. Solar panels also requires vast amounts of rare materials such as very pure silicon.
@Codysdab5 жыл бұрын
Geothermal = limited, nuclear = the future.
@StartupTV4 жыл бұрын
Great video and amazing graphics and writing! Looking forward to more :)
@pflernak4 жыл бұрын
When I become a supervillain Ill use geothermal power plants as my cover for cooling down the Earths core and putting an end to the Earths magnetic field. Muhahahaha...
@johannesnm97064 жыл бұрын
Is this a Risk?
@andrewbatist63554 жыл бұрын
and filled it with candys for the tallest ? this sound like an Irken. is that you Tak ?
@drabberfrog4 жыл бұрын
That's like saying you're going to put up a bunch of solar panels and take all the sun's energy so the sun shrinks and disappears. All that energy is just going to waste when it's not being harnessed. The Earth's core is going to cool down in a few billion years regardless if the energy is harnessed or not.
@HannesZietsman4 жыл бұрын
@@johannesnm9706 yes. Small hole can empty the sea over enough time
@HannesZietsman4 жыл бұрын
@@drabberfrog No not the same. Your not accelerating the sun decay by catching its radiating heat. You are accelerating the cooling of the core but allow more energy to flow out with addtinal drilled holes. But the core is big and the hole is small so time is going to more than one election period so why cares...
@vwarbase2775 жыл бұрын
#YangGang . It’s absolutely insane that oil drilling gets a better tax advantage than geothermal drilling
@IoOrganism5 жыл бұрын
That's the power of "big money in politics" in action. Check out how much fossil fuel industries donate to US political campaigns: www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=E01&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U&mem=Y&cycle=2020 Yang really needs to talk more about his "Democracy Dollars" policy. Larry Lessig held a talk with Yang about big money's influence on our democracy, It's basically legalized bribery. Link: Restoring Democracy | Andrew Yang Town Hall with Lawrence Lessig: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/odCZe9qpm8jUm5s.html Larry also had an extremely informative interview on Joe Rogan's podcast, I highly recommend watching it. Link: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/f82TkpSFtcyvaY0.html
@AttilaAsztalos5 жыл бұрын
What exactly is "renewable" about a limited (albeit huge) reservoir of residual heat that is bound to slowly cool on a cosmic timescale? We may or may not be able to tap any significant fraction of it, yes, but what would be renewing it? There's no such thing as "idling" energy "sitting in reserve" while we aren't using it - if the energy coming to the surface and being radiated away is currently roughly in balance, then as soon as we start tapping any significant portion of it something will start cooling off...
@jeffvader8115 жыл бұрын
Yeah, it's no good on cosmic scales, for that we're talking Dyson spheres and lifting fusion fuel out of the gas giants.
@jengleheimerschmitt79415 жыл бұрын
@@jeffvader811 That's what I'm talking about. Drilling holes in planets sounds dumb when we have a giant star right over there.
@jeffvader8115 жыл бұрын
@@jengleheimerschmitt7941 Probably a waste of time for a K2 civilisation, not so much for us. I wonder if geothermal power would work well on Europa or Io for that matter?
@ExploreLearnEnglishWithGeorge3 жыл бұрын
Earth's Heat Energy is intentionaly being ignored
@TriloByte1013 жыл бұрын
there is actually a way which most scientists know but ignore that is using superthermal-conductors rods and shoving them in earth crust to about 50-60 km.... and there will be probably 600c temp over them which can be used to generate heat which will be used to generate steam on surface (why are we even using water from steam we should get alternatives seriously)... which is actually pretty efficient coz earth is actually a toddler planet... it would take 5-6 billion years if we actually tried to use earth's geothermal property...... but the problem which arise is normal superconductors are very expensive and they lack in material but the energy they provide will be actually more than nuclear 20-21x more with 20% of size required to build..... but it will take twice the time to build.....and the problem which arise will be the area surrounding the power station needs to be dry and away from ground water.... and vegetation....
@joshuawebb67305 жыл бұрын
"Boundless", the laws of thermodynamics would like to have a word with you.
@eug_metta5 жыл бұрын
The Sun isn't off the hook either.
@colmercer33154 жыл бұрын
If we drill deep enough the pressure will generate enough heat to the point that it can boil water. This will be a good geothermal steam power source. Assuming a company is willing to invest on this.
@Alexander_Kale4 жыл бұрын
Same can be said about "renewables". Yes, it is a misnamer. Practically speaking, it does not really matter.
@nasim32694 жыл бұрын
Boundless in engineering terms and not physics terms.
@xenuno4 жыл бұрын
@@colmercer3315 At what cost and for how long can the heat be extracted? Do economics enter into this at all? For many physical reasons you can't just drill down anywhere and expect a good return on your investment. Look how many alternative energy companies rose .. and fell .. under Obama. The market wasn't there and the tech wasn't good enough nor economical enough nor scaleable enough. Fossil fuels are energy dense, economical, and pervasive. That doesn't make me happy as I despise the damage that the industry and the use of the products does to mother nature. However, I have yet to see any current alternative that doesn't have some serious negatives, comparable to the worst in fossil fuel usage.
@kovacskovacs34655 жыл бұрын
One of my ideas was to use Yosemite's super volcano as a source of "limitless" geothermal energy. Siphoning off the heat may slow down or maybe reverse the timeline for eruption. Or if it has no impact on the volcano's eruption timeline, then you still get practically limitless energy.
@user-pw1rr2vm8b Жыл бұрын
I love how he provides us with references throughout tthe video. Excellent work!
@bethymears26483 жыл бұрын
Iceland is already using it. With pipes or channels just under the surface to melt the ice and warm the country. They have turned their country into a lovely place to live.
@user-rw6xo9jc3n5 жыл бұрын
What about thorium? I thought that was the future fuel?
@EvitoCruor5 жыл бұрын
It will be the year someone puts the first commercial plant into profitable generation. Chinese are going to get there first and patent the technology we invented because ecolunatics and corrupt politicians don't give a fuck about anything but me mine and I.
@robertsmith46815 жыл бұрын
Geothermals is basically thorium with extra step.s
@hazelhazelton13465 жыл бұрын
Some numbnuts let it slip that it's nuclear, and now no politician can touch it. :(
@jamesburleson19165 жыл бұрын
@@EvitoCruor The Chinese can't patent the technology we invented in the 1960s, since we invented it in the 1960s and it's public knowledge, being a government funded program and all. Yes the Chinese will get there first, in part because we are helping them, but that will only serve to hasten it's adoption in other countries. I'm more worried about the potential energy independence China will have and how that will impact the global economy than I am about the technology being available to China.
@infantjones5 жыл бұрын
Molten salt breeder reactors are the actual future in this regard, almost all of the claimed benefits of thorium are just in the type of reactor, not thorium itself. A lot of research is still needed on these types of reactors however, while we already have very good uranium designs ready to go at any time. The main issue is that in the US there's loads of opposition to nuclear that ends up leading to construction times and costs being 2-3 times that in the rest of the world, while the anti-nuclear lobby is trying to force a nuclear phase-out in Europe (which has only really occurred in Germany so far, leaving them with with a 500 billion dollar failure to reduce carbon emissions and a much less stable power grid). If molten salt breeder reactors become viable, even with the benefits of them over light water reactors, they'll immediately become a major target of the anti-nuclear lobby. Nuclear already being extremely safe, efficient, and reliable hasn't stopped the anti-nuclear pro-"renewable" lobby (Greenpeace, Sierra Club, and most importantly the fossil fuel industry, /especially/ natural gas) in the US and Europe from making blatant falsehoods and misconceptions common beliefs in order to drive up public opposition to the technology, I really do doubt that even better reactor designs are going to change this.
@ryanm.1915 жыл бұрын
My uni is very much focused towards energy engineering and my lecturer believes that unless we switch entirely to solar wind geo and nuclear within the next couple years there is no chance
@davidellis2794 жыл бұрын
No chance of what ???, the last thing we need is more Nuclear Power Stations and yes I know about how badly we need the electricity and how environmentally friendly it is and all that Bullshit, the problem is when it goes wrong the Conciequences for the world could be Catastrophic if enough atomic pollution was blasted into the Atmosphere. It would kill every living thing on the planet eventually, whilst I agree we must do something to try and cut our man made emissions it needs to be done Globally not just a few country's taking action while the likes of China and India carry on regardless burning fossil fuels. Unless we all change its not going to work and all this about electric vehicles won't work either if there's not enough power stations to produce all the electric these vehicles are going to need worldwide. This change over should have been started years ago Not left to the last minute but of course the oil producers wouldn't have liked that and scuppered any chance of it happening. The oil Barons are beginning to see where their industry is going and they ain't happy about the fall in oil prices but the only way is down from here now on as demand drops because of people's desire for electric vehicles goes up as battery storage gets better. The glory days for oil is over. The Saudis and others have had a field day with oil sales squandering vast amounts of money on Bentleys and Rolls Royce cars and flash speedboats plus other extravagant lifestyles.
@sssssnake2224 жыл бұрын
And now we know why the core of Mars is frozen solid
@TheONDoubleB4 жыл бұрын
hahaha
@jamielonsdale30184 жыл бұрын
Actually, this is a good reason why we shouldn't do it. Energy isn't free, to drive our systems up here, energy must come from the system down there. It is converted from heat into electrons, which is a very wasteful process. Those electrons then must travel, resistance of which saps more energy to form heat. We then use that electric potential to drive systems we call electronics, because they run on the power of the electron. This converts the electrons back into a significant amount of heat, as well as several electromagnetic waveforms. One of these is infrared leakage all along the entire system, not just in the electronics phase. Another comes from converting the electrons into visible length photons in the display phase of the use of electronic tools. This means the geothermal energy must convert from kinetic energy to electron potential energy inefficiently, travel to where it is used inefficiently, be used inefficiently, and it is not recyclable. Once the energy has been radiated or consumed, it cannot be reused, even if the source is producing energy, very little of the energy used in this process feeds back into the cycle. The vast majority is lost to space eventually. It's only because space gives us energy that our magnetic field is even remotely sustainable. Eventually, that will run out too.
@jamielonsdale30184 жыл бұрын
TL;DR We shouldn't do it because the energy we'd use up here is being used down their to power our magnetic field, which is already weakening somewhat. It's perhaps possible that some is being radiated away in the form of radio, microwave, infrared and visible wavelength electromagnetism. Our atmosphere is surprisingly good at shielding us from x-rays and gamma rays, so I'd also assume it's good at stopping x-rays and gamma rays produced on Earth from getting out in significant quantities. Pretty sure you just ionise the air, which then radiates that energy as infrared radiation or directly as kinetic energy if the affected molecule reaches escape velocity.
@sssssnake2224 жыл бұрын
@@jamielonsdale3018 that's the weirdest thing about light, no matter what Vantage Point you're looking at it from, it's always going the speed of light, even if you're also going the speed of light.
@sssssnake2224 жыл бұрын
@@jamielonsdale3018 great reply by the way, I see you know your physics.
@blacked29872 жыл бұрын
*Germany 🇩🇪 must start developing geothermal energy with the UK... geothermal energy can greatly enhance Germany's and Britain's 🇬🇧 energy production and will provide huge backup until the next revolution!*
@gtraqs_5 жыл бұрын
swedish climeon ab is has such cool technology for extracting geothermal energy
@victordupree56095 жыл бұрын
Kolla in video - Vad är en Trompe? - kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bdZ9mKVnra_Vno0.html
@celofoliveira5 жыл бұрын
Man of steel vibes. Jor-el telling to the concil that harvest Krypton core was suicide haha
@ralphwarom25143 жыл бұрын
Also...it can cause earthquakes....so really.....lets just invest in more solar.
@notmenotme6143 жыл бұрын
0:41 If there’s one thing I’ve learned about batteries. Is how they soon degrade and lose their ability to hold their charge. Let’s hope these batteries don’t suffer the same fate.
@chaning254 жыл бұрын
Couldn’t they reuse the already drilled holes from fracking for geothermal energy ?
@rossbroomfield51994 жыл бұрын
Theoretically yes however often in areas where geothermal energy is present you dont get petroleum drilling because the excess heat will destroy the hydrocarbons so
@NZLKevin884 жыл бұрын
Yes, there are old oil wells that are used for geothermal energy but not many and output is low.
@aliozanerbektas5 жыл бұрын
Method number 1: Use all the excess energy of the summer to pump water and refill a giant dam. Therefore you convert the electrical energy into potential energy. Granted it will not as efficient but you save that energy to be used in winter. Just a thought. Method number 2: Use all the excess energy for electrolysis of water into H2 and O2, save those two in liquid form in large storage tanks and than using hydrogen fuel cells you can generate electricity. In my opinion method number 1 is the most logical since you probably already have all the necessary infrastructure you just pump water back in the dam. What do you guys say about those methods? Are they so "star trek" level methods? :)
@blackmesa2323235 жыл бұрын
Step 3: Realize renewable are kinda shit and switch to nuclear.
@EvitoCruor5 жыл бұрын
First method is useful for some places but not most, two big problems are efficiency when accounting the infrastructure on installation and maintenance in operation. Second is the location, you can't go around damming everything without causing some serious issues with your local hydrosphere.
@mctoel26305 жыл бұрын
For method 1 there's just not enough space on earth to build so many dams. And for method 2 we can go a step further and convert the H₂ into methane, because it's easier to store, and we have an existing grid of gas power plants and heating systems that run on methane.
@techheck33585 жыл бұрын
Ozan l I can’t really comment on method 2, as I’ve not researched that, but method 1 is unlikely to be plausible at a national or international scale: - Immensely high initial cost (to buy the land, build the dam; reservoirs, etc) - Immensely damaging to the environment in/around it (think about it; a reservoir is basically a controlled flood. Plus you still need fossil fuels (asphalt) to line the bottom of the reservoirs so the water doesn’t seep out)
@aliozanerbektas5 жыл бұрын
@@blackmesa232323 I cannot agree more dude! Nuclear energy is the only energy source available that is completely independent from the sun or the environment around it! I wish we had more nuclear power plants. But noooo some idiot thinks that it generates too much radioactive waste. Sure it does, as long as you handle them accordingly it is by far the safest power generation method!
@snowstrobe5 жыл бұрын
Great stuff, had often wondered why there wasn't more geothermal... [tho clearly never enough to actually bother looking it up] So thx for the info. What about the idea of using simple pipes to provide underfloor heating direct to buildings? [obv in suitable places.] Loved the subtle little Yang plug.
@schlend44 жыл бұрын
my alarm bells always ring when i hear "safe additives"
@Aeturnalis4 жыл бұрын
That's because you don't understand science.
@schlend44 жыл бұрын
@@Aeturnalis I have bachelor degrees in chemistry and biology and a master in life sciences so I have to disagree strongly with you
@Simon-nx1sc4 жыл бұрын
it does, but i tend to trust real engineering most of the time.... mixed feelings
@yashvashistha60043 жыл бұрын
Could you make a video on safety risks and average deaths for conventional sources like oil and coal and gas, i am very interested in why nuclear is considered so much riskier
@franciscruz55365 жыл бұрын
Geothermal energy? Sounds pretty hot ngl... I'd tap that
@katraconnor84515 жыл бұрын
the problem wiht geothermal is the same as withc fracking, putting lots of lubricant into fault zones and instable tectonic regions and near volcanoes isnt a very good idea, its also very locational
@Zarcondeegrissom5 жыл бұрын
yeah, and if industrialized to the extent to make a dent in global electric needs, well, I'm not sure how I feel about accelerating the cooling of the dynamo that protects us all from solar flairs and cosmic radiation. At the most basic level, geothermal is taking the heat out of the ground and dumping it into the air to generate mechanical or electric energy. thus my second doubt about geothermal electricity on a mass industrialized level. There is a limit to how much heat the atmosphere can dissipate into space before things get a tad toasty for us down here on the ground. The latter being why city-planets (Ecumenopolis) in sci-fi is not that realistic unless you space people out significantly to reduce total heat output from energy usage.
@jeffvader8115 жыл бұрын
@@Zarcondeegrissom Any method of energy generation will eventually turn into heat though, that's a fact of thermodynamics. If we looked only at the power generated (ignoring all emissions) wind creates the exact same amount of heat as coal. It seems counter-intuitive, but it makes sense really, all that energy goes into heating homes, powering ovens, driving electric cars, etc, and all of that generates heat either directly or through friction and other losses. What matters isn't so much the energy generated, but the energy lost to space, if we lose energy at the same rate we gain it, huzzah! We won't change temperature, but right now we're decreasing our rate of energy loss with greenhouse gases, so we're warming up to a new equilibrium, which ain't the greatest. Ultimately, global warming is all about managing our thermodynamics.
@Zarcondeegrissom5 жыл бұрын
"Any method of energy generation will eventually turn into heat though, that's a fact of thermodynamics.", yep, true, and sure I implied as much in closing (energy usage). "if we lose energy at the same rate we gain it, huzzah!", again, yep, (There is a limit to how much heat the atmosphere can dissipate into space). And agreed about managing thermals. I'm just not sure you understood the scale of what was being suggested by this vid. we are not talking about using geothermal heat that otherwise would naturally rise to the surface at natural rates, what was being proposed is digging down and pulling more heat out of the ground than would otherwise naturally rise through the ground to the surface, thus adding more heat to the atmosphere than what naturally arrives here from the sun or through normal geological heating. That's what I have doubts about. (sarcasm detected) Burning fossil fuels is bad, so let's add more heat to the atmosphere from another place it normally doesn't come from at the proposed rates needed to augment the electric grids worldwide, lol.
@jeffvader8115 жыл бұрын
@@Zarcondeegrissom I'm afraid you've still not understood. All of our energy comes from heat, all of it. Solar power utilises the heat of the sun, coal power uses the heat of burning things, nuclear power uses the heat of splitting atoms, every kilowatt of power produced has at least a kilowatt of heat that went into making that power. Getting energy from the core of the Earth would dump just as much heat into the atmosphere as getting the same energy from solar or wind, the source makes no difference outside of emissions, which change the Earth's rate of heat loss.
@Zarcondeegrissom5 жыл бұрын
except, the sun still shines if you don't use a windmill or solar panel. thus that source of heat is not being changed (only where it's converted into heat the atmosphere must dissipate). Whatever, you'll figure it out on your own eventually. you're so close to grasping what I first typed. good day.
@BjornCanute4 жыл бұрын
Open loop geothermal energy does produce waste. Toxic mildly radioactive waste from sediment carried up in the steam and deposited in pipes and filters. In fact geothermal produces more radioactive waste per watt generated then nuclear.
@pauldescartes3724 жыл бұрын
@Real Engineering Great topic. It would be nice if you did a video on residential/commercial HVAC. IMO, we should've been dumping tax incentives into the consumption efficiency side of the equation. Geotherm is a source of heating/cooling that could benefit far more people more quickly than solar or wind.
@scienceatbest16145 жыл бұрын
Could now make a video about thorium because it seems like a lot of people dismiss nuclear energy...
@DarkDrai5 жыл бұрын
That's what I was about to google.
@iwiffitthitotonacc46735 жыл бұрын
There's also direct solar water splitting, which can be used to store solar energy for later use and avoid wasted electricity like in California.
@DarkDrai5 жыл бұрын
@@iwiffitthitotonacc4673 Interesting!
@dcaban855 жыл бұрын
seems good to me, in 30 years we can go and build another geothermal plant just aside.
@baldurelitraustason6625 жыл бұрын
30% of Iceland's electricity comes from geothermal
@jamesbizs5 жыл бұрын
have you seen Iceland?
@ayumikuro37685 жыл бұрын
Not really astonishing for 5 people living on a steam geyser.
@giovanniquargentan61985 жыл бұрын
@@ayumikuro3768 lmao that's true actually
@huntera1235 жыл бұрын
That Iceland, the perfect geothermal location is only 30% tells a great deal.
@jamesbizs5 жыл бұрын
Edward Nelson im glad someone noticed that glaring inconsistency!
@Pandapucks4 жыл бұрын
At enormous/global scale, will it not be bleeding our core of its heat and accelerate its cooling? Not a great thing considering how lifeless Mars is without a molten core/magnetic shield.
@NoahSpurrier2 жыл бұрын
Radioactive decay is responsible for about half of geothermal energy. The other half is primordial heat left from the formation of the Earth. Potassium-40 is responsible for about 15% of Earth’s radiogenic heat. Uranium-238 is responsible for about 40% and Thorium-232 for about 45%. Uranium-235 decay also contributes a negligible amount.
@tristanmoller94985 жыл бұрын
3:09min „Heat within 10km of earths surface“ Wasn’t the deepest hole man has ever built around 12km deep?
@polgabaldon5 жыл бұрын
Yesterday I finished installing solar panels on my roof, let’s go green energy!!!
@NGC14335 жыл бұрын
Good luck redeeming footprint of logistics of getting them to you from production plant. Let alone the impact of their production and maintenance.
@polgabaldon5 жыл бұрын
NGC1433 You can either stay as you are and complain or try to make the world a better place.😉
@mammutmkii72425 жыл бұрын
@@polgabaldon He's saying that if they do not produce enough electricity over their life span, you're actively doing the opposite.
@polgabaldon5 жыл бұрын
MammutMKII I know, I know, but that's when all the calculations come into account and not only will they will be completely paid for in five years but are also built in a sunny climate which makes the most profit out of them ensuring a clean final net production.
@brandonbenjamin94525 жыл бұрын
Pol Gabaldon Im not sure why everyone’s being a dick to you. Even if solar isn’t yet a viable enough option to please everyone, the only way the technology will ever improve is if those who sell it are able to continue selling them as they continue to improve. Also, solar panels can easily absorb more energy than it took to produce them, even taking the mining into account. To suggest otherwise is absurd
@markhaus3 жыл бұрын
Another side benefit to geothermal is that you can more quickly mine and process lithium and other valuable minerals using the same process that heats the water used to produce energy. When you circulate these liquids you also pick up a lot of the mineral brine that is embedded in these rocks, and some of that will be lithium if placed near a lithium deposit.
@debasishmajhi6873 жыл бұрын
Got a seminar to present ....glad I find this video ❤️