Seriously, sometimes I wonder why I come on here anymore. Every time I go into missions is just pisses me off with people who CAN'T. FUCKING. READ. And then those who can't read and also don't have any ideas on how to help people. Finally, those who can't read, don't have ideas, and don't feel like lending support to those who have good ideas! God fuck!

*sigh* OK. /rant. I feel better. Now, the reason for this thread. I found some interesting stuff while reading my local paper today, so I thought I'd share some intel.

Volcano-Heated Water Could Be The Next Energy Boon

So what they're doing is a direct injection of water into dormant volcanoes. This causes a chain reaction that superheats the water, turns it into steam, which they will funnel through a pipe to turn a turbine. But that's not the interesting part.

"The U.S. Department of Energy has given the project $21.5 million in stimulus funds. That has been matched by private investors, among them Google with $6.3 million."

What I find really interesting is Google, which is a software conglomerate that just entered the hardware market with its Chromebook and FiOS services in Palo Alto, is getting into energy production. I mean, it's normal for a multilevel corporation to diversify, but it seems kind of out of place, does it not?

There's another thing I want to show you guys, since it has to do with water resources (which I have been spearheading missions for in the aforementioned board). Energy Project Would Generate Revenue For County

Now in my paper, the Headline is that the investment figure is close to $2 Billion. Basically they'll convert some old farmland into a low-level reservoir, and then some BLM land into an upper level reservoir. A pipe connecting the two will be built underground.

The point of this is, there's a lot of energy-intense projects going on, and the distribution of water is another big factor. I feel like there's going to be a lot of growth in many like fields in the coming years, and the Dollars should become involved. Many of the members are in high school or, if you're like myself, attending college. We have the capacity for knowledge, but the key will be collaborate efforts across all sectors.

TL;DR: There's a lot of tech advancement going on at this very moment. This could be the change we as the Dollars are looking for, and I want your thoughts.

I'll post a well-detailed comment on this later, but now I just have to say, that this is the type of topics we NEED here in Main. Good fucking job.

I suppose I'll chime in with my two cents.

1) This is bloody brilliant. A renewable energy resource utilizing water and geothermal heat. I only have a few qualms;

We would need to pinpoint locations where seismic reactions to the process would cause minimum damage to civilian properties. All of the money we WERE spending on fuel would instead change over to repairing damage caused by our own system. Or something like that. This project, however, doesn't seem as if water distribution will be a problem. My only concerns with the water aspect is a wonder if they have a solid plan to recapture evaporated fluids, as I can easily see the gases being lost to the atmosphere. Now, it wouldn't be damaging to the atmosphere at all, but how does that affect the economic sustainability? And how would it affect weather conditions if we were to expunge too much evaporated water into the system?

Just a few thoughts.

2) Another bloody brilliant idea. I have zero qualms with this one, as it is a tried and true method.

All I want to do is beat the head over the morons in that community that were worried about their "way of life" or some stupid shit like that. We have bigger things to be worried about.

~ ~ ~

Those are my thoughts on the information you presented. Good post in the Main section, I really enjoyed this. I've been searching for things to funnel research into lately, things I will be supporting in the near future as I continue to accumulate personal funds and skills that I can use to apply in a movement to improve... Well, anything.

But I have one question for you; what CAN the Dollars do to get involved? I'm all for it, but it seems like we would need to be CEO's of major companies that are willing to donate to the cause.

I'll start brainstorming myself, but I'm drawing blanks at the moment.

TL;DR: This is good stuff. What ideas do you have in terms of the Dollars getting involved?

1) I believe the water supply will be coming from the Crater Lake water table. The water table also serves the needs of small towns with populations lower than 1,000 across Central/Eastern Oregon; I believe Bend, OR, which has just over 75,000 people, is also served. The area where I live (Klamath Falls) is served by a river flowing from Upper Klamath Lake. Western Oregon is served by smaller lakes and rivers near Ashland.

Other possible volcanic sites include Mt. Lassen and Mt. Shasta, which are about 100 miles from here. Water sources in those areas include Whiskeytown Lake and the manmade Lake Almanor.

Evaporated water will head east where it should be captured by the Rocky Mountains in Colorado and the surrounding areas. There is a risk of small amounts of sulfur dioxide entering the atmosphere, but the difference in overall temperature is negligible.

Part of my water resources mission is to take brine or saltwater and purify it, using large labor forces and simple distillation rigs (one of which I'm working on in my dorm). This water can be introduced into any system, including the above.

2) Yeah, it's interesting that a farm community is turning into an energy farming community. Personally, I hadn't thought of the reservoir project, so even I'm baffled by its genius.

The opponents to the project do have an interesting move that they could take, however, and I'm surprised they aren't considering it. Cellulosic ethanol (ethanol made from the husk of plants) is going to take off soon enough. I've made a few posts about it on here, since Covanta Energy is a major player in my hometown. I'd like to see some of these fields converted into energy plants, and there have been deliberations about where these plants would be placed in Klamath County anyway.

As for what the Dollars can do in this regard, if it takes off, we can start harvesting tons of biomass. People in forested areas tend to burnoff the pineneedles that litter their backyards every fall (my family does it too so I'm just as guilty). If we can create drop-off facilities as opposed to burning them, and create an incentive for doing so, then we can amass several tons of ready-to-consume biomass for the cause.

I hope I answered all of your questions.

I like how well you've answered my questions thus far.

1) I may just be blind, but I didn't really see a whole lot of attention towards the lack of water here. I'm going to assume that there is currently not enough(?) to support the current population AND the project at once. With that said, here's an idea:

Arizona has been requesting aide from my state, Michigan, by having us run water lines all the way down there so that they could have access to our plethora of water from the Great Lakes as drinking water during harsh droughts. I don't know if we ever agreed to this, as it was a few years ago that I remember hearing of this, but that's what prompted my next thought.

The Great Lakes only support a minor fishing industry, and are primarily used as transportation for mass amounts of goods to Canada and neighboring states that also have access to the lakes. Because of the minimal damage that would take place should the lakes be used as a resource for this endeavor, I suggest utilizing some of the (rather massive) funding to bring in water from the Great Lakes.

Now, unless the project needs a constant flow (similar to Arizona's request for running a water line), this should be a relatively easy way to accumulate the fresh water necessary for the project.

As for my concerns about the atmospheric changes, they were actually relatively minimal. By utilizing water as a source for our energy, we will be significantly cutting pollution, helping to reverse the temperature rise we have already begun to influence.

My real concern here is what the rain conditions will become if too much new water is introduced into the system. This could cause a fluctuation in how crops grow, and cause local streams/rivers/small lakes to flood with the sudden addition of water mass to the ecosystem. What kinds of effects could you predict from this addition?

2) I personally find it to be a great idea, and am in full support. With either option, really, as they both accomplish the same task. Just by different means is all.

I really like that suggestion of saving biomass to be used in ethanol in the near future. As I live in a state that is heavily forested, this could be a genius idea if implemented in major cities. Generally every city has a surrounding area with thick woodlands, so using major cities as specific dropoff points before it gains the funding to become even more widespread would be a great start.

I like where you're going with this, I'll start looking into ways that this might be implemented in my own state.

1) Oi, I was wondering how the Arizonans were doing in that regard. Nevada is trying the pipeline idea with their northstate, which could have disastrous results. California did this with the LA Aqueduct, which destroyed the Owens Valley decades ago. Seriously, look up California City on Google Maps. You'll find acres of city streets with nothing built there, because there wasn't enough water to expand the city. That's why I'm opposed to pipelining freshwater.

Now, saltwater can be pipelined, and there are many places in the Mojave desert and the Arizona basins where solar stills can be placed. But to get those off the ground will require heavy legislation, and then years of construction. On the upside, thousands of jobs created.

Anyway, the only thing I really know about the Great Lakes is that they're fueled by the St. Lawrence River, so it is a heavily tappable resource, and one that will need to be taken into consideration in future endeavors. If possible, we could use these resources to restore the Ogallala Aquifer (See Here).

2) Here we have Lassen National Forest, Plumas National Forest, Tahoe National Forest, Tehama National Forest, and Mazama National Forest, all within 400 miles of each other. The Covanta Energy facility I mentioned is in the Plumas National Forest, where heavy logging leaves a lot of waste cellulose to be used. They produce, at current rates, enough energy to power 11,000 homes. When they upgrade the facility, that number will go up.

More facilities need to be placed, however, if we want a combined, renewed effort. Again, jobs will increase.

*Edit: It was Shasta and Winema National Forests, not Tehama and Mazama. Also, forgot to add Modoc National Forest to that list.

1) As I said, it was quite some time ago that I heard about it... So it may take some digging before I can even find out if it ever began to happen, if it got dropped, or if it IS happening, or possibly even completed; though I highly doubt all of these. I don't think it got off the ground, else I would think I would have heard about it at some point.

I actually wasn't thinking to pipeline the water at all, to be honest. Like you said, it can easily be damaging to either environment. My thoughts are that if the water for the geothermal project is just a single set amount, and most of it can be recaptured, then the lakes could be used to acquire the base amount necessary to launch the project.

They are an amazing resource if we are careful about using them; I would love to see them used to assist in other areas of the country. I like your thoughts on the Ogallala Aquifer, perhaps it would be worth your time to write up that pitch to a group working to restore it?

2) I feel like we should also be taking into account the effects of removing the "waste." As I see it, the left over biomass is converted almost immediately into a nutritional resource within the soil, allowing for the ecosystem to regrow using nutrients left over from the previous life.

What damage would be caused by removing those excess nutrients?

However, that thought is primarily for heavily forested areas. If people did so much as clean up the needles from their yards, that would have minimal effects on the soil while still allowing us to assist in the conversion of biomass to a usable, renewable fuel.

I love the fact that doing these things will increase jobs, but I also think it necessary that we take into account possible damage that these attempts may cause. If not properly accounted for, we could actually end up worse-off than before.

~~~

I really like where this is all going though, and I'm glad that there is a mind like yours on this site.

1) I'll see what I can do in regards to the Aquifer. At the moment I know someone in San Antonio who might be able to get a steady steam of water to the section of the aquifer that's in Amarillo (both cities are in Texas at the aquifer's southern end). BNSF Railway would be our primary transit component if that were the case.

If we didn't do pipelining then we could still transfer water from the lakes to the aquifer by rail. It's the most efficient and environmental way. I'd need to find some groups who are talking about the aquifer, but I think we can, in time, get more people on board.

2) I don't know enough about environmental chemistry to gauge the impact of removing waste from the forests. However, I will wager that since logging operations are going on in these areas, it means less of a war over nutrients between plant life in the area. Thus, we have a small amount of leeway.

One more thing. Groups for saving the aquifer are still appearing relatively recently. This could be our chance to make a huge impact, but we have to act now.

1) That seems like a very sound plan to me. Count me on board, I'll do whatever is possible for a kid like me to do. I'll start looking around here to see if their are any groups that are looking to utilize our lakes to restore other areas.

2) I agree, I think that the logging would probably have enough of an impact that the plant life would not be making too much use of it. But it IS still something to keep in consideration; I would hate to see that forests can no longer grow in those areas because we both destroyed them, AND removed the resources necessary for them to recover.

Now here's something interesting: I was reading a copy of Scientific American from back in 2009 that had an article on the Ogallala Aquifer.

"Growing populations throughout the
Great Plains region are also demanding
more municipal water from the only available
source: the aquifer. T. Boone Pickens,
the billionaire oilman and recent alternative
energy advocate, is among the entrepreneurs
who have entered the domestic
water market. A Texas law granting landowners
unrestricted rights to the water beneath
their property makes it possible for
Pickens to sell groundwater from his
24,000-acre Mesa Vista Ranch in the Texas
panhandle to metropolises as far away
as Dallas and El Paso. The 654-mile pipeline
he plans to build to El Paso would cost
$2.1 billion. But with water sales priced at
more than $1,000 an acre-foot, profit is
waiting to be had (38)."

Now, under circumstances like these I would normally try to set Pickens as a target to rally against. However, he's by all means a saint, having made the Giving Pledge (basically he's donated half his wealth to charity). Also, technically the land is his.

Still, this presents an added problem. He and those like him are going to want to mine the water for all it's worth now, regardless of where it stands in the future. On the upside, there are a lot of farmers across the region who are abstaining from groundwater mining entirely.

"For Funk, the depressing data he took
home from that Garden City meeting was
transforming. Whereas other farmers responded
to declining water levels by adding
wells, Funk eliminated them: “We decided
to go dryland.” Today he pumps almost
no water on his 6,000 acres, which
are planted largely in wheat and grain sorghum.
These crops are typically not as lucrative
as corn, but they are sustaining
Funk’s family. To farm without groundwater,
Funk has changed some of his
methods. Instead of plowing his fields after
harvest, he leaves the stubble in the
ground and plants a new crop in the residue.
This technique not only reduces soil
erosion but also decreases evaporation
and catches more blowing snow than bare
ground. Leaving crop residue in the field
can reduce moisture loss by the equivalent
of an inch or more of rainfall annually, scientists
say. Funk aims to capture every bit
of the 18 inches of precipitation that fall
on southwestern Kansas. “Got to,” he says.
“It’s all we’ve got around here (35).”"

Thoughts?

1) I feel a little two-faced about this first one. Without doing any further research right this second, here's how it looks to me:

Fantastic, the otherwise untapped water is being used elsewhere. What's not so fantastic? The fact that they are both running a pipeline (which we have previously discussed to be a dangerous task), and aiming to profit entirely.

My thought would be to charge the people on the receiving end... But to either charge them low enough to just cover costs, or to re-route that profit into restoring the aquifer as it dies.

2) I feel like the farmers are modern-day geniuses. He's self-sustainable, and actually using significantly less resources than other farms. Another bloody brilliant farmer.

I would suggest that we think about talking to other farmers about this, but I also understand that most crops cannot survive under the conditions above. It's great that a few farmers can do this, but I wish we could push the envelope a little bit.

>>14 There probably is a way to push the envelope, but how do we go about interacting with the farmers and getting them to support our cause? Communication isn't exactly my strong suit so I'm kinda stuck.

Generally, being forward with people is a good start. Most people respond well to being straightforward and honest, especially when the cause is good.

I might suggest Email, or a letter of sorts, to get things started. I would think that since most farms are probably independent business/contractors, and have a public work email.

Bump.

I was actually just on my way to find this thread...

It's tough tracking down a group that supports using the Great Lakes as a resource for other regions of the country, but progress is being made. I've been redirected through a few people already, I'll keep this posted on any progress I make.

Any other Michigan Dollars that might be able to help out? I can give a short summary to those that are nearby and curious.

Also, some interesting search topics for Westerners would be the Owens Valley, Owens Lake, the Los Angeles Aqueduct, the Sacramento Delta, and the Klamath Bucket Brigade, to name a few.

bump

bump