This Technology Could Revolutionize Clean Energy
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 11. 2023
- Want to support my work? You can sign up for a paid subscription to my newsletter and CZcams channel here - www.distilled.earth/
In this video we cover enhanced geothermal and the role it could play in decarbonizing the world's electric grid.
Recently there have been a series of breakthroughs in enhanced geothermal systems, an advanced method of generating electricity from the Earth’s heat.
If these developments continue, geothermal could generate between 10 and 20 percent of the country’s electricity in the coming decades, according to recent studies from the Department of Energy and Princeton.
Enhanced geothermal could also solve one of clean energy’s biggest problems: intermittency. Unlike solar and wind, geothermal power plants can operate at all hours of the day, no matter the weather or time of year.
In this story, I’ll cover the past, present, and future of enhanced geothermal and look at what needs to happen in order for the technology to play a large role in decarbonizing America’s power sector.
All sources can be found in my article on the same topic here: www.distilled.earth/p/the-new...
#climatechange #technology #sustainability #geothermal #energy - Věda a technologie
The biggest problem I can see with most geothermal would be the calcification of the plumbing now if they could do it with a closed system, where they took demineralized water and pumped it down into the ground, kept it inside of the pipes, and then return to surface with the heat it could be a decent system. But most hot water from those deaths are highly mineralized and would require constant maintenance using acids to keep the plumbing functional.
The closed circle system is in the works by a few copanies, but many of the proposed ideas is to circulate the water already in these deep prous rocks too. The chemistry of this water varies quite a bit. But even still, since the pipe to the reservoir is closed, and the reservoires are encased with a clay cap, this comcerm can in most cases be ignored for deep heat geothermals, yet it depends on the individual case:))
Look up Eavor in Alberta. They have been developing a closed-loop system for years.
Lol "but Oil and Gas wells have a loophole and can permit new wells in just a few years"...Of COURSE they do...
Classic
Geothermal should be able to piggyback on that. It's only fair.
It’s the same crap over and over again. Big oil. Big money. Profit first. Talk later. Who cares about the next generation.
Could an Oil and gas company drilling a well for 'Energy' legally speaking exploit the same loophole I wonder?
@@incognitotorpedo42
It’s not about what’s fair; it’s about what was bought and paid for.
Geothermal doesn’t have oil’s money to grease the palms of politicians.
Mechanical engineer working in the renewable energy sector here. Thanks a LOT for this input. Very interesting!
Happy you liked it!
How does a channel with only 13k subs produce such well made and well researched videos!?!
Mechanical engineer working in the renewable energy sector here. Thanks a LOT for the input. Very interesting!
Thanks for watching!
One correction here, fracking for natural gas allowed the US to switch from coal to natural gas power plants which are much less CO2 intensive then the coal. Therefore I would argue that fracking had a net positive impact on the environment compared to the coal that preceded it.
Not sure this is the most promising geothermal innovation, but who knows. Ever hear of Eavor? They don't use fracking, but drill down deep enough to harvest energy from anywhere essentially. I believe they use a closed-loop type of system.
Yes. They use a fluid with a lower boiling point than water in order to make a thermosiphon that has no parasitic load - there's no pump. Cold fluid sinks, and the warm fluid rises to have its work exchanged off, and then back down as cold it goes again.
@@CanCobb Yes, there are several fluids with a lower boiling point than water and several that reach the expanded gaseous state at lower temperatures. A closed loop system returns the heated liquid or gas to the earth and does not expel anything to the atmosphere.
No but I'll check it out! Thanks for the tip.
Great video! You should check out the latest drilling technology (millimeter wave drilling). I'd love to see a follow up video where you talk about how "easy" it could be to retrofit some oil and gas power plants to use geothermal steam if we can drill deep enough. I'm surprised you didn't mention the geothermal energy project in Swan Hills Alberta.
Will check it out!
Specifically, two fascinating companies that could revolutionize geothermal energy (without fracking) are are Quaise Energy and Eavor (if they can bring down the cost curve).
The main selling point of Quaise Energy’s approach is the it’s a Closed Loop system: one sealed hole, water down steam up. No fracking. No pollution. Just have to get down 22 km to reach 500 degree Celsius rock. Will they get there? Time will tell.
@@fordstone6308I’m one of the people who is confident they will. My biggest concern is how long the entire system will remain viable. If maintenance costs are very low, the upfront costs will pay back over the long lifespan of the installation. If maintenance costs are too high, the break even may be too far into the future. It would be fantastic to have an additional, completely renewable source for base load power that doesn’t involve damming major waterways and messing with the environment. If successful, it will without question be another nail in the coffin of fossil fuels.
Eavor is the company here in Alberta doing the same thing. I really hope they are successful because we could use our oil and gas workforce to drill for heat instead of the toxic levels of fossil fuels we produce today... Aka the 3rd largest oil reserve on the planet locked away in the tarsands..
Excellent, informative, and timely! Thanks, Michael!
Thanks Dani!
Are there any downsides from traditional fracking that also happen with this technology? Like maybe large amounts waste water?
There aren't the same risks to groundwater. But there's an active debate over the seismic risks.
More from the Department of Energy here: www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/EGSFAQ_Sept22.pdf
I was going to ask the same question. My initial reaction was that fracking is BAD. From the linked PDF, I can see that EGS does not pose "a high risk" - not all that reassuring. It seems the safety is being monitored and improved as they go.
In a way, the renewable nature of the technology will ensure that it grows slowly for now. And so we'll have time to verify its safety before it and other renewables suddenly get ramped up. @@distilled-earth
It is an unfortunate likelihood that there will be some downsides to the technology (eg. seismic). Most of the problems with traditional fracking are caused by the oil and gas leaking into the surrounding environment and not so much the technology itself. But there are always downsides to every energy production technology. Removing the need for fossil fuels means we have to weigh the risks of renewable technologies as well and place them in suitable areas. We should always be aware of the risks posed by certain technologies and weigh them against the benefits of using them rather than traditional fossil fuels. But we also shouldn't become a victim to the propaganda put out by fossil fuel companies that only focus on the downsides of the renewable technology. It's funny how society accepts that coal and gas companies destroying our environment and health is normal but if windmills kill some birds they should be banned altogether.
@@mrawesome9219exactly, the petroleum industry shills that haunt social media highlight any and all of the downsides of renewables (and there are some to be sure) but neglect to acknowledge the absolute unmitigated disaster that the O&G industry causes in areas like the Alberta tar sands, the oil spills that recurringly blight our landscape and oceans and the *direct* human health hazards that burning fossil fuels represents. All of that before even considering the acceleration it is causing to warming of the planet.
@@distilled-earth so different risk? Not worth it.
If the target is only 10% with rising electricity demand, meaning in absolute numbers more coal and gas is going to be needed too. Does not sound like an energy transition to me in the slightest.
The more i learn about our power grid, the more i realize that modern nuclear energy options are our best option. Small form reactors, LFTRs, Thorium Reactors, molten salt reactors. Utilizing our advanced technology, Improved engineering & material science. Utilizing our greater understanding of safety & well made designs. We have so much more advanced computer technology & robotics that can be used. It feels like even tho tons of advancement has occurred with engineering designs, safety measures, etc. It still doesn't matter to most people. It's like most people are ingrained with a natural negative response when talking about nuclear energy. It's a bummer because i truly believe that our best option for our future is to start utilizing Modern advanced nuclear energy options in our electrical grid. It's just proving to be challenging to get politicians to get on board.
It will really allow places to be much more energy independent. Less reliant on fossil fuels. They'll have efficient, stable electrical grids and the rest of the grid could experiment with alternative power sources, power desalination plants, etc.
We need to heal from the trauma of our past. See & learn that those things only happened solely from Us not understanding what we were doing when it came to nuclear energy at the time. We didn't have advanced enough technology, material science, engineering, safety measures, understanding of how to go about everything, etc. This source of energy will greatly help the world improve towards the future and lowering emissions. More than anything else could, while also providing a very stable electrical grid system. Currently we have alternative energy options but the majority of our grid is powered off of fossil fuels and emission producing sources of energy. We will be so much better going forward commiting to modern advanced nuclear energy options.
Fun fact. Since the induction of water creates a ton of pressure. It creates little earthquakes. The USGS and other seismic networks have a bunch of seismic sites to study earthquakes
Ya still lots of researching looking at this. The Energy Dept has more on it here: www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/EGSFAQ_Sept22.pdf
excellent quality, congrats and thanks.
Thank you!
I remember this stuff back in the seventies reading in Popular Mechanics
Good information ji sir tq so much for giving this information
No mention of where they’ll get the water to pump through the wells. Also, the rock temperature will moderate over time and new wells will need to be drilled to keep up with the power plant’s economic needs.
that technology has been around for some time, problem is cost of drilling. they done numerous drillings in Indonesia and those have not been viable
Iceland is very successful with this but then they have active Volcanos to help.
Being a recent video is very strange that no mention has been made to the real revolution in geothermal: the deep and everywhere millimetric wavelength drilling by Quaise Energy. That's really seems the future.
But it uses conventional fracking, if this pollutes the groundwater, it is not at all clean energy because it comes at the cost of two things, ground stability and natural groundwater pollution through fracking and powerplant water that might have chemicals that are foreign to the groundwater...
Solar and wind are a waste of money when compared to an idea like this. THIS is a good idea that will work.
They definitely aren't a waste of money. They'll be cheaper to build than EGS for a long time. And MUCH cheaper than fossil fuels like coal and gas.
As Jesse Jenkins says, we don't need a basketball team of point guards. We need an evenly balanced team.
Wind and solar will play a really important role in the energy transition even with great tech like EGS.
@@distilled-earth. Nope. As one indicator, the huge offshore projects on the Atlantic coast are being cancelled due to lack of profitability. It seems the interest on the loan would be more than the payback on investment.
Search for “Simon Michaux” and listen to the ultimate reason why it’s not going to happen.
Do that and let me know what you think. Please.
Deep is making some advances in using old oil wells to produce electricity Alberta has lots of abandoned wells that need maintenance.
Thanks for sharing. Will check it out!
I think in order to harness geothermal energy people need to develop technology of cheap deep drilling, most likely based on plasma principle.
The two greatest sources of energy available to the Earth are the sun and the heat of the Earth beneath our feet. We have become well aware of the challenges, difficulties and limitations of efficiently harnessing the energy of the sun after it has reached the atmosphere of our planet. Geothermal needs to be given the support and encouragement to be developed at least as much as solar and other energy generating sources. A typical alien message to humanity would be; "Hey you idiots,....it's right under your feet!"
We need more aliens running utilities here on Earth!
I'm surprised this video doesn't mention Eavor, in Alberta. They have been developing a closed-loop geothermal system for years; in my opinion, this is a much better and more predictable technology. Right now (January 2024) they are building their first plant in Germany, which will provide both electricity and district heat.
Deep drilling technology is the answer to our 24/7 needs
The areas were you find permeable rock, water and heat are more common than talked about here. We are very far from exhausting those areas. Going to enhanced geothermal systems opens up nearly the whole world for geothermal power plants. It is actually strange how little geothermal energy is used for producing electricity, space heating and industrial applications.
It produces energy 24/7/365, is inexpensive to run, costs far less to build compared to nuclear and is that abounded, it could provide all the primary energy needs of the USA for example.
Tough Sell: I ran preliminary numbers on their 400 MW facility, enormous upfront installation costs for 8-10 doublets of 8000’ horizontal wells with multi-stage fracs will be {50 doublets at $20 million each is already a billion} Then add a geothermal plant at $500 million.
Love more information about how this new technology works instead of a history leason on everything else.
Appreciate the feedback. I'm most interested in the broader context that leads to technological innovation. So I explore history, politics, economics, and other angles to technology stories.
If you want deep technical explainers, I recommend checking out other channels like Just Have a Think or Real Engineering.
Thanks for watching this one though!
Check out "utah forge" for more detailed information about this project
Fervo's geothermal tech is pretty good, but Eavor's is significantly better. While Fervo relies on fracking tech, Eavor uses a closed-loop system that eliminates the fracking piece and all the problems that go with it. Details on Eavor's CZcams channel.
But how will the oil companies drink the milkshake?
I'm an all-of-the-above energy guy. If this works and if it can be done in an economical way, then by all means. What I oppose is demonizing one source of energy for its drawbacks while refusing the acknowledge the potential drawbacks of the "preferred" option. Hydraulic fracturing is a revolutionary technique. It's not risk-free. We see mini-quakes/geological instability. We have the slickwater that must be handled in an environmentally responsible way. And we have the costs for the entire life cycle of all the equipment to factor in. When we start having a proper, fact-based discussion on this topic without the politicking and with a genuine effort to find real solutions, then I'm all in. That means 4th gen nuclear, MSRs, renewables where they make sense, and yes chemical energy whether its fossil fuels or biofuels.
Does the energy generated exceed what is required to pump the water through the earth? What is the efficiency of this process?
Yes, definitely. Same principle as a heat pump. Use a little energy to run your system, and extract a massive amount of energy from air or water.
I'm surprised that you didn't mention companies using high-power millimeter wave drilling like Quaise in your video. This technology opens far more locations to geothermal than fracking based technologies alone. Using high-power millimeter wave drilling any location in any geology anywhere in the world is open to virtually unlimited amounts of heat
That’s a subject for another video, maybe. That said, I’d want to see cost breakdowns on it. The free market is your best friend or your worst enemy, and a lot of wishful thinking goes on with the subject of clean energy, that emphasizes cool tech without looking at its economic viability relative to other solutions. (See also the “Nuclear is the only option!” crowd, and the “game changer” fusion breakthrough fantasies.) I really like the principle of geothermal, and I’m excited to see a real-world implementation of EGH, because it’s based on well-understood, proven technology (fracking), so the cost model is predictable and much of the scale-related cost improvement is already done. Maybe alternative drilling technologies will open up more sites in the future, but afaik there is ONE non-traditional geothermal site right now, and it’s the one in this video. Go after the low hanging fruit first, and if alternative drilling techniques want to challenge, they can do so by either offering lower cost, or by reaching a market ESG can’t reach.
I'd need to devote a whole video to that. David Roberts has written about other geothermal applications and technologies here:
www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2020/10/21/21515461/renewable-energy-geothermal-egs-ags-supercritical
You have missed an important issue in your talk - execution risk. Australia has huge geothermal reservoirs and a number of companies have tried to develop it and had serious problems with corrosion in well linings. Seems to have stopped development there. The concept is great and superficially relatively simple but the environment several kilometres down is pretty tough. I invested money in it 15 years ago and lost most of it. Not saying it can’t be done but your explanation is short on major risks. B- from me.
This particular technology doesn't tap existing resources, the water is 1st treated to reduce harmful effects to the system and then pumped into the loop and monitored throughout the process
How comparable is this to a Net Power?
Geothermal Energy is Nuclear Energy due to the radioactive decay of matter deep within the Earth; Abiotic Oil and hydrocarbons are also the result of radioactive decay/fusion, not fossils.
The amount of dispatchable energy you can get from each dollar's worth of capital has been increasing exponentially, just as computing power has been for decades. Such increase always runs into the constraints of physics eventually, but solar+storage is likely to have the edge over using steam turbines _even if the heat were produced for free by magic_ because of factors like the inherent wear-and-tear involved in having moving parts.
Still important to have a diverse energy mix. No energy tech is perfect.
@@distilled-earth- Diversity is good, but there are limits.
I always wanted to build a wind generator for the winter, but the cost of solar dropped so much that even the marginal cost of additional solar _in the winter_ made wind a nonstarter. I guess I’ll just build it because I want to - it’ll be my SUV!
Note: This is Not one of the first enhanced geothermal energy or EGS application. There is even a list of EGS facilities on wiki. You are confusing it with Hot Dry Rock or HDR technology as you explain this later.
It's the first commercially viable EGS project. Big difference between that and the early experiments.
wave energy is going to happen too. It like geothermal is about to breakthrough tech obstacles and go widespread.
Will look into it more. I'm most interested in tech that is being deployed. But deep tech like this is cool too!
At least 30% of the thermal energy needs to be dumped into the air for multi cycle generators. Yes, better than carbon fuel heat +co2 production but still huge thermal pollution. Near surface geothermal cools the surrounding land so no net thermal pollution. Deep well pulls heat up that wouldn’t reach the surface for a very long time. Check excess over geothermal gradient to determine net heat pollution…
But does not too much use of geothermal power cause premature cooling of the Earth's core - thus solidifying and we lose plate tectonics and magnetic field prematurely....
Hmmm.... we Icelander have been using Geothermal energy for 100 years to warm our houses, green houses and make electricity, so this is a new element?
Actually, we been experimenting this method here outside Reykjavik, but it made earthquakes, so they stopped.
They pumped cold water down, but the earthquakes started, check it out....
It's a new element for countries which don't have freely available geothermal sources like Iceland, Japan and New Zealand do. There was talk about using geothermal in non-porous rock in the Hunter Valley in Australia, but I haven't heard any progress on it. I'm surprised that Japan doesn't make a lot more use of geothermal, although recently I heard of objections from hot spring owners who were worried about their wells drying up.
Lots of sulfur with Geothermal especially Iceland. However goto sauna in Iceland they charge you $100.00/day. Crazy.
Iceland is not a place for a poor tourist@@lmtada
As I mentioned in the video, the type of geothermal harnessed in Iceland is very geography dependent. The new element is technology that makes it possible to do what you're doing in Iceland where I live in Colorado.
sorry, but I did not understand your comment? How is Icelandic geothermal different?
Here is a link from OR, which is a Icelandic energy company and this report explains, what happen if you put water down, sadly it is in Icelandic, but you can use Google translate.
www.olfus.is/media/stofnanir/stjornsysla/frummat_a_skjalftahaettu_vid_Skardsmyrarfjall.pdf
@@distilled-earth
EGS is a niche application. AGS is the future of geothermal.
AGS would be great. Still in the category of deep tech that is pretty far from actual deployment. I'm watching it though. Would solve a lot of problems.
Huh. I wouldn't call this enhanced geo.
Just a few weeks ago I saw a new video where no fracking is needed. Instead pairs of boreholes are drilled parallel, close to each other at a somewhat diagonal angle. The parallel holes creating a loop in a small area. Several of such pairs next to each other. And If there's enough heat, this can easily have multiple layers (diagonal after all).
That seemed more promising to me than reverting to fracking.
You can't say fracking without waking up the ninnies huh.. lol.. good video. Sorry for the comment section. This technology is well on its way
I love the demonizing of fracking, lol. I'll let you in on a little secret, if we hadn't figured out how to buy more runway for renewable energy research and rollout, we'd all be screwed. You can't legislate scientific discoveries in renewable energy, and trillions of dollars in infrastructure don't just appear because you decide you want it to.
We are STILL, even after the extra time we bought researchers with fracking, not ready for the transition to renewables. Talk to anyone who works for the power company, they're not going to blow smoke up your rear.
🤔
I swear oil always has some sneaky loophole! Why is it so much easier for oil than clean energy 😭
Always! 😭
Yeah! Lets crack open more of the earth...what could go wrong? Using fracking tech, pumping water into a "Hot area" ? Like they have excess water to throw away. Remember what happens to the aquifers during fracking?
There's no aquifers, it's solid rock
With efficiency of 10%, it is not economical. if you are not lucky, it could be only 1%.
Only certain locations it can reach to 20%.
I expect that this technology like all others will have an unforeseen detrimental effect on the planet, it’s just which is the lesser evil.
There's no such thing as a free lunch. So it probably won't be perfect. But I'd bet money it will be orders of magnitude better for people and the environment than fossil fuels.
Ah yes, let's use tech already known to increase likelihood and frequency of geological events (earthquakes specifically) in an area like California already more prone to such problems...... 🙃
Fracking--bad.
We learned this directly from the oil and gas industry's experience with fracking.
Fracking will cause harm to the reputation of renewables and will slow renewable energy adoption.
Geothermal fracking and burning wind turbine blades are not sustainable.
It has many problems and is not ready for prime time - maily due to heating and cooling and material expansion and durability. NOt a panacea and certainly NOT doable everywhere
Revolutionized it to where? Location, location, location. $$$$$$ to locate it anywhere that is not a hot-spot. Nuclear still exceeds geothermal, by being mobile. Copenhagen Atomics can ship a reactor anywhere and have it set up where the transmission line already exist….. much cheaper, ThorCon is ready shipping reactors to Indonesia cheaper than coal & geothermal.
I've only heard ONE thing that this video didn't touch on. A new kind of drilling setup that China has. Instead of a (drill-bit) to cut down through the earth. Drill-bits get dull and after a certain depth are not even viable. As the heat is just to much and they melt. China uses a (plasma) to cut down into the earth. And, as a by product, the earth turns into a ceramic and coats the sides of the hole. And, this method, was (really) energy efficient. (Really, really) energy efficient. I don't remember, except it was astronomical (like only 10% of what would be required with legacy drill-bits). Don't quote me on those figures cuz I don't remember exact number on that. I only remember the "feeling" of astonishment, it induced in me.
Millimetre wave drilling used to melt and vaporise rock. Like microwaves used to heat up the water content in food, but longer wavelength, and higher power.
With the (cheap) drilling that China proposes, I think it will be the next (thing). The drilling is so cheap and easy. That this kind of thing will be at every house (that is rural). Your own power well will be as common as (your own water well). In WV, where I am, about (50%) have their own water well. And a little bit (2%) have their own gas well. (you need to own some land for that (gas well), as a gas vein is not commonplace. A (heat) well will fit right in.@@paulnewman2000
I will believe in geothermal energy if it can supply all of the energy needs of a self-contained and self-sufficient vertically integrated iron and steel industrial factory from ore and other raw materials to the finished product in the form of finished and semi-finished steel and iron products of all kinds. With 300 to 400% leftover energy for other purposes. For the time being, we Russians will concentrate on oil, gas, coal, and NUCLEAR ENERGY.
If you can't go to geothermal, bring geothermal to you, I guess.
BYO geothermal!
Rock can also store surpluse energy .
1:25 you meant to say 20th
gotta keep y'all on your toes
The lithium ion battery part is extremely oversimplified
🤔
No. This Technology Could Revolutionise Clean Energy.
I thought fracking causes earthquakes !
If it’s for Oil and Gas yes! . . . . I’m sure fracking for geothermal would be seen as perfectly acceptable
I think EV's are going to go the same way as the walkman.
Great video ... however the title is boring like all the rest ... it will not revolutionize clean energy ... it will help, and be a part of many different solutions that will decrease our dependance on oil ... this particular solution cannot be used everywhere ... ie fracking ... still enjoyable to watch your work
Thanks for watching!
Will edit the title to: "This technology will help, and be a part of many different solutions that will decrease our dependance on oil ... this particular solution cannot be used everywhere ... ie fracking"
Don't you mean the beginning of the 20th Century, not the 21st? 1:25
Sloppy editorial review.
Yes. But don't you mean the "20th century" not the "20th Century"?
Sloppy comment.
High Folks,
This is a bad idea. There is maggma down there that wants to become lava. Not a good idea to piss off Hades!
V/r ,
R
Quintillion and quintillion dollars business in the universe years2024 making electricity by tharmal😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊
Fracking for energy? Heh... What could go wrong?
As long as there aren't the same problems as fracking for gas.
*fingers crossed* #StudiesAreNeeded
Ya there are lots of studies looking at the seismic impacts right now.
my man... love the channel.. would recommend working on ur storytelling... gets slightly boring😢 but nah good video though!!
🤔
@@distilled-earthdon't worry about your storytelling, it's great, could even be more in depth and longer
@@distilled-earth🤨🤨
Clean power, Nope.
You create a weakspot in the earthcrust. Layers after layers have secured the crust, with bringing water in it you will weakening the crust and can causing a devestating effect on the planet.
If you put water straight in, it can go into a fisher and this could reach even magma in the depth. So with it you will create weaknesses and even earthquakes.
The well should be having a coating to secure water to move into the deap or into fishers.
NO. and I say that Because Yes It is No
40 year old technology with brand new click bait title. Nothing new here.
Nope. This is a *thousands of year old* technology. If you're going to criticize the video at least be accurate with your complaint!
@@distilled-earth oh...that changes everything......lol...
Yeah, "could", probably not, based on revolutionary tech over the last hundred years...
Another greenwashing topic pumping water onto hot granite rocks ,meaning uranium and thorium elements the water is then radioactive. Thus steaming radioactive water can be life threatening all I say its hare brained ideas amaze me .
ur mum is a technology now?
nice.
Unless this is done where the earths crust is very thin you would have to drill down miles to get usable heat energy. It is absolutely NOT everywhere. So 2 miles would be about 100C and 7 miles for 180C usable heat. That would be a fantastic cost to produce a small amount of heat. This is just another renewable unicorn CON.
At this point in time in history, clean energy is just Thomas Edison putting generators every couple of miles. It's destroying Landscape just to make a couple of bucks and we could be using pulse energy
Lmao geothermal fracking power plant
Drill, baby, drill!
Is this kind of smug and irritating, or is it just me?
you should be banned from using the word "clean"
😂 20yr old tech. wasn’t even new or historic or a breakthrough 20 yrs ago. There is exactly nothing new here click Effn bait bs
Is this kind of smug and irritating, or is it just me?