The Future

Over the centuries, mankind has mastered technologies that have allowed us to tap various sources of energy to enhance the quality of life. The current list ranges from wood to coal and more recently from nuclear to solar and geothermal. Fortunately we continue to find new sources of oil and gas plus new technologies to reach even deeper into the Earth and the ocean to tap these same energy resources.

Now let us ask the question what sources of energy have yet to be technologically mastered? Fusion a form of nuclear energy has been the focus of years of research but is not close to scientific feasibility in the sense that it will produce a positive number when output versus input power is measured. The second technology yet to be mastered is energy from magma. The simpler forms of geothermal energy have been exploited for years, but the direct reach into the yellow hot magma and the productive chemistry available from within magma has not been technologically demonstrated as yet. The scientific feasibility of extracting energy and fuels from magma has been documented since 1980.

Developing the engineering technology to tap the 50,000,000 Quads of energy estimated to be available within 10 Km of the surface in the US will dramatically change the domestic energy supply picture by adding a new energy source that is environmentally benign—no Carbon dioxide expansion and no other pollution elements result from magma energy exploitation.

Additionally adding a new energy resource to the domestic and world picture will also change the geopolitical pressures related to the supply and demand for oil and gas. Magma resources are distributed world wide but geographically different from that of the traditional energy deposits. So some of the have-nots would become haves from magma resources. The energy from magma would be predominantly steam and/or electric power. However, steam reaction with magma in most cases does produce hydrogen, a valuable industrial gas that can also be used as a transportation fuel. Hydrogen production is unique to the magma geothermal resource.

Over time even electric power will be seen as a precursor to transportation fuels as recyclable primary batteries enter transportation commerce. An example of a recyclable primary battery is the aluminum air or lithium air battery, which as it discharges reverts to aluminum oxide or lithium oxide. The oxide can be processed back to aluminum with electric power so a fuel fill up would be a change of aluminum plates. Reconstitution of the aluminum oxide would take place wherever there was a processing station and electric power.

There is also the potential that a magma-based power plant could process city sewage into useful products. The water would be returned as distilled water. The biomass from the sewage returned as hydrogen, natural gas and carbon monoxide, all storable industrial fuels.

The failure of the Long Valley project to advance magma energy has apparently caused a reluctance to try again. But this is a tragic mistake. There are many technical questions that need answers before private investment interests will be kindled, but that is only part of the picture. The major benefits from magma energy are national benefits not private benefits, which places the future of this resource decision at the door of the government—The Department of Energy.

This resource can probably power the entire state of California based on the magma resources in that region at no environmental penalty. In fact as a replacement to the existing energy sources the benefit to the environment will be positive rather than neutral. Secondly, some of the sewer systems of California could be used to feed the Magma Energy Plants and help produce hydrogen, natural gas and distilled (pure) water, as described earlier.

However, the place to restart a test of this technology is probably not California, but Iceland where magma is relatively close to the surface and hydrogen is a focus of their energy economy. Icelandic technology for tracing magma pools is highly advanced which is the first step for such a project.

To be successful a Magma Energy Plant must tap into a region of magma where circulation of the magma is possible. This is so the cooled magma near the heat exchange region will be replaced by hotter magma from deeper or other regions of the magma body. Similarly, the chemical reaction that produces hydrogen may continue using fresh (basalt) ferrous oxide. According to Sandia estimates under conditions of circulating magma the heat rate after 30 years will be between 5 and 300 kw/m2 compared to a Nuclear Plant which has a heat rate of 140 kw/m2 this is an encouraging comparison since the costs of a Magma Energy Plant are likely to be less.[15] Note also that such a plant does not have nuclear waste problem or plutonium risk issues.

In the current (2005) international relations field it would seem a real step forward if we could offer a Magma Energy Power plant to the North Koreans and the Iranians and avoid all the nuclear weapons risks associated with nuclear power and the side production of possible weapons grade plutonium and uranium.