Plan for geothermal development in West OK'd

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • samhill
    Dec. 19, 2008 1:20 p.m.

    This is another case where we should really put the petal to the metal and develop these and every other domestic source of energy, like our lives depend on it.

    They very well may.

  • Let Them Eat...Flour/ Sugar
    Dec. 19, 2008 9:45 a.m.

    If the enviro-radicals get their way, there sure won't be enough energy to bake cake.

    Geothermal, as much as I love the concept, will not be "competetive" till our energy costs have tripled.

    Yellowstone is off the table, of course. But, that is the one place where it might be reasonable economically.

    You enviro-extremists might begin to think what levels of misery your energy and global warming policies might force on your fellow Americans if we go from recession to depression. Your extremism is demonstrable and was indirectly characterized by Scott Matheson senior as being "...Out of balance!"

    Oh, and you all need a lot more economics, math, and science, particularly physics, classes so you can tell crap from shinola in technical policy areas.

    Your extremism and ignorance may prove deadly to your fellow Americans, all too soon.

    P.S. Good comment, Thinkin' Man!

  • Thinkin' Man
    Dec. 19, 2008 9:15 a.m.

    Where is Robert Redford? Drilling for geothermal energy "scars" the land every bit as much as drilling for oil or natural gas (which isn't very much).

    Geothermal energy is a great idea. The problem is, hot enough, large enough resources are very rare and difficult to find.

  • Matthew
    Dec. 18, 2008 12:37 p.m.

    First, the Yellowstone thing is a dumb idea. Some things are priceless and the decision about in perpetuity has already been made there.
    Second, if we, as a nation, had been collectively smarter way back in the 1980's then we would already have tapped into geothermal energy in a big way. I know where I put most of the blame for the fact that we didn't (think national elected official) but that is water-under-the-bridge and he is dead now. Starting now, we need to make up for lost time. That includes development of the resources and the technologies. Having said that, it still needs to be done in a smart, environmentally sensitive way. It can be, but stupid things get done in the name of expediency.

  • basinboy
    Dec. 18, 2008 12:30 p.m.

    Sorry, but several environmental groups are concerned about the impacts such energy development, including new power lines, would have on the environment, so they will drag it out in the courts to the point that it won't be feasible. So, we will have to rely on foreign oil for that much longer. Good to read that the Sierra Club might take a realistic stance.

  • Lets us All possibilities
    Dec. 18, 2008 12:05 p.m.

    finally we are getting serious about using geothermal the cleanest, least problematic and most reliable type of energy.

    Might I suggest that even in Yellowstone we consider development, in a way that has low visibility.

    I read a study that geothermal potential in Yellowstone is enough to displace 35 or 2billion watt power plants, this is 35 large scale coal or nuclear power plants that we would have to have otherwise.