Geothermal and the Nature Island....

Dominica....slow and steady leads the race.

In reply to Ayenmol

Good stuff.

Geothermal is particularly attractive to utilities because unlike many other renewable energy sources, it is not intermittent. Once the assets are commissioned, they can provide 'baseload' capacity. Of course the upfront CAPEX is very high, but its very mature technology.

There is also massive potential in St Lucia....and possible Grenada and SVG also. The major barrier is the high upfront costs.

How long a payback period for a venture like that?

In reply to camos

Don't think there is a typical number. Its very much about context and economies of scale, but the primary metrics for assessing energy projects are Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE), Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and NPV. I would say payback under 15 years for large scale projects for the traditional utility may be acceptable. If the NPV is positive over the life of the asset (most utility projects are 20-30 years) then it is considered a viable project also.

The world is changing as utilities are forced to have higher RE penetration, so the risk of stranded assets is pretty high ...especially considering the high capital cost of generation expansion projects which are really long term investments. Its an awkward time. Lots of energy investors are worried about not recovering their investsments.

In reply to Cheeks

The only concern is that it will be turned over to the Island's owners after 20 years....so how much will they have to put in for maintenance and repair at that point?

Otherwise. This is really encouraging and gives us small islands independence in what is a very necessary resource.

Self dependency in crucial areas of consumption is what every country should strive to achieve.

In reply to camos

Geothermal energy is often touted as a sustainable and long-term solution for heating, cooling, and power generation, but like any energy source, it comes with its own set of considerations, costs, and challenges.

The Cost of Geothermal Systems
For residential heating and cooling, the cost of geothermal systems can range from $40,000 to $75,000, depending on factors like the type of heat pump and the installation method. Horizontal heat pumps, which are less expensive at around $35,000, require substantial land space for trenching. On the other hand, vertical heat pumps, priced around $60,000, are more suitable for smaller properties but involve deeper drilling, hence the higher cost. These systems are a long-term investment, with outdoor components like ground loops lasting up to 50 years, while indoor components typically last 25 years before requiring replacement.

Risks and Challenges
While geothermal HVAC systems are durable, they are not without risks. One notable concern is the freezing of heat transfer fluid (HTF) during extreme cold weather, which can lead to pipe expansion, cracks, or leaks. Proper system design and maintenance are critical to avoiding such issues. On a larger scale, exploratory drilling for geothermal energy is as complex as drilling for oil or gas, with a level of uncertainty and significantly less energy density in the resource compared to fossil fuels.

Environmental Impacts
Despite being a cleaner energy source compared to fossil fuels, geothermal energy technologies are not free from environmental concerns. Air and water pollution, land subsidence, and the disposal of hazardous waste are pressing issues. Additionally, most geothermal power plants require substantial amounts of water for cooling or other operational needs, which can strain local water resources. Proper site selection and environmental safeguards are essential to mitigate these impacts.

Commercial Feasibility
Geothermal power projects, such as the Swan Hills co-produced geothermal and natural gas power project completed in 2023 at a cost of $49 million, highlight the significant upfront investment required. On average, it takes 5 to 10 years for a geothermal power plant to break even and recover its initial costs, making it a long-term commitment that demands careful planning and financial backing.

The Trade-off
Geothermal energy offers undeniable benefits, such as reduced greenhouse gas emissions and long-term cost savings in residential and commercial applications. However, its initial costs, environmental challenges, and technical risks must be weighed carefully. For homeowners and developers alike, the key lies in understanding these trade-offs and implementing strategies to maximize efficiency while minimizing environmental harm.

In reply to sgtdjones

The environmental effects of geothermal energy depend on how geothermal energy is used or how it is converted to useful energy. Direct-use applications and geothermal heat pumps have almost no negative effects on the environment. In fact, they can have a positive effect by reducing the use of energy sources that can have negative effects on the environment.

Just copy and paste without actually checking the sources and making sense of AI generated replys.reply.

Very little of what is posted in your reply is of any real concern for the application in question.

Ex....all pipes are prone to freezing in extreme cold...yet underground pipes are hardly affected by freezing issues unless you are referring to a Biblical event.

Dominica or the Islands am referring to have no issue with cold.

Ex 2....All projects make use of land....even farming has impact on land and need proper planning for efficiency.

You just post stuff you Google to seem smart rather than relevance to subjects.

In reply to Ayenmol

If you read what I wrote, you would see it applies to Canada

It gives a cost of one that was built in Canada.

But it's not your objective. Your insecurity keeps showing , one of your voids...

One of the friends in my Hall in Missouri was a contractor. He was much older when I got to know him and was long retired. But he had a geothermal setup in his home that he built himself.

He had it there for decades. The only thing you have to worry about is the Heat pumps.

He said it was expensive to incorporate because all cost are up front....thus usually contractors or those involved in building their own homes were the ones making use of it.

Prebuilt n omes hardly ever do.

............

When the temperature falls below 40°F, heat pumps become problematic.

In reply to sgtdjones

It does not matterwhere....the idea is that this method is almost fool proof compared to any alternative.

I would think, based on my admittedly limited knowledge. That freezing is not at all an issue with the most basic planning.

Water run underground is going to have a constant temperature. Even if you ran it for a while on open ground it would not freeze....because one....it comes to the surface at a constant temperature ....is moving.... and would actually warm the area around it than be impacted severly by the air temps.

Also....the real reason pipes freeze is due to the water sitting there after coming from an already cold source....and the air temps acting like a freezer.

That is why opening your pipes, even to a drip, nullifies freezing.

Much less a system that hardly touches the outside air and is always moving.

In reply to Ayenmol

Just stick to shingling roofs; its your forte

Explaining heat transfer , you have limited knowledge.

When I become as old and miserable as you are , I hope someone ends my misery.

There are available testosterone treatments to help you/for geriatrics...check it out.

Have a good day.

In reply to sgtdjones

You are not an expert in anything other than lies.

Everyone knows this!

You literally did a search and simply copy and posted all the AI generated tidbits that shows up on the search page.

You have no knowledge of anything!

Am 100% sure am younger than you....btw.

If you have noting to post, just stay of the thread.....if we want AI generated search responses we'll go to Google.

In reply to camos

Another option is Co-gen!

In reply to sgtdjones



So.....you would need a pipe that runs for more than 6 hours above ground, non insulated and no antifreeze properties, before having to worry about this issue. Not to mention the water would have to be stationary.

But dopey you probably think frozen ground means frozen pipes in the ground.....but you want to tell me am the one who does not understand heat transfer.

You do realize heat transfer knowledge is almost symbiotic to a roofer? Particularly a metal roofer?

Dopey. The only knowledge you have is what you find in searches. Whenever needed to produce an original thought your feet end up in your mouth.

In reply to XDFIX



useful, but that seems to be utilized only by some big industrial plants, that generate their own power.

In reply to Ayenmol



I am curious about the details of the commercial arrangement myself. I may or may not know someone with the details. . I just haven't asked the questions yet. Life has been busy, but classic arrangement is BOOT (Build Own Operate and Transfer).

In reply to XDFIX



Co-gen is indeed an option even for fossil fuel powered plants. All the waste heat from burning fuels or even from the hot gases from a geothermal plant can be further used for additional generation, heating water for hotels, etc. The classic arrangement is based on what is called the Rankine Cycle (feel free to google it - for the non engineers) or there is even a version called Organic Rankine Cycle, which uses a lower boiling point working fluid where the temperatures are not as high.

Waste heat recovery can increase efficiency and hence reduce carbon emissions by up to and maybe even over 5% for even a small diesel plant.

I am a proponent of a balanced approach to energy security and carbon emissions reduction. The Renewable Energy rabid folk don't get the challenges that intermittency can play in grid stability and even resiliency in times of major hurricanes etc. The last thing you want is a hurricane to damage a bunch of large scale PV systems and Wind Farms, and after a hurricane, you have a generation shortage. Which is why Dominica is 'lucky' in that Geothermal can provide a low (almost zero) carbon energy source without the intermittency and resiliency concerns of wind and solar.

On another note, while I believe in energy independence and resiliency. I dislike mimicry. The pressure put on small islands to reduce carbon emissions is stupid IMO. The entire Caribbean probably contributes barely 1% of global carbon emissions. We can go 100% renewable, in the process reducing power quality and reliability and still not make dent in global emissions.

These little islands should feel no burden to do this unless it comes with reduced cost and improved reliability and resiliency.