Google Outspends US Government on Drilling... for Geothermal Energy

[free_energy0]

Originally Posted by logansowner

Only one thing...

Geo thermal is CLEAN...it is NOT renewable. It's still drilling a well into a finite amount of hot water.

It's a great idea, but get the terminology right Google

Also, 11 million is a drop in the bucket, don't let them fool you into thinking this makes them some sort of savior, it's still not going to accomplish anything.

Nice try though. I like Google, and I like the image of saving the world they like to portray, but don't let them BS you into thinking they are doing more than they are.

Way to embarrass yourself.

[LAMRONH]

Geothermal is clean and constant. After the initial investment, there should be little cost.

The costs are amortized over time, and in 20 years you're glad you did it.

Hopefully, by then the Age of Idiocy will be dead and buried, algore will be a fat greybeard in prison for his massive fraud schemes, and George Jetson will be zipping around in his aircar.

[samkung]

Originally Posted by Pedal 2 Metal

Oh the government...

They take a tremendous amount of money from us, and yet almost none of it is put to good use. How the hell did we get to this point?

It's funny to see how much got invested in Iraq and how little return it generate, i wonder if Iraqi actually like America after all the $$ you have spent on them

[logansowner]

Originally Posted by free_energy0

Way to embarrass yourself.

I'm sure you aren't a little biased on the subject...

Over time the constant replenishing of water into the ground cools off the project area to the point of it not being economical anymore.

Why do you think in countries that use this type of energy that they need to continuously rebuild new sites? The time it takes to use up the heat ranges from a few years to many, many years.

I'm simply saying that we tend to have a problem with people using the terms clean and renewable together as if they always go hand in hand, and that is simply not the case.

Also, if you want to get really precise, it is in a way renewable, if shut down, an area will eventually regain much of it's heat after many years, and could be used again...but if we want to use that as a basis for our definition of "renewable", then oil is also renewable. Once modern plant matter decays, I'm sure it will turn to oil too, making oil a renewing resource, but as we all know, the time it takes for that, really makes it hard to justify that argument.

And it still doesn't change the fact that they are spending $11 million and portraying it as saving the world. That's like donating 5 bucks to the red cross and proclaiming that you saved lives. It's a drop in the bucket, and yet everyone seems to think they've solved the energy crisis.

[emh]

Originally Posted by logansowner

And it still doesn't change the fact that they are spending $11 million and portraying it as saving the world.

What makes you so sure this is ALL that Google (and other investors) will invest in this? Most early stage ventures aren't fully funded to begin with. They always start with small investments in the initial stages with further funding based on progress from the initial work. This shouldn't be any different.

In fact, given that Google is investing in a variety of clean energy solutions, and this is only one of them, they are taking a classic venture capital approach -- keep a broad portfolio and some fraction of those investments will pay off.

[slowinthefastlane]

Originally Posted by KingElvis

Fact: Right now you could think of the untapped oil in US federal lands as "our" oil, in that it belongs to the US government.

Fact: Once the oil is drilled and pumped, it becomes' "Exxon's oil" (or whatever company).

Fact: The oil Exxon takes from American federal lands will be put on a WORLD oil market and sold to the highest bidder.

All the drilling demagogues need to keep this in mind: It's not "our" oil once it's out of the ground - it's Exxon's.

So this means drilling BY DEFINITION, means taking American oil and selling it to the rest of the world - how in God's name could that ever be construed, in any way, as "energy independence."?

Exxon has three divisions: upstream (exploration/extraction), downstream (refining/retail), and chemical. If the downstream and chemical portions of the company can get the barrel of oil cheaper from the upstream portion of the company, guess where they will get it from? They won't go out to the market to buy it.

If the oil is sold on the world market rather than consumed, the proceeds from the sale of that oil goes to Exxon, an American company. Exxon pays taxes and makes lease payments to the US federal government. The money either comes to the US or stays in the US. There is no wealth transfer to the OPEC states or Venezuela.

Furthermore, having more supply on the world market will decrease the price. This will mean that the US will pay less for oil it purchases from foreign countries, slowing the transfer of wealth.

While not necessarily making the US energy independent, it does improve the energy and political situation.

[steined]

That's the way it should be. The government's job isn't energy production.

[SuperSS27]

Originally Posted by logansowner

I'm sure you aren't a little biased on the subject...

Over time the constant replenishing of water into the ground cools off the project area to the point of it not being economical anymore.

Why do you think in countries that use this type of energy that they need to continuously rebuild new sites? The time it takes to use up the heat ranges from a few years to many, many years.

I'm simply saying that we tend to have a problem with people using the terms clean and renewable together as if they always go hand in hand, and that is simply not the case.

Also, if you want to get really precise, it is in a way renewable, if shut down, an area will eventually regain much of it's heat after many years, and could be used again...but if we want to use that as a basis for our definition of "renewable", then oil is also renewable. Once modern plant matter decays, I'm sure it will turn to oil too, making oil a renewing resource, but as we all know, the time it takes for that, really makes it hard to justify that argument.

How is Geo thermal not renewable???? How long has Old Faithful in Yellow stone park been shooting water up in to the air???? Read up Smart guy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Faithful_Geyser

[SUPERBADD75]

this is definitely just a start, but Google is high profile, and this could at least raise some awareness and possibly cash for more.

[Michael_S]

Originally Posted by samkung

It's funny to see how much got invested in Iraq and how little return it generate, i wonder if Iraqi actually like America after all the $$ you have spent on them

Speaking as a damn liberal , going into Iraq was a mistake but staying there now is not.

Politically, we can't afford to let the area erupt into a civil war. If oil supplies from Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and so forth are disrupted, the price of oil will go well past $200 per barrel.

Morally, we dismantled their government, their police, and their military. It was all corrupt and there was torture and evil. But it was there. They still have less electrical services, fewer jobs, fewer schools, fewer police, and fewer hospitals than when we started. Our leaders are faced with a tough choice - sleep with the blood of US soldiers on their conscience, or sleep with the blood of Iraqi women and children on their conscience.

Originally Posted by mbukukanyau

This is a religious endavor by google. Perhaps Google owners should try steer the company away from politics?

Google's search engine is powered by tens of thousands of networked computers running 24/7. I'm sure electricity is one of their biggest expenses.

I would bet the $11 million investment in geothermal is not related to environmental concerns, just looking for ways to find cheap power to meet their needs.

[XP300]

Sherman Hospital, in Elgin, IL will be heating and cooling their new building using geothermal energy.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=209060

It's kind of interesting. They claim they will have a savings of $1 million dollars a year.

Check it out.