Gore has no clue – a few million degrees here and there and pretty soon we’re talking about real temperature

This is mind blowing ignorance on the part of Al Gore. Gore in an 11/12/09 interview on NBC’s tonight Show with Conan O’Brien, speaking on geothermal energy, champion of slide show science, can’t even get the temperature of earth’s mantle right, claiming “several million degrees” at “2 kilometers or so down”.  Oh, and the “crust of the earth is hot” too.

Screencap of Gore on The Tonight Show 11/12/09

Temperature of the sun’s corona: 1–2 million kelvin

Temperature of the sun’s photosphere:  6,000 kelvin

Temperature of the Earths mantle, more than “2 kilometers or so down”: between 500 °C to 900 °C (773 to 1173 kelvin)

Watching Gore make a complete scientific idiot of himself on national TV: priceless

Don’t believe me? Watch the video from NBC below:

Click for video – Gore’s statement on temperature is about 40 seconds in

For a faster presentation, without a pre-viewing commercial, here is the same video on YouTube

Oh…and here is a graph of the vertical temperature profile with drilling depth:

Earth's Crust Temperature Profile

Source Geohil AG (captions added)

And here is the temperature profile of the Earth’s crust, mantle, and core:

Geothermal Gradient

Source:  Electropaedia (Mpower UK) page on geothermal energy


Sponsored IT training links:
Pass 1z0-050 exam in easy and fast way! We offer up to date JN0-304 study materials including latest HP0-S26 dumps with 100% success guarantee.


About these ads

331 thoughts on “Gore has no clue – a few million degrees here and there and pretty soon we’re talking about real temperature

  1. This is one of the most lucid and accurate things he has ever said. Except for the temperature number it isn’t even stupid.

  2. Two km = 6,561 feet. Many oil fields are twice that depth and more… a million degrees? Mind boggling.

  3. Damn, all those new models based on Gores 2,000,000 degrees will have to have their ‘settled science’ outputs modified by feedbacks now to keep their outputs consistent.

  4. Quite a blooper ! Using geothermal heat seems to work more in theory than practise. Here in Australia the listed companies have been testing the patience of their shareholders for years either loosing their drill bits or the ‘hot spots’ are in very remote locations away from the grid. Bit like the promise of wave energy, abundant, available 24/7,great idea but the engineering proved too difficult.
    Remove the subsidies and they both collapse.

  5. Why does any ‘respectable’ TV channel give this certifiable fool any air-time at all?
    Doesn’t ANYONE check what piffle he utters? Why is this buffoon not mocked by journalists around the world?

    “Several MILLION degrees” only two kilometres down from the earth’s surface???
    What codswallop!!

  6. OK, you got him here. It did sound like he said million degrees.

    That aside, geothermal energy is probably a bit underexploited. I think (not entirely sure) that the cost of digging holes has gone down, so the hot rocks needn’t be very close to the surface for the operation to be viable.

  7. Thankfully Al baby is as wrong about Earth’s internal temperatures as he is about climate change. I guess he is too stupid to realise that if what he said was true than the ground would be a little too hot for us to risk putting our feet on it – like a million degrees or so.

  8. Where does Gore get the idea that there is only 35,000 years of energy available? The use of geothermal energy causes no measurable depletion , excepting shallow, isolated geothermal pockets.

  9. Wonderful to see the leader of the alarmist masses making a fool of himself.

    Here’s a youtube link to the same video:

  10. carrot eater, the cost of drilling may be less, but the difficulties in drilling over 5km into granite are huge. One company here in Australia had big problems drilling the first hole in their attempt to prove the concept & establish a demonstration power plant. That was months ago, they have not been in the news recently.

  11. BTW, geothermal can be incredibly polluting if not done properly. And in many really hot spots, like Hawaii, the pollution was extremely difficult to control. Aerated heavy metals.

  12. The sweet irony of this tiny glimpse of the real Gore, when ocntrasted with the propaganda piece by Newsweak, is delightful.
    The cover story on Al Gore in Newsweak this week is, I kid you not:
    ” The Thinking Man’s Thinking Man”

    http://ksjtracker.mit.edu/2009/11/02/newsweek-gore-has-a-new-book-out-just-in-time-for-copenhagen-and-speaking-of-global-things/

    Fiction cannot be stranger or more entertaining than fact, especially when bloviating self-declared genius con-artists are concerned.

  13. This is more scary than funny. It just shows that Al Gore, author of an inconvenient truth understands NOTHING about basic physics. He just repeats what he has been told and he’s not even smart enough to do that right.

    Shocking!

  14. A good illustration of the difference between “knowledge” and “intelligence.”

    The former refers to the ability to remember facts, figures, and events. The latter refers to the ability to figure out what those facts, figures, and events actually mean: determining which are most relevant to testing hypotheses, drawing the proper logical conclusions from them, etc. If you can recite Pi to the 1000th digit, it doesn’t make you “smart” – it just means you have a good memory.

    I don’t judge too much about a person from their ability (or inability) to remember exact figures off the cuff (same reason I think the reaction to Sarah Palin’s inability to cite a Supreme Court case she disagreed with was overblown – pretty easy to slip up like that when you’re speaking or put on the spot).

    Now, if Gore’s mistake had been a written statement, we’d have a different issue on our hands: evidence of sloppy fact checking.

  15. I think this fits right in with his previous statements about exaggeration being ok to achieve his goals. But it would seem he went more than a little overboard with this one. I wonder if he’s had a CAT scan recently?

  16. RICH (14:43:08) :

    What a maroon.

    Why are you insultative to maroons?

    One of my friends is a many times member of the 5 mile club. In Oklahoma many oil wells hit over 25,000 feet. The temps go up and at 70,000 feet are above boiling temp.

  17. The deepest mines worked by humans are 3.9km deep – Gold mines in South Africa. It’s pretty hot down there (rock face temperature 60 degC) and they need a lot of cooling – but millions of degrees?! The guy is just making it up.
    The saddest part of this interview is the fulsome applause he gets at the end of the interview, which is just a shameless plug for his book anyway.

  18. DEEPEST HOLE EVER DRILLED

    “the Russians drilled for more than 15 years to reach a crust depth of 40,226 feet, a record that’s never been broken.”

    http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/multimedia/2008/08/gallery_kola_borehole

    Why they stopped, I don’t know, but I don’t think it was because their drill bit melted.

    See here for brief comparison with oil drilling depths, etc.

    http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/multimedia/2008/08/gallery_kola_borehole

  19. Geothermal is a bust because the power station removes heat from the rocks faster than heat can flow through the rock to replace it.
    Odd how the people who refuse to believe a nuclear power station can be built safely by engineers then expect them to drill through to molten rock.

  20. Just 2 more comments. In the Bakken field they send air down hole and do fire flooding to warm the oil and improve viscosity. Obviously the heat and pressure by injecting CO2 under a few thousand PSI also is used to push oil to the lift pump device. Of course Algore doesn’t know about energy.

  21. hunter (14:37:32) :

    “Fiction cannot be stranger or more entertaining than fact…”

    Ahh, yes, but at least one can put the fiction back on the shelf and return to reality. But when reality bites, where is one to go? I wonder if maybe that’s not one reason man invented fiction to begin with?

  22. “Temperature of the Earths mantle, more than “2 kilometers or so down”: between 500 °C to 900 °C (773 to 1173 kelvin)”44

    Classic!

    So people have a problem with non-climatologists (but with a scientific background) commenting on AGW but Al Gore gets a free pass – amazing.

    In a well we drilled on the North Slope of Alaska, at about 2 kms, the temp was a chilly 110 F , because the 1st 2000 ft are frozen solid in the permafrost (ie the temp at 0.67 km was zero deg C).

    Typical geothermal gradients – outside geothermally active areas are 1.5 to 2.5 deg F per 100 ft. The gradient hangs off the mean surface temperature of where ever you ar on the Earth.[ ie subsurface temp = surface temp + (depth*gradient) ]

    Do the math Al !

  23. I understand geothermal is the largest alternate energy source and technologically mature. Having made the occasional mistake under pressure myself I can overlook fhe tempreature blunders. For once I fhink Gore had something useful to say.

  24. Two points:
    1. As far as “Green” goes, GW “walked the walk” while Al Gore only “talks the talk”.
    2. GW was a leader in “green technologies” and his record gives lie to all of the things said about his care for the environment.

    GW’s ranch house in Crawford Texas was designed to be energy efficient. It utilizes ground water at 67 degrees as a source of heat and heat sink FOR A HEAT PUMP and the total energy consumption has been rated at 1/4 the “normal household usage”.

    The Goracle’s house on the other hand…….

    http://www.practicalenvironmentalist.com/energy-efficiency/perhaps-al-gore-should-ask-george-w-bush-for-help-in-making-his-house-more-energy-efficient.htm

    I believe that wind power is useful only in very limited applications and subsidized mandates are a waste of my money. Never the less, GW made Texas the leader in wind power when he was Governor (see above link). He may have been able to do more as President if the Democrats hadn’t been so desperate to make him fail in everything he tried.

    GW’s 2008 State of the Union Speech, relevant part here:

    Or the whole speech here (worth listening to for a historical perspective):

    http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/stateoftheunion2006.htm

    On the other hand, see here:

    Do you miss him yet?

    Regards,

    Steamboat Jack

  25. “The interior of the earth is several millions of degrees.” – Al Gore!!!

    2012 SPOILER ALERT for the movie 2012!!!!

    In 2012, the epic and awesome disaster movie to end all disaster movies, the Earth’s crust is heated up (by some nonsense) and starts melting and collapsing everywhere causing total destruction.

    Al Gore just stated that the core of the Earth is several million degrees. Well, get ready for the crust to melt! 2012 is here!

  26. Robinson (14:35:33) : “In other news, the mainstream media are starting to go with the flow. I’m seeing more and more skeptical articles, particularly I think, in response to the avalanche of skeptical comments they keep getting in their warmist articles. I suppose it’s a kind-of democracy, isn’t it?”

    That particular article is a setup. As Leif will tell you (oh, about two dozen times) TSI hasn’t changed significantly over the past 100 years. There’s a chance that temperatures will not take a drastic turn downward due to lower sunspot numbers. The article takes an either-or stance–either recent warming (such as it is, given GISS ‘corrections’ and ‘homogenizations’ and whatnot) is due to solar maximum or it’s due to CO². But there are other, better possible causes. We just don’t know at this point.

  27. Crikey, it’s time for a little reality here…As a geologist, mainly working in sedimentary basins (that’s right – hydrocarbon exploration) a rough rule of thumb is that temperature increase with depth is about 3.5 C per 100 metres in a basin with a normal gradient. So, at a little less than 3,000m (~10,000 ft) depth we are just above boiling point of water, i.e. 105 C or 212 F. At 70,000 ft (~21,000m), ref. Henry Chance, we should expect to see a temperature of c. 750 C (1,375 F). Hot! but not millions…..

    Michael

  28. @Sandy – Geothermal works where the conditions are right. Calpine’s Geysers geothermal plant is probably their most valuable asset. Its just that there are not a lot of places around that you can arbitrarily plop a plant and think you are going to get much power out of it. In that I will agree with you. It is also interesting that some of the attempts at geothermal power generation in mainland Europe have been halted because the thermal contraction of the rock due to the extraction of energy has appeared to have produced some minor earthquakes. They are holding off until they understand things better. Sometimes unintended side effects really ruin the whole show. This one may be one of them. But that said, geothermal cooling does have some advantages at least in the NE. In those areas where you can extract water from some number of feet down, the water is reasonably cool. Flow it over the condenser of the air conditioning unit and return it and the efficiency of your heat pump goes up quite a bit. You could probably save more energy that way in summer than you could produce with geothermal in the more general case.

  29. The juxtaposition of this story with the Monckton is about the best commentary I have seen about AGW in a long time. Pure accident I am sure. Uh huh.

  30. No wonder Al runs away from the prospect of openly debating Lord Monckton on AGW! LM would crucify him.

  31. BC Bill,
    I think if it were mature and going to work, it would be working right now.
    I would certainly like it be practical.
    It is not as environmentally damaging as windmills.
    At least the heat source does not set every everning, like solar.
    It takes up vastly less space than either.
    But it is not widely used for a reason. I am certian the reason has to do with the corrosive nature of deep hot places, and the problem of tapping heat out of a region too quickly. Added to that problem of moving power from remote places where it is produced to where it is wanted, and I am betting the problems are very significant.

    http://www.energy-consumers-edge.com/pros_and_cons_of_geothermal_energy.html

  32. That particular article is a setup. As Leif will tell you (oh, about two dozen times) TSI hasn’t changed significantly over the past 100 years. There’s a chance that temperatures will not take a drastic turn downward due to lower sunspot numbers. The article takes an either-or stance–either recent warming (such as it is, given GISS ‘corrections’ and ‘homogenizations’ and whatnot) is due to solar maximum or it’s due to CO². But there are other, better possible causes. We just don’t know at this point.

    Indeed, but the point I’m making is that the MSM are at least exploring alternatives and presenting the views of dissenters to an extent, whether or not their counter-view is actually the correct one. It’s not something I would have seen this time last year.

  33. Is that a toupee ?

    Yes, always on topic and adding that extra bit of insight, but appropriate in this case because that’s the only significant thing gleanable from the video. Makes me glad that Bill Clinton stayed healthy.

    I’m guessing the areas near rifts would be the hottest, since that’s where the crust is thinnest.

  34. The smug delivery here makes it worse, but being off by three orders of magnitude is just very, very bad in itself, betraying a complete lack fundamental understanding of whatever the subject is.

    “‘Cause New York is extremely far away from Los Angeles, three million miles…”

    “‘Cause Denver has an extremely high elevation, five million feet…”

    “Cause Al Gore was extremely overweight, 125 tons…”

  35. Is it any wonder that Gore refuses to debate any anti-AGW scientists or other skeptics in a public forum? He would get his head handed to him! Heck, who needs someone on the other side of the debate? Just let him talk and he’ll provide the rope to hang himself. It’s pitiful, really.

    Paul

  36. A year or two ago, sitting in the barber shop, waiting my turn, I was leafing through a Pop. Science or Pop. Mechanics and found an article about a working, sizeable, low temp. geothermal power plant powering a large resort in Alaska. The plant was designed and built by the Trane Co. using an air conditioning fluid as the working medium. The energy came from a warm aquifer, well below boiling temp. and a cold aquifer. The temp diff. was enough to drive a gas turbine that drove a generator. They said it eliminated a $100K/mo. diesel fuel bill. THe article also stated that the hot waste water coming from many oil wells was sufficient to power the oil well. I’ve seen or heard nothing about it since. I think I’ll give Trane a Google.

  37. What’s new in geothermal power development?

    AUSTRALIA
    “As reported from Australia, “Geodynamics Ltd. (GDY.AU) (recently) said progress on its geothermal energy demonstration plant in South Australia state could be delayed until well into next year after an investigation into an explosion at one of its wells uncovered operational deficiencies.”

    GERMANY (and America and Switzerland)
    “LANDAU IN DER PFALZ, Germany — Government officials here are reviewing the safety of a geothermal energy project that scientists say set off an earthquake in mid-August…
    – – – –
    In the United States, the Energy Department is scrutinizing a project in Northern California run by AltaRock Energy to determine if it is safe. (The project was shut down by the company last month because of crippling technical problems.) Another project, in Basel, Switzerland, was shut down after it generated earthquakes in 2006 and 2007 and is awaiting the decision of a panel of experts about whether it can resume.”

    Elsewhere(s) in GERMANY
    “Residents near Dortmund were evacuated this week after the ground collapsed around a geothermal heat pump, while in another German town, almost 190 buildings have now been damaged by a geothermal project gone awry.”

    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,4473382,00.html

    Sorry, but I would like to wait for the technology to be a bit more reliable, thank you, before installing it anywhere near me. Come to think of it, I wonder how far below Cent.Florida we would have to drill to reach bedrock?

  38. Being in the business of drilling geothermals, we are starting to see declines in output, after 5-6 years.

    Combine this with the aforementioned pollution, earth quake generation, difficult and expensive drilling, its not the panacea hoped for.

  39. “Temperature of the Earths mantle, more than “2 kilometers or so down”: between 500 °C to 900 °C (773 to 1173 kelvin)”

    The earth mantle is 2 km down??? Ah, priceless Gorism!

  40. The only problem is that he advises Obama and has made presentations to congress as their adviser. Obama and congress believe the stories. Lisa Jackson has bought one of the stories and is acting on it. One or two million here or there then you end up with a current 10.2% unemployed and trillions of debt to boot. While bad energy policy based on bad science is the focus of Obama’s congress.

  41. I don’t think it’s right to call Al Gore stupid. Call him intellectually lazy and sloppy, and you go a long ways towards explaining “An Inconvenient Truth” and his venture into carbon offsets. Funny, it’s the charge that was usually leveled at W, who seems to be far more thorough in his alternative energy pursuits.

    I believe Iceland is using quite a bit of geothermal energy. In their case I think they use steam and hot water directly for a number of purposes: electricity (steam turbine), direct heating, and so on.

  42. If the MSM decides to look into this, which they likely won’t, it will be the death knell for the former VP.

    How can you win a Nobel Prize for pushing complex science and be so ignorant about basic geology?

    How can you come on a nationwide TV show and talk about geothermal, and not know the temperatures?

    How can you not know that drilling equipment can’t withstand temperatures of a couple of million degrees?

    I’m very shocked at Gore’s ignorance. But I will be just as shocked if the media ignore this. And I’m pretty jaded, as are most of us on this blog, it seems to me.

  43. …well, Mr. Al Gore is right. Such a drillbit turns around 360° to fulfill one complete turn. So quite a lot of million ‘degress’ are necessary to drill down 2 km.

    You guys should listen much more accurately when St. Gore preaches to you disbelievers

    ;-))

  44. He shouldn’t be talking about things he knows nothing about.

    All he has done now is add to the great list of urban myths he has already created and a bunch of green people are going to be quoting “35,000 years of geothermal heat only 2 kms down – but the oil companies keep stopping it.”

    We will all be using geothermal energy as soon as someone can figure out a way to make it work. But there are lots of things that are just impossible and geothermal beyond a few uses could easily turn out to be one of those.

  45. I have to wonder. How much pollution is Al Gore producing just to get his face out everywhere and say “The earth has a fever, we are at fault, now pay up (and just ignore that I will be rich for life when you do).”?

    Apparently, in the Gore-utopia only a special few will be able to travel great distances without any penalty.

  46. I think horrible Al has hit the nail on the head, cunning if not intelligent. Folk are waking up to the climate scam so let’s move on… and there are energy issues that deserve airing…

  47. Perhaps it is just the way attached advertising works, but I was first shown a clip of a Disney film of The Muppets cooking flambe that had to be extinguished with a CO2 fire extinguisher? Is that humorous or what?

  48. Well to be fair to the man (why not) he did say “the interior of the earth is extremely hot; several million degrees.”

    “Interior of the earth” to me does not mean anywhaer out side of the mantle; so his use of that term is consistent with (lovely turn of phrase) with Conan Obrien saying “the coreof the earth”.

    But Gore did say that several km down there are these extremely hot rocks. Well that is certainly true where you have magma pools under volcanoes.

    As to the core of the earth, evidently the temperature is not well known, but I have read estimates of 5,000 to 10,000 Kelvin. You are not going to get anywhere near there; but it is useful to know that the ultimate driving temperature is in that range.

    As to the practicality of geothermal; well it is done commerically in several countries one of which is New Zealand at Wairakei.

    I can remember well when they started the very first experimental drilling at Wairakei. They were drilling very close to the main hiway (Great South Road), and once they had a well drilled, with a pipe, they let the steam just exhaust into the air, for several years, just to see how stable the supply was.
    That created a problem, since the whole surrounding terrain was volcanic pumice rocks, and the steam was both very wet, and also laden with pumice dust. As a result, the land all around the well, including the hiway, and trees, got coated in a heavy layer of pumice ash; which has a tendency to set up like concrete. So there were a lot of complaints from passing motorists; getting all that crap all over their cars.

    So the engineers came up with a solution; build a great big steel funnel, with a 90 degree bend in it, so they could direct the steam horizontally and away from the road. So they welded up this monstrous steel elbow, out of steel several inches thick, with a flange on it to attach it to the bore pipe.

    Came the great day to shut off the white monster; so they lowered the elbow down over the well, and of course once they got close enough they had to hold it down, since the momentum transferred to it by the curving steam was horrendous. Once they got it down on the pipe, then of course they could bolt it in place; problem solved.

    And they very nearly did get it bolted in place; but before they completed the installation the pumice laden steam/water jet, cut a hole clean through the steel, and the whole thing just shot up in the air again.

    Somehow; they have solved that problem, and Wairakei is now a functional operation; and yes it still is right by the main hiway; and it is sent through a lot of horizontal piping; apparently quite safely.

    Gore also said “several” km down, and that to me means more than two, so at least three.

    Despite all the pedantry here; the statement is still inane, and demonstrative of the fact that the guy simply hasn’t even bothered to learn some of the fundamentals.

    I would guess that sites that are potentially good for geothermal energy (high grade energy), are likely to be earthquake active.

    Wairakei, is right in the middle of the biggest volcanic active zone in New Zealand; so far so good.

  49. Let me take a shot at predicting his defense: If each geothermal site has a working temperature of 500 °C, if you build 4,000 sites, then you’ll have 2,000,000 °C.

    Hey, it worked when, as VP, he defended taxing millionaires by increasing taxes on incomes as low as $200,000 because in 5 years that would be a million dollars, then it ought to work here, ’cause it’s the same science: arithmetic.

  50. “”” Bill (15:22:31) :

    Give the guy a break. After all, he did invent the internet. “””

    Yeah but his invention of screen doors for Nuclear Submarines seems a lot more useful; along with his invention of ejection seats for helicopters.

  51. The Russian Kola Peninsula super deep drill hole to 12.2 km depth was stopped due to higher than expected temperatures at this depth and location, 180 °C (356 °F) instead of expected 100 °C (212 °F). Drilling was stopped in 1992 so it’s not as if this is new info. The drill bits could not handle the temperature and stresses.

    There is extensive literature on the limitations of geothermal.

  52. In the Goreacle’s defence (to a degree – no pun intended) he had changed to talking about the core, so he was not saying it was 1 meeeellion degrees 2kms down. That being said, it is nowhere near 1 meeellion degrees anywhere in the earth’s core unless I have missed some significant scientific finding.

    Anywho, I thought the massive study done by MIT on geothermal would be of interest:

    http://geothermal.inel.gov/publications/future_of_geothermal_energy.pdf

    Wet geothermal is easy, if you don’t mind reducing geyser activity in the area a bit… the dry rocks geothermal is the trickier one to implement (what we would need to engineer in Australia). We are working on it…

    I have no idea of the orders of magnitude, but I would assume that the heat would have to be harvested from different areas to allow the heat spots to recupperate. Whether that takes 10, 100, 1,000 or 1,000,000 years is a complete unknown to me. The K/U/Th decay can’t be generating a huge amount of heat or it WOULD be a meeellion degrees down there.

    In Western Australia (WA) we recently released a large amount of land for geothermal exploration – there is a fair bit of interest out there. Also, one doesn’t have to go down 2-5kms for the heat to be useful… heat exchangers and low heat applications can utilise sub-100C rock heat adequately … whether it is economic versus say gas-fired electricity or not is another issue altogether… we have a fair bit of gas in WA :D

  53. Geothermal and lawyers don’t mix is my guess. Imagine an earthquake that can be blamed on removing heat from the crust. Sounds plausible to me.

    Lucy,
    The day Al Gore has a good idea is the day you should think twice. Even assuming the man has good intentions don’t forget that he has been used as a tool for great evil at the least.

    Let his influence wane and give the man no credit. His credibility should be shot for the rest of his life even if he said the sky was normally blue.

    Why on earth should anyone ever listen to Al Gore again? Forgive him sure but trust him? Never in this life again, I say! Let him be content to be a rich disgrace. There are many poor ones.

  54. Gore knows nuttink about Will. That’s Will Shakespeare.
    …-

    “In the meantime though, they were short of cash for erecting a new building, and found a way around that problem by dismantling the old Theater building and carrying it piece by piece for four days across the frozen Thames river to the new site on Bankside in the Southwark District of London.”

    “Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre”

    http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/5-22-2004-54511.asp

  55. I think Pat has the key bit of info here…

    “pat (14:28:29) :

    BTW, geothermal can be incredibly polluting if not done properly. And in many really hot spots, like Hawaii, the pollution was extremely difficult to control. Aerated heavy metals.”

    We are talking real pollutants here, not the plant food type.

    I have been an architect for some 32 years and I have yet to install a geothermal system… but then I have not worked in Iceland or Alaska yet.

    I have found that passive solar heating/cooling and day lighting to be the best strategies for reduction of building energy use, by about 50%. Keeping in mind the built sector uses about 48% of all US energy… and we can effect this change at 1-2% increase in first costs…

    BTW, I do not believe it usually makes sense to use photovoltaics yet… but we will get there eventually.(except under ideal conditions)

    Al Gore is very savvy in regards to exploiting a fraud to his own gain, but I would not risk pulling him from a raging current as he is quite willing to bring down the country for his gain.

  56. 2km down is still the crust. His claims are ludicrous. The Earth’s core is 5700 K. Millions? He must have been the scientific consultant for that stinker movie, “The Core” with Hillary Skank.

  57. I don’t think most people took the time to ask if he was accurate or not. But any teachers, professors, or scientists, etc., who were watching could easily pick up on his sloppy presentation.

    But one thing Al Gore is known for—predictions of the planet heating up and cities like New York and Miami bring underwater; as winters get longer and summers get milder (if the current trend continues) people will continue to ask “Where is Al Gore’s global warming?” You don’t have to be a professor or a scientist to detect the inaccuracies of Al Gore’s predictions.

    Time and nature are enemies for Al Gore. Books, interviews on pop tv, and lectures with colorful pictures and scientific looking graphs won’t save him. And he has no one but himself to blame.

  58. The sbs was at it again yesterday on dateline giving the opinions of the non-scientist STERN. my hope many of you will keep the pressure on these radical lying tv stations by emailing them and demanding equal coverage of lord monckton the only person to have taken is science to court aganst these scammers and destroyed them with real science. it actualy says by law they are not to be biased, email the hell out of them i say. Good work guys keep the pressure on these loons.

  59. That’s true, he said the core was millions of degrees. But still it would make the crust 10’s of thousands of degrees. So we can still have fun.

  60. Zeke the Sneak (17:03:13) :
    I like the water that turns to steam at millions of degrees.
    —————–

    ……. and Biden’s Arctic ice that evaporates.

    It’s a Vice-President thing !!!

  61. So, instead of releasing evil CO2 into the atmosphere, he wants to release stored heat into the atmosphere in order to stop warming?

    Btw, you don’t have to be a degreed psychiatrist to see that Gore is making it up as he goes along. He’s betrayed by his own body language.

  62. ” Roger Sowell (17:37:01) :

    yonason, and other skeptics on geothermal:

    Geothermal has produced, and very reliably, 12 to 13,000 GWhrs per year in California for at least the past decade, representing approximately 4 percent of all power sold in the state.

    source: http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html

    This is a clear site, wish we had one as open in Australia.
    The contribution of each generating sector since 1997 are interesting….
    Hydro down
    Nuclear down
    Coal up
    Gas almost doubled
    Geo flat
    Biomass flat
    Wind up
    Solar up

    but what makes up ‘the other’?

  63. You would think that at some point he would just get embarassed and stop doing stuff like this. On the other hand, he has a new book to sell, so he has no choice. I’m betting on “Going Rogue” to outsell “Our Choice” Any takers? (any odds, any wager).

    Let me know thrill takers.

  64. Gore is the worst type of pseudo-intellectual and blow hard. He knows buzz words and confidently spews them out to promote his agendas. Why do you think he won’t debate? He knows that anyone who will challenge him on facts will show him as a total fool.

  65. And the Aussie government forges ahead with its ETS legislation:

    http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/6480785/senate-delays-debate-on-ets/

    Keith Minto (18:51:09) : but what makes up ‘the other’?
    I am guessing something that was absorbed into another category because of changed statistical reporting. Perhaps something like energy from bagasse burning being absorbed into biomass… that kind of thing. We just had a change in the industrial classifications in Australia and NZ (the ANZIC system) and it causes no end of statistical headaches. It is needed, because technologies come and go, as do the associated industries and hence the need to update industry classifications.

  66. “I’m betting on “Going Rogue” to outsell “Our Choice” Any takers?”

    Heh, Going Rogue is now in its second printing and hasn’t even been officially released yet.

    Last time I looked Gore’s book was in the 70’s on Amazon’s list.

  67. I once read an email from a physicist that went into the physics of Santa Claus visiting everyhome to deliver presents in one night. The conclusion was that if there was a Santa Claus, there isn’t one anymore because he would have been killed in his first attempt.
    It would appear that if there was global warming, we don’t have to worry about it any more, because, according to Al Gore, we’re all dead, fried by the two million degrees at the Earth’s core.
    So, this is what Purgatory is all about, watching videos of Al Gore.

  68. ” BarryW (19:19:03) :

    Gore is the worst type of pseudo-intellectual and blow hard. He knows buzz words and confidently spews them out to promote his agendas. Why do you think he won’t debate? He knows that anyone who will challenge him on facts will show him as a total fool.”

    True, but he has such a commanding strong speaking voice it sorta grabs your attention. I have an interest in Audio and making every voice sound as good as possible, as good voice quality could sell icebergs in Antarctica (or even AGW).
    A high, squeaky male voice goes nowhere,ever heard Helium raise the pitch on the human voice?, it just cannot be taken seriously any more.
    Now if we could just alter the audio feed……..

  69. George E. Smith (17:19:06) :

    Don’t knock ejection seats for helicopters!

    There have been numerous proposals, from sideways ejecting seats with rocket packs to gain height, to jettisoning of rotors prior to ejection.

    DaveE.

  70. hunter (14:37:32) :

    The sweet irony of this tiny glimpse of the real Gore, when ocntrasted with the propaganda piece by Newsweak, is delightful. The cover story on Al Gore in Newsweak this week is, I kid you not: ” The Thinking Man’s Thinking Man”

    Here are all four letters nesweek published in its 11/7 issue on the gore article:

    ‘The Thinking Man’s Thinking Man’
    Until each nation makes responsibility for the earth a priority, we will continue to devastate it—and ourselves.
    Theresa Hirschman Jericho, N.Y.

    As a six-continent bicycle traveler for the past 35 years, I admire Al Gore addressing climate change. However, he fails to highlight the basic factor accelerating it: human overpopulation. Either we address it, or Mother Nature will do it for us.
    Frosty Wooldridge Golden, Colo.

    Propaganda by global-warming skeptics and deniers reminds me of 1944, when as an Army officer I saw living skeletons in striped pajamas. Horror stories about Nazi concentration camps suddenly rang true. I wondered how intelligent people could commit such atrocities. History records the effectiveness of Joseph Goebbels’s propaganda. I hope Al Gore and others can prevail over today’s anti–science propaganda.
    Lee Bidgood Jr. Gainesville, Fla.

    I was surprised to see Al Gore’s essay (“The Plan That Saved the Planet”) on the historic choices we face regarding energy and climate change followed by Karl Rove’s “Scrap Cap-and-Trade” piece attacking the leading legislative proposal to reduce carbon emissions. Rove’s essay repeats debunked claims about cap-and-trade systems and fails to offer an alternative method for significantly reducing carbon emissions to the levels scientists say are necessary. Rove’s opinion piece was an unworthy counterpoint to Gore’s serious call to action.
    Aaron Huertas Press Secretary, Union of Concerned Scientists Washington, D.C.

  71. If you had exactly one question to ask Gore in a psuedo-private gathering of law students and professors what would you ask?

  72. It’s NBC so are you sure that’s not John Lovitz playing his pathalogical liar character from Saturday Night Live?

    Yaaaah, the ceeenter of the Earth, a MILLION degrees, yaaaah that’s it!
    35,000 years of electricity there, yaaaah, just a mile down, and the drillbits won’t melt, yaaaah, that’s the ticket!

  73. Is anyone the least bit surprised by this and the applause? Gore is a politician and people tend to follow herd mentality in groups. Of course, the audience would have been selected for this event.

    Another issue that can affect geothermal energy sources is that the source can change/move to such an extent that the plant would be come unviable. This has happened in Iceland and New Zealand before as I recall. There is a plant just north of Taupo, NZ, and Rotarua is another geothermal plateau where, I understand, people used to tap the source to heat swimming pools etc until the local authorities banned that action. Hot Water Beach is quite an amazing place too where you can feel geothermal heating flowing right at the surface, although you can’t stand in the flow of hot water without cold sea water too as it’s too hot on its own.

  74. Did he say that steam from the heat is “used to turn turbans”?!

    He’s already figured out, apparently, how to use geothermal energy to subsidize the Saudis. A forward thinker!

  75. philincalifornia (18:49:39) :

    Zeke the Sneak (17:03:13) :
    I like the water that turns to steam at millions of degrees.
    —————–

    ……. and Biden’s Arctic ice that evaporates.

    It’s a Vice-President thing !!!
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    1,000 votes away from this vp.

    Or, one heartbeat away from a vice president at all times. After him, Nancy Pelosi, if I am correct.

  76. A thought or two on the various “green” technologies:

    Since I got active in politics about 6 years ago, I have met a bunch of politicians. The Executive Director of a very conservative congressman asked me about coal integrated combined cycle with CO2 sequestration.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_gasification_combined_cycle

    My first thought without doing any research was: “If it was a slam-dunk, they wouldn’t be begging for tax payer dollars.” There has to be something wrong or they would be putting their own money into it and getting filthy rich.

    I was strictly in steam plant operations, but my WAG is: It probably work but……it will cost perhaps 50% more to build the plant, 50% more to operate/maintain it, and fuel consumption will be 30% higher as it will take that much of the energy in the fuel to run the process.

    I suspect that is true of most all of the green technologies. They are only viable in special circumstances or unless the government transfers money from fools to slickie boys (a term I learned in the Far East) wanting to get rich on green technology.

    As for geothermal. Yes, it will work in certain specific cases. However, the steam from a geothermal source can not be used directly in a turbine: it carries too many chemicals. So, you need to use the steam/hot water for space heating, or use an indirect heat exchanger to create steam for a turbine or use some type of Sterling Cycle engine. And even so, you will have maintenance problems with the chemicals in the steam and I suspect that even stainless steel will stress crack if not corrode. Maybe 70-30 CuNi alloy would work; if anyone out there knows, please advise.

    A 1,000 mWe Sterling Cycle engine would be a sight to behold! As a retired steamboat engineer, I would drive 3,000 miles just to marvel at the sight of one in opertion!

    Regards,

    Steamboat Jack

    PS
    A final rhetorical question:
    The Goracle has made over $100 million on this scam and I’ve read that he may be the first “Green Billionaire”. So, a question for all of you (and I) that have made disparaging remarks about Al: ” Who is the fool, Al or me?”

  77. Well it just goes to show that earth is venus in blue jeans, a walking talking work of art. It isn’t that hot and it isn’t co2.

  78. “Jon Jewett (20:51:51) :

    The Goracle has made over $100 million on this scam and I’ve read that he may be the first “Green Billionaire”. So, a question for all of you (and I) that have made disparaging remarks about Al: ” Who is the fool, Al or me?”

    Actually, Gore and his family fortunes are largely derived from oil (Oxy), amoung other things. But stands, as already suggested, to make much much more than that with carbon taxes.

  79. Re: DaveE (20:03:47) :

    There have been numerous proposals, from sideways ejecting seats with rocket packs to gain height, to jettisoning of rotors prior to ejection.

    Russian Ka-50 and South African Rooivalk both have ejector seats I think, both losing the rotors pre-launch. ISTR some mention of downward firing ejector seats being thought about, but for low-flying aircraft that seems… risky.

    Anyway, this geothermal malarky is dangerous. Remove heat, core contracts and we risk 2012-style delamination or no sleep due to big lump rattling around under the crust. Won’t someone think of our grandchildren?

    (presumably this also means Al Gore Inc is investing in geothermal, in which case I hope he’s done better due diligence than this interview shows. Or maybe it’s just a pump & dump advertorial, in which case perhaps the SEC should take a look.)

  80. Do you know, during our primaries many thought that electing Mr. President Barack Obama and his Esteemed Vice President Joe Biden, would punish the conservatives so severely that there would be a return to Constitutional principles?

    Now they will pack the courts, pack the Doe the nea the department of everything with
    M—ists.

  81. Truly a man on a money making mission……When will the people of today wake up and realise the difference between SPIN and FACT.

    The man can not and will not give a respond to a reasonable question unless he is asked it in a prepared controlled environment.

  82. So Gore rattled off the wrong number on a TV talk show. Not a very big deal. we need laughs. And he may actually believe it. Who knows?

    Geothermal isn’t a mystery. It has worked well a few places with the right geology. And failed at others. At most places getting to adequate heat is expensive. And you need a lot of relatively pure water, or expensive dry cooling, or a substitute fluid for a closed loop system.

    Like acrobatics at the circus, if it was easy everyone could be performing.

    An MIT study this year said it is a good alternate for the US. But I am always cautious about studies not involving field trials.

    The proper role for DOE in geothermal power generation is to fund several serious and independent trials by experienced engineering firms and accept the outcomes – good or bad.

    And read Jon, aka Steamboat Jack @20:51:51 in case you overlooked that.

    For now, many already use a form of geothermal, the ground sink heat pump. More effective cooling in summer and heating in winter. My brother in Kansas lives over a rather shallow water table and his ground sink heat pump is astonishingly effective.

  83. I am a American living in Leyte, Philippines. Our electricity is produced by geothermal energy and is old technology here.

  84. George E. Smith (17:10:04) : Well to be fair to the man (why not) he did say “the interior of the earth is extremely hot; several million degrees.”… But Gore did say that several km down there are these extremely hot rocks. Well that is certainly true where you have magma pools under volcanoes… I would guess that sites that are potentially good for geothermal energy (high grade energy), are likely to be earthquake active…

    More precisely it has to be above a high temperature geothermal field, where you have high temperature, high pressure steam available underground, at well above 100 C. You cant just drill anywhere 2,000 meters down as Gore was suggesting and get steam to run a turbine!

    As for the interior of the Earth being at millions of degrees maybe Gore knows better. After all the Earth does have a fever.

  85. PS the Magma pools dont have to be under volcanoes (active ones that is) Auckland is sitting atop large magma pools.

  86. Drill bits that can survive two million degrees of heat and steam that powers “turbans”.

    Thats Sikhs taken care of but what about the rest of us?

  87. In a retail shopping centre in Southampton, in England, is an incongruous corrugated iron building. It is a geothermal power station, dating, I think, from 1928. Amazing metallurgy they had then, not to melt. But is it safe, with all those shoppers threatened with several million degree rocks?

  88. Now that British courts have declared AGW a religion, I’d like to make sure we all recognise it as such, no more calling them a crazy cult, they are a respectable religious faith like any other, with saints and prophets, miracles and deluge myths. Please spread this:

    Our Nobel Father Al
    Who art flying the heavens
    Smokey be thy business jet flames.
    Thy Carbon Exchange come,
    Thy Inconvenient Truth be done,
    In the UN as it is in Copenhagen
    Sell us this day, our daily carbon credits
    and forgive us our emissions,
    as we forgive those who emit against us.
    And lead us not, into nuclear temptation,
    but deliver us from denier evil, Almen

    You may go forth and spread the Lords prayer amongst the heathens, in hopes it inspires them to come to the One True Faith, the Church of Global Warming.

  89. Gore isn’t just clueless about science. He doesn’t seem to have a clue what’s going on. Nowadays we say ‘It’s the economy stupid’ but what we get is blah blah from the Climate Bore in Chief. Well, it is the economy stupid, Al.

    ‘At some point, American workers will rebel. US unemployment is already 17.5pc under the broad “U6″ gauge followed by Barack Obama. Realty Track said that 332,000 properties were foreclosed in October alone. More Americans have lost their homes this year than during the entire decade of the Great Depression. A backlog of 7m homes is awaiting likely seizure by lenders. If you are not paying attention to this political time-bomb, perhaps you should.’

    A prayer for those Americans who have lost there jobs and homes. From the 23rd Psalm circa 1929. Et tu Democrats?

    Hoover is my shepherd
    I am in want
    He maketh me to lie down on park benches
    He leadeth me by still factories
    He restoreth my doubt in the Republican party
    Yeah though I walk through the valley of soup kitchens
    I am hungry
    Surely poverty and hard times will follow me
    All the days of the Republican administration
    And I will live in a rented house forever.

  90. Maybe I’m wrong, but millions of degrees, under pressure, would trigger spontaneous nuclear fusion, vaporizing Al, Conan, and the planet in about a nanosecond.

  91. Petitio principii? Didn’t someone then ask, “how sure are you in that case, seeing that heat rises (well it used to in the olden days), with the ocean heat rising out of control & the atmosphere sizzling, the polar caps melting, polar bears & penguins frying, that all this “unprecedented” global warming is not natural?” Unless of course the “inner subterrainian greenhouse” from all that carbon locked up in the rocks prevents it from getting through to the surface.

    Being such a technically minded guy, didn’t Gore recently advise NASA that their new space rocket, at peak thrust on lift off would cause the engine to develop transverse thrust in the epicyclic torque condenser units resulting in both cordwangling of the falangy & excessive fibrilation of the phased flux converter? Or is it just me?

  92. Richard (22:28:48) :
    “PS the Magma pools dont have to be under volcanoes (active ones that is) Auckland is sitting atop large magma pools.”

    And most of the rest of New Zealand has more sense.

    ———————

    Go to Ebay and buy an old drilling rig.
    Set it up in your back yard and start drilling.
    When you hit the magma, withdraw the drill and stand back.
    Look, a do-it-yourself volcano.

    Make one yourself, and be the envy of your friends.

    ———————

    Can’t somebody just tell Al Gore that geothermal is not cool

  93. I work at the 6800 foot level in Creighton mine. Taking the cage down, the air gets cold as we pass the ice fields around the 2000 foot level. The ventilation system uses the ice fields to cool the air before it gets sent down to the lower levels. Working out in the drift on 6800 is warm. The walls are constantly near 34 Celsius. It is a degree or two warmer down on the 7000 foot level and it gets warmer the deeper you go. — John M Reynolds

  94. “AlGore” and “Idiot” just seem to be made for each other. The longer he talks and the more he answers questions without a “teleprompter” the more ridiculous he becomes. No wonder there is no open Q&A, no discussion, no debate.

    I am grateful for intelligent discussion of geothermal energy and I have some questions. Tor Hansson (16:39 – 11/16) provides a link to info on Iceland’s Reykjavek geothermal heating and electric plant. The description seems to have been written in the early 1990s for data on waste water:

    “There are two important features of the waste water from high-temperature fields that may have a negative effect on the environment. These are the raised temperature of surface waters and ground water aquifers and the presence of hazardous chemicals in the waste water, i.e. arsenic, mercury, boron, etc. Extensive research has been carried out at Nesjavellir with respect to disposal of the waste water. ”

    The article concludes that there are no problems with the surface disposal of waste water. Shore water of Lake Thingvallavatn continues to be the same as it was in 1979 before the plant was built. My old-fashioned (olive green) realist environmental self asks: “Can this be true year after year, or is the waste frozen for the present in Iceland?” “Can we get something for nothing?” Perhaps Roger Sowell on California geothermal, or others, have some answers.

  95. As Patrick Davis notes, Rotorua had to control the tapping of geothermal steam by private residences so as to save the geysers at Whakarewarewa thermal reserve, which is a famous tourist attraction. The power station at Wairakei has been running for decades now and shows no sign of faltering, as far as I am aware. There are a number of tourist attractions close by where boiling lakes and regular geysers are to be seen, so its pretty hot close to the surface.

    In fact, NZ continues to build geothermal stations of various sizes and there have been no subsidence or pollution problems anywhere, nor have any run dry. Auckland is certainly underlain by a large volcanic field that is a long way from extinct yet. A new volcano in the city is by no means impossible, so a geothermal operation ought to be viable there as well.

  96. I shall allay my language here, but watching Al is difficult for me.
    Of course we would disagree on almost everything, if perchance we met.
    I would not and do not deny his rights to say what he feels and thinks.
    We would certainly differ on hypothetical AGW conjecture.

    What I do find painful however, is this guy – and I hesitate to be too brutal, is a dullard and his public speaking/interviews or addressing of the camera is, to say the least halting, unsure and timid ( as if he knows he is a charlatan), his comments simply, are ill-informed pap.

    He certainly hit a nerve with his power-point presentation a few years ago, though I remember the hullabaloo about Disney’s ‘ Jungle Book’ or the ‘Lion King’, great films but only cartoons………. and really only for the little ones.

    Finally, it is no wonder he shuns a public debate with the likes of say Monckton………………….. !

  97. Al (20:25:30) :

    “If you had exactly one question to ask Gore in a psuedo-private gathering of law students and professors what would you ask?”

    I’d ask, “Al, could you cut me in for 10% of the action? I could use the bucks.”

  98. ” How many fingers am I holding up, Winston ? ”

    ” Four. ”

    ” And if the party says that it is not four but five – then how many ? “

  99. “So, a question for all of you (and I) that have made disparaging remarks about Al: ” Who is the fool, Al or me?”” Jon Jewett

    What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? Matthew 16:26

  100. Let’s see….?
    “Several million degrees” at “2 kilometers or so down” !

    Given the geothermal gradiant that would still put the earth’s crust at > 1million K.

    It’s a wonder he not puzzled by the presence of any ice at the north pole, or south pole for that matter.

  101. It’s interesting the term algorithm is derived from algebra, an word with origins in Arabic, to decribe a new mathematic discovery made in the Islam world before the times of Grenada and Toledo. The foundation of science as we know it is based on algebra, among others. It’s rather funny that we use the nickname “algore-ithm”, or some other such nicknames to describe him, but he certainly has nothing to do with sceince at all.

  102. Noticed a miss-wording in the title of the youtube clip. It should be that Gore ‘makes a profit’ for Gaiea not “is the prophet”

  103. Ok, he makes a mistake in temperature, but I think his point is clear and I really think it is a good thing to seek for new energy resources. At least smarter then make war for the old ones!

  104. “John (16:34:53) :

    If the MSM decides to look into this, which they likely won’t, it will be the death knell for the former VP.

    How can you win a Nobel Prize for pushing complex science and be so ignorant about basic geology?

    How can you come on a nationwide TV show and talk about geothermal, and not know the temperatures?

    How can you not know that drilling equipment can’t withstand temperatures of a couple of million degrees?

    I’m very shocked at Gore’s ignorance. But I will be just as shocked if the media ignore this. And I’m pretty jaded, as are most of us on this blog, it seems to me.”

    A few things to keep in mind:
    1) He’s not stupid, unfortunately. He’s made billions, yes, with a “B”, of dollars shilling like this.
    2) He won the Nobel PEACE prize…that’s the PEACE prize. A fact that’s consistantly and conveniently overlooked by the MSM.
    3) Since when has ANY politician known much of ANYTHING about what they’re talking about. Remember point #1.
    4) Shocked at his ignorance?…he’s one of the craftiest, coniving, manipulative figureheads out there. Of his many faults…ignorance ain’t one of ‘em.

    JimB

  105. Roger Knights (20:04:52):

    Roger, do you have a point??

    “ocntrasted”.

    When I use this word. I will refer back to you, Roge

  106. “dutch (03:31:27) :

    Ok, he makes a mistake in temperature, but I think his point is clear and I really think it is a good thing to seek for new energy resources. At least smarter then make war for the old ones!”

    Are you suggesting WWI and WWII were all about energy? You should read up on your history. Were the Nazis and Stalin at war with people over energy?

  107. Just confirms what I already knew, Gore is an uneducated wind-bag who hasn’t a clue about climate change, the environment of anything helpful to the debate.

    As with most politicians these days, They’re only as good as their script writers – no wonder politics and science are in such an abysmal state.

  108. 2 kilometers, huh? 2 million degrees? I bet the folks working the TauTong mine in South Africa, at 3.9 kilometers, really hate getting up in the morning.

  109. Yes, right. The poor guy is unfamiliar with geology and makes misstakes. From some of the comments above it seems that the subject of geothermal energy is not very familiar to many others either. For example the crust is not evenly thick everywhere. If you drill in northern Scandinavia you have to go several kilometers down to reach a temperature high enough for a power station, while in Iceland and parts of western USA the crust is thin. Gore has caught the general principle. There might be technological issues to be overcome, but it is a possible source of energy. For example Chevron and Calpine already earn money from Geothermal energy.
    The fact that Al Gore mentiones it is not enough to dismiss geothermal energy.
    He might be less than clever on temperatures and geology but that’s a different issue.

  110. For the true believers defending the profit of AGW, at least ask try to reflect a bit:
    Why exactly are you so enchanted with Al?
    You know he is a personal hypocrite – his personal energy use is flagrantly and massively high. He flies personal planes. He directly prophets from selling products that are popular because of his claims about climate.
    What if any skeptic at all had made the numerical blunder Gore made on TV?
    You know that every AGW promotion blog out there would be talking about nothing but this as *proof* of how ignorant and subhuman denialist scum are.
    Gore, in ignorantly claiming that significant geothermal energy is available on 2 kilometers down, and implying that it is easily done, was just plain misleading people. And his reference to the temps involved is more reflexive, in that context, of a man who does not give a fig about what the facts may actually be, and who has no significant understanding of the topic at all.
    That Conan was not sharp enough to pick up on the pile of ignorance Gore was selling only points out to me why his show is not doing so well. If you are willing to let a big easy target like Gore stroll around dropping misinformatoin off like that, then maybe you are not really ready for prime time.

  111. Check National Geographic on the Witwaterrand: It’s 130+ degrees down there, not 2 million.
    Elmer Fudd weighs in on Climate Change.
    Shhhh. I’m hunting Carbon Wabbits.
    Omigod, it’s Gwobal Warming, huh, huh, huh, huh!
    ~”What a Maroon”.~

  112. Drill bits made of material that can withstand temps over a million degrees?!
    Wow!
    Must be some new super material I aint heard nothing about.

  113. Al Gore should stick to inventing the next version of the Internet. It’s obvious he know more about IT than geology. What a dope!

  114. Yeah, that’s why Jay Rockefeller, Doofus-WV, is against Kerry-Boxer. Those coal miners have enough to deal with, with the heat and all.
    Great catch Anthony. I linked it for the 10 people who don’t already know you put it up.

  115. The 500 to 900 degrees 2 kilometers down or so is not correct. I have been underground in South Africa 12,000 feet and it is not that temperature. The rock temperature is 145 degrees farhenheit at that depth.

  116. Philip T. Downman (04:16:00) :

    “The fact that Al Gore mentiones it is not enough to dismiss geothermal energy.”

    Of course. Even a stopped clock …

    What is Al Gore? A pseudo-scientific opportunistic politician who has been seriously WRONG. He should be ignored henceforth.

    The true energy solution is Liberty. One size does not fit all.

  117. “… A good illustration of the difference between “knowledge” and “intelligence.”

    The former refers to the ability to remember facts, figures, and events. The latter refers to the ability to figure out what those facts, figures, and events actually mean.”

    But if one has no grasp of the facts, can he possibly ‘figure out’ what they mean? Falsity has no meaning.

  118. When is Gore coming out for table-top fusion? Or perhaps for power generated by rubbing crystals and listening to Allen Ginsburg chant ‘Om’?

  119. Do not mock the all-knowing, all-seeing and wise Goreacle. Remember, in just a little over 4 years now (Dec., 2013) the ENTIRE north polar ice cap will DISAPPEAR. Poof, and it will be gone, and the flooding that will result will be on a biblical scale. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth by those who Didn’t Listen. We know this because the Wise One said it, so it must be so. In fact, I hear of a great Ark being built now in Memphis, and there is word of creatures of all kinds heading there by twos.

  120. Dutch wrote: “Ok, he makes a mistake in temperature, but I think his point is clear and I really think it is a good thing to seek for new energy resources. At least smarter then make war for the old ones!”

    Club of Rome wrote: “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

    G. Orwell wrote: “Peace is War”

    The Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) wrote: “Threat of climate change should be treated like war” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6554690/Threat-of-climate-change-should-be-treated-like-war-say-engineers.html

    Now, make peace, not love, brothers & sisters!

    Big Brother

  121. From http://www.tennessean.com/article/20091115/NEWS08/911150340/Al+Gore+sees+global+shift+on+climate+change

    Why do some people ridicule you about climate change?

    I think there are three or four reasons why there’s a persistent group of deniers out there. Number one, there has been a huge ongoing effort by many of the largest carbon polluters to run a billion dollars every year in advertising aimed at reinforcing skepticism about this. … Secondly, … there is a really large effort that works hand in glove with the point of view of the carbon polluters. Third, the old cliché “Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt” also applies. … And then I guess the fourth element is there’s an ideological group of opponents who believe that any serious effort to solve the climate crisis is going to involve a role for government in limiting carbon emissions….

    I see he’s wrong about that too. :-) I don’t have time today to make my four suggestions, but the above comments have plenty.

  122. Well to be fair to the man (why not) he did say “the interior of the earth is extremely hot; several million degrees.”

    George is about the only one, who got it right. the majority of comments (and the original article) do misrepresent what he said.

    REPLY: “sod” Not only are your the worst of the cowardly trolls, never daring to put a name to an opinion, but you are just as wrong as Gore. There is no place in the interior of the Earth where ther temperature exceeds 1 million degrees F/C/K take your pick. Your agreement with Gore on this indefensible faux pau says more about your lack of character than your troll cowardice. – Anthony Watts

  123. OK people, you’re laying it on a little thick. He fumbled a number. Assuming somebody points it out to him, see if he repeats the error.

  124. I agree Al Gore should stick to talking about things he knows about. Like inventing the internet.

    Could anyone help out here? We need to identify something Al knows about.

  125. A lot of people seem to think that geothermal energy is unworkable. It seems to be a question of where you are. It works just fine in Iceland. They get all the power they need from geothermal, but then it’s a volcanic island.
    Maybe it would be worth doing in Hawaii, and if the mainland US really wants to go green, you could turn Yellowstone into one vast power plant.
    Just kidding!

  126. Be at peace, my friends. Former VP Gore is from the political class in Washington, DC, having been born into the family of a Senator.
    Thus he is incapable of distinguishing thousands, millions, billions, and trillions. To Gore all such terms mean “many”, as in more than the count of my fingers and toes together.
    Gore shares another Beltway Insider characteristic: he is infinitely flexible on issues of truth and morals. He will happily espouse whatever he perceives to be popular today, without any regard to accuracy, or any reference to what he said yesterday.
    Lastly I observe that Gore does not believe in capitalism. Were there profit to be made from the sale of geothermal energy, we would be buying that energy. The sole restriction on geothermal use is technical. The last time I looked, the flow of heat in rocks was slow (heat removed from a geothermal source will produce a local heat deficit). So what works today will not work so well in 20 years. And the geothermal heat is separated from us by lots of rock (which is why our feet do not fry); the rock is very hard; the costs to drill down to where the heat is are not yet compensated for by the cash value of the extracted heat. The rare exceptions are, of course, where crustal rifts allow the magma to come close to the surface (Iceland, Yellowstone, etc.).
    And flashing water into steam, to be used to drive a turbine, in order to generate electricity, is old technology. As is the case with solar energy, our means of conversion to transportable energy are strongly subject to inevitable entropy loss.
    If you really want to become an instant billionaire, invent or develop a cheap and durable method of direct conversion of temperature differential or radiation into readily transportable electricity.
    Or even a lossless electrical power line. Figure out a way to reflect or capture all that lovely 60-cycle radio frequency emission from our power lines and you will be very wealthy indeed! Maxwell’s laws are such a bore.

  127. listening to him makes me think of being stuck next to someone in a pub after a few pints and having to listen to them talk absolute [self snip]. biggest problem with having to listen to a drunk is that there is no point reasoning with them because alcohol has shut down the reason part of their brain, in fact reason can be responded to with aggression. Can be the same talking to an activist but they don’t have alcohol as an excuse. Tolerable if you have had a few pints yourself but not if you are sober.

  128. carrot eater (06:15:47) :

    “OK people, you’re laying it on a little thick.”

    If the ridiculing of Al Gore were doubled and squared, it would not come close to the spittle flecked, red faced arm-waving from the alarmist contingent if, for example, Lord Monckton had said the same thing.

    Word up, bro.

  129. Just in case anyone has forgotten and to renew my non-coward membership:

    My name is Steve Stanley Stipulkoski:

    I oppose and will fight to my death:

    1) government backed central banking.
    2) government backed education.
    3) world government
    4) the ninny, nanny, welfare/welfare state
    5) other things

    Now back to my nom de plume.

    REPLY: Good for you. -A

  130. carrot eater (06:15:47)- “OK people, you’re laying it on a little thick. He fumbled a number.”

    He just released a book last week, supposedly non-fiction, describing ways to solve the climate catastrophe, with in-depth discussions of renewable energy such as geothermal. This ‘fumble’ exposes an inability to grasp the magnitude of numbers. It was very illuminating.

    Or maybe it was an attempt at humor, by purposely exaggerating the core temperature by a factor of 200. It sure made me laugh…at him.

  131. This is the REAL science of global warming as explained by a Nobel Prize winner. No-one can deny the holocaust happening just beneath our feet and we can only have a matter of a few months to save the Earth at this point.

  132. mathman (06:21:28) :

    George Gamow’s book “One, Two,Three Infinity: Facts and Speculations of Science” takes it’s title from a story about a tribe in Africa. The tribe only has numbers for One, Two, and Three. Any number higher than that is “many”, or for all practical purposes “infinity”. (I.e. a number so big the mind can’t comprehend it.)

    Perhaps the Goracle has the same mathematical knowledge?

    By the way, Gamow’s book is really delightful and written suitably for a high school student (or a high school nerd anyway). It would be a good Christmas gift.

    And no, I don’t have any stock in either George Gamow or Amazon.

    Regards,

    Steamboat Jack

  133. Smokey: There’s rather a difference between fumbling a number now and then while speaking (and hopefully not making the error again) (and where the point he was making was still valid, with the correct numbers), and repeatedly saying things that are unfounded.

  134. carrot eater (07:20:39),

    Since we’re making that direct comparison between the two, then Nobel laureate Gore should have no hesitation in debating Viscount Monckton.

    Let the world audience decide who is right and who is wrong regarding AGW… unless, of course, there is some sort of reluctance by one or the other to go at it, and let the chips fall where they may.

  135. carrot eater (06:15:47) :

    “OK people, you’re laying it on a little thick. He fumbled a number. Assuming somebody points it out to him, see if he repeats the error.”

    To be serious for a moment, I disagree with you in the strongest possible terms.

    This “error” is not fumbling a number. Al Gore has repeatedly misrepresented this issue. That’s something that IS settled (courts, science inquiries, journalism etc.). Furthermore, Al Gore has a long track record of misrepresenting (not “fumbling”) numbers in Congress, in Presidential debates, etc. Fully documenting these would be like Anthony’s 450 paper reference article (maybe longer).

    At this point one has to be extremely naive to think one side of scientists on this issue just interpret the information out there differently. The exposed egregious lack of scientific discipline, often obviously twisted to arrive at convenient conclusions, makes it abundantly clear there exists a political battle being waged against an honest scientific one (and against honest science itself in many cases). That’s not to say we understand what is happening with our climate or why. This site and others like it are valuable however, because there is an honest approach to sorting that out.

    Dismissing this as a “number fumble,” ignores facts, established behavior patterns, and context, engaging in a moral relativism that is inappropriate and, if intentional, insulting.

  136. Given that Al Gore is a co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Prize, this spectacle reminds me once again that the 2007 Nobel for the IPCC’s climate science was NOT awarded in the Physics category…

  137. ” Douglas DC (07:09:11) :”

    Pebble bed reactors generate waste that isn’t easy to process. A site with two or more new, modern reactors and a reprocessing plant on-site would suit me better. After initial fueling, nothing comes into the plant but natural uranium. Waste after reprocessing is 1% of the amount of waste from a conventional plant and decays in a few hundred years rather than tens of thousands.

  138. This bothers me, I have no formal education past high school yet, and I know the difference. I know that at those tempertures fussion happens…. How do these people gain office, power, money and fame?

  139. Gore has no clue? No [fooling]? What was your first clue?

    Does anybody not expect someone who won’t take questions from people who disagree with his agenda to have good grasp of facts?

    The man should have his picture in the dictionary next to the word “denier.”

  140. al gore is the worst kind of agw liar…unlike snake oilers or infomerciallers which have to sell a product under the guise of marketing, people like him want to usurp that choice and pass laws to make it so because their doom and gloom product will not sell…its dastardly, wrong and we have to shut it down…gore lied with a movie, lied again in an interview and like most agw proponents of cap and trade lie about the facts…the media that willing twist or spin his lifestyle as an example of frugality and concern for the environment are liars as well…the truth needs to be spoken loudly and clearly because if it isnt, you can bet they will run over you with their false prophesies of the end of the world and never look back…calling out this farce of a man may sound harsh but it is the truth and mr gore, dont you dare tread on me with your pseudo science looking for a way into my pocketbook!!!..there, i feel better

  141. chris y (07:02:53) –

    What did Gore’s book (Our Choice) say was the temperature of the earth’s interior? That’s the real test of whether he’s being sloppy or not.

  142. It’s obvious that he used the same hockey stick generator to find the earth core temperature. What did you expect? At least he is consistent in his inconsistencies.

  143. carrot eater (07:20:39) :
    Smokey: There’s rather a difference between fumbling a number now and then while speaking (and hopefully not making the error again) (and where the point he was making was still valid, with the correct numbers), and repeatedly saying things that are unfounded.

    I assume you mean alarmist things like:

    1. The Arctic will be ice free in five years (predicted in 2001).
    2. Sea levels will rise by twenty meters.
    3. Antarctica is warming.
    4. The hockey stick.
    5. Positive feedback

  144. Our favorite speaker, Mr. Al Gore apparently will be broadcast over the airwaves tomorrow 18 NOV 09 in at least the CONUS Pacific Northwest, over KUOW which is the local public radio broadcaster in the Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area at 94.9 FM on your radio dial. While flipping through the available stations on the way in to work this AM, I caught the tail end of a recording of a senator (did not catch which one, apparently a left-leaning one) lamenting the delay of climate change legislation in the senate also SNAFUs for the Copenhagen meeting (he was also hoping for a stronger push for both from the US after the holidays). The local broadcaster then came on gushing that Big AL was going to be in the KUOW studios (in person!!!!) tomorrow for an interview.

    Here is the link to KUOW, not sure, haven’t done it before, but you may be able to hear the speech by clicking on the “Morning Edition” audio tomorrow….

    http://www.kuow.org/index.php

    Heck, The Oracle For All Things Warmist may even be broadcast nationally…

    MCR

  145. Rereke Whakaaro (01:38:32) :.. Can’t somebody just tell Al Gore that geothermal is not coo..l

    Geothermal can be cool (or hot) in certain circumstances. In Iceland for example it is used for heating as much as power generation. Many pools in Rororua are heated by geothermal.

    But as I pointed out geothermal can only be used where you have a geothermal field and these are limited. There are also many disadvantages of Geothermal power generation. You can only have them where you have a large preferably high pressure field, there is a high initial cost, low efficiency and plant equipment and fields get degraded over time.

    From Wikipedia “Worldwide, geothermal plants have the capacity to generate about 10 gigawatts of electricity as of 2007, and in practice supply 0.3% of global electricity demand.” To reach from 0.3% to even 2 or 3% seems a colossal jump and not the saviour of the world Al is chalking it out to be. (Just drill and run a turbine or tur-bin according to him).

    That video didnt show him in such a bad light, all said and done, faux pas not withstanding. It showed the human side of him, laughing about the comparison to Lex Luthor.

  146. Geothermal?

    What about those hundreds of thousands of hydrothermal vents all along the mid-ocean ridges, all round the world, each one spewing out as much energy as a nuclear power station, in the form of plumes of water at 10,000 PSI and 400deg C.

    No need to drill down, and no problem about depletion, as their percolation systems do all the concentration and heat transportation already.

    Just need to lower stirling engine/generators onto these vents, and with an oceanful of water at ~4 deg C just feet away, that temperature gradient is just otherwise going to waste!

    Use the electric power to electrolyse water locally, and it should be a simple matter to get the hydrogen up to the surface. Could even use some seabed energy to liquefy it.

    (BTW, how about seeing if the tremendous power of these vents can be used to convert CO2 to Methane? Do you suppose Al Gore would be interested in investing in researching this ‘ultimate’ recycling project to solve the global warming and global fuel-shortage at the same time? )

  147. The Goreacle knows no controlling legal authority exists to rein in his excesses.

    Which is unattractive but a good thing, IMHO, and ought to remain so.

    * Reject Copenhagen
    * Dissolve the U.N.
    * Cap and Trade the U.S. Congress
    * Live Free or Die
    * Don’t Tread on Me
    * Warmer is Better

  148. Pretty clear now why Gore will never debate anybody on global warming. He has no grasp of reality or facts. The only thing missing is the big red nose and the floppy shoes.

  149. The only thing heating up is the compost pile of AGW error clippings.
    That’s a lot of hot air, methane and backpeddling for the biggest perpetual motion machine ever invented.

  150. Jon Jewett (07:17:33) : Gamow’s book, ‘One, Two, Three, Infinity’, is great for kids, read it at age of 12, changed my worldview forever after. It reveals the universe as a wonderment, through mathematics and physics.

  151. Always helpful to bring a few numbers to the table.

    There’s probably no better place on the planet for geothermal generation than `Iceland. Their government is keen to see it developed – they’ve been promoting the idea of a high voltage sub-sea interconnector cable to the UK, so that they can sell geothermally generated electricity.

    As part of the promotion for this, the Icelandic government has estimated the potential output of geothermal stations using readily available steam sources (and hot rocks) –

    “”Energy in Iceland – Historical Perspective, Present Status, Future Outlook” accessible via wikipedia

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_power_in_Iceland

    It’s 20TWh/yr; which is equivalent to about 2,300 MW.

    For comparison, the proposed new nuclear stations at Hinkley Point and Sizewell here in the UK will generate 3,200MW EACH. Both sites have the space to double that. And eight more (with a possible three beyond that) have been identified, each with at least as much potential as Sizewell and Hinkley.

    So, bear that in mind – the best sites in the world together can’t produce as much as a single medium sized nuclear development.

  152. Alan the Brit (01:07:03) :

    Being such a technically minded guy, didn’t Gore recently advise NASA that their new space rocket, at peak thrust on lift off would cause the engine to develop transverse thrust in the epicyclic torque condenser units resulting in both cordwangling of the falangy & excessive fibrilation of the phased flux converter? Or is it just me?

    Alan

    That sounds like a cross between Fred Wedlock, Rambling Syd Rumpo and Arnold J Rimmer to me. Oh, I see your point …

  153. UPDATE:

    Did a little more in-depth research RE: Gore in Seattle 18 NOV 09:

    http://www.kuow.org/program.php?id=12897

    While browsing also saw he is to speak later tomorrow in Portland, Oregon:

    http://www.oregonlive.com/books/index.ssf/2009/08/al_gore_lectures_in_portland_o.html

    FWIW….I would guess he will be greeted with hugs, kisses, and palm branches strewn upon the ground in his path in Portland, what?

    Maybe a key to the city????

    Sarcasm – I Love It!!

    MCR

  154. Roger Sowell (17:37:01) :

    “yonason, and other skeptics on geothermal:

    Geothermal has produced, and very reliably, 12 to 13,000 GWhrs per year in California for at least the past decade, representing approximately 4 percent of all power sold in the state.”

    Fine, but that doesn’t alter the fact that geothermal isn’t risk free, nor is it widely available. Apart from the problems in the links I already posted, there are other concerns, like:

    1. Availability.

    With most of geothermal in the West, and only a fraction of what is there hot enough to generate electricity, what is the rest of the country to use? Many other sources of power will always be needed, even in areas where geothermal exists.

    As you yourself pointed out, even where it’s available, it only supplies less than one twentieth of the total power. And, since it’s been around for so long, if it were economical it would have a much greater share of the market. In fact, from the data you gave, you can see that the market share has gone from 4.7% in 1997 to 4.2% in 2008. That’s hardly a booming industry.

    2. Safety and Reliability.
    Apart from the considerations I’ve linked to in my posts above, there’s also the inconvenient truth that accessible sources of geothermal heat are located near fault lines, not the safest places to be. And if a plant is destroyed in an earthquake, how long would it take to rebuild it and what source(s) of power would replace it until it’s restored?

    Bottom line, like all other “green” energy sources, it can never be relied upon to supply all our power, nor can we be confident that it will invariably be available when needed.

    I’m not saying it shouldn’t be used when possible, just that it’s no panacea.

  155. Anyone check if Big Al’s made any investments in geothermal companies lately. Maybe this will be his next money maker like his “carbon credits” company. Pump and dump….

  156. [blockquote]alaskabill (20:47:04) :
    The Nobel committe must be so proud. [/blockquote]

    The Nobel committee has no idea that this was on TV in the US, and if they had they would probably have agreed with what he said…

  157. As scientific knowledge advances, newer and more amazing sources of power become known. To date, the greatest source of power known to science, by several orders of magnitude, is that unleashed from the atom. The amount of energy that is released from splitting an atom is 10**17 times greater than the amount of mass lost.

    Knowing what we know, can somebody explain why were talking about trying to scrape heat out of the ground, or scavenge a trickle of power from the wind?

  158. Simon (22:42:01) :

    “Drill bits that can survive two million degrees of heat and steam that powers ‘turbans’.”

    It would certainly take a lot of degrees to spin a turban like this:

    Or was that dungarees?

    Whatever. Anyway, maybe we can get him to make one for Big Al to wear when he goes on the snake oil circuit, just to add a little of the mysterious orient to his routine.

  159. AlGore is Partner of Kleiner Perkins that has invested in Alta Rocks that describe them selves as follows “AltaRock develops and commercializes geothermal technology to produce clean, renewable power”. Anyone surpirsed?

    Anders

  160. Al’s running scared. With the Lord Monckton video going viral, vs. Conan’s paltry viewership, it’s obvious that people are beginning to see Gore correctly as just another snake-oil selling fraud.

    The old MSM game of running the talk show circuit doesn’t work so well with the Internet. Ironic, Gore’s own invention coming back to bite.

  161. Vincent (11:56:14) :

    Because the genie of nuclear fission makes deadly wastes, there’s a storage problem along with half-lifes/toxicity, and the spectre of nuclear material falling into the wrong hands.
    Plus, anything with that much power carries with it a risk factor that is proportional to it’s yield. Fissionable material was created in nova/supernove implosions, as a direct testament to the unimaginable forces involved in the process.
    That’s one big genie in such a small bottle.

  162. Anybody that can stir that much panic out of thin air deserves the title of “Magician in Chief”.
    Capo Trado Chango

  163. rbateman (12:31:25) :

    >Because the genie of nuclear fission makes deadly wastes,
    >there’s a storage problem along with half-lifes/toxicity, and
    >the spectre of nuclear material falling into the wrong hands.
    >Plus, anything with that much power carries with it a risk
    >factor that is proportional to it’s yield. Fissionable material
    >was created in nova/supernove implosions, as a direct
    >testament to the unimaginable forces involved in the process.
    >That’s one big genie in such a small bottle.

    As of 2008, France derives 90% of their electricity production from nuclear. The US generates 806 TWh, or almost 20% of all electricity generated. A tax from the electricity generated pays the US government to handle the waste.

    Wikipedia says that between 1970 and 1992, there were 39 on the job deaths for nuclear power plan workers, 6,400 in coal production, and 1,200 in natural gas production.

    I have a friend who is a particle physicist and says that nuclear power is extremely safe. I tend to believe him.

  164. rbateman:
    “Because the genie of nuclear fission makes deadly wastes, there’s a storage problem along with half-lifes/toxicity, and the spectre of nuclear material falling into the wrong hands.”

    The same argument applies to Carbon Capture and Storage. Can you imagine the death toll if millions of tons of CO2 bursts forth from its underground containment to smother a local community? And imagine if CO2 falls into the wrong hands.

  165. yonason, and other skeptics:

    From Geothermal Resources Bulletin, Jan/Feb 2007, pg 90:

    Geothermal power plants in 2005 provided substantial portions of national power in Costa Rica (15 pct); El Salvador (22 pct); Iceland (17.2 pct); Kenya (19.2 pct); Nicaragua (9.8 pct); and Philippines (19.1 pct).

    Geothermal is a valuable resource, and as is the case with all resources, it is not equally distributed around the world. It works quite well and has done so for many decades. It has baseload capability, is not subject to being shut off due to importing fuel from other nations, and has zero fuel cost.

  166. Roger Sowell (13:09:23) :

    “Geothermal is a valuable resource, and as is the case with all resources, it is not equally distributed around the world. It works quite well and has done so for many decades. It has baseload capability, is not subject to being shut off due to importing fuel from other nations, and has zero fuel cost.”

    How about water?

  167. Gore is obviously correct. The most cost effective solution to exploit our geo-thermal resources is to build a gigantic plant in the middle of the geyser zone at Yellowstone NP.

  168. yonason (12:05:40) :

    Wow! With that turban he looks like Carnac the Magnificent on steroids!

    [Carnac holds the envelope to his forehead, concentrates]

    Carnac: “Algorithm!”
    McMahon: “Algorithm!”

    [Glaring at McMahon, Carnac opens the envelope, reads the question]

    Carnac: “What’th the oppothite of a truithm?”

  169. If geo-thermal is an efficient method of producing energy, then the market will select it over other methods.
    If it is not an efficent method, then it needs salesmen to get the government to take the money from productive people, and waste it on inefficent schemes, that will benefit a few at the expense of the many.

    If it is an efficient method, whether AlGore promotes it or not, makes no difference. If it isn’t, then it is a waste of money that could be spent on more efficient methods, and AlGore is advocating a method that will make us all pay higher taxes, and higher electric bills, than we otherwise would have.
    I don’t mind when the rich get richer, as long as they produce something of value in the process. I don’t think AlGore, has met that requirement.

  170. AMS Survey of Weathercasters on Climate Change

    http://www.alabamawx.com/?p=24574

    A survey of weathercasters’ feelings on global warming was published in this month’s edition of the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. It had some interesting findings. There were 121 respondents. 94% of the respondents had at least one of the three major seals.

    Television meteorologists are the official scientists for most television stations. The overwhelming majority felt comfortable in that role for their stations. The majority agreed that the role of discussing climate change did fall to them.

    more…

  171. WAG (09:43:43) :

    “What did Gore’s book (Our Choice) say was the temperature of the earth’s interior? That’s the real test of whether he’s being sloppy or not.”

    I have no idea what is in any of Gore’s books. I’m not interested in paying for or reading works of fiction that claim to be factual. If it is correctly listed in his book, that makes it worse.

    Missing the Earth’s core temperature by a factor of a couple hundred while professing expertise on renewable energy such as geothermal says a lot about his depth of knowledge. Its like saying solar PV is only 0.1% efficient in full sunlight, or 1.5MW wind towers only need to be 2 feet tall.

  172. OT – Bogus bidder loses shot at global-warming defense

    http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13801439

    The judge took away his martyr moment. I am certain that his lawyers will appeal on conviction. I don’t think that he wants to be acquitted at this point. He desperately wants to grandstand the AGW defense. The District Court in Denver has been eco-friendly, so I think he has a chance at getting Hansen on the stand in his defense.

  173. We can make a lot of fun about Al Gore’s technical and scientific level but we should realise that this is probably the general level of most politicians.

  174. Roger Sowell (13:09:23) : , I agree with your points, 24/7 availability, free source, etc but how do those countries handle the disposal of waste water loaded with heavy metals?
    GT sounds great, I tried to get a new swimming complex in Canberra heated with GT energy a few years ago ,mostly to promote GT, but the Natural Gas people put in a more cost effective case.
    GT seems to be very location sensitive, geologically, and for waste disposal.

  175. Back in the mid-70’s, the city I lived in, Bountiful, Utah, was looking for alternative sources for electricity for the municipal power company. They signed a contract with a geothermal company in the Milford area which was immediately blocked by one of the large oil companies (I think it was Chevron, but I don’t remember for sure). The City backed off rather then spend millions fighting it.

    I researched geothermal then and a few years ago. Yes, it can be complicated and there is risk, but it has been developed successfully at several sites. There has been some pressure from the energy industry to block it, but I am not willing to go so far as to say that they are suppressing it. I think it may be more a case of hoarding mentality. They don’t want anyone else to have it, but they don’t need it right now.

  176. I like the idea of nuclear power, but can someone who advocates it tell me that if a terrorist crashes a plane into a nuclear power station there will not be a release of radiation? No, I thought not. Therefore nuclear power generation would be crazy – and yet that is exactly where the UK is heading for in the future. I would much prefer geothermal as it is unending and won’t be interrupted like wind and wave power. I can’t help but think that if we spent the same billions of £s on geothermal that we’re about to spend on nuclear, we’d have a viable power generation scheme going in Cornwall (apparently the only place in the UK close to being geothermally-viable).

  177. Paddy (13:53:57) :

    “Gore is obviously correct. The most cost effective solution to exploit our geo-thermal resources is to build a gigantic plant in the middle of the geyser zone at Yellowstone NP.”

    If he has invested in AltaRock, then you aren’t far off:

    http://www.altarockenergy.com/AltaRock_EGS_Demonstration_Project_Status_101909.pdf

    Here’s a report (big file) of the supposed ins and outs of geothermal, including
    what can happen in areas such as “geyser zones”:

    http://geothermal.inel.gov/publications/future_of_geothermal_energy.pdf

  178. Gary Hladik (13:56:35) :

    LOL

    Roger Sowell (13:09:23) :

    Do you know why Costa Rica, El Salvador, Iceland, Kenya, Nicaragua and the Philippines have such a high percentage of power generated from geothermal, apart from the fact that it is easily accessible? It’s because they don’t have much else, and no means of getting it. If they did, their usage of geothermal would probably be a lot lower, even though they have access to it, which most of the USA does NOT.

    And do you know the consequences of not having much of anything else? Poverty.

    I don’t like poverty, and I don’t want to be an extra in the remake of “Joe Versus The Volcano.”

    Like I said, where it’s feasible and economical, then by all means use it. But where it isn’t, don’t get in the way of what has served so well, and without which our economy will be ruined.

  179. Roger Sowell (14:15:37) :

    ““How about water?” In what sense?”

    Many hot dry rock sites are located in arid areas and will need water to inject into wells and for the cooling towers. Water that comes from geothermal wells brings significant amounts of contaminants with it so wastewater can be a complication.

  180. Barry Foster (14:35:12) :

    I like the idea of nuclear power, but can someone who advocates it
    tell me that if a terrorist crashes a plane into a nuclear power station
    there will not be a release of radiation? No, I thought not.

    Actually Barry, the government tested for that:

    Regards,

    Steamboat Jack

  181. Roger Sowell (14:15:37) :

    “Glenn, not sure what you are asking. “How about water?” In what sense?”

    Of your claim that geothermal has no fuel costs. Water is injected into the ground, which has to come from somewhere. Water has a price, and direct and indirect costs associated with it’s consumption. Some of it is lost. Look at pictures of these plants and the pipelines that supply some of them.

  182. Wow, Al’s discovery of the earth’s actual temperature is earth-shattering (literally). Where is his scientific transcript (appropriately peer – reviewed and published in a recognized scientific journal of course) ?

  183. “Knowing what we know, can somebody explain why were talking about trying to scrape heat out of the ground, or scavenge a trickle of power from the wind?”Vincent

    1) Environmental ignorance and paranoia.
    2) Muslim paranoia.

    1) is cured by abolishing the government school system.
    2) is cured by removing Western troops from Muslim soil.

  184. Gore is an insatiably greedy snake oil salesman. His gimmick has been to promote a global warming as a byproduct of the industrial age, by presenting bogus science to ignorant people. It’s as simple as that.

  185. Andrew Parker, and Glenn,

    Water is not necessarily imported and rejected, with contaminants. Some geothermal plants are closed loop, re-injecting the same water into the wells. The hot water is used to boil a second fluid, usually a binary compound.

    Also, water is not necessarily used to condense the turbine exhaust, but can be via air-cooled exchangers.

    These things exist, and have existed, for decades in California, the one state with the strictest environmental laws. Does anyone actually think that California allows metal-contaminated water to be dumped?

  186. ” Roger Sowell (17:27:22) :

    Andrew Parker, and Glenn,

    Water is not necessarily imported and rejected, with contaminants. Some geothermal plants are closed loop, re-injecting the same water into the wells. The hot water is used to boil a second fluid, usually a binary compound.

    Also, water is not necessarily used to condense the turbine exhaust, but can be via air-cooled exchangers.

    These things exist, and have existed, for decades in California, the one state with the strictest environmental laws. Does anyone actually think that California allows metal-contaminated water to be dumped? ”

    OK, if it is so good, why is GT production since 1997 essentially flat, with production varying between the narrow range of 12 to 13 GWH ? There must be constraints that we do not know about.

  187. Patrick Davis (03:56:18) says to “dutch (03:31:27) :

    “Are you suggesting WWI and WWII were all about energy? You should read up on your history. Were the Nazis and Stalin at war with people over energy?”

    In three words, yes, kind of.

    WWI: partially over colonies, and hence resources. The rest was over industrial and economic power. Germany was in the ascendancy, and thought it could be king of the hill for real. France and England were lagging behind, needed to protect their colonies, and didn’t mind taking down Fritz a notch or two.

    WWII: entirely about resources (land and raw materials), not the least oil. Hitler had none, and needed it, so he looked to Baku, where Stalin had some, and defended it. But populations and land were the big ones.

    That comes out in the propaganda as “We must subjugate the untermensch, and fulfill our destiny!” On the other side: “Kill the class enemies in their mothers’ wombs!”

    You didn’t really think it had anything to do with ideologies, did you? Stalin and Hitler collaborated happily to divide Poland between them.

  188. yonason,

    Iceland wasn’t poor until they started buying junk paper, but now they are.

    Maybe they should have stuck to cod.

  189. Patrick Davis (03:56:18) to “dutch (03:31:27) :

    “Are you suggesting WWI and WWII were all about energy? You should read up on your history. Were the Nazis and Stalin at war with people over energy?”

    Yes, pretty much.

    Reply: Time for the debate over WW I and II causes to stop. Don’t make me come down there Tor. ~ charles the moderator

  190. Tor Hansson (18:28:14),

    Churchill called WWI & WWII the second thirty years’ war. Germany lost no territory to its enemies in WWI, and controlled plenty of land outside its borders at the Armistice. Had Germany been treated with moderation, rather than being fined six billion gold marks, proposed by a vindictive France [an amount far beyond Germany's ability to pay, and which led directly to the Weimar Republic inflation], it is much less likely that the German populace would have been so easily fired up and desirous of revenge.

    But after being treated so shabbily by countries that were as responsible for the war as Germany, Hitler was easily able to rally the population to follow him.

    And don’t even get me started on President Wilson.

  191. “Reply: Time for the debate over WW I and II causes to stop. Don’t make me come down there Tor. ~ charles the moderator”

    Reminds me of a Faulty Towers episode but, seeing Al talk about science is so much more funnier. John Cleese and Connie Booth would be proud.

  192. Al Gore should learn some basic science “not next year, this year” –

    What is most troubling here is not simply that he does not have any idea of the Earth’s interior temperature. Rather, it is that that he knows so little about temperature that he thinks solid rocks (or even liquid rocks) could possibly exist at temperatures of “millions of degrees”. He should know that temperatures like that would vapourise matter as we know it, even at the high pressures encountered underground. Perhaps he meant to say “thousands” of degrees, but I have not heard that he corrected the error and I doubt it.

    John Game

  193. Barry Foster

    “I like the idea of nuclear power, but can someone who advocates it tell me that if a terrorist crashes a plane into a nuclear power station there will not be a release of radiation? No, I thought not.”

    I can.

    Back in the 1980s, I used to work for the UK’s sole constructor of nuclear plant – then called National Nuclear Corporation. I worked on the designs for the Heysham and Torness AGRs.

    As part of that, I spent several months firing steel rods, simulating the main spindle of a jet engine from an F4 fighter into concrete walls of the same design of those for the emergency services buildings serving the plants. Commercial jet engines lack a single end-to end spindle.

    There were four such buildings, one at each corner of the plant, separated by several hundred metres from each other. Any one operating could shut down the entire plant safely. The pressure vessels, (or in a PWR, the containment) were several times the thickness of these walls.

    We used the rod because, in terms of it’s ability to penetrate a structure, it was the biggest problem of all. The main structure of an aircraft is lightweight aluminium, and it crumples on impact, wasting most of its kinetic energy.

    The rod didn’t penetrate. The only slight issue was something called “spalling” where chips of concrete would be expelled from the inner surface of the wall. But they hadn’t much energy, and were easily contained.

    So, for your case to work, a terrorist would have to steal four fighter jets, and crash them accurately onto four well separated buidlings; and then still wouldn’t compromise plant operations.

    That comment is pretty typical of the more “know nothing” strand of the anti-nuclear movement. Just because you can imagine a scenario doesn’t mean that it can’t be engineered against. Nuclear plant is NOT built like the WTC – a lightweight structure, lacking redundancy it it’s construction.

    Oh, and don’t mix up spending on plant construction with R&D. I know people at the Cambourne School of Mines who worked on the “Hot Dry Rock” geothermal scheme that you seem to think offered potential. It dies for a very good reason.

    Hot rock is plastic. After you’ve drilled the boreholes, and cracked the rock between them to give you a means of generating steam, guess what?

    The cracks close fairly rapidly. Unless you pump down water at such pressure that you’re spending as much energy on pumping as you get from the steam coming up. Which rather destroys the point, you’d agree…..

  194. “Also, water is not necessarily used to condense the turbine exhaust, but can be via air-cooled exchangers. ”

    only at the cost of huge reductions in efficiency.

  195. Keith Minto (18:14:50) :

    Geothermal is a risky investment and hasn’t seen the same kind of subsidies thrown at it as with Solar and Wind.

    Requiring closed systems increases upfront costs and scares off private money. Of course, if His Emminence, The Algore, is hawking it, I am pretty sure there is serious public money or tax incentives in the pipe.

    There are certainly some innovative things being done in geothermal and there is great potential. I hate to throw the baby out with the bathwater just because The Algore is involved in it now. Hey, I like the idea of Global Warming, but I find myself cheering for cooling trends out of spite.

  196. People, give the illustrious Nobel Laureate some respect!

    He was OBVIOUSLY using the Gore Scale, which he invented on the spot, where 1 kelvin = 1000 gores.

    Not coincidentally, that same ratio times negative one also measures the relative contributions to the world of science between William Thomson and Al Gore.

  197. What geothermal has going for it is that it is continous whereas windmills, tidal etc are intermittent (though at least with tidal the intermittency is predictable). This makes it as useful as nuclear & if Gore’s opinion about temperature gradient were sane then it would probably be cheaper too.

  198. This is a very well thought through and explained argument refuting what you claim to be nonsense. The guy was on a chat show, why not throw up a clip of an actor claiming his/her movie to be the ‘best they’ve ever made’ equally ridiculous hyperbole. This thread would be made better if we could somehow work in a photoshopped version with Frank Gore answering the questions.

    Feargy

    http://anactorslife.wordpress.com

  199. ATD. I would love to believe you – seriously I would. But I am old enough to have heard, “Oh that can’t possibly happen” so many times, my friend, so, so many times.

  200. Gore is an idiot and so are the liberal loons that actually are dumb enough to believe anything this loon says.

  201. ATD. I would love to believe you – seriously I would. But I am old enough to have heard, “Oh that can’t possibly happen” so many times, my friend, so, so many times.

    That doesn’t work Barry. The “precautionary principle”, essentially going ahead with nothing that cannot be proven to be 100% safe is a recipe for complete economic and technological stagnation. You’ve essentially set up a strawman “Oh, I’ve heard THAT before”, that no logic, much less an aircraft, can penetrate.

    In you fevered imagination, engineers can crash all manner of objects into the wall of a containment vessel and it still isn’t enough for what “might” happen.

    Well Sparky, it is a statistical certainty that the earth will be struck with a large meteor, and the Yellowstone caldera will erupt*, so you might as well stop living because we can’t say “that can’t possibly happen”.

    *of course the time scales on these happening are likely so distant that to worry yourself is useless.

  202. Tom, all I’m saying is that I don’t believe that a plane crashing into a nuclear power station WOULDN’T release radiation. That’s all I’m saying for crying out loud! Personally, I don’t think that belief is unreasonable! For that reason (if I were so empowered) I would not be going down the nuclear route. A release of radiation would be such a disaster that I don’t think nuclear merits consideration. Even though I am firmly in the sceptic-AGW house, I still think we should be generating electricity though geothermal, solar and tide. I also have no problem with burning gas to generate electricity – or even coal if it has filters.

    Try and be nice Tom.

  203. ATD, re nuclear power plants and aircraft impacts:

    The NRC recently made a new regulation that any new nuclear power plants (but not existing ones) must withstand an impact from a large commercial aircraft. Not just the reactor, but also the cooling systems, and spent fuel storage.

    The spent fuel storage areas are the weak link, with respect to release of deadly radioactive substances.

  204. Keith Minto,

    Yes, there are constraints. But there are also new plants in the planning and development stages, with leases from MMS (minerals and mining service). Some new plants are in development near the Salton Sea in California. Part of the problem is power transmission lines.

  205. Tom, all I’m saying is that I don’t believe that a plane crashing into a nuclear power station WOULDN’T release radiation. That’s all I’m saying for crying out loud! Personally, I don’t think that belief is unreasonable!

    Even though you’ve been given links to show that not only has the scenario been considered, it has even been TESTED FOR.

    Hey, you can believe all you want, but it doesn’t make it fact. And unfortunately, it is easy to scare other ill-informed people to believe as you do, just by trotting out the “radiation” bogey man. Which is why we are stuck listening to Gore tell us how to generate energy instead of looking at the decades of safe, reliable use of nuclear power.

  206. Mr Green Genes (11:01:54) :

    Spot on! I am of that age.

    BTW to all Brits out there fed up to the back teeth with lying, cheating, self-promoting, self-eneriching, venal, mendacious, British politicians/scientists/econstalinists, etc., who smile on both faces, I watched my son’s dvd of “V for Vendetta” the other day, oh how refreshing, especially the last 10 minutes of the film IMHO. I wonder if the politicians were actually inside when it went up?

  207. Tom, I didn’t say it was fact, it’s just my opinion that a fully-laden 747 crashing into a nuclear power station at so many hundreds of miles an hour may release radiation. As I said, I simply don’t believe it’s worth the risk…it isn’t! We are stuck with Gore’s rubbish because people like you believe what they’re told…like you believing that an accident releasing radiation couldn’t happen. Like the incident in 2002 when a radiotherapy source was transported from Leeds to Sellafield with defective shielding. The shielding had a gap on the underside. No, Tom, I mean that could never happen, could it, after all the safety training? Jeez!

    Tom, accidents – including nuclear ones – that “could never happen” DO! Time you wised up, my friend. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents

  208. I get to listen to the Goracle keynote address at SuperComputing 2009. I wonder if I should ask any inconvenient questions.

  209. Tom, you may want to stop commenting:
    “All reactors are designed to withstand impact by a light plane. Experts say it is unclear whether a larger modern jet loaded with fuel, deliberately flown at high speed, could break open the reactor vessel. The resultant fire could, however, cause enough damage to allow radioactive material into the air.”

    http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/onofre/cnn2001a.htm

    Someone earlier, maybe you, commented on the fact that a plane is lightweight aluminium and couldn’t penetrate much. I saw the steel beams that the plane went straight through on the World Trade Center, did you?

  210. Smokey, with all due respect, that wall was not stationary. Note carefully the video at around 25 to 28 seconds – the wall moved with the impact.

    The vulnerable part of the existing nuclear plants is the spent fuel storage area.

  211. As I said, I simply don’t believe it’s worth the risk…it isn’t! We are stuck with Gore’s rubbish because people like you believe what they’re told…like you believing that an accident releasing radiation couldn’t happen.

    No, I believe the facts. And the facts are that there are hundreds of nuclear reactors fuctioning perfectly well, and have been for decades. New reactor designs, such as the pebble bed and others, are to be built to an even greater safety standard. But YOU don’t want nuclear power because of a “feeling”.

    Have all the feelings you want, but leave the rest of the world out of it.

    “All reactors are designed to withstand impact by a light plane. Experts say it is unclear whether a larger modern jet loaded with fuel, deliberately flown at high speed, could break open the reactor vessel. The resultant fire could, however, cause enough damage to allow radioactive material into the air.”

    BTW, if your “proof” has to use the word “could” more than once in a sentence, it really doesn’t prove anything.

  212. I think I’ll have the feeling that windmills attract flesh eating unicorns or indeed million degree plumes of plasma & we ought to get rid of them all for that reason alone unless somebody can disprove such feelings to the satisfaction of everybody in the world.

  213. Re: planes crashing into nuclear power plants, Just out of curiosity…

    Anybody know why the 9/11 terrorists didn’t target at least one nuclear plant? Pentagon, White House I can understand, i.e. political and military leadership, but a nice nuclear disaster would seem to hold so much more potential than the WTC, especially if it led to another backlash against nuclear power, making the US even more dependent on fossil fuels from Guess Where.

    Apologies if too far OT.

  214. Okay Tom, you win, a plane crashing into a nuclear power station will NEVER release radiation. You’ve told us that because the word ‘could’ doesn’t prove anything then it MUST mean that radiation will not leak from an impact by a fully laden 747, so it must be true. There, how’s that?

    Dear, oh lord…

  215. Smokey, I’m well aware of that clip as it’s on my ‘favourites’ in youtube, but it doesn’t mean anything.

    “Engineering experts are divided over whether concrete containment shields around nuclear power stations could withstand a direct hit from a large passenger aircraft, especially one carrying 200,000lb of fuel, as was flight 93.”

    http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/onofre/cnn2001a.htm

    As experts are divided then Tom wouldn’t entertain the thought that he could be wrong, and I’m “ill-informed”. I think that if experts ‘think’ that it could happen then I’ll stay with my original thought – that it’s just not worth the risk.

  216. Remember terrorists prefer bodies at rush hour.

    So terrorism is a better argument against using big public transportation projects, which the environmentalists want to jam us into, than it is an argument against generating our own affordable power. We are far safer in our own cars.

  217. “Tom, all I’m saying is that I don’t believe that a plane crashing into a nuclear power station WOULDN’T release radiation. That’s all I’m saying for crying out loud!”

    Well, before making’d presumably have to have given some thought as to the failure modes by which the plane could cause the release. And then the sort of damage it’d have to do to cause that failure.

    Let’s start with the most important one – a breach of the primary circuit (let’s assume a PWR of one of the types likely to be built in the UK; one resulting in overheating and core damage.

    On an EPR, that assumes it penetrating two roughly 1M thick prestressed concrete walls (which means getting through not only the concrete, but all the prestressing tendons, which will be perhaps 20% of the volume of the wall), or one concrete wall, and then a pressure-bearing steel shell maybe 30mm thick on an APR. Then having sufficient energy to get through a 10mm or so liner in the EPR . Then either happening to hit a piece of exposed primary circuit piping (maybe 1/10th of 1% of the containment volume, or having sufficient energy to get through another metre or two of biological shield concrete. Then having sufficient remaining energy to shear or otherwise break a steel circuit with walls 8-12″ thick.

    All at the same time, of course, as disabling the various emergency shutdown systems, and the emergency core cooling systems – which is hard to do, especially in the APR case, as they’re totally passive.

    We could do the same, if you want, on themes like how to damage the spent fuel cooling ponds – but it’s hard to cause much release there, as by definintion the fuel’s pretty cool, and in a non-reactive configuration. Or ideas like somehow simultaneously disabling four independent shutdown and post shutdown cooling systems.

    So, over to you. If you’re so sure it can happen, tell us how.

    As to

    “Experts say it is unclear whether a larger modern jet loaded with fuel, deliberately flown at high speed, could break open the reactor vessel. The resultant fire could, however, cause enough damage to allow radioactive material into the air.””

    Which experts would these be? And do they actually know what they’re talking about, in terms of failure modes etc? Even more so, have they actually calculated any numbers about the energies involved?

  218. Okay Tom, you win, a plane crashing into a nuclear power station will NEVER release radiation. You’ve told us that because the word ‘could’ doesn’t prove anything then it MUST mean that radiation will not leak from an impact by a fully laden 747, so it must be true. There, how’s that?

    Strawman, argument from incredulity, argument from fear. Do you always communicate in logical fallacies?

    There are no “absolutes” in this world. That is why I originally brought up the “precautionary principle”. Many children die of vaccine-preventable diseases becuase of the argument “prove that vaccines are 100% safe”. It cannot be done, so anti-vaccinationists claim the high ground, parents are frightened away from getting their kids shots, and some kids die.

    Likewise, you demand absolute assurances that no plane can breach a reactor, not just the containment vessel mind you, but the entire structure, causing release of radiological products. That cannot be done. But what can be done is to do tests with actual plane crashing into actual structures. There really isn’t much more one can do to prove safety except to continue what they’ve been doing successfully for decades. But that isn’t good enough for you. Someone yells the word “RADIATION!”, and you curl up into the fetal postition.

    I can’t help your irrational fear of nuclear power. But if you are serious about energy independence, nuclear is absolutely the ONLY viable alternative at the present time.

  219. Tom, more bad news, but I guess you just won’t believe it…

    “But we do know this: When Indian Point and a hundred
    other nuclear plants like it were built across the United States, no one
    considered a direct hit by a commercial airliner loaded with fuel to be a
    credible threat. As a result, the plants were not built to withstand one.”

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission: “At this time, we
    could not exclude the possibility that a jetliner flying into a containment
    structure could damage the facility and cause a release of radiation that could impact public health.”

    Would you like more Tom, or have I made my point? That point being that the possibility exists. However, having read this for the past 20 minutes I’m even more concerned than I was before!

  220. ” The vulnerable part of the existing nuclear plants is the spent fuel storage area.”

    Ever been on a nuclear plant, and seen where spent fuel storage typically is?

    The stuff isn’t stacked in a shed around the back, you know. It’s in an engineered, shielded storage facility, almost invariably below ground level, sealed and with a managed, multiply filtered air supply. If it’s wet stored, it’s under water, in a pond that itself is in a sealed tank. If it’s a dry store, like the one my former employers built at Wylfa, the fuel is stored as individual stringers in tubes sunk several metres under a concrete floor, with each tube capped by a steel and concrete lid.

    And there’s another small point……even if all of that DID fail, the fuel is still inside it’s cans. Cans that are engineered to last for 20-odd years inside a nuclear reactor, at 500C plus, being buffeted by either rapidly-flowing water at 200 atmospheres, or with near-supersonic CO2 rattling them against the outer graphite shell of the stringer. Zirconium alloy in the LWR cases, stainless steel in the AGRs.

    There’s noting better than experts who’ve not the faintest conception of what they’re talking about.

  221. Ahem…..

    EPRI study: reactor containment protects against 767 crashes

    The Nuclear Energy Institute is releasing preliminary results of an EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute) study that claims that reactor containment buildings would withstand credible aircraft crash scenarios proposed in the aftermath of 9/11: (Note: many points echo the “informed conjecture” presented in my FAQ on the subject at

    http://www.ncf.ca/~cz725/cnf_sectionD.htm#terrorist)

    “- The industry is very confident that the containment building would safely protect the reactor in the unlikely possibility that a commercial airliner is used as a weapon against nuclear power plants. Preliminary results of an industry study indicate that a commercial aircraft like that used in the Sept. 11 attacks would not likely penetrate the robust containment buildings where the reactor is located. Neither the mass of the aircraft nor the engines would likely penetrate the containment building.

    – EPRI performed the studies of nuclear plant structural strength at the request of the Nuclear Energy Institute. Four engineering companies performed the engineering studies: ABS, Environmental Qualification Engineering, Erin Engineering, and Fauske and Associates. These companies are recognized industry experts in structural analysis. The results of the studies are being reviewed by an industry task force and are expected to be final by the end of June. Details of the report will not be distributed publicly due to the sensitive nature of the information, however the Nuclear Regulatory commission will be briefed on the results.

    – The study did not analyze every type of containment structure, but used a containment building that is representative of a typical containment structure at nuclear power plants.

    – The study evaluated the impact of a Boeing 767 – the aircraft used in the Sept. 11 attacks – and engineers are confident that containment buildings can safely protect the reactor against most commercial aircraft (including 757s and 777s). Assuming the low profile of nuclear power plants relative to the World Trade Center the study used the aircraft ground speed and angles associated with the Pentagon attack. That is the most realistic scenario in the unlikely event that an airliner is hijacked and used to attack a nuclear power plant. Given the ground forces at low altitude, a pilot could not accurately fly an aircraft at the speed of the World Trade Center attacks and target structures low to the ground like nuclear power plants.

    – Given the angles at which aircraft would have to fly to strike containment buildings, the containment dome would only receive a glancing blow. It is virtually impossible for a skilled pilot to control a commercial aircraft in a steep dive that could hit a containment structure at the top of the containment dome. In fact, the wings of commercial jets likely would sheer off of the plane in such a steep dive a high speeds. Moreover, pilots cannot precisely control a large commercial aircraft at that steep dive angle.

    – Spent fuel storage vaults at nuclear power plants also would be protected from direct aircraft crashes. Walls of spent fuel vaults typically are even thicker than reactor containment walls. All plants have this robust protection of concrete walls around their fuel vaults. The study also analyzed a 767 hitting a spent fuel vault, and although there is significant damage to the 4-foot to 5-foot thick concrete walls of the vault, the stainless steel liner of the vault remains intact and protects the used reactor fuel. Because the concrete walls absorb most of the energy from the aircraft, there is no penetration of the stainless steel liner that could cause a breach of the vault. There is not drainage of cooling water out of the vault in this scenario. The impact of an airliner on nuclear fuel dry storage containers is still being evaluated.

    – The study also considered the consequences should auxiliary buildings at nuclear plants be struck by a commercial airliner. These buildings typically are 18-inch thick reinforced concrete. A commercial aircraft would penetrate the exterior walls of these structures, and the resulting damage to some plant systems would depend on he specific location and interior structure of the building. In any event, the availability of redundant and diverse safety equipment at other locations at the plant could be used to safety shut down the reactor.”

  222. ATD. Those damn experts eh? What do they know? At least we have you and Tom, thank god for that.

    Oops, strawman, argument from incredulity, argument from fear…always communicating in logical fallacies. Sorry.

    Like I said earlier, dear oh lord!

  223. So now we have “dueling cut-and-pastes”? Is that your idea of debate Barry?

    I’ll leave aside you’ve completely ignored ADT and his/her points and quote the Congressional Research Service in a 2009 study:

    “In light of the possibility that an air attack might penetrate the containment structure of a nuclearplant or a spent fuel storage facility, some interest groups have suggested that such an event couldbe followed by a meltdown or spent fuel fire and widespread radiation exposure. Nuclear industryspokespersons have countered by pointing out that relatively small, low-lying nuclear powerplants are difficult targets for attack, and have argued that penetration of the containment isunlikely, and that even if such penetration occurred it probably would not reach the reactor vessel.They suggest that a sustained fire, such as that which melted the steel support structures in theWorld Trade Center buildings, would be impossible unless an attacking plane penetrated thecontainment completely, including its fuel-bearing wings. According to former NRC ChairmanNils Diaz, NRC studies “confirm that the likelihood of both damaging the reactor core andreleasing radioactivity that could affect public health and safety is low.”

    Of course, they didn’t say ZERO, so Barry you might want to continue to hide under your bed.

    Which brings up the bigger point. Your problem is with currently functioning reactors. Nobody is proposing we build 30 year old designed reactors. The newer designs have the requirement that they withstand the impact of a large commmercial aircraft.

    So why is it we can’t build new ones?

  224. Still won’t answer ADT, eh Barry?

    How do you manage to type hiding under your bed like that?

    Oh dear Lord…..

  225. ATD. I see your 2002 report and raise you my 2006 one:

    “What would happen if a plane crashed into a nuclear plant?
    No one knows. U.S. nuclear power plants are built to withstand hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and small plane crashes. Their “containment walls” are typically made of two to five feet of reinforced concrete with an interior steel lining. But the NRC didn’t anticipate the type of attacks seen on September 11—large passenger airliners loaded with fuel slamming into targets. Both the NRC and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have said that U.S. nuclear plants were not designed to withstand such an impact, and the NRC has ordered a study of plant designs to look at what would happen in such a scenario.”

    Oh, and ATD, there’s no need to cough “ahem” before you say something, unless you’re trying to do it for some sort of misplaced gravitas. There’s a good chap.

  226. Tom, be patient, I did answer him (as you can see) and it was held up in the queue. Dear oh lord! And if he’d bothered to read the link I provided earlier he would read about “stuff stacked in a shed around the back”.

    I repeat (for those who are having trouble) my original point:

    “Can someone who advocates [nuclear power] tell me that if a terrorist crashes a plane into a nuclear power station there will not be a release of radiation?”

    No, Tom, they cannot. Experts disagree (as you can read from the links). So you can fluff and bluster all you want, but even experts (people ATD has no time for) cannot give such an assurance. And that’s the point I’ve been trying to get through to you Tom! I’m afraid you’re not really paying attention.

  227. No, Tom, they cannot. Experts disagree (as you can read from the links). So you can fluff and bluster all you want, but even experts (people ATD has no time for) cannot give such an assurance. And that’s the point I’ve been trying to get through to you Tom! I’m afraid you’re not really paying attention.

    But my point, which you are continuing to ignore, is that all new reactors WILL be built to withstand a terrorist crashing an airliner into it. And since this thread is about new sources of power, that should suffice. But, of course, for you it won’t, because we can’t prove beyond a doubt that a plane crashing into a reactor won’t allow release of that scary radiation.

    If you are so damn scared of a terrorist crashing into a reactor, why don’t you support building new ones to allow the old ones to be decomissioned?

  228. BTW, my 2009 trumps your 2006 one (how the hell old are you?). And it was pretty specific that the likelyhood of everything coming together right to allow a plane to breach not only containment but the vessel itself is very unlikely.

    Oh, and ATD, there’s no need to cough “ahem” before you say something

    And there’s no need to write “oh dear lord” after just about everything you write…

    Sheesh.

  229. “What would happen if a plane crashed into a nuclear plant?
    No one knows. U.S. nuclear power plants are built to withstand hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and small plane crashes. Their “containment walls” are typically made of two to five feet of reinforced concrete with an interior steel lining. But the NRC didn’t anticipate the type of attacks seen on September 11—large passenger airliners loaded with fuel slamming into targets. Both the NRC and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have said that U.S. nuclear plants were not designed to withstand such an impact, and the NRC has ordered a study of plant designs to look at what would happen in such a scenario.””

    You mean, apart from the people who’d undertaken exactly such studies, like the lot I quoted in my last post?

    Or the NRC, having done the study that’s been completed since your 2006 quote

    “Since 9/11, the issue of an airborne attack on this nation’s infrastructure, including both operating and potential new nuclear power plants, has been widely discussed. The NRC has comprehensively studied the effect of an airborne attack on nuclear power plants. Shortly after 9/11, the NRC began a security and engineering review of operating nuclear power plants. Assisting the NRC were national experts from Department of Energy laboratories, who used state-of-the-art experiments, and structural and fire analyses.

    These classified studies confirm that there is a low likelihood that an airplane attack on a nuclear power plant would affect public health and safety, thanks in part to the inherent robustness of the structures. A second study identified new methods plants could use to minimize damage and risk to the public in the event of any kind of large fire or explosion. Nuclear power plants subsequently implemented many of these methods.

    The NRC is now considering new regulations for future reactors’ security. The goal is to include inherent safety and security features to minimize potential damage from an airborne attack…”

    Low probability, in this context, btw, has a specific meaning – less that one chance in 10^7 reactor-years.

    http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/security-spotlight/aircraft.html

    That’s probably worth an “ahem” or two….

  230. Tom:

    “New reactors.
    It might be thought that new reactors would be designed to withstand the impact of a jumbo jet, but a leaked document by Electricite de France (EdF) on the vulnerability to terrorist attack of the new European Pressurised water Reactor (EPR) – being considered or already under construction in several countries including UK, France and Finland – reveals a dangerously flawed approach to security. Nuclear engineering consultancy, Large and Associates, has assessed the secret EdF document and concluded that it includes seriously flawed assumptions about whether the reactor could withstand a potential terrorist attack using hijacked commercial aircraft.”

    How much of this do you want me to post Tom? There’s more if you want it, and please note that it’s about the NEW reactors Tom.

    As I keep saying, it’s not worth the risk, it simply isn’t!

  231. How much of this do you want me to post Tom?

    If you keep quoting no2nuclearpower.org and Greenpeace, I have no doubt you could cut-and-paste abject garbage all nite. At least now I know what side of the fence you are on. That being said, I’m not suprised you are still taking the “absolute proof” approach.

    So let me ask you, what proof do you require that will assue you the safety of nuclear reactors?

  232. Low probability, in this context, btw, has a specific meaning – less that one chance in 10^7 reactor-years.

    Sorry ATD, in Barry’s world of absolutes, that isn’t exactly zero, and although it is extremely close to zero, in Barry’s perfect world there MUST be no risk at all.

    Barry, do you wrap yourself in bubble wrap before you get into your car or do you just wrap the whole car and be done with it?

    Or do you do both?!

  233. Barry, if we allow the terrorists to dictate our energy policy then they have won.
    “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” FDR

  234. “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” FDR

    “….and that scary radiation stuff!!!” – Barry

  235. Gore’s had plastic surgery. He’s now got that “chiseled billionaire” look. That’s not his natural facial structure, no way. How sadly appropriate, another plastic personage.

  236. A study done in 1993 by the Department of Education stated that 90 million Americans possess only rudimentary literacy skills. 47 percent of America adult population perform only the simplest reading skills. As many as 40 million of the nation’s 191 million adults have only the lowest level of skills- meaning they can add the total on a bank slip or identify a piece of specific information in a brief news article. Instantly, Al Gore has a congregation for his church.

  237. Barry Foster (14:10:45) :

    As I keep saying, it’s not worth the risk, it simply isn’t!

    I guess you just don’t leave your home Barry, I mean, every time you leave your home, there’s a risk someone may jump the kerb & run you over, or you may get a puncture in your car & lose control & crash!

    Wait Isn’t it true that there are more accidents in the home than anywhere else?

    OMG Where can we go to be safe & risk free?

    DaveE.

  238. “Nuclear engineering consultancy, Large and Associates, has assessed the secret EdF document and concluded that it includes seriously flawed assumptions about whether the reactor could withstand a potential terrorist attack using hijacked commercial aircraft.”

    I’s alsways worth considering sources/ Large & associates is a one-man band, rund by John Large, formerly of Brunel university. It’s not really a “nuclear engineering consultancy” in the sense that it does design or assessment work for plant builders or for regulatory bodies. It works almost exclusively for FoE, Greenpeace, and anti-nuclear groups,

    In fact, so far as I’ve been able to gather. Large has never actually worked on designing or building an actual plant….

    One thing is certain. With the size of L&A, the can’t possibly have actually done real models of the structural implications of impacts and fires. They’d not have the time or resources to build the finite element models in the first place.

  239. An aircraft is, for obvious reasons, a very light metallic shell containing mainly air. The containement dome of a reactor is very strong indeed since it is designed to contain a massive explosion. Hitting the one with the other is like firing a cigar case at a brick wall.

    If people are claiming they honestly believe this is a serious risk perhaps they could confirm how often they have demonstrated outside the larger baseball games explaining to fans that they should be banned in case terrorists fly planes into them. If they are sincere they must have done so since this is a technically possible risk which could cause deaths on a scale matching a deliberate military nuclear explosion & many orders of magnitude more than the 50 killed at Chernobyl, which is above what could be expected from such a terrorist act. Excluding those in the plane of course to whom the nature of the target would be immaterial.

  240. Man.

    I just got back upstairs from having a smoke in the shop. I’m sure a lot of people would not have joined me, because my alarming dosimeter always sets up a howl when I walk near the storage area. Then again, those things are extremely sensitive.

    One of my coworkers was laughing at his neighbor, a nurse, who got her TLD readings back and they showed 2mR/y… from working in Nuclear Medicine. What he was laughing at was that her yearly dose exceeded his weekly, and she was almost in open panic.

    Meanwhile, the older guys working here have been at it since the 1960s, and the ONLY health issue is someone out from cancer. There’s likely zero causation here, since a) cancer runs in his family, b) he’s a HEAVY smoker, and this is throat cancer, and c) he doesn’t actually work with the material.

    Okay, that said, even if a plane or bomb or other “device” managed to breach the outer shell of a nuclear plant, is anyone actually naive enough to believe there are no other failsafes? Most plants are built to withstand an atomic blast at reasonable distance (ie. not a direct hit), a simple aluminum-foil shell of an aircraft is not likely to do much harm no matter how fast it’s moving. And if someone uses a nuke to take out a nuke plant, well, the reactor issue will be the least of our worries already.

    We, as humans, grossly overestimate the power of things that happen to be more powerful than we are. In fact, hey, we’re pretty fragile compared to a lot of the things we build and use daily. But we also grossly overestimate the dangers presented by some things, like radioactivity. It’s not true that ZERO exposure is the only safe exposure, since there has never been a being alive on this planet that had zero exposure.

    Now, aside from that ramble,

    I’ve known people who actually believe in the “hollow Earth” theory. I guess now I know that it’s filled with plasma… :)

  241. We, as humans, grossly overestimate the power of things that happen to be more powerful than we are. In fact, hey, we’re pretty fragile compared to a lot of the things we build and use daily. But we also grossly overestimate the dangers presented by some things, like radioactivity. It’s not true that ZERO exposure is the only safe exposure, since there has never been a being alive on this planet that had zero exposure.

    Indeed.

    Just rereading Barry’s rantings, and his cut-and-paste jobs from anti-nuke sites show what an uphill battle nuclear power has around the world.

  242. Hitting the one with the other is like firing a cigar case at a brick wall.

    Sure. But the engines aren’t like a cigar case at all, as illustrated by what they did when a passenger airliner impacted the side of the Pentagon.

  243. Even jet engines are largely air (otherwise they wouldn’t work;-) )

    The Pentagon walls are simply walls. They were not designed to contain reactor explosions. The point about scaling up an example is that you have to scale up both sides.

    I note nobody disputes that football games are far more vulnerable terrorist targets than reactors 7 that no opponent of reactors confirms having demonstrated outside one of them calling for their banning. QED none of them actually believe their scare stories or are motivated by them.

  244. Maybe the Associated Press should send the 11 “fact checkers” who were assigned to find any errors in Sarah Palin’s new book, and have them take a crack at Al’s speeches or “An Inconvenient Truth.”

    Of course, I’m assuming that the A.P. fact checkers have had a few college level classes in physics, chemistry and geology.

    Not always a safe assumption.

  245. Notice that after Uncle Al asserts that the earths core is a “few million degrees”, he also adds that the crust of the earth is also hot. Of course. Wouldn’t want to forget to shore up your $mantra.

    The video is funny. The fact that this maroon is taken seriously is frightening.

  246. I would really like to see the EPA-OBD II Annual Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law that Al Gore helped to pass, closely examined and changed.As it stands right now, it is entirely possible for any Gasoline powered Vehicle from 1996 to the present to fail it’s Emissions Inspection, for not emitting enough polluting Exhaust Emissions ! All such Vehicles have on board Oxygen [O2] Exhaust Sensors.These O2 Sensors are set up to detect a level of polluting Exhaust Emissions that would indicate that Gasoline is being consumed by an Engine at 14.7 parts of Air to 1 part of Fuel.If there is a low level of Oxygen, and a high level of Pollution, a Vehicle will fail it’s Emissions Inspection as well it should.But Gasoline can be safely vaporized into a mixture that is 100 parts of Air to 1 part of Fuel.With this, even the largest SUV could easily get 50 + MPG and emit a fraction of the Emissions of a conventional 14.7/1 Fuel System, with an increase in Power, and much longer Engine life.I’m not the first to figure this out.Far from it ! For proof, do a search on [the late] Tom Ogle, and Charles Nelson Pogue.Then, go to http://energy21.freeservers.com/bookrep.html and scan down the page to just before the update.But even if it is not to be believed that Fuel Vaporization is entirely possible, it’s illegal to even attempt to do so with any Vehicle from 1996 to the present.O2 Sensors are set up to detect that Fuel is being consumed at 14.7/1. A mixture of 100 / 1 will not emit enough Polluting Exhaust Emissions to register on O2 Sensors.When such a Vehicle is connected to an OBD II Emissions Inspection Analyzer, an O2 Sensor Failure Code will be generated, which will result in a failed Emissions Inspection.O2 Sensor Exemptions are permitted for Vehicles that have been legally converted to operate on Natural Gas, Propane, or Hydrogen, and are Registered as such.But not for vaporized Gasoline.Thus, it is entirely possible under this EPA-OBD II Vehicle Emissions Inspection Law for any Gasoline powered Vehicle from 1996 to the present to fail it’s Emissions Test for not emitting enough polluting Exhaust Emissions ! As long as this insane 14.7/1 Law that only benefits Big Oil remains in effect, the only way to make Vehicles more “efficient” will be to make them lighter, and smaller.This has got to change ! I have asked the Question many times ; “Why is it illegal for any Gasoline powered Vehicle from 1996 to the present to emit too little polluting Exhaust Emissions”? So far, not one Big Oil Executive, Politician, or Concerned Environmentalist can, or will answer the Question.Those that have bothered to reply can’t seem to come up with an Answer either.Can you ?

  247. “…no matter what the temperature of the outer core is, and most likely it is quite high, the mantle is cold, and its rigidity increases with depth, because otherwise seismic wave velocity cannot increase with depth, for example for P waves from 6-7 km/sec in the surface layers to about 14 km/sec at the mantle-core boundary.” — Stavros T. Tassos, seismologist, October 2008

  248. Depth[km] Component Layer

    (0–60 Lithosphere)
    0–35 Crust
    (35–60 Upper mantle)
    35–2890 Mantle
    100–700 Asthenosphere
    2890–5100 Outer core
    5100–6378 Inner core

    Bet Big-Al wish he had Googled “Earth” before stating that the mantle begins only 2km below our feet.

  249. The science is settled. Most leading scientists agree that the atmosphere is heating from within the core of the earth. We shall all be vaporized in the next several seconds….

    Oops, too late. We’re all dead…. Should have listened to Algore.

  250. Look, I’m no fan of AlGore, but he didn’t say it was millions of degrees two kilometers down. There are two separate statements there.
    That being said, the real issue is the hacked emails which prove quite clearly, that this bunch is in collusion to screw us out of major $$ and now that the source code is being analyzed, that doesn’t look too good either.

  251. ok, I saw it and here is what he said.

    2km or so below ground at some places they are very hot rocks, because you know the Earth’s core is extremely hot, several millions of degrees.

    For people who have trouble understanding, he was saying that since the Earth’s core is hot to the order of several millions of degrees, 2km below ground is very hot. He never said or intended to say the 2km down the Earth is millions of degrees hot.

    However, the Earth’s core temperature is not that much and most reasonable estimate it to about 10000 degrees or on that order of magnitude.

  252. He sure looks that way, but as a con man and a son of a con man, he knows how to work the marks.

    And if you’ve bought into AGW, you’re a mark.

    Say, I have this ocean front property in Arizona, if any of you Leftards are interested…

  253. This stuff is hilarious. Even if we were to build geothermal power stations (forgetting Gore’s incredible million degree ignorance) it would only be a short time before geo-cooling alarmists would come out of the woodwork telling us of the dire calamities awaiting us for sucking the heat out the the poor bosom of mother earth.

    I keep telling people, this isn’t about science, it’s not about climate and it’s not about energy. It’s about controlling every aspect of your personal lives under the guise of “taking care of you.”

  254. After inventing the internet, Al has now discovered the actual source
    of global warming; vertical heat flow from the ‘million’ degree
    source at 2 km depth. My feet are getting warmer.

  255. How much carbon reduction is needed to reduce the temperature to the UN target?

    Answer: A minimum of 80 years without electricity and without fuel (no heat, no cooking, no cars, no trucks, no tractors, no planes).

    Follow the money….

    “The carbon market in the US is expected to be trillions of dollars by 2015, and the technology we are offering is as little as 10% to half of that number”. Earning only 10% of a trillion represents an income of 100 billions a year, which is twice the total wealth of Bill Gates. Guess who is behind this corporation, to become a trillionaire?

    You also have to watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuifVNofEtk

  256. Like a hungry baby grabbing at his mother’s nipple…so many writers here grab on to Gore’s error and use it to expound their own rigid beliefs. Both sides of the Climate debate cloud the truth…

  257. Perhaps David, you would care to give us an example of any sceptic deliberately “clouding the truth” as much as Gore has done repeatedly. Or 1/10th as much. Or 1/100th as much.

    Thought not.

Comments are closed.