Google on Tuesday took the drilling debate in a different direction – announcing that Google.org is investing nearly $11 million in technology to expand the nation’s geothermal reserves. That’s more than the U.S. government is spending on geothermal projects this year.
Traditional geothermal power plants, like those built by Calpine (CPN) in Northern California, sit atop reserves of naturally occurring steam or hot water that can be tapped to drive electricity-generating turbines. So-called Enhanced Geothermal Systems, or EGS, hope to tap geothermal energy in any location by drilling deep underground to fracture “hot rocks” and then pump them with water to create steam that can be used in a power plant. The great potential, of course, would be to liberate the Midwest and South from their dependence on coal-fired power plants.
“While the U.S. debates drilling in the ocean for oil, we are focused on drilling for renewable energy – and lots of it – right beneath our feet,” Google.org said in a statement, citing a Massachusetts Institute of Technology study that estimates the accessible heat below the U.S. represents more than 2,500 times the nation’s annual energy consumption. (A Google.org video on geothermal is above.)
Google.org (GOOG), the search giant’s philanthropic arm, will invest $6.25 million into AltaRock Energy, a Sausalito, startup, developing EGS technology. The investment is part of $26.25 million round of funding AltaRock revealed on Tuesday. Other investors include marquee green-tech venture capitalists Khosla Ventures and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.
Potter Drilling, a Redwood City, Calif., company developing hard-rock drilling technology to be used for geothermal, scored $4 million from Google.org. Other investors include MIT.
Google.org is granting the Southern Methodist University Geothermal Laboratory $489,521 to map North America’s geothermal reserves.
The geothermal funding is the latest investment in renewable energy by Google. It has invested in solar power plant companies BrightSource Energy and eSolar as well as in high-altitude wind company Makani and various ventures related to plug-in hybrid electric cars.
Green Wombat 
If Google wanted to save the economy the would invest in http://www.helveyusa.com
the build hightech drilling rigs usa made!!!
It’s a big relief to see a non-oil company invest its own money in alternative energy sources. Lord knows we won’t get that sort of committment from our pathetic oil soaked government.
I own Google stock…(Fidelity Contrafund)…It is outperforming all others…Consider that!!!
Wow Google! That’s a huge positive move.
While this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as tapping geothermal, what implications are there if the whole country were to convert to geothermal?
As we tap the energy the rocks would cool. As the rooks cool they would contract. Could this contraction cause increased seismic activity.
Before we make a major commitment, this needs to be studied.
My thoughts are exactly the same Ray. I wonder if this technology widepread would cause more issues than drilling for oil, as we are tapping areas that are still in a very dynamic state. I wish it would work, but we need to study it more for sure. I liked to see alternative energies get more tracion, this one seems more risky than most?
The whole interior of the earth is “geothermal”. This will last for several more billion years. The sun will probably become a red giant and engulf the earth before our geothermal resource can no longer boil water. The only problem is to locate where the subterranean heat is close enough to the surface to be reached (drilled to) economically.
Doesn’t Iceland use geothermal energy? I could be mistaken but I thought they were completely energy independent. Albeit there small pop < 500,000 I am pretty sure they use geo-thermal for the majority of their energy needs. Can someone say for sure?
Dream on folks. There is only one viable “alternative energy source and that’s Nuclear. But I don’t here any of these Namby Pamby Go Green types preaching the good that this energy would provide.
Instead they want to praise the smoke rising out of their pipes and dream of energy that doesn’t exist.
Ethanol was supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread. But what did it bring us? A higher cost for a loaf of bread and an automobile that gets horrific gas mileage. I’ll say this quietly so as not to upset to many people. The energy it takes to produce a gallon of Ethanol offsets and actually reverse any gain the fuel might actually have in reducing oil dependency. Said another way, you might reduce the amount of oil needed to produce gasoline, but you turn and and burn more oil making the electricity to produce the Ethanol.
Face it folks, oil is not outdated or antique. It has always been and will remain the best viable energy source for a long long time.
I say start drilling and producing US oil. You want energy independence? Then that is the only way to do it.
And for those that do not understand the free market system. Here it is in a nut shell. When demand rises and supply diminishes the price for the product goes up. When the supply rises and outstrips demand, the price of the product goes down.
More oil equals less cost. The sooner we wise up to the fact that global warming, save the planet and all the other BS junk science floating around is exactly fiction the better off this planet will be.
Of course I would venture to bet that their are some that still believe the outlawing of CFC’s actually had some effect on the dreaded Ozone Hole. Well guess what it is still there and hasn’t gotten any smaller. But hey the Government couldn’t have been wrong could they? Yep they were. Now science tells us that that dreaded hole has always been there and is a natural phenomenon that man had nothing to do with.
Get a clue people.
Save the Earth? Junk Science? Where did you go to school? Was it Kansas-no-evolution-high?
I am glad to see that companies try to explore something new. After seeing how geo-thermal energy is harvested in Iceland, I do not see why we cannot supplement our energy supply with something that is already produced by the planet. Granted, this approach will NOT solve all our energy problems, but this is a great step forward. This is as American as it gets. We were the first country to start drilling for oil and we will be the first country to get off it.
Yeah, James, that’s the type of yahoo thinking we need! Just drill, sheep, drill!
If the leaders of Google wanted to save the world, they would sell their jet fuel guzzeling 737’s and travel coach like the rest of us.
At least lower their carbon footprint and save the ozone!
What a bunch of hypocrites.
Iceland’s geothermal energy is a result of its unique presence atop an oceanic spreading ridge where geothermal energy is close to the surface. The Iceland model is not likely transferable to other locations.
RTFA folks, this is a grant
Hey “Had it with Namby Pamby,” what do you propose we do with all the waste that remains radioactive for potentially thousands of years from this “clean” nuclear energy? Cut off mountain tops?
If the private sector must blaze the ‘green path’, I hope the government is taking notes.
Where will all the water come from???
I applaud Google for their vision! But…why don’t we just turn Hawaii into a big thermal generating plant and stick a pipe down in an active volcano? LOL
“I own Google stock…(Fidelity Contrafund)…It is outperforming all others…Consider that!!!”
Hey Jeff….YOU DOLT! the Fidelity fund might be performing well but Google only makes up 3% of their holdings and is actually down over 31% for the year.
INCREDIBLE !!!!!
Good. Oil is ancient technology only still around because of greedy terrorists and politicians who take their money (George W. Bush as an example). Wouldn’t attack the country that attacked us on 9/11 because they have too much oil, but made up excuses to attack another country. And we don’t even have their oil yet.
In Fallon & Reno, Nevada we have Geothermal Plants that are producing electricity to the Sierra Pacific Power Company. The water is already deep in the earth in these areas; it is heated by basalt rocks. After generating the heat from this water it is recyled back into the earth by infusion wells. Think of a large hot water heater deep underground & that is what Geothermal is all about. A number of companies are doing explorations in our area to bring in more of these plants. I applaud Google for their resources & vision into the future for alternative resources.
At first I thought this was going to be about tapping the heat of water underground in the water table! 😦
The most famous geyser in Iceland is now an artifical fountain whose water isn’t even that hot. The pressure collaped.
I heard the same about the geysers in Yellowstone but I have never seen those so maybe it’s not true. I heard a large population of Californians have emigrated to the outskirts of Yellowstone and are pumping the water table the Yellowstone geysers rely upon dry as a bone.
This ideal is pretty good though one always has to be mistrustful of scientists where money is involved.
I think this is an amazing thing. I hope this jump startes a new revolution to invest in this.
Wow, there are real live people that actually believe if we drilled all are oil we would be energy independent.
Geothermal heating and cooling works great on individual homes, never see your oil an again for the most part. At these prices your return is less than 5 years and long-term savings are huge. All new construction should eb using geothermal heating/cooling.
To do it on a larger scale for power plants has great potential and truly would give us energy independence. Unfortunately the Bush administartion has no energy policy outside of “let’s make oil companies rich” but hopefully we’ll get real eladership soon and start toward an energy independent path.
sorry to all you tree huggers but for geothermal you still have to drill a hole in the ground. That means creating roads, and sometimes (heaven forbid!) even cutting down trees for the roads or the facility locations in the wilderness. No CO2 but there is still some disturbance to the surface and buildings to build.
I’ve used closed loop ground source geothermal for my house for 2 years to heat and cool my house. Say what you will while I pay $350/yr for heating and cooling with a payback in about 3 years with the current fuel prices.
“Had it with namby pamby,” your logic is flawed. There are multiple types of ethanol. Corn based ethanol is an inefficient fuel, it is true that more oil is consumed producing corn based ethanol, then it replaces. It takes 1.3 gallons of oil, to produce the amount of ethanol that is equal to the energy in embodied in 1 gallon of oil. Also if you planted just corn in all of the acres of land within the US that can be harvested you would still not have enough corn to replace or meet the US’s current oil energy demand. A large amount of the increase in food prices is a result of rising oil costs, but the increase in demand for corn due to corn based ethanol creating a new market for corn is a contributing factor. Corn producers now can seek higher sale prices and pit the markets against each other, to garner increased profits. Corn based ethanol is not a viable solution, however cellulose based ethanol has promise. Rather than try to change your opinion look into it.
I also have to disagree with you on nuclear, I think there is enough common sense in the arguments against nuclear that I don’t have to go into too much detail. Radioactive waste, and its safe containment. There are some promising nuclear waste reprocessing technologies, that may change this, but for the time being it is not the best course for future energy production.
As for opening up the national wildlife preserves and allowing new off shore drilling off the coasts of the US, these are not short term solutions. The first issue is that US oil is not nationalized. The US’s oil production is sold in the World’s energy markets. The US’s portion of world oil production is 3%. With the increased production it could possibly rise to 4% and that is about all, this is a very generous increase, and it would take a perfect aggregate of all factors involved to realize. Simple math tells us that this will not decrease oil prices in any significant way in a global market. The second issue is that oil companies are already sitting on proven reserves that they have not drilled. Why would we give them access to more land and areas to drill that haven’t been proven, when they aren’t utilizing what they already have. Also any increase in oil production and the resulting hypothetical decreases in prices would not be seen for 4 to 5 years. There is a lengthy process from licensing to design to construction to delivery to legislation for nationalizing oil production before any price fluctuation might occur.
Now for global warming and global dimming. Global dimming is scientifically proven with the pan evaporation method. Search for it on the web. Basically we are receiving less sunlight then we did 100 years ago, about 4% less. Due to the increased emission particles in the atmosphere sunlight is actually being reflected back into space. Rain occurs by water condensing on the surface of particles in the atmosphere. More particles in the air due to increased emissions results in larger surface area for rain to condense on. These rain droplets act as mirrors, which reflect the sun’s rays back into space. So your saying this should result in lower temperatures across the globe. It would if in fact global warming didn’t exist. Scientists until recently have been grossly understating global warming, it is in fact much worse than previously predicted. Rather than try to change your opinion I will leave you with two facts. The Bush Administration’s scientists agree that global warming is a reality, though impossible at this point to prove within in our technical and economic knowledge, models, and theories. Rather than focus on global warming focus on the cause, increased pollutants in our atmosphere, which decreases air quality, one of the key components to our existence. As we contribute more emissions into the atmosphere from non-emission free sources, pollutants are absorbed into the air we breath, without mechanisms in place to cope with and process these increased pollutant levels we will choke ourselves to extinction. Look up the increased rates of respiratory disorders in newborn infants. Your right it is a free market system and we are running an increasing deficit.
Everyone wants a silver bullet approach. The truth is oil with all of its inherent issues is probably the most efficient source of energy we currently are aware of, however we use it in very inefficient ways. To mitigate our factual pollution problems it will take an aggregate approach of hopefully renewable zero emission technologies to meet our current and future energy needs. We are not experiencing an energy shortage, we are in a pollution crisis, as a result of outdated and inefficient technology.
It is striking how some comments in this discussion thread imply there is only one solution to the current energy crisis. Yes to nuclear but no to geothermal; build wind mills at the detriment of more drilling. Our economy proves that there are mutiple answers to a problem, and they all may be right within specific parameters. Maybe wind would be good in TX, while solar best in the SW, and nuclear in Florida. Our strength is our ingenuity as a country and our market flexibility that should allow us to finance the appropriate options for each financial environment.
However, there are some invariable parameters. First, more of the same in energy policy is no longer an option. The degeneration of our natural environment is a well proven fact (just wishing it gone will not make this problem go away) and thus we need new alternatives. We thrive under free markets and competition is the best driver for innovation. Therefore, we need a leveled playing field. The gvt should not decide on a technology (corn ethanol vs cellulosic) but allow the markets to make that decision after a carbon cap and trade policy has been instituted. The efficiency of the markets will allow the best contenders to rise to the top while those not financially viable will dissappear.
It is encouraging that companies like Google have the foresight to promote that innovation. That does not make them tree huggers (they may be for all I know, and yet that is irrelevant)but instead pioneers, much like those that conquered the West in the 19th century. This is our new frontier, and as we have in the past we will rise to the challenge and succeed. Personal attacks against those that propose this forward thinking (Google billioners with their jets, or Al Gore with his large carbon footprint) is reactionary and ultimately pointless. It doesn’t matter if they are being hypocrites; we have a problem and we need to fix it.
Talking about geothermal check out this article at Popular Mechanics
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/earth/4245896.html
I built a home a little over a year ago. After researching several alternatives to heating and cooling (to lower my monthly costs, not being a “tree-hugger”), I decided on a closed-loop Geothermal system for my home. It was a little more expensive to install, but my original estimated payback period was 6-7 years. After 1 year of (very low) utility bills, my new payback estimate is 3-5 years. My avg. electric bill for year 1 is $215/month and about $12/month in natural gas (basic charge for hook-up) for a 4500 sq. ft. home. My neighbors with traditional natural gas systems are paying several hundreds more each month.
I’m not sure about the scalability of the single residential model to a large power plant, but everyone building a new home in this country should seriously consider this option. It just makes sense.
Geothermal is the best option out there and finally people with money are realizing it. It works 24/7 and doesn’t create any harmful bi-products, what can be better than that? Not even nuclear, which is a great option, can come close to this since the earth will stay hot and keep geothermal plants running till the turbines break. Iceland has already figured this out, now we have to.
For more information on Geothermal Energy please see the Australian Company featured in the above video.
http://www.geodynamics.com.au/IRM/content/home.html
Drilling into Granite located approx 4km from the surface, water injected is then exchanged into heat to produce power then cooled and re-injected thus a closed loop effect which does not use new water each time.