• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Saskatchewan company greenlights Canada's first large-scale geothermal power plant

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #25
    https://deepcorp.ca/saskatchewan-driller-hits-gusher-with-ground-breaking-geothermal-well-that-offers-hope-for-oil-workers/

    This is a more detailed description of the Deepcorp project with a good video of them setting up and fracking.
    Is fracking OK if its now and green approved?

    Good read.

    $25.6 million in federal funding.
    Last edited by shtferbrains; Feb 9, 2023, 09:51.

    Comment


      #26
      interesting they mention ft nelson , i have drilled wells in most provinces and territories and i have never saw heat like below ft nelson
      we were still quite shallow and had to put steam heaters on the water lubricators on the mud pumps to cool the heads . it was crazy double or triple the 25 degree C. ave per km of depth
      the reason they had to stop drilling record deep well (well into hell) in siberia is because they couldnt cool mud anymore with refrigeration units

      Comment


        #27
        Originally posted by shtferbrains View Post
        https://deepcorp.ca/saskatchewan-driller-hits-gusher-with-ground-breaking-geothermal-well-that-offers-hope-for-oil-workers/

        This is a more detailed description of the Deepcorp project with a good video of them setting up and fracking.
        Is fracking OK if its now and green approved?

        Good read.

        $25.6 million in federal funding.
        money well spent if it pans out !

        Comment


          #28
          Originally posted by caseih View Post
          money well spent if it pans out !
          Exactly. I would far rather have government money invested into research and development and prototypes of multiple different potential energy sources, rather than continuing to pour billions down the black hole continuing to build and subsidize the black hole that is wind and solar. Look at germany, they have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on renewable energy, resulting in the highest prices almost anywhere, just to end up back to burning coal again. If even a fraction of that had been spent on researching practical solutions instead, imagine where they would be by now.
          I readily accept that the free market model does not have any good method of raising capital for highly speculative endeavors such as this, which may take decades to come to fruition if ever. Let the free market choose which system is best and direct their own Capital that direction.

          Comment


            #29
            Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post
            You talking about nuclear A5?

            Solar and wind the most expensive option? Really?

            Says a wanna be republican libertarian farmer who can't tell fact from fiction?

            Perhaps take a look at the IEA and Bloomberg and what they say about the costs of renewables before you make stupid claims.

            Kind like your idea that we are going to run out of carbon dixode if we don't keep burning fossil fuels?
            You seem to bring this gaslighting argument into every thread, almost as if you knew what you were talking about. Which as you just helped me prove in the other thread, you hadn't a clue about even the magnitude of the answer. And what is a dixode?

            But since you like cut and paste so much, someone just shared this article about the benefits of CO2 to agriculture:
            WORLD'S GREATEST PROBLEM.
            Agricultural Science.
            Amazing Experiments.
            It is said that some amazing ex-
            periments that have been carried out
            in Germany may lead to a revolution
            in agriculture, and solve the world's
            greatest problem—that of food. It has
            long been obvious to all thinking
            people that the only hope for the
            world lies in the development of agri-
            cultural science, so that two blades of
            wheat or maize or rice may be made
            to grow where only one grew before.
            The problem is a pressing one, and
            in his attempt to solve it Dr. Riedel,
            of Essen, a German scientist, seems to
            have obtained marvellous results.
            As we all know, the green leaves
            of plants take carbon dioxide from
            the atmosphere, and in some way
            produce starch and sugar to feed the
            plant. Now, the ordinary atmosphere
            contains only about one twenty-fifth
            of 1 per cent. of it bulk of carbon
            dioxide, or four parts in every ten
            thousand parts of air
            ; and twenty
            million cubic yards of air; and
            twenty million cubic yards of air are
            needed to furnish the carbon for a
            tree whose wood weighs ten thou-
            sand pounds.
            Knowing all this, Dr. Riedel con-
            ceived the idea of speeding up the
            growth of plants by giving them extra
            supplies of carbon dioxide.
            Living and working in a great
            manufacturing district, Dr. Riedel re-
            alised that vast volumes of carbon
            dioxide were being thrown into the atmos-
            phere every hour, and lost. He
            calculated that an ironworks dealing
            with 4,000 tons of coke a day in its
            blast furnaces produces about 250
            million cubic feet of carbon dioxide.
            There were, therefore, immense sup-
            plies available.
            Dr. Riedel set to work, designed a
            process for arresting the gas, and
            took out patents. Then he put his
            great idea into practice. He set
            aside three greenhouses, in each of
            which the same kind of plants were
            grown under similar conditions, ex-
            cept that in one house extra supplies
            of carbon dioxide were to be sup-
            plied from blast furnaces. The test
            began in June.
            The results were such as to amaze
            even the scientist. A few days after
            starting the test the leaves of a cas-
            tor oil plant in the greenhouse sup-
            plied with gas measured a yard
            across, while the largest leaf of a
            similar plant in the other greenhouse
            was about 18 inches. The height in-
            creased correspondingly. Tomatoes
            in the greenhouse supplied with gas
            weighed 175 per cent. more than in
            the other houses, and cucumbers show-
            ed increase of 70 per cent.
            At the same time experiments were
            made in the open air, gas being sup-
            plied to a plot of land through open-
            ings in cement pipes arranged all
            around. The gassed plot showed an
            increase of 150 per cent. in spinach,
            180 per cent. in potatoes, and 100 per
            cent. in parsley.
            Quite recently the experiment has
            been tried of gassing a barren and
            hitherto uncultivated piece of land
            not very far from Berlin and re-
            sults have been equally remarkable.
            From these results there seems to
            be no doubt that fertilising the air
            with carbon dioxide is a more effi-
            cient and cheaper way of increasing
            the crops than treating the ground
            with manures. In greenhouses in
            winter the same coke furnace that
            supplies the heat will provide, the ad-
            ditional carbon dioxide.
            Dr. Riedel believes that before long
            ironworks will be systematically sup-
            plying carbon dioxide to farmers.


            What a novel idea.
            Actually it was quite novel when this was written, in 1922.
            But that isn't why I posted this. What I found interesting, is that in 1922, apparently it was accepted as fact that CO2 made up 4 parts per 10000 parts of our atmosphere. Which if you are doing the math, is the same as 400 ppm. Yet no one was ringing the alarm bells about a tipping point, and a climate emergency due to CO2 being at those lofty levels. Good thing the science is always settled.

            Comment


              #30
              Originally posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View Post
              No. It doesn't have any of the drawbacks of wind or solar. It is reliable, predictable, dispatchable, scalable, and doesn't rely entirely on a supply chain completely dependent on a hostile China.

              And I don't know why you continue to list hydro as an option, when your own NFU organization is radically opposed to hydro. Why will you never address this hypocrisy?
              You need to look up the word supplementary.

              Why do you constantly bash a technology for which you obviously do not understand its purpose?

              Comment


                #31
                Originally posted by tweety View Post
                You need to look up the word supplementary.

                Why do you constantly bash a technology for which you obviously do not understand its purpose?
                Supplementary Definition: functioning in a supporting capacity

                So you think that intermittents are supporting dispatchable fossil fuel power plants and hydroelectric?
                Supporting definition: bearing all or part of the weight of something.

                So intermittents are carrying the weight of dispatchable generation? Not only could they stand on their own, but furthermore, they can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and support the reliable generation when required?

                Or this definition of supplementary: added to complete or make up a deficiency I'm just curious, what deficiency does dispatchable power possess, that adding non dispatchable intermittent generation will make up for? Unless of course you consider cheap and reliable to be a deficiency?
                Last edited by AlbertaFarmer5; Feb 18, 2023, 10:38.

                Comment

                • Reply to this Thread
                • Return to Topic List
                Working...