Malcolm Gladwell on geothermal home heating 5

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   PBrazelton Posted 1:08 am
   08 Aug 2006

   Definitely not for everyoneI did a lot of research on this technology here in St. Paul, MN, even to the point where I was having a weeks-long conversation with a geothermal installer in the area.  The primary issue we had with this solution (and it's mentioned in the post) is that that people without a very large yard have to drill down to install the system.  For my old, 2,000 sq. ft house this meant drilling five holes a couple hundred feet into the ground; each hole would start at $2,000, and increase in price if they ran into obstacles like solid rock.  In other words, a $20k system could inflate to 30 or 40k very easily, dwarfing any economic benefit of reduced energy costs.
   A secondary issue related to the first is that installers are loath to work on city lots, as there are the usual labrynthine obstacles any well-developed bureaucracy will put in place.  It's simply a pain in the ass to secure permits, find a driller willing to work in the city, and risk their equipment on a tiny lot with the potential of layers of solid rock beneath their feet.  It's a LOT easier to just go out to a suburban lot, bulldoze the half acre needed to lay lines, and be done with it.
   After learning all of the down sides, we ended up bailing out of the conversation.  I was pretty irritated, because it felt unfair; here we were in our old, restored house, trying to reduce our bills and carbon impact, and the best technology for the job is being used on McMansions in suburbia.  That such a phenomenal solution be only an option for rich people with giant lots or big box retail outlets (both of whom don't really need the break on the utility bills) really grates on my nerves.
   I've thought about other potential solutions for urban lots, including combining multiple city lots as a single heat sink, but in reality geothermal seems destined to live on the outskirts of the places where it really would make a difference.

   Permalink

2. 

   sunflower Posted 2:55 am
   08 Aug 2006

   It takes a villageSingle building geothermal energy systems are not efficient and are expensive.  Community geothermal systems developed in Sweden are very efficient and cost effective.  
   Known as seasonal heat storage, these systems capture waste heat from industry, from crop residue, and from solar collectors in the summer.
   Pile drivers punch holes 30 meters deep every 2 meters.  The well casings are pulled from the holes to allow the earth to collapse around plastic pipe loops.  
   Hot water is circulated through the pipes to heat the ground.  Cold water is pumped through the same pipes to recover the heat.  This heat is delivered to the entire community in the winter via district heat grids.  
   Large seasonal heat storage systems are 90% efficient.
   
   
   
   Don't carpool alone.

   Permalink

3. 

   PBrazelton Posted 3:12 am
   08 Aug 2006

   I'll be damned.Huh.  So my idea wasn't so far fetched after all.  Do you have a good link for information about this Sweden thing?

   Permalink

4. 

   sunflower Posted 3:26 am
   08 Aug 2006

   seasonal-heat-storage swedenI attended the international conferences on seasonal heat storage in the 1980s so my references are thick books of proceedings.  
   I just googled: seasonal-heat-storage sweden (use the connecting hyphens) and saw lots of references.
   
   Don't carpool alone.

   Permalink

5. 

   pat joseph Posted 7:53 am
   08 Aug 2006

   Bush beat us to itThe Crawford Ranch uses ground source heating and cooling. Also passive solar, wastewater recycling and rainwater collection. Go figure.

   Permalink