23 months to build is impressive, but the number that matters for EGS is thermal drawdown. If the fractured rock cools faster than modeled they have to keep drilling new wells, so I'd like to see Cape's output a few years in.
23 months to build is impressive, but the number that matters for EGS is thermal drawdown. If the fractured rock cools faster than modeled they have to keep drilling new wells, so I'd like to see Cape's output a few years in.
Fervo engineers for thermal drawdown up front, it is well known that for EGS to maintain constant power output you need to periodically re-stimulate the field after a period of some number of years. What matters for the economics is the rate of eventual drawdown. The nameplate 100MW is also a bit misleading as it represents gross power output without taking into account the parasitic load of pumping which for an EGS plant is quite high. There was a ~60% parasitic load for their test facility and IIRC Fervo is eventually targeting 30-40% for the commercial power plant.
What does re-stimulate mean in this context?
Would the deep-drilling approach enabled by Quaise alleviate this issue ?? I was super-interested when Quiase was first announced, but not sure if they are moving towards viability. Insights appreciated. Thx, NSC
Not really, it is more the limiting physics of extracting heat through conductive transfer in the rock. The rate of heat extraction through fluid convection has to be less than the rate of conductive replenishment though the basement rock to not get thermal drawdown and these rates are often not economical.
Is there any reason to believe this is likely?
If it wasn't, enhanced geothermal would be everywhere, which it isn't. (Yet, this company would say.)
Op is really just describing a core breakeven metric on the energy source. In the same way you measure an oil well with half-life of useful output, this is basically saying "EGS can prove to be useful if they can make sure they extract more economically useful heat than the economic costs of constantly drilling new wells."
Since no one has really made EGS widespread yet, that suggests no one has yet cracked this nut.
> If it wasn't, enhanced geothermal would be everywhere, which it isn't.
That seems like a fallacy.
It is a heuristic regarding the scaling of a business idea based on conventional industrial processes presented as a technological breakthrough.
It is premised on a belief that a significant number of smart motivated professionals have been trying to solve the same problem with substantially the same budgets and technologies for many years and that experience has led them to an informed belief that more practical solutions exist.
You might say it is a stronger belief in engineering practice and economic efficiency than in press releases.
[note: I agree it would not be “everywhere” because the practicality of drilling into bedrock varies significantly between locations. But that is not a point in favor of scaling the proposed technique]
It may be a deductive fallacy, but it's perfectly reasonable inductively.
"World's first" implies this is fairly experimental, surely?
"If the internet was useful, everyone would use it" is something that wouldn't stand the test of time, right?
I am most likely the world’s first brudgers.
And at the time I write this, it breaks the world record for HN comments by the world’s first brudgers.
The internet expanded as the result of semi-conductor break throughs made by thousands of engineers with access to semi-conductor break throughs. There was a ‘virtuous’ cycle.
That is not the same thing as a press release. ‘World’s first,’ ‘New Record,’ and ‘Scientists’ correlate with press releases. Press releases make for easy news content and news sites are attracted to them.
It is not an uncommon problem with geothermal.