Obviously the carbon-economics analysis (everything denominated in TACs) loves this approach.
So long as we are working on increasing the Tonnes Avoided CO2 stock (in part by reducing the Tonnes Atmospheric CO2 flows) there is a strong incentive against pulling fossils out of the hole, unless it substitutes for higher-cost fossils. Following the incentives that, according to the State Senator for Bakersfield, make extraction from the Kern oilfields carbon-efficient compared to, say, the Ecuador oilfields supplying the LA refineries,
Where in Oregon is the pilot project being developed, and why there? I live in Sonoma County CA. Our transmission utility is PG&E, and our regional Community Choice Aggregator is Sonoma Clean Power (SCP). A very large % of SCP portfolio comes from the Geysers Steam Field, the worlds largest aggregate conventional geothermal production complex, located between Sonoma & Lake Counties. SCP is currently trying to develop new local Enhanced &/ or Advanced Geothermal resources. The presence of conventional geothermal indicates that heat is close to the surface. Seems like Quaise would be a strong candidate.
A good thing about Geysers is that it comes pre-equipped with transmission infrastructure.
A big part of the DeepHeat value proposition is that you don't have to go to Sonoma County to get it.
(Nothing wrong with Sonoma County, and I should be nice because under Prop 50, which I strongly support, Sonoma County is going to be delivering a working Representative to us benighted hicks in the sticks who have never (unless you are like me old and/or well-travelled) experienced such a thing).
Anyplace with enough flat space for the generating station and adequate transmission will do. I would suggest as a better place the campus in Cotati, with its captive customer base for HVAC from geothermal-driven trigeneration (Combined Cooling, Heating and Power, CCHP). Or central Santa Rosa, which really needs to grow up.
Interestingly, Chevron recently purchased the 4+ square mile Pocket Ranch property located in the valley below the Geysers Steam Field. It has a year-round creek. They were going to participate with SCP to develop new geothermal resources, but dropped out shortly before the Pocket Ranch purchase. Also, as you might already know, much of the Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Cotati & Rohnert Park wastewater is tertiary treated & pumped up to The Geysers to recharge existing conventional steam wells there. The wastewater is otherwise used to irrigate hay fields located in the Laguna de Santa Rosa flood plain.
When explaining carbon economics (TAC-valued) I lean on experience in Big Brown (i.e., the legacy fossil-dominant energy industry). Duke and Chevron are not the only companies working like mad to reduce their exposure to carbon-offset costs, which basically involves keeping a set of TAC books.
I'm sorry that Chevron has taken out of rotation its commercial describing a well in the Gulf of Whatever as carbon-efficient. It may be, served as it is by a dense pipeline network, and close to the refinery, compared to (using the example in my previous comment) some well in the Ecuador rain forest. Maybe Chevron's well in the Gulf is the last one we turn off...
My point is that Chevron is pretty smart. For a dinosaur...
(A little birdy told me that not all the dinosaurs died, pointing at the flock of angry turkeys chasing a terrified dog. I predict Chevron survives the reckoning, albeit in a different form.)
Obviously the carbon-economics analysis (everything denominated in TACs) loves this approach.
So long as we are working on increasing the Tonnes Avoided CO2 stock (in part by reducing the Tonnes Atmospheric CO2 flows) there is a strong incentive against pulling fossils out of the hole, unless it substitutes for higher-cost fossils. Following the incentives that, according to the State Senator for Bakersfield, make extraction from the Kern oilfields carbon-efficient compared to, say, the Ecuador oilfields supplying the LA refineries,
The deep geothermal sure sounds good.
Where in Oregon is the pilot project being developed, and why there? I live in Sonoma County CA. Our transmission utility is PG&E, and our regional Community Choice Aggregator is Sonoma Clean Power (SCP). A very large % of SCP portfolio comes from the Geysers Steam Field, the worlds largest aggregate conventional geothermal production complex, located between Sonoma & Lake Counties. SCP is currently trying to develop new local Enhanced &/ or Advanced Geothermal resources. The presence of conventional geothermal indicates that heat is close to the surface. Seems like Quaise would be a strong candidate.
A good thing about Geysers is that it comes pre-equipped with transmission infrastructure.
A big part of the DeepHeat value proposition is that you don't have to go to Sonoma County to get it.
(Nothing wrong with Sonoma County, and I should be nice because under Prop 50, which I strongly support, Sonoma County is going to be delivering a working Representative to us benighted hicks in the sticks who have never (unless you are like me old and/or well-travelled) experienced such a thing).
Anyplace with enough flat space for the generating station and adequate transmission will do. I would suggest as a better place the campus in Cotati, with its captive customer base for HVAC from geothermal-driven trigeneration (Combined Cooling, Heating and Power, CCHP). Or central Santa Rosa, which really needs to grow up.
Interestingly, Chevron recently purchased the 4+ square mile Pocket Ranch property located in the valley below the Geysers Steam Field. It has a year-round creek. They were going to participate with SCP to develop new geothermal resources, but dropped out shortly before the Pocket Ranch purchase. Also, as you might already know, much of the Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Cotati & Rohnert Park wastewater is tertiary treated & pumped up to The Geysers to recharge existing conventional steam wells there. The wastewater is otherwise used to irrigate hay fields located in the Laguna de Santa Rosa flood plain.
Interesting indeed!
When explaining carbon economics (TAC-valued) I lean on experience in Big Brown (i.e., the legacy fossil-dominant energy industry). Duke and Chevron are not the only companies working like mad to reduce their exposure to carbon-offset costs, which basically involves keeping a set of TAC books.
I'm sorry that Chevron has taken out of rotation its commercial describing a well in the Gulf of Whatever as carbon-efficient. It may be, served as it is by a dense pipeline network, and close to the refinery, compared to (using the example in my previous comment) some well in the Ecuador rain forest. Maybe Chevron's well in the Gulf is the last one we turn off...
My point is that Chevron is pretty smart. For a dinosaur...
(A little birdy told me that not all the dinosaurs died, pointing at the flock of angry turkeys chasing a terrified dog. I predict Chevron survives the reckoning, albeit in a different form.)