[Pops]

Kub, I bought a big electric water heater (no place for a heat pump) and it has a time of day feature built in. I live in Missouri and climate change stops at our borders so there is no variable rate here. I did pay somewhat of a premium but that was based on size and insulation mostly I think.

[kublikhan]

I heard Missouri ordered the most aggressive use of time of use plans in the country. I think Evergy and Liberty have already started switching to those billing plans. Ameren are starting the switch next year.

Missouri’s Evergy, Ameren and Liberty residential customers may soon see their utility bills change based on when they use electricity instead of only how much they use it. All three of Missouri’s investor-owned utility companies should have a majority of their customers on a time-of-use rate structure by the end of 2025. The push for time-of-use rates comes as advocates hope to put less pressure on the power grid and give consumers more choices.

Upcoming rate structures
Evergy is the first utility company moving toward a mandatory time-of-use rate structure. Customers in Kansas City and other western Missouri communities can select from four plans.

Liberty transitioned its customers in Missouri last fall to a default time-of-use rate option that payers could opt out of. Ameren plans to move payers to a default time-of-use rate in the next year.

Missouri utility companies are moving to time-of-use rates. Here’s why

Regulators in Missouri have ordered the most aggressive electric-rate overhaul in the country — a bold step aimed at providing households with more control over their bills and encouraging them to use less energy during peak hours. Unlike “flat” electric rates, the industry standard for decades where power costs the same no matter what time of day it’s used, regulators in the Show Me State are making time-based rates the default option for households. They carry steep price differentials between peak and off-peak periods, a setup that will be watched across the utility industry.

Missouri is one of a growing number of states making time-varying rates the default choice for consumers, requiring them to opt out if it doesn’t suit their lifestyle. California and Michigan have done the same. But Missouri stands apart because of the aggressive price differentials between peak and off-peak periods that are aimed at influencing consumer behavior.

When the new rate structure takes effect next year for St. Louis-based Ameren Missouri, the state’s largest utility, running an air conditioner for residential customers switched to the new rate will cost five times more between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on weekdays than during off-peak hours. By contrast, off-peak prices, in effect from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. and on weekends, are about half of what residential customers currently pay under today’s default rate.

Missouri overhauls electric rates, raising rewards — and risks — for customers

A new rate plan by Evergy will soon change how Missouri residents are charged for electricity.

Starting in October, Evergy will be rolling out a series of new time-based rate plans that adjusts the price you pay for electricity based on the time of day its used. Evergy said all Missouri customers will be impacted by this change and will need to enroll in one of four time-based rate plans.

“The Missouri Public Service Commission regulates utilities in Missouri,” Kelli Kolich with Evergy said. “They mandated last year that we switch to time based rates for all of our customers by the end of this year.”

Standard Peak Saver
Under this standard plan, customers will be charged a higher per-kilowatt hour rate from 4-8 p.m. on weekdays from June until September.

According to Evergy’s website, during the summer months from 4-8 p.m. the price of electricity will spike from $0.09 to $0.38 per kilowatt hour (kWh).

Evergy to roll out time-of-use rates for Missouri customers

[Pops]

Thanks Kub!
So far we haven't seen this as yet. Our power comes from a tiny municipal system that sets the rates. I assume they will adopt it eventually as we did have smart meters installed. A google didn't find anything but general white paper stuff.
Maybe I'll get to use my fancy WH computer yet!

[yellowcanoe]

Our previous Liberal government in Ontario installed smart meters everywhere and put everyone on TOU billing. It was ok for my wife and I as we were not home during the day when power was most expensive and thus could do most of our power intensive activities such as laundry, running the dishwasher and airconditioning during off-peak times. However, the TOU billing was not popular and the off-peak rate was too generous and didn't reflect the actual cost of generating power. Our current Conservative government gave people the opportunity to either retain the TOU billing or switch to a flat rate for power. TOU rates were also adjusted so that off-peak consumption isn't as cheap as it once was. As we are now retired and are generally home during the day, it became inconvenient to move consumption to the off-peak period. Pricing for on-peak power was so high that we would have had to shift a high percentage of our consumption to off-peak to actually save any money. It made more sense to switch to the flat billing which unfortunately means the investment the province made in giving us a smart meter isn't accomplishing anything.

[ralfy]

Alternative energy is a big deal for most people worldwide because they have no choice.

[theluckycountry]

Like EV's, as more and more money is poured into the rollout less and less people can afford it. We're going back to the old serf days where the majority labor in the field so the wealthy landowner on the hill can illuminate his entire castle at night.

Of course all of this is being done on debt, like the promised US Federal program to build techy stuff at home. But what is debt? It's borrowing money from tomorrow (future decades in this case) to rollout energy systems that will be old and broken by the time the debt is theoretically repaid. So not only does it have to have to turn a profit for the company, it must turn enough to rebuild itself and pay off all the loans as well.

Coal and Gas was always going to run out, in fact a famous British scholar warned of it over 100 years ago when the system was tooling up. People laughed at him as people laugh today because they know it won't happen in their lifetime. But he was looking forward in time to the obvious and suggested we shepherd this Amazing resource.

Solar and wind are not magic as some believe, they are just ways to burn oil and coal to give us electricity at a more expensive rate. The *Magic* is that they will do this even when the oil and coal is no longer available. Is that possible? Perhaps. But at what cost? The electricity they generate now is 50~100% higher in cost, and that's using cheap oil and coal to build install and maintain them. Decommission them and cleanup the old mess? Yeah, like Hell.

Realist View



Cornucopian View

[theluckycountry]

Here's a rerun for you fans of yesteryear

Only renewables - not nuclear - could be too cheap to meter

Germany's long support for wind and solar energy is delivering zero-cost electricity at times. In contrast, the UK's new energy policy seeks to underwrite the rising cost of nuclear. "Too cheap to meter": that was the infamous boast of the nuclear power industry in its heyday. It has been catastrophically discredited by history.

Yet the phrase may yet see a new life - not of course for nuclear power - but for renewable energy. As the UK government publishes its draft energy bill on Tuesday, acknowledged by all but ministers themselves as primarily an arcane way of getting new nuclear power stations built, I am sitting in Germany. Already, on one particularly windy weekend here, the surge of electricity drove the price down to zero. Very soon, due to the 25GW of solar capacity Germany has already installed, hot summer's days will see the same effect: electricity too cheap to meter.

Yes folks, that cornucopian story was from 2012. How are we going in Germany today, still on target?
...German consumers pay highest electricity prices in the world. ...Households in Germany on average paid 40.07 cents per kilowatt hour. ...Despite the energy 'price brake', household bills in Germany are likely to hit a historical high in 2023.

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factshe ... lectricity
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-0 ... 385790.htm

Nov 2023. Germany to Offer Billions in Relief for Industry Power Bills

Package to provide €28 billion of support from 2024 to 2027
Energy crisis battered nation’s manufacturing-heavy economy

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ower-costs

And there you have it, from the leading nation on the transition, the best engineering in all Europe, and over a decade of abject failure.

[GHung]

Hello all! I only recently discovered that this board is active again and wanted to check in.
Regarding renewables - we are still happily off grid, here in Western NC (since @1999), going on 25 years having not paid a single utility bill, and have greatly reduced our reliance on fossil fuels over the years. While our vehicles are still gasoline powered, and our small farm tractor is diesel, alternatives can't be justified because we just don't drive or mow as much. We have re-wilded much of the property, letting nature have its way, and we drive much less than we used to. We also use about 200 gallons each of gasoline and propane per year for things like cooking, clothes dryer, and a generator when I'm in the shop (compressor, welder, lighting,, all that), when the sun doesn't cooperate.

I've made some updates/upgrades to our off grid systems - newer, more efficient, inverters, added a few more kW of panels; good lightly used higher wattage panels that are performing well, and best of all, I sourced some lightly used industrial grade LiFePo4 batteries (@32kWh storage) and said goodby to lead acid batteries. Huge improvement, that. They came from a test facility in AZ and are performing at/near their rated capacity after over 5 years.

Before folks make the usual comments about embedded energy, sustainability, resource usage re production of those things, I stopped doing that math years ago. Excepting balance-of-system equipment, virtually all of our system was sourced second hand, and personal resilience was top of our list. The way things were going 25 years ago, a priority for retirement was: no debt (no mortgage, car payments, credit locked, no power bill, no water bill, no sewer bill ....), Staying that course. And, yes, we have retired since I last posted here. Health is ok beyond things like my arthritis and minor age-related annoyances. We live well on a very modest income having paid so many things forward.

Our earth-bermed south-facing passive solar home has been nothing short of remarkable to live in. Just required some adaptations over the years which became second nature long ago. I also installed an evacuated tube solar water heater some years back which works well to keep our big hot (warm) water storage tank happy. We heat with wood (deadfall off the property) when needed. Surplus hot water warms the floors as well.

I realize that most folks can't/won't live this way and feel damned lucky to have had the opportunity and know-how to get where we are, considering the state of things. Due to covid/hurricanes/overshoot, our small community has been inundated with new arrivals, mainly from Florida. What used to be an annual migration has become a full-time invasion (infestation?), bringing their consumption habits and far-right politics to what used to be a remarkably balanced community. Lots of complaints about shortages of services and housing these days. Rentals and home prices sky high. The small hospitals in the area are generally overwhelmed. So there's that. We're content being the happy old hermit and his mate.

I reminisce about the early Oil Drum days and our discussions with remarkable people like Greenish, Randy Udall, so many others. I see Ron, Old Farmer Mac and some others are still drumming over at Peak Oil Barrel, and follow Nate Hagens on YouTube, though I'm even less interested in solving humanity's problems. Fully convinced nature and reality will take care of that. Too many humans. Not enough Planet.

Cheers! Hoping this finds you folks well. Hunker down. It's going to be an even wilder ride.......

[theluckycountry]

Sounds like you took the peakoil message onboard GHung and made the big transition when it was still unpopular. So the rural migrations are an issue for you. No one ever talked about such a thing in the old days but a little extrapolation and you could have seen that coming I suppose. That will only get worse too I suspect.

GHC heavily influenced my thinking on the matter, I transitioned from city to a 100 acre property but after thinking through his opinion on small towns sold up and moved into one of those. There was a crime trend developing on rural properties, at least those not owned by the traditional locals, and I found the drive to get supplies and whatnot was a drag, even though it was only 1/2 an hour. That's one thing I wanted when I moved, easy access to modern shops, healthcare, all that. Picking the town wasn't easy, I did a couple of years research on demographics, crime, etc etc before I settled on one in a mixed food growing region with a good local water supply. Because all the land around the town is farmland it's expensive, and developers don't build here unless it's high-end little estates, no deadbeats.

It's a bit different down here in Oz, we don't have a lot of the security issues you guys have and nowhere near the population pressure but as times get tougher (the long emergency) I know we'll be seeing more trouble. I went with grid-connect solar and it pays me well with the excess I export. I also have a modest offgrid system that can provide the basics but am considering a full house battery system since the state government is going to be subsidizing them next year. Given the longevity of batteries and their cost it just doesn't pay when you live by the grid. My grid solar system cost $8k and has 3/4 paid for itself in 4 years, soon I will be generating an overall profit which is rare these days.

It sounds like your home is super efficient energy wise, that's the way the builders should have gone from the 70's onward but pine frame boxes hungry for electricity became the standard. In 100 years most of modern suburbia will be a wasteland of ruin IMO.

[Newfie]

GHung,

Good to see you stopping in and reporting. It is interesting having the longer term history.

Our life has taken a different road. Once retired we have found we are drawn to undeveloped places. When we pass back through our old haunts and see hie they have “developed” it make us very sad indeed.

We now live on our old English steel sailboat for 5-6 months a year. That has wind and solar and we get by with 4 Golf Cart batteries, replacing about every 5 years. We burn some diesel getting around, the wind does not always cooperate, and we cook with pressurized kerosene. But boat maintenance is expensive and I am not getting younger, so there is that expense.

In summer we travel to Newfoundland where we have a small cabin in a rather remote area. A supermarket is an hours drive. But there is no visible government, the scenery is perfect and we have lots of family.

Both the Caribbean and Newfoundland are economical backwaters. Struggling to maintain a population. Yet wooing rich outsiders, thinking some of that money will rub off.

In any case we get to hang out with real people, generally not caught up in the Western rat race, and that is a blessing.

[theluckycountry]

Progressive Lawmakers Line Up Behind Costly Fix For Error They Made In Renewable Energy Plan

Oopsie.

When Congress voted to spend hundreds of billions to switch electricity production to solar and wind, it forgot something: transmission lines. New ones will be needed going to the locations of the new power sources, but nobody bothered to figure out who will pay for it or how much it will cost.

Congressmen Sean Casten (D-IL) and Mike Levin (D-CA) introduced a bill last month to fix their omission, largely at your expense. The bill has already picked up 76 co-sponsors, including eight from Illinois.

Grab your wallet. Here are the details:

In 2022, Congress passed the mislabeled Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which will cost an estimated $1.2 trillion, far exceeding initial claims. The IRA actually was the largest energy bill in U.S. history. Tax credits for renewable energy production, among the biggest elements of the law, are estimated to cost $263 billion.

No cap was placed on those tax credits and they were generous – 30% of project costs. That’s part of the reason for the cost overrun but it also means that new solar and wind production projects are underway. All the better, say IRA supporters.

Now, however, there’s widespread, bipartisan recognition that those projects are futile without transmission linking them into the electrical grid. Progressive economist Paul Krugman, for example, cheered the IRA but wrote despairingly in the New York Times that “we may need a third, bureaucratic miracle to fix the electricity grid and make this whole thing work.”

Casten, also an avid IRA supporter, now admits to the gravity of the problem saying that “80% of the clean energy progress we made with the Inflation Reduction Act will be lost unless we reform transmission and permitting.”

https://wirepoints.org/progressive-lawm ... irepoints/

Another good example of why not to take futuristic pronouncements by governments at face value.

[Tanada]

Progressive Lawmakers Line Up Behind Costly Fix For Error They Made In Renewable Energy Plan

Oopsie.

When Congress voted to spend hundreds of billions to switch electricity production to solar and wind, it forgot something: transmission lines. New ones will be needed going to the locations of the new power sources, but nobody bothered to figure out who will pay for it or how much it will cost.

Congressmen Sean Casten (D-IL) and Mike Levin (D-CA) introduced a bill last month to fix their omission, largely at your expense. The bill has already picked up 76 co-sponsors, including eight from Illinois.

Grab your wallet. Here are the details:

In 2022, Congress passed the mislabeled Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which will cost an estimated $1.2 trillion, far exceeding initial claims. The IRA actually was the largest energy bill in U.S. history. Tax credits for renewable energy production, among the biggest elements of the law, are estimated to cost $263 billion.

No cap was placed on those tax credits and they were generous – 30% of project costs. That’s part of the reason for the cost overrun but it also means that new solar and wind production projects are underway. All the better, say IRA supporters.

Now, however, there’s widespread, bipartisan recognition that those projects are futile without transmission linking them into the electrical grid. Progressive economist Paul Krugman, for example, cheered the IRA but wrote despairingly in the New York Times that “we may need a third, bureaucratic miracle to fix the electricity grid and make this whole thing work.”

Casten, also an avid IRA supporter, now admits to the gravity of the problem saying that “80% of the clean energy progress we made with the Inflation Reduction Act will be lost unless we reform transmission and permitting.”

https://wirepoints.org/progressive-lawm ... irepoints/

Another good example of why not to take futuristic pronouncements by governments at face value.

Rather pathetic when you consider that each of the Vogtle NPP just completed came in at $17 Billion with years of delays causing massive cost over runs. Using that as a base figure that 263 Billion green energy portion of the bill would have built 15 brand new 60-80 year lifetime green energy units producing 1250 MWe power, a grand total of 18,750 MWe. In addition all 15 could have been constructed at existing Coal power production locations eliminating the need for new distribution infrastructure and eliminating 30, 750 MWe coal burning station in the process.

[theluckycountry]

In addition all 15 could have been constructed at existing Coal power production locations eliminating the need for new distribution infrastructure and eliminating 30, 750 MWe coal burning station in the process.

Well I never thought of that, but of course it makes perfect sense. Certainly most of the existing plants would be located at sites amenable to solar. But that's the nature of capitalism, it doesn't take practical reality into account, only personal profits. And when government gets involved it can be even worse because of all the corruption inherent in the political apparatus.

Solar Firms Running Out Of Cash In California

The solar industry in California is facing significant headwinds following the implementation of a new policy in April, which reduced incentives that had encouraged homeowners to install solar systems.

...Since last April, sales of rooftop solar systems across the state have crashed 85% in the most recent months of 2023 compared to similar periods one year before, according to solar firm Ohm Analytics...

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/worri ... california

As I've often said, I'm a huge fan of home solar systems, decentralized, with or without in-house storage. It works. It takes the load off the grid during the day when you want to heat or cool spaces, do your washing, cook on an electric range. It literally pays for itself, certainly in my case so far. Then you move to large corporate owned systems and there the benefit is less for the homeowner but it still works. It's one area Australia has got it right, Federal government pays for 50% of a household install, and whoever is paying the taxes (not me anymore) foot the bill.

What they are doing in California is insane, and just another sign that without large subsidies all this renewable tech will only be available to the wealthy classes. I'm no fan of nuclear reactors as you well know Tanada, but they are the low-carbon future, if we want to keep the lights on.

[kublikhan]

Feb 12, 2024 - In the U.K., the government is investing in the assessment of the potential for old coal mine sites to be converted into renewable energy hubs. As many governments around the globe aim to phase out the use of coal, researchers are exploring the potential for old mining sites. Rather than be left abandoned, ex-coal production sites could be used for a multitude of purposes, from solar energy to geothermal operations, supporting a green transition and reinvigorating the economies of previous energy hubs.

In the U.K., the metro mayor for the west of England, Dan Norris, is investing £1.5 million in the exploration of over 100 coal mines in Somerset and South Gloucestershire to explore the potential for supplying renewable heat sources in the region. The mines in this region were emptied of coal and then closed and flooded, as the pumps were turned off. The water in the mines is heated by geothermal energy, with heat coming from the Earth’s core, allowing it to reach temperatures of around 20oC. The idea is that the water is extracted, and the heat is separated from the water to be used in heat pumps in homes and businesses across the country. New geothermal operations in existing coal mines could provide vast amounts of low-carbon heat. In addition, the water is pumped back into the mines to be recycled, making it a highly efficient process.

And it’s not just the geothermal energy potential that researchers are exploring when it comes to repurposing old coal sites. With many coal operations covering vast amounts of land, they are ideal for conversion into solar farms. Installing solar energy infrastructure on degraded lands like mining sites and landfills is a low-cost way of transforming the sites into clean energy hubs. Using ex-mining sites can help save time and costs associated with project development, as many sites already have vital infrastructure, such as transmission lines and roads. It can also revitalise the economy of former energy hubs, creating jobs and providing clean energy for communities.

Daniel Kestner from the Virginia Department of Energy explained, “In the coalfield region, there are about 100,000 acres that’s been impacted from mining… better to build on a lot of these mine sites than some prime farmland or some areas that maybe don’t want solar in their community.”

As governments look to increase their renewable energy capacity and reinvigorate former energy hubs, the repurposing of coal sites could provide the perfect opportunity for transformation. There is huge potential for the development of both geothermal and solar energy operations, which could help bring jobs and revenue back to long-neglected mining communities, as well as support a green transition.

Abandon Coal Mines Are Being Repurposed Into Renewable Energy Hubs

January 14, 2024 - Across the United States, coal-fired power plants are shutting down for good. In the last twenty years, over 600 have been retired. But just because these plants aren’t burning coal doesn’t mean they aren’t still being used. A trend is now emerging in a number of states to repurpose the plants to create new jobs and supply clean, renewable energy.

So, why would a solar farm, for example, want to be placed at the site of a non-operational coal plant?

It turns out that because these plants are already wired to the power grid — meaning that they’re already connected to the network of substations, transformers, wires, sensors, and poles that carry electricity from power plants to be distributed to our homes — installing new power plants at the site of old ones saves energy companies a lot of money and time.

Additionally, many oppose installing new power lines because they can spoil a nice backyard view, or even reduce your property’s value.

All these factors make existing coal plants ideal sites for new clean energy projects to set up shop. In the race to ramp up clean energy production across the United States, this is an important part of what the future looks like.

The idea to transition these sites has taken hold in a number of states, with Illinois leading the pack. In the Prairie State alone, there are currently nine plants that will become solar farms or battery storage facilities.

And more coastal states like New Jersey and Massachusetts are opting to repurpose their coal plants for new wind farms.

These switches make sense, as clean energy is quickly becoming the least expensive energy source available in many states.

In an unexpected twist, old coal plants are being repurposed to generate clean energy

[theluckycountry]

The mines in this region were emptied of coal and then closed and flooded, as the pumps were turned off. The water in the mines is heated by geothermal energy, with heat coming from the Earth’s core, allowing it to reach temperatures of around 20oC. The idea is that the water is extracted, and the heat is separated from the water to be used in heat pumps in homes and businesses across the country. New geothermal operations in existing coal mines could provide vast amounts of low-carbon heat. In addition, the water is pumped back into the mines to be recycled, making it a highly efficient process.

And it’s not just the geothermal energy potential that researchers are exploring when it comes to repurposing old coal sites.

What a crock of $hit. Geothermal? 20°C, talk about stretching the truth.

In the English Channel the water temperature can vary from (15°C) at the end of June, increasing to (18°C) by the beginning of September. WOW! Geothermal for sure...

For direct use of geothermal heat, the temperature range for the agricultural sector lies between 25 °C 90 °C, for space heating lies between 50 °C to 100 °C

You seem to find every useless scam out there in your desperate search for a renewable that works kub.

[theluckycountry]

Feasibility analysis of using mine water from abandoned coal mines in Spain for heating and cooling of buildings https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 8119310742

Conclusions:

Mine water from three closed coal mines, located in the ACCB (NW Spain) and is presented as an interesting option for local geothermal energy generation. The temperature of the stored mine water was found to be 20–23 °C ...The results obtained show that 20 MW of thermal energy is available for heat recovery from mine waters, compared to 4 MW of electrical power committed

You don't need a filthy old coal mine, any deep hole will do, but the 20MW in the example above comes at the cost of a sophisticated network of pipes and pumps and 4MW of electricity. And don't forget, that's 20 down in the mine, how much is lost into the environment from the pipe network before it reaches the houses? But of course electricity doesn't magically appear from the water, it's generated elsewhere and there are a lot of losses involved there too.

Electricity is not a particularly efficient way to heat, cool or move water (or a car) because of all the losses inherent in the system. We use it because it's convenient, and used to be cheap. It was proved long ago by szokolay in his book "Solar energy and building" that household heat sinks can be used to store the energy from the sun to be reused efficiently. Proper house design with good insulation (not what we build) is the key. But that system does not provide profit to a utility or tax revenue to a government so it was never promoted. The Spanish were world leaders in Solar thermal power generation and that was proved to be an economic failure. This coal mine BS will be proved a waste of time and money too. There are no free rides in the energy sector. No cheap replacements for Russian gas.

Energy losses in Electricity generation.
https://www.enerdynamics.com/Energy-Cur ... icity.aspx

And forget alternate rebuildable systems, they are worse. That's why any utility incorporating them has to raise charges by nearly 100%. And that's today with the systems being built with cheap coal and oil in China

Do it yourself, it's a lot cheaper in the long run https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI45yUhUWgk

[kublikhan]

The mines in this region were emptied of coal and then closed and flooded, as the pumps were turned off. The water in the mines is heated by geothermal energy, with heat coming from the Earth’s core, allowing it to reach temperatures of around 20oC. The idea is that the water is extracted, and the heat is separated from the water to be used in heat pumps in homes and businesses across the country. New geothermal operations in existing coal mines could provide vast amounts of low-carbon heat. In addition, the water is pumped back into the mines to be recycled, making it a highly efficient process.

And it’s not just the geothermal energy potential that researchers are exploring when it comes to repurposing old coal sites.

What a crock of $hit. Geothermal? 20°C, talk about stretching the truth.

In the English Channel the water temperature can vary from (15°C) at the end of June, increasing to (18°C) by the beginning of September. WOW! Geothermal for sure...

For direct use of geothermal heat, the temperature range for the agricultural sector lies between 25 °C 90 °C, for space heating lies between 50 °C to 100 °C

You seem to find every useless scam out there in your desperate search for a renewable that works kub.

You are the perfect example of the Dunning–Kruger effect. You learn a little bit about a topic. Then you think you know everything. You walk around absolutely certain of your conclusions. Then you think people who have come to a different conclusion on the topic ignorant fools. I have seen you display this behavior time and time again on many topics. No uncertainty, no doubt, no room for new information, just blind unwavering faith in the faulty conclusions you have drawn. Never mind it is a proven technology that has already been around for decades. If you think it's a scam, it's a scam.

Now it you want to turn off your arrogant "I know everything" attitude for 5 seconds, maybe you will actually learn something for a change. There are different ways of using geothermal energy. Some use high source temperatures, others use low source temperatures. The projects I quoted were for the second type. They are called geothermal heat pumps, or ground source heat pumps. These use much more moderate temperatures:

In regions without any high temperature geothermal resources, a ground-source heat pump (GSHP) can provide space heating and space cooling. Like a refrigerator or air conditioner, these systems use a heat pump to force the transfer of heat from the ground to the building. Heat can be extracted from any source, no matter how cold, but a warmer source allows higher efficiency. A ground-source heat pump uses the shallow ground or ground water (typically starting at 10–12 °C or 50–54 °F) as a source of heat, thus taking advantage of its seasonally moderate temperatures.

This technology makes ground source heating economically viable in any geographical location. In 2004, an estimated million ground-source heat pumps with a total capacity of 15 GW extracted 88 PJ of heat energy for space heating. Global ground-source heat pump capacity is growing by 10% annually.

Ground-source heat pumps

Ground source heat pumps, also known as geothermal heat pumps, are highly effective space heating and cooling technologies that extract heat from the ground. The ground source heat pumps are literally pumping heat from the ground into a space, often someone's home. Heat can be extracted from any temperature, no matter how cold, however hotter temperatures result in better performance.

Environmental Impact
Ground source heat pumps use energy effectively, and are often cost-effective and clean systems. They use 25% to 50% less electricity to run compared to conventional heating and cooling systems, and for every unit of electricity they can get over three units of heat (a COP over 3).[9]

CO2 emissions from these systems can be up to 40% less than other heating or cooling systems. Even better, if the electricity was generated by a renewable energy source, such as a house's solar panels, then there are zero greenhouse gas emissions during the system's operation (however, there are indeed GHGs associated with manufacture, installment, decommission, etc).

Ground source heat pump

It has already been a success in Gateshead, where the council-owned Gateshead Energy Company is using warm water from the extensive network of old mine workings 150 metres below the town to supply heat and hot water.

How disused coal mines are used to heat buildings
The water is heated by geothermal energy, the heat from the Earth’s core, and in some places can reach temperatures of about 20C.

Dan Mallin Martin, a hydrogeologist with the Coal Authority, the public body responsible for managing the effects of past coalmining, says this naturally heated water can be brought up through shafts or boreholes and passed through a heat exchanger – extracting the heat from the water.

“Typically we can take out around five to 8C, which doesn’t sound like a lot, but if you pass that to a heat pump, which is effectively a fridge in reverse, it boosts the temperature to something we can use – something like 60 or 70 degrees centigrade – that can go into people’s homes, people’s businesses, into hospitals, heat networks, many different end users.

“That’s a great way to make use of that and they can be really efficient. And really low carbon.”

“The transition to heat pumps as an energy source is very important and that’s one of our options for decarbonising our heating requirements across the UK,” Mallin Martin said. “With heat pumps, ground source options and mine water, we can feed into that decarbonisation, especially if we couple it with green electricity like solar panels and wind.”

West of England coalmines to be mapped for renewable energy potential

[nocar]

ground source heat pumps are nothing new in Sweden. We have heated our 1944 house that way since 1999. I think that is one of the most common heating methods in Sweden. Works very well.

[theluckycountry]

You are the perfect example of the Dunning–Kruger effect. You learn a little bit about a topic. Then you think you know everything. You walk around absolutely certain of your conclusions. Then you think people who have come to a different conclusion on the topic ignorant fools.

You're an ignorant cornuopian, you just parrot media spin, stories from companies hoping to garner government funding and startup capital. I at least do a little critical research from reliable sources. But I also use a lot of common sense, and common sense says that if this low grade Geo thermal was of any value it would have been tapped into long ago. Like nocar says above, it works ok up around the arctic circle where the temperature differential is high, but it's not cheap.

Let's look at Sweden.

Ground source heat pumps use the heat from the bedrock for space heating and hot water. In Stockholm, more than one third of all single-family houses not connected to district heating have a ground source heat pump.

https://www.sitra.fi/en/cases/ground-so ... stockholm/

1/3 Of those not connected to district heating. And what is district heating?

District heating is a climate-smart energy system which heats over half of all commercial and residential buildings in Sweden. The district heating network is a network of several thousand kilometres of pipes, transporting hot water under our feet through our towns. The hot water then heats up the buildings without you having to do a thing. ...We produce district heating from what would otherwise go to waste. For example, this can be waste from forests in the form of branches and wood chips,

https://www.vattenfall.se/english/district-heating/

So they are burning wood to heat water, whatever, but that's no free ride. How much oil etc is used to cut, process and ship it all? The homes with GEO come at a price to, drilling into bedrock.

The heat is typically collected by circulating a fluid in a well that is 100 to 200 metres deep and extracted by a heat pump, which delivers three units of heat for each unit of electricity used.

https://www.sitra.fi/en/cases/ground-so ... stockholm/

Then there are the other type of heat-pumps, which we simply call air-conditioners. Reverse cycle refrigerative units that run on electricity.

How Sweden electrified its home heating — and what Canada could learn

In the 1970s, three quarters of Swedish homes were heated with oil boilers. Today, electric-powered heat pumps have all but replaced oil in single-family homes ...Forsén, manager of international affairs for NIBE Energy Systems, shared his personal account of the Swedish transition last week at the Heat Pump Symposium in Mississauga, Ont., organized by the Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Institute of Canada. ...Sweden had a surplus of electricity that made electricity cheap, nudging homeowners toward heat pumps.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/sweden- ... -1.6806799

So what have we got out of all that? Sweden, which is a lot colder than the UK, has a quarter of it's detached homes using Geo. Not bad! But it's a rich country of course. And while the Geo systems are probably cheaper, after the installation is repaid, they still rely on a lot of electricity. Quite frankly a smarter alternative would be to have built the homes themselves underground, or at least a structure built that could be buried under a few meters of earth insulation. Because if the Grid goes down every home will turn into an ice chest.

It's easy to be positive about future energy requirements when you have a good job and fat bank account, when massive electric networks are delivering reliable power to your door 24/7. This geothermal is just another example of what we can achieve with liberal amounts of coal and oil. I hope they used copper pipe?

The vast majority of the Swedish shallow geothermal energy systems are vertical boreholes in hard rock, serving as heat source for heat pumps to single-family houses. There are around two million single-family houses in Sweden, and approximately 20-25% of these houses are today heated with a GSHP.

https://www.geothermal-energy.org/pdf/I ... /01040.pdf

[theluckycountry]

The critical flaw in all your thinking kub is that you attribute the technology and lifestyles we enjoy today as being the result of mankind's big smart brains. But it is the oil and coal that got us here, not our brains. All our brains achieved was a million ways to waste it.