Geodynamics set to prove hot rocks model  

Posted by Big Gav in , , , ,

The SMH has an update on Australian geothermal power hopeful Geodynamics progress out in the desert - Geodynamics set to prove hot rocks model.

High-profile geothermal hopeful Geodynamics Ltd says it's moving closer to creating an operating heat exchanger and validating the geological model of its joint venture Innamincka project in South Australia.

Operations have started at Jolokia 1, a joint venture with Origin Energy in the Cooper Basin, to complete the well, fracture the granite and create a geothermal reservoir, Geodynamics said in a statement on Friday.

Rig 100 has re-entered Jolokia 1 and successfully drilled through the cement plug set in September 2008, the well has been cleaned and Geodynamics is undertaking scheduled logging to check the condition of the well.

A simulation program is expected to start in late July and run through August.

Geodynamics will then return to Habanero for the drilling of two more wells and the commissioning of the one megawatt Pilot Plant, with the aim of being in a position to make the final investment decision regarding development of the 25 megawatt Commercial Demonstration Plant.

Giles Parkinson at the Climate Spectator reports that cleantech stocks haven't done too well in Australia in recent times, with geothermal energy companies being the worst performers of all - CLIMATE SPECTATOR: The cleantech bubble blowout.
Australia’s first cleantech bubble has well and truly burst. The geothermal energy industry has lost practically all support from the investment community, and share prices are just a fraction of what they were just a year or two ago. Hundreds of millions in market value has been wiped from the board.

In the history of market bubbles, this event might have passed unlamented. But geothermal energy is not a mere passing fad, or a cool iPhone app – it forms a crucial part of the government’s renewable energy strategy, and is supposed to be the centre of $15 billion of investment over the next decade.

As things currently stand, that looks impossible, and the government, in danger of another embarrassing debacle in its renewable energy policy, is under increasing pressure to take action to help de-risk the sector.

Cleantech and renewable energy investments as a whole are in a sorry state in this country. The 75-company Australian Cleantech Index, a basket of renewable, environmental, waste and biofuel stocks with a combined market value of $10 billion, slumped 32 per cent in fiscal 2010, compared to an 11.8 per cent gain for the ASX200 and a 10.5 per cent gain for the ASX Small Ords.

Cleantech Australia managing director John O’Brien blames “weak and inconsistent political leadership” on environmental issues for this fall. “The story of environmental investments in Australia is a depressing one compared to global cleantech stock performance,” he says.

The geothermal index was the weakest component, losing 57 per cent in the last 12 months, following a 34 per cent loss the year before. Even the two market leaders, Geodynamics and Petratherm, who share $153 million in government grants between them – if they can advance their projects far enough – have slumped by two thirds in the last six months.

Yet, according to the federal government’s own estimates, geothermal energy could provide more than one quarter of 41,000 gigawatt hours required to meet its 20 per cent renewable energy target. And the government’s own Energy Resource Assessment rates geothermal as the likely cheapest and cleanest form of baseload energy (including “clean” coal and nuclear) by 2030.

But in its current state, the industry fears it will be unable to deliver. It simply doesn’t have the support of the market to raise funds for the relatively expensive task of drilling.


Anonymous   says 6:20 PM

Interesting, but some of their order-choices surprise ?

It states :
["That would lead to a flurry of activity. The company would return to Habanero to drill two more wells and commission the 1MW pilot plant that was delayed by the blow-out in the Habanero 3 well last year."]

but if they have a drilled test case already, why is that not continually circulating water, so they can check for losses. Water loss would seem to be one of the larger variables in this process.

The web animation shows two wells, but the site photo, seems to have only one ?
So is this test still short of a lateral transfer flow of water ?

Post a Comment


Locations of visitors to this page

blogspot visitor
Stat Counter

Total Pageviews




Blog Archive


australia (605) global warming (381) solar power (367) peak oil (335) renewable energy (234) electric vehicles (212) wind power (182) ocean energy (161) csp (154) geothermal energy (143) solar thermal power (141) smart grids (139) tidal power (136) coal seam gas (129) nuclear power (125) oil (124) energy storage (122) solar pv (120) lng (115) china (112) geothermal power (112) iraq (111) green buildings (108) natural gas (107) agriculture (88) oil price (79) biofuel (77) smart meters (72) wave power (70) electricity grid (66) uk (66) energy efficiency (63) coal (57) google (57) internet (51) bicycle (49) shale gas (49) surveillance (49) food prices (48) big brother (47) thin film solar (42) canada (40) biomimicry (39) scotland (38) ocean power (37) politics (37) new zealand (35) shale oil (35) air transport (34) algae (34) water (34) concentrating solar power (32) queensland (32) california (31) credit crunch (31) saudi arabia (31) tesla (31) bioplastic (30) offshore wind power (29) population (29) cogeneration (28) geoengineering (28) arctic ice (26) batteries (26) drought (26) resource wars (26) woodside (26) bruce sterling (25) censorship (25) cleantech (25) ctl (23) economics (22) limits to growth (21) carbon tax (20) coal to liquids (20) distributed manufacturing (20) indonesia (20) iraq oil law (20) lithium (20) origin energy (20) brightsource (19) buckminster fuller (19) rail transport (19) ultracapacitor (19) santos (18) ausra (17) exxon (17) michael klare (17) cellulosic ethanol (16) collapse (16) electric bikes (16) mapping (16) ucg (16) atlantis (15) bees (15) concentrating solar thermal power (15) ethanol (15) geodynamics (15) iceland (15) psychology (15) brazil (14) fertiliser (14) lithium ion batteries (14) al gore (13) ambient energy (13) biodiesel (13) bucky fuller (13) carbon emissions (13) cities (13) investment (13) kenya (13) matthew simmons (13) public transport (13) biochar (12) chile (12) internet of things (12) otec (12) texas (12) victoria (12) cradle to cradle (11) desertec (11) energy policy (11) hybrid car (11) terra preta (11) amory lovins (10) fabber (10) gazprom (10) goldman sachs (10) gtl (10) severn estuary (10) tinfoil (10) toyota (10) volt (10) afghanistan (9) alaska (9) biomass (9) carbon trading (9) distributed generation (9) esolar (9) four day week (9) fuel cells (9) jeremy leggett (9) pge (9) sweden (9) antarctica (8) arrow energy (8) big oil (8) eroei (8) fish (8) floating offshore wind power (8) guerilla gardening (8) linc energy (8) methane (8) methane hydrates (8) nanosolar (8) natural gas pipelines (8) pentland firth (8) relocalisation (8) saul griffith (8) stirling engine (8) us elections (8) western australia (8) airborne wind turbines (7) bloom energy (7) boeing (7) bolivia (7) chp (7) climategate (7) copenhagen (7) vinod khosla (7) apocaphilia (6) ceramic fuel cells (6) cigs (6) futurism (6) jatropha (6) local currencies (6) nigeria (6) ocean acidification (6) scenario planning (6) somalia (6) t boone pickens (6) space based solar power (5) varanus island (5) garbage (4) global energy grid (4) kevin kelly (4) low temperature geothermal power (4) oled (4) tim flannery (4) v2g (4) club of rome (3) norman borlaug (2) peak oil portfolio (1)