Geothermal energy developers plan to pump 24 million gallons of water into a dormant volcano in Oregon this summer to demonstrate a new way to generate electricity.


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Geothermal energy developers plan to pump 24 million gallons of water into a dormant volcano in Oregon this summer to demonstrate a new way to generate electricity.

The irony I glean from this article is this: Pumping water underground to produce energy from geothermal sources (a source liked by the environmental movement) is good. However, pumping water underground to produce energy from gas or oil (energy sources hated by the environmental movement) is bad. And yet, what difference really is there between either effort?

Share

3 comments

  • Jim

    There is a line in the article that tells you the difference:
    “Hydroshearing is similar to the process known as hydraulic fracturing, used to free natural gas from shale formations. But fracking uses chemical-laden fluids, and creates huge fractures.”
    One has chemicals, some of them carcinogens, and the other is just water.

  • I’m not sure but “creates huge fractures” is vague , I wonder what the actual difference in size of fractures are they are talking about . Also hydro-fracking doesn’t always use bad chemicals . i would be interested to learn more about the difference between this shearing and fracking

  • Kelly Starks

    > .. fracking uses chemical-laden fluids, and creates huge fractures.” One has chemicals,
    > some of them carcinogens..

    Well all geothermal water sources are rich with carcinogenic chemicals that leach out of the rock, so no big plus there.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *