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

[AlbertaFarmer5]

And wind and solar components are being manufactured in several countries of the world.

And I consider hydro a great source of renewable electricity with some downi sdes but Canada already gets 60% of its electricity from hydro.

Then why don't you use your influence within the NFU to convince them to support hydro? Why do you refuse to admit your own complicity in this issue?

[chuckChuck]

The NFU position on hydro is their position not mine. And I dont even know what position they have and I wouldn't rely on your opinion of what their position is. LOL

And I support hydro if it is already existing and well planned new projects.

[Sheepwheat]

Is nuclear scary, chuck?

[shtferbrains]

Dark blue is China
Light blue is Asia.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

The NFU position on hydro is their position not mine. And I dont even know what position they have and I wouldn't rely on your opinion of what their position is. LOL

And I support hydro if it is already existing and well planned new projects.

You don't have to rely on my opinion of what the nfu stands for. They are generous enough to put out countless press releases stating their opposition to hydro.

Was very interesting wording you used. So who is this ubiquitous "they" who is responsible for nfu policy? If a member and former director such as yourself doesn't know how they create policy, then who could possibly be calling the shots? Is it not in any way a democratic process? Where do the marching orders come from?
Or do you no longer get invited to the meetings, being too insufferable even for them?

It is revealing posts such as this one that keep me engaging with you. We can learn so much about how the left thinks and functions.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

We are already using all the sources above successfully.

Now that you have defined successfully, it makes the rest of your agenda much clearer.
So it is considered to be a success if an energy generation source is the most expensive in the world, destroys the reliability of an existing grid, results in blackouts and rationing, and only functions with generous mandates and subsidies. And relies almost exclusively on materials and labor (often toxic materials, and slave labour) from hostile nations.

At least you are honest about what you consider to be a success.

[chuckChuck]

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?

[Hamloc]

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?

I certainly think a geothermal power plant makes far more sense than intermittent power sources like solar and wind, with a much smaller land footprint. But the question is how much of our electricity demand can be met with geothermal?!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I certainly think a geothermal power plant makes far more sense than intermittent power sources like solar and wind, with a much smaller land footprint. But the question is how much of our electricity demand can be met with geothermal?!

The resource is there to easily meet not only all of our electricity needs, but all of our total energy needs. What is not yet known, is if it can be done more economically than the current sources, or if it is sustainable in the long run.
Unlike Iceland and or Hawaii where the heat source is constantly regenerated on useful timescales, our geology is not as generous.

[shtferbrains]

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.

[Guest]

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

[Guest]

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 !

[AlbertaFarmer5]

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.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

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.

[tweety]

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?