On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 09:52:46 +0100, Mark Rand
wrote:

snip
====================
As long as we are discussing alternative energy sources, how
about geothermal.

Seems ideal for costal areas [where the majority of the US
population now lives] where the sea can be used as in infinite
heat sink, high [enough] temperature strata are relatively close
to the surface [at least in the tectonic active areas] and the
newer heat pipe technology using more dense vapors such as R-123
Freon result in higher turbine efficiency and the transfer of
only heat from the tectonic zone to the surface, i.e. no
pollution.

This is off the shelf stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_power
http://geothermal.marin.org/pwrheat.html
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/powerplants.html
http://geothermal.id.doe.gov/

As this is existing technology why are we continuing to construct
coal, NG and nuclear generating sites? No "piece of the action"
on geothermal heat?

Seems like a natural for Los Angeles. Municipal power company
drills on municipally owned land, uses municipally owned ocean
areas for the heat sink, constructs municipally owned geothermal
generator stations, and sells the power to the [local] citizens.
No rag heads in the loop and the money stays local [which may be
the problem]. Warm seawater may even be good for high value
aquiculture such as abalone.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.