<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More on US climate and energy legislation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blocksindicator.com/2009/07/more-on-us-climate-and-energy-legislation-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blocksindicator.com/2009/07/more-on-us-climate-and-energy-legislation-2/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:16:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Bowery</title>
		<link>http://blocksindicator.com/2009/07/more-on-us-climate-and-energy-legislation-2/comment-page-1/#comment-327</link>
		<dc:creator>James Bowery</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:57:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blocksindicator.com/?p=274#comment-327</guid>
		<description>In another article you wrote:

&quot;Finally, there is a further 517,800 MWe of power generation
potential from unconventional (high temperature, low
permeability) enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). The
conventional geothermal resources are in the north western part
of the US-California, Nevada, Idaho and Oregon, Hawaii, and
parts of the north east of New England. The unconventional
resources, where hot dry rock or deep geothermal/EGS can be used
in almost all of the US, but is particularly applicable in the
southern and eastern parts of the country.&quot;

I&#039;ve been unable to locate the source of the 517,800 MWe figure.  Understand that this is as much power as is generated by all the fossil fuel electric plants in the US presently.  If the figure is substantiated, it could change the direction of national planning for energy and the environment.  The Cooper Basin project is far enough along that it could easily demonstrate the viability of this approach in the near future.  That validation, along with the figure of 517,800 MWe potential baseload with good geographic distribution in the US, would create an imperative.

I have the ear of some influential folks but I can&#039;t substantiate that figure.  What is your source?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In another article you wrote:</p>
<p>&#8220;Finally, there is a further 517,800 MWe of power generation<br />
potential from unconventional (high temperature, low<br />
permeability) enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). The<br />
conventional geothermal resources are in the north western part<br />
of the US-California, Nevada, Idaho and Oregon, Hawaii, and<br />
parts of the north east of New England. The unconventional<br />
resources, where hot dry rock or deep geothermal/EGS can be used<br />
in almost all of the US, but is particularly applicable in the<br />
southern and eastern parts of the country.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been unable to locate the source of the 517,800 MWe figure.  Understand that this is as much power as is generated by all the fossil fuel electric plants in the US presently.  If the figure is substantiated, it could change the direction of national planning for energy and the environment.  The Cooper Basin project is far enough along that it could easily demonstrate the viability of this approach in the near future.  That validation, along with the figure of 517,800 MWe potential baseload with good geographic distribution in the US, would create an imperative.</p>
<p>I have the ear of some influential folks but I can&#8217;t substantiate that figure.  What is your source?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

