Category Archives: Geothermal

Looking Back at Looking Forward

Back in January 2008, before most people even realized that trouble was brewing with our economy, Gail Tverberg wrote how the financial system was in for a serious battering. Because she worked as an insurance actuary, she was in a unique position to understand the intertwining and dependencies of financial products and institutions.

Here is a link to a talk she gave in October 2009, which updates her view of what she feels will influence the world’s economies.

I ask myself: Why did we not have more warning? Is it possible we were not looking at the right things?

Being a farmer, I tend to rely on simple physical processes as a basis for explaining things. The simpler, the better. “Energy Return on Investment” is much easier for me to understand than graphs and charts. It has predictive value and it seems like common sense –- i.e., there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine. Water does not run up hill. Things cool off by themselves. Etc.

I do think that we can still do meaningful things for our future, providing we don’t waste time. For us here on the Big Island, it is clear that we need to develop geothermal sooner, rather than later.

Listen To Richard on KIPO-FM Monday 2/1/10

Next Monday’s Energy Futures program on Hawaii Public Radio will focus on sustainable agriculture and its relationship to energy efficiency. Guests will be Richard Ha, president of Hamakua Springs Country Farms located on the slopes of Mauna Kea on the Big Island, and Jerome Renick of the Integrated Agriculture Network, also on the Big Island’s Hamakua Coast.

Energy Futures is broadcast live on Mondays 5-6 pm HST on KIPO-FM (89.3 in Hawaii) and is streamed on the Internet. An archive file of each week’s show is usually posted sometime on Tuesday at the Hawaii Public Radio website.

To listen to this program over the Internet via live streaming audio, click on your player (Windows Media, Real Media or iTunes).

We will be talking on the radio about ag and energy, both subjects that are dear to my heart. Here are some of the things I want to discuss.

Agriculture

For two years now, I have been the only person from Hawai‘i, where we are heavily dependent upon oil for our transportation and for the generation of our electricity, to attend the Peak Oil conference (in Houston 10/07 and Denver 10/09).

The world is not running out of oil – it’s running out of cheap oil. I believe that, in close consultation with the Hawaiian community, we should consider using geothermal for most of the Big Island’s electrical base power needs.

Geothermal breaks even at the equivalent of $57 per barrel oil and will stay steady for centuries. Fossil fuel oil prices will keep on rising, and bio fuels are even more expensive than fossil fuel oil.

We need to choose the alternative that is cheapest and that will not rise in cost, and that is geothermal.

We are busy reorganizing our farm so it will be relevant as oil and gas prices keep on rising. Last summer, when gas prices spiked, some of my workers asked to borrow money to pay for gas to come to work. Clearly, this is not sustainable.

We don’t think that importing foreign labor is sustainable, either. So we are reorganizing into units of small family farms. We call it the “family of farms.” The idea is to utilize our large-scale economy to the benefit of smaller, family-sized units.

For example, we have a local farmer growing all the Japanese cucumbers we used to grow. We provide free water and cooling and they do the farming. We hope to replicate this many times. The result is that all the family farmers will come from the immediate neighborhood, and this way we are not pressured to find workers, nor to provide labor housing.

Energy

I’m big on using Energy Return on Investment (EROI) as another tool to evaluate energy resources.  In the 1930s, to generate 100 barrels of oil took the energy equivalent of 1 barrel. In the 1970s that had declined to approximately 30 to 1, and now it is around 10 to 1. Clearly this trend is not good.

Folks who study these things, Professor Charles Hall in the forefront, estimate that an EROI of 3 to 1 is the minimum for a society to be sustainable. Biofuels, which are often discussed as the solution to the oil problem, have an EROI of <2 to 1.

On the other hand, geothermal has an EROI of 10 to 1 and it will be that way for centuries.

Plus, geothermal is the cheapest form of base power. And because the State owns the mineral rights to geothermal, it is a resource for the Hawaiian people: 20 percent of proceeds from geothermal goes to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

In addition, from the “off-peak” stranded power that geothermal provides, we can make ammonia, which can be used as a transportation fuel as well as a fertilizer source.

There’s a lot to like about geothermal.

Ulupono Organic Farm, First Nations & Geothermal, Korean Natural Farming

There are very interesting things going on all around us right now.

Yesterday, Kimo and I went to Kapalua on Maui to visit with the Ulupono Initiative organic farm folk. They have taken over the organic farm section of Maui Land and Pine and are starting to ramp up the organic farm. I am helping them in their marketing efforts.

Having grown up on a poultry farm, I couldn’t help myself and I had to take pictures of some of the free-range chickens. They looked happy.

Ulupono Kapalua 007

We flew back to the Big Island and, from the airport, I went straight to a Keaukaha Community Association meeting. Kanoe Wilson, Program Coordinator of the Kipuka Native Hawaiian Student Center at UH Hilo, explained that the Kamehameha Schools First Nations’ Futures Program, of which she is a member, is involved in facilitating dialogue among the various stakeholders surrounding the geothermal issue on the Big Island.

I believe that Kanoe and her group are leading the way in developing a model that shows the proper way to engage the Hawaiian community in future issues. They have a plan to engage the people and then to quantify results.

I am very happy to be working closely with her and the First Nations’ Futures people. It’s a great example of the younger generation taking its future into its own hands. I told the group in a recent get together: “…With their group, the future of Hawai‘i is in good hands.”

I gave a short synopsis of the geothermal resolution that will be introduced by Senator Russell Kokubun on the Senate side and by Representative Mele Carroll, head of the Hawaiian caucus, on the House side. Kanoe and I both emphasized that we were bringing information so the community will be on the leading edge of the discussion. That way decisions come from the bottom up, rather than from the top down.

This morning the Ulupono Initiative/Kapalua organic farm folks came to visit our farm. We are very excited to be on the ground floor of this new enterprise. Ulupono is in the middle of efforts to transition Hawai‘i to a sustainable place. I am happy to be a part of it.

Also, there will be a Korean Natural Farming workshop from February 26th to 28th. This method of farming claims to eliminate much of the fossil fuel inputs of traditional farming, and I feel it has great potential. We are one of the sponsors.

From the brochure:

You will learn a completely sustainable system of farming that requires no off-island inputs and provides abundant and nutritious food. Learn how to:

•    collect and cultivate Indigenous Micro-Organisms
•    make Oriental Herbal Nutrient (OHN), Lactic Acid Bacteria (LAB), Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ), Fermented Plant Juice (FPJ), Fish Amino Acid (FAA), Water-Soluble Calcium (WCA), and Water-Soluble Calcium Phosphate
•    These ingredients enhance plant growth and you will learn how to apply these inputs in synchronization with the nutritive life cycle of plants.

More Thoughts on Peak Oil – And Our Solution

I thought that I would revisit a post I did on my first impressions of the Peak Oil conference in Denver this past October. I have added comments to the post I did back then. My new comments are in italics.

Examining Energy Alternatives

I learned something interesting at the Peak Oil Conference I’m currently attending in Denver. It’s about a pattern. When U.S. oil costs exceed four percent of the gross domestic product – so, when the price of oil hits $80 per barrel – we go into recession. (Note that this does not mean oil prices won’t go even higher than $80 per barrel.)

I think that investors are very reluctant to bet against the pattern above. They know that at some point above 4 percent GDP, they will be playing with fire. Last July’s oil price of $147 and the immediate collapse is fresh in their memories as something that can happen. So we watch as the stock market and oil prices twist themselves into a pretzel, according to the strength of the U.S. dollar, the strength of the Chinese economy, the cold winter, the status of Iraq, the riots in Iran, and on and on.

We should be paying attention to the actual supply situation. The natural decline rate of the oil supply is between 5 and 6 percent. That means we need to find 4.5 million gallons per day of new oil supplies — every year — or we are going to be short.

Right now, we have more than enough oil. But Jeff Rubin, former chief economist of CIBC, predicts $225 per barrel oil by 2012 and with it the end of globalization, a movement towards local sourcing and a need for massive scaling up of energy efficiency.

We need to move to geothermal now, not thirty years from now.

David Murphy talked about Energy Return on Investment (EROI), and I asked him what he thought the EROI is for geothermal. He said around 10 to 1, and he agreed with me that it is an attractive alternative energy to pursue for Hawai‘i. This was the consensus of everyone I asked about geothermal. Because geothermal costs are stable, it’s a no-brainer.

Terry Backer, a panel member and long-time Connecticut legislator, pointed out how he sees the economy unwinding. He said that people in his state had been doing okay. In early 2007, although things were tight, people had around a $400-500 per month cushion. But then the price of heating oil was high in the winter, and then the price of gas went to $4.50 per gallon, and food prices went up too. It just stripped people of their “cushion.”

If the consumers have no extra money they cannot buy things. Elizabeth Warren gave this speech that says it all. (Coincidentally her base year is 1970, the year that oil peaked in the U.S.).

The question is, how do we give the middle class disposable income? Choosing the low cost alternative to fossil fuel can help. We have geothermal, which is this.

It’s exactly why we need to move to geothermal. It will stabilize costs, and protect folks forever from ever-higher electricity and water bills that result from rising oil prices.

We need to force that change, not give a thousand reasons why “no can.” Sure we can try other alternatives. But as farmers always say: “What works, works.” Geothermal works.

We must be careful not to end up like Iceland. Fishing and geothermal worked. But instead they started chasing after finance matters, whose foundation rested on sand. Their economy collapsed and now they are left with fishing and geothermal—the things that still work.

And when people start buying electric vehicles, this will protect them from gasoline costs, too. As for businesses, their customers will have more discretionary income to spend. The government will see fewer folks fall through the cracks.

We probably are going to be dependent on gasoline for transportation for a long time. One practical way for Hawai‘i people to protect themselves from high gasoline costs is to buy hybrid vehicles. In Japan, hybrids are a hit. On the Big Island, the more “base power” that comes from geothermal, the more discretionary income people will have. The more discretionary income people have, the more business prospers and the more jobs are available for people who are raising their families.

In the final analysis it is about the consumers. Consumers drive the economy. We tend to forget that.

For native Hawaiians, the use of the geothermal resource will generate revenues in royalties and possibly rents as well. They are consumers, too.

Biofuels, on the other hand, are not expected to be cheaper than oil, and may even need subsidies from consumers. Why would we do that, when we can instead save consumers money by using geothermal?

By now, everyone must be aware that biofuels are wishing and hoping. We wish it would work. Farmers know that it will be very expensive and that it will take money away from consumers.

We need to put in a cable to O‘ahu. They need base/dispatchable power over there, on top of which they can put solar and wind. Without that, O‘ahu will be hopelessly dependent on oil.

All that is true. But we need to take care of the people on the Big Island before we even consider another option. That point was made abundantly clear at a presentation on geothermal I did for the Keaukaha Community Association.  Done right, with community input and community benefit, I’m confident that the people would look favorably on sending power to O‘ahu. But it is a Big Island discussion.

As a farmer, I am concerned about where we are going to get the fertilizer to feed ourselves. Nitrogen, the building block of protein, is extracted from air using high heat and pressure. Oil and gas are what is used now, and that process takes lots of power. But if oil and gas prices rise enough, geothermal power can be substituted. We need to place ourselves in a position to win.

Again, geothermal would generate a lot of royalty money for the Hawaiian people. Without this revenue source, we will see more and more cuts to social services.

I am very encouraged to see that Hawaiians are leading this discussion. This is the right thing to happen.

Geothermal can be a blessing for the Hawaiian people.

If we can maximize its use as a resource for the native Hawaiian people, we will also strengthen our middle class. If we do that our businesses will flourish, everybody will benefit and our future will be hopeful

Study: U.S. Should Reconsider Biofuel Policy

Now there’s a study out saying it is basically wrong to pursue our present biofuel policy. I agree with it completely.

In the 1930s, you could get 100 barrels of oil with the energy from one barrel. In the 1970s, this had decreased to 30 to 1. Now, oil’s Energy Return on Investment (EROI) ratio has decreased to 10 to 1, and it will steadily decline as oil is more and more difficult to harvest.

To sustain our society, we must have an EROI of at least 3 to 1. Biofuels only have an EROI of 2 to 1.

Geothermal, however, is 10 to 1, and that ratio will stay steady for centuries.

Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy took a strong stance in the following article, and it goes against everything that is taking place in Hawai‘i today. Lots of the biofuel companies are benefitting from the new stimulus money, which is pushing biofuels that have ex-HEI folks in their organizations.

HOUSTON (Dow Jones)–The U.S. government needs to rethink promoting ethanol as a way to enhance energy security as production of the fuel is costly for taxpayers and poses economic and environmental risks, according to a study released Wednesday.

The report by the Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy notes that in 2008 the U.S. government spent $4 billion in biofuel subsidies to replace 2% of the U.S. gasoline supply. The average cost to the taxpayer of those substituted barrels of gasoline was roughly $82 a barrel, or $1.95 per gallon on top of the retail gasoline price, according to the study.

“We need to set realistic targets for ethanol in the United States instead of just throwing taxpayer money out the window,” said Amy Myers Jaffe, a senior fellow in energy studies at the Baker Institute and one of the report’s authors.

Here are the names of leaders in the Baker Institute for Public Policy. I especially trust Colin Powell, who seems balanced and credible to me.

Personnel
•    James A. Baker, III Honorary Chair,
•    Edward P. Djerejian, Director (former American Ambassador to Israel and Syria and Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs).

Board of Advisors
•    William Barnett
•    David Leebron
•    Colin Powell
•    Madeline K. Albright

Differing Geothermal Processes

From the New York Times:

Geothermal Project in California Is Shut Down

By JAMES GLANZ
Published: December 11, 2009

The company in charge of a California project to extract vast amounts of renewable energy from deep, hot bedrock has removed its drill rig and informed federal officials that the government project will be abandoned….. (read more)

There is a big difference between that California geothermal project and what we have here. In Hawai‘i, we already have the three key elements of HEAT, WATER and FRACTURES (PERMEABILITY), so our geothermal operators only use conventional methods for exploration– unlike that California project, where they were doing fracturing that can cause earthquakes.

The Alta Rock Energy company shutdown at Geysers (California), in the article above, comes one day after Swiss government officials permanently shut down a similar project in Basel because it produced damaging earthquakes.

The type of geothermal energy explored in Basel and at the Geysers required fracturing the bedrock, and then circulating water through the cracks to produce steam. They both had HEAT but they needed to FRACTURE the surrounding rock and then inject WATER to produce steam.

By its nature, fracturing causes small earthquakes. One of the largest ones measured 3 on the Richter scale, which is considered small for those of us living on the Big Island.

Still, 99 percent of the geothermal operations in the world — including ours here in Hawai‘i — do not use the fracturing techniques that caused the earthquakes leading to that
California project shutdown.

Here, they drill two types of holes: production and injection holes.
Production wells bring up the hot water and steam that pushes itself up under pressure. Injection wells take the “cooled” fluids back into the ground. This is a “closed loop cycle.”

From The Oil Drum, some examples of fracturing procedures used in the oil and gas business — again, this is not the process used here in Hawai‘i:

Geo1

Equipment used for hydraulic fracturing a well (Primer)

Geo2

Arrangement of shaped charges (the yellow cylinders) – when the
explosive goes off the cones collapse and small liquid metal jets shoot
out of the open end, through the casing, concrete and into the rock,
creating a channel. (Core Labs)

The charges aren’t all necessarily fired at one time or place, even though, for the illustration below, they appear to be.

Geo3

Representation of shaped charges firing and penetrating the casing, cement and wall (OSHA)

The jet of metal that shoots out of the cone will travel into the rock roughly 10 cone diameters, as a rough rule of thumb, and this carries a channel, or tunnel, out through the damaged rock into the surrounding reservoir. The collapse and creation of the channel happens very fast:

Geo4

Penetration of a perforating charge into Plexiglas after 3, 12, 21 and 30 microseconds. Marks are in cone diameters. (after Konya*)

The channel is initially hollow, and drives a set of small and large cracks out into the rock around the line of the charge.

Geo5
Jet penetration through Plexiglas (note the lateral cracks away from the line of penetration. The dark section is due to a change in background. (after Konya*)

However, while it is easier to show the damage that the jet does by showing how it penetrates Plexiglas, this is not rock, but it does show some of the events that occur. When, for example, (vide the discussion on jointed shale last week) the jet shoots into rock where there are clear joint planes defined, then these act to stop the crack growth (perhaps in the way that those who used to remember stopping cracks growing in old cars by drilling a hole at the end of the crack. It distributes the stress that was causing the crack to grow when focused on the tip, over a larger area so that it drops below the critical level). Or the stress is high enough to cause cracks to form and be reflected back at the jet.

Geo6 

Jet damage confined between two adjacent planes when the charge is fired into plates that run parallel to the direction of the jet. (after Konya*)

Biofuels & Geothermal

In Saturday’s Honolulu Advertiser, there was an article about a $25 million Department of Energy grant to UOP, LLC. That’s a Honeywell company that will test biomass feedstock at Tesoro’s refinery in Kapolei.

In Denver this past October, prior to the Association for the Study of Peak Oil conference, I asked my friend Gail Tverberg if she would introduce me to Robert Rapier. He is a well-respected chemical engineer and a frequent contributor to The Oil Drum blog. I wanted to ask him about next-generation biofuel projects.

Gail forwarded my email to Robert, and he wrote back that he was sitting in an office in Waimea, and that he had moved to Hawai‘i to work on just these kinds of projects.  It’s very fortunate for us, as he can explain these complex processes in a very clear way.

From his September 2009 post at The Oil Drum. There is a reference to UOP.

There are a number of companies involved in pyrolysis research. Dynamotive Energy Systems has been working on this for a while (I first wrote about them in 2007). UOP – a company that specializes in product upgrading for refineries – has teamed with Ensyn to form a joint venture called Envergent Technologies. The company intends to make pyrolysis oils from biomass for power generation, heat, and transport fuel (this is where UOP’s skills will come into play).

When I asked him about this specific project, Robert responded that: “…Pyrolysis is not too difficult unless you are trying to upgrade to transportation fuels. Then it gets expensive. But for stationary power generation, it is a pretty promising option in my view.”

And in this post he talks about pretenders, those technologies that are not working:

To summarize, the biofuel pretenders fall into several broad categories. The big ones are:

  • Hydrogen
  • Most would-be cellulosic ethanol producers
  • Most would-be algal biofuel producers
  • Most first generation biodiesel producers

This isn’t to say that none of these will work in any circumstances. I will get into that when I talk about niches. But I will say that I am confident that none of these are scalable solutions to our fossil fuel dependence. Frankly, I wish the algae story was true. I love the idea of getting renewable fuel from brackish waterways. But I try not to let a hope get confused with what I believe is realistic.

I agree with Robert that first generation biofuels, farmer grown, will not scale without major subsidies. If we were to give 20 cents/pound subsidies to grow biofuels, I would rather give the farmers a 20-cents/pound subsidy to grow food!

“Base power” is proven technology that is dependable 24/7 and makes up 85 to 90 percent of a utility’s power. There are only few options for base power. The first option is fossil fuels. The second is biofuels. And the third is geothermal.

Other options, like wind and solar, are nice to talk about. But they are only a tiny part of the mix. Biofuel, grown by farmers, doesn’t break even until approximately $320 per barrel; oil is in the high $70s today and we all know it will keep on climbing.

Geothermal breaks even at less than $60 per barrel oil. And it will stay that way for centuries!

On the Big Island, unless someone can show that the electricity cost to regular folks will be cheaper with biofuels than with geothermal, then we should go with geothermal.

Ammonia: The Practical Person’s Hydrogen

Midwestern farmers seeking fertilizer security are now looking to ammonia as a way to make fertilizer and fuel.

As we all know, farmers are very practical. What works, works.

What they have figured out is a quicker way to get to the hydrogen economy. (See a brief discussion of the hydrogen economy here.) Ammonia is the short cut they have discovered. To farmers, ammonia is the practical person’s hydrogen.

Ammonia can be made from geothermal and it is a dual-use product. It’s commonly used for nitrogen fertilizer, and it can be used for fuel in internal combustion engines (diesel as well as gas). Ammonia was used to power the rocket powered X-15 aircraft a long time ago. Maybe it can be used as jet fuel, too? Here is a link to the Ammonia Fuel Network.

The problem with straight hydrogen (H2) is that the molecule is so tiny it leaks all over the place. So in a hydrogen economy, our whole infrastructure, from gas cans on up, would need to be retrofitted. Ammonia (NH3) is a larger molecule and can work with present propane containers and pipelines. And because ammonia is more efficient as a carrier of hydrogen than is straight hydrogen, it is cheaper to move around.

It can be made from many renewable energy sources at many locations. It can be made using unused geothermal energy, and then stored for later use. This makes geothermal power even more valuable.

Farmers use ammonia all the time when planting their crops, so they are familiar and comfortable with its uses.

It’s not a done deal and there are limitations – such as that ammonia has half the energy of gas. So a car with a 20-gallon tank would need a 40-gallon tank to travel the same distance.

But what I’m doing is raising the question. I’m saying: Since ammonia is a thinking person’s hydrogen, instead of having to change every single car and every single service station, why not use it until we figure out something better? At this point, it actually seems doable.

It could be created using the off-peak geothermal energy the utility does not use. That makes it cheap.

Geothermal is a great Hawaiian resource. We are having discussions about it with the community right now. Decisions about increasing our use of geothermal need to come from the bottom up and not the top down. I need to repeat this: “It needs to come from the bottom up. Not the top down!”

The Geothermal Fork In The Road

This paper has most influenced my thinking about our energy future. I noted that in the 1930s, one could get 100 barrels of oil from the energy in one barrel of oil. By the 1970s, that had declined to 30 to 1 and now it is around 10 to 1.

An excerpt from that paper:

What is the Minimum EROI that a Sustainable Society Must Have?

Charles A. S. Hall *, Stephen Balogh and David J. R. Murphy
Program in Environmental Science, State University of New York – College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse NY, 13210, USA

Energy surplus is defined broadly as the amount of energy left over after the costs of obtaining the energy have been accounted for. The energy literature is quite rich with papers and books that emphasize the importance of energy surplus as a necessary criteria for allowing for the survival and growth of many species including humans, as well as human endeavors, including the development of science, art, culture and indeed civilization itself. Most of us who have thought about this issue deeply would even say that energy surplus is the best general way to think about how different societies evolved over time.

The trend is unmistakeable, and it’s what made me realize how important geothermal is to our sustainable future.

Geothermal has an Energy Return on Investment (EROI) of 10 to 1 and unlike fossil fuels, which will steadily decline, that won’t change for centuries. Very few people in the world are lucky enough to have this option.

When coming to the fork in the road where one choice is geothermal, the survivor types – the rubbah slippah folks – will naturally take the geothermal turn.

If we were to take the other fork, our electricity and water costs would rise and rise until there was no more. People would start to leave the electric grid. Our schools would not be able to afford the electric rates, and they would have to turn off the air conditioning and the kids would have a hard time learning. The poorest among us would have their electricity and water tuned off.

Down the geothermal road, however, the grass is always green. Our electricity and water costs will stay the same as they are today – for centuries. After awhile, our everyday living costs would be cheaper than those on the mainland.

Because our low income folks would have extra money, our businesses would start to grow. And as our electricity costs became lower relative to the U.S. mainland, we would be more competitive in manufacturing and things that use energy. Most of us would be cruising around in hybrid electric cars.

It’s perfectly clear that we need to go down the geothermal road. My Pop used to say: “Get thousand reasons why no can; I only looking for one reason why can!”

Here is the Puna Geothermal Ventures website. The company is run by local folks and its manager is Mike Kaleikini. They are good community citizens.

Geothermal Is Our Best Choice

Back on November 16, I attended a workshop to review work plans being considered by the Hawai‘i Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Task Force to recommend to the legislature at year’s end.

I was struck by the fact that geothermal was not chosen as an alternative. Geothermal has no greenhouse gas emissions, and it results in lower electricity rates.

Why was it not included?

The utilities plan to transition to biofuels instead of continuing to use fossil fuels, but consider this: Biofuels involve farming. At today’s prices, a farmer would get 6 cents per pound for growing jatropha or palm oil. They obviously would not do it for that price. When oil is at $200 per barrel, they would get 18 cents per pound. Still not enough. I believe farmers might become interested when biofuel feed stock pays 24 cents per pound, which is the equivalent cost of $270 per barrel oil.

So we can probably assume that we would not see very much local biofuel farming in the near future. Instead, the biodiesel would probably come from Indonesia. It would be certified as eco-friendly by a third-party, green organization. Whether or not the oil is brown or green, though, the bottom line is that it will be costly.

The legislation requires that adverse effects on small businesses be considered. It is fair to say that fossil fuel costs will rise and, therefore, electricity rates will rise too. When oil hit $147 last summer, it was disastrous for small business folks.

On the other hand, the estimated break-even price of geothermal is approximately $57 per barrel and it will stay stable for as long as we can see.

Why is geothermal not being considered?

I submitted the following comments:

My name is Richard Ha. I am testifying on behalf of myself and the 60-plus employees who work with us at Hamakua Springs Country Farms at Pepeekeo, here on the Big Island.

Why is geothermal energy not considered?

  1. Geothermal energy does not give off any greenhouse gas emissions.
  2. Geothermal energy has an Energy Return on Investment (EROI) ratio of 10 to 1—and, unlike fossil fuels and bio fuels, the EROI will not decline in the future.
  3. Geothermal breaks even at an oil price equivalent of $57 per barrel.
  4. It is available in abundance on the Big Island.
  5. Unlike 20 years ago, there is only a handful of opponents.
  6. Unlike the other two alternatives for base power—fossil fuel and biofuel—geothermal is much cheaper.
  7. There will be a huge benefit to small businesses if geothermal is sourced right here on the Big Island. It will give the Big Island a competitive advantage to the mainland at some future time.
  8. The EROI for geothermal is 10 to 1 and will never decrease; unlike oil, which was at 100 to 1 in the 1930s. It is in the 10-15 to 1 range today. It will steadily decline that is not in dispute. How soon will it hit 3 to 1 is the issue.
  9. Since geothermal is base power, we can potentially source up to 80% of HELCO’s power from this source. On the other hand, wind and solar can be depended upon for only 20% or so.
  10. Because geothermal is the cheapest source of base power, it will have the biggest positive effect on discretionary income for lower income folks.
  11. Choosing the high cost alternative for base power will send a message that the utility does not care about the situation of the lower income folks. And, the native Hawaiian community.

EROI is calculated in energy units, not dollars. It gives one a sense of direction and causes us to  question solutions that have low or declining EROIs. For example, shouldn’t we question biofuels as a solution when the EROI is less than 2 to 1?

I recommend that EROI should be included in all energy studies. It is a fundamental shortcoming of this study.

In the 1930s, we got 100 barrels of oil from the energy in one barrel of oil. In the 1970s, we got 30 barrels from one barrel. Now, we get 10 barrels from the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil.  This is understandable, and it will continue to go down as oil becomes more and more difficult to access. At some point before the last drop of oil is sucked from the ground, the EROI will be 1 to 1 and there will be no point in going further.

Charles Hall authored a paper: What is the minimum EROI that a sustainable society must have?  In it, he says that the EROI ratio must be no less than 3 to 1 in order to maintain a sustainable society.

Fossil fuel oil EROI is approximately 10 to 1 and dropping steadily, while geothermal is 10 to 1 and will not decline further. Bio fuels have an EROI of less than 2 to 1. Clearly, geothermal is the best choice.  

Aloha,
Richard Ha