GEOTHERMAL ENERGY hahachfjvd
Authored by: Kluwi Otadoy
A Short Introduction of a Debate lmao (dili apil lol) (gl sa debate : D back go poof)
A formal debate consists of split teams with different stands regarding a certain topic. In
your team’s case, you’re asked to defend your stand on why Geothermal Energy is a better and
more practical choice than Fossil Fuels and Hydroelectric Energy (Team’s Motion). During middebate, focus on rebutting the opposing statements instead of just randomly throwing in facts about
your E.S and avoid repeating points. To properly defend and provide rebuttals during the debate,
let’s first understand how Geothermal Energy works.
General Overview of Geothermal Energy
Geothermal Energy is, in simple terms, a renewable energy source that uses the Earth’s
underground heat to produce energy. Heat is, as we all know, is continuously being produced in
Earth’s crust and mantle due to Radioactive Decay, and therefore, produces energy as well. Hot
water gets extracted from underground to the surface, then it turns to steam. This now-produced
steam then goes through a turbine to produce electricity.
There are many energy sources, indeed. But is it reliable? Does it have less environmental
risks? As we believe, this Geothermal Energy is the most safe, efficient, and feasible choice for
energy production mainly for its renewability, reliability, and availability.
(in case na ang opposing side kay mag include ug other sources of energy na di kasali sa debate, tell them straightup the irrelevant na bec ang kasali lang sa debate ay g.e, foss f., and he.e [from what i’ve heard])
Pros of G.E (geothermal enerji. kapoy type) (these are infos na ma apply sa rebuttals, but not to be used
DIRECTLY.)
1. Renewable. As I’ve said earlier, heat is continuously being produced inside the Earth’s
layers due to Radioactive Decay (been doing so for 4.5bill yrs). Since heat production
is continual, it makes this energy source renewable. There are three main heat sources
of the Earth:
o Radioactive Decay (Uranium, Potassium, and Thorium)
o Frictional Heating
o Heat from Planetary Accretion
(in case that a member is asked to define these terms for the purpose of elaboration as
requested by the opposing side, I have prepared a glossary sa last page e)
These three internal heat sources can last up to billions of years, unlike other resources
that is non-renewable and whose fuels can run out in a few decades or centuries.
2. Small Land Footprint. Wind, solar, and hydrologic energy are scattered plainly
outside the Earth surface, and this means that it needs a large area to harness its sources.
But G.E comes WITHIN the Earth. Therefore, only a focused amount of a small area
of land is necessary for heat to be harnessed.
3. Clean. Unlike fossil fuels, G.E produces VERY LITTLE amount of greenhouse gases
(similar to HE.E). Additionally, it doesn’t rely on fuels like coal, oil, gas, etc. It also
isn’t weather dependent. Das why it’s better lol (pwede nyo gamitin as visual aid yang graph
sa baba)
Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2014)
This pie chart basically shows that fossil fuels are the no.1 contributor to GHGs. Another
data taken from Statista entitled, Annual carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions worldwide
from 1940 to 2022, they showed that CO₂ emissions have increased by 60% since 1990.
From these data collected, it is easy to see that further increase greenhouse gases should
be avoided and put to a halt. And that’s what G.E does. Another point is that G.E
produces critical materials. One of these is Lithium. Lithium is used for many
purposes; G.E can become a reliable source for it.
4. Low Water Use. G.E uses a comparably lower water use than He.E and Fossil fuels.
This means that we can produce energy efficiently without worrying much about taking
up too much of other resources.
5. Inexpensive. G.E may have high initial costs, but when it’s up-and-running, the only
costs are spent on only expenses for maintenance (also requires very little maintenance
hehe). G.E operations are also silent and does not produce much noise. Costs are
definitely worth it in the long run.
6. Components may be recycled. When a G.E plant is nearing its end, some of its parts
and components may be used again in another installation. Excess extracted heat is put
back steam pipes to produce energy once again. Therefore, no heat is wasted : )
Possible Oppositions and its Rebuttals
1. G.E has high initial costs.
G.E sure does have high initial costs, but it is cost-effective. In the long run, it is
inexpensive and only needs little maintenance; unlike fossil fuels. F.F prices are surging
because more nations are growing dependent on it and supply is dwindling. It’s expensive
yet doesn’t even yield productive results. It’s even associated with air and water pollution
and contributes to climate change. In short, it’s not worth the costs at all compared to G.E.
2. He.E is more renewable since its fuel is water.
He.E is not as renewable as G.E. There are limited reservoirs for He.Es. Sure, water is
renewable, but there are many conditions necessary to build a dam. Some of these are:
Earthquake zones, height, availability of materials, etc.) He.E even displaces people.
Chixoy Dam had hundreds of people killed during its construction. One of the many
differences is that G.E does not destroy biodiversity and aquatic life even though it is
renewable. (So far, there have been no reports of people being displaced due to G.E
constructions.) Lastly, both He.E and G.E’s plants have life cycles of 100 years, while fossil
fuel plants only have about 30-50.
3. It produces greenhouse gases.
It does. But among the three energy sources involved in this debate, G.E produced the least
amount of GHGs. Fossil fuels account for approximately 75% of the global greenhouse
gases (Source: United Nations.org). Hydroelectric energy produces GHGs too. Minimal,
but still more than G.E emissions since He.E takes up more land space and most of its
emissions are associated with dam infrastructure.
4. GE.E can cause surface instability and earthquakes.
(On a November afternoon in 2017, a magnitude 5.5 earthquake shook Pohang, South Korea,
injuring dozens and forcing more than 1,700 of the city’s residents into emergency housing.
Research now shows that development of a geothermal energy project shoulders the blame.
[news.stanford.edu])
It does, too. But a new analysis by a Stanford Physicist, William Elsworth, suggests that
as long as you don’t put more than a certain volume of fluid into a well, you won’t get
earthquakes beyond a certain magnitude. A newly-manufactured device that’s proven to
work in Switzerland has been made to induce earthquake magnitudes that they cannot be
felt in the Earth’s surface. The Bronkhorst Solution produces mass flow controllers are
required to accurately inject the desired amounts of water into the rocks, at the right
pressure. With this, harnessing G.E can be done right without excess processing that may
cause large-scale earthquakes.
5. GE.E is location-dependent.
Not quite. Large GE.E factories are location-specific. But small-scale ones are accessible
almost everywhere using heat pumps.
6. The fossil fuel industry provides more employment and transitioning is difficult.
Transitioning from F.Fs to cleaner alternatives like Geothermal Energy has benefits and
does not mean less jobs. Jobs in the solar and wind industries were among those with the
fastest growth in the country, according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The government can also start transition programs for workers who wish to shift to cleaner
E.S factories to facilitate. Shifting to cleaner power plants is also beneficial for the
employees themselves since alternatives are greener, less risky, and cheaper.
7. Coal has an abundant supply and fossil fuels are more cost-effective.
(Refer to no.1) It’s a global issue, but most of you may have noticed that the Philippine’s
electricity is getting more expensive as time passes by. Our country’s main energy supply
is fossil fuels—specifically oil. Our fuels are decreasing and demand is increasing; hence
the electricity price. This is evidence that its fuel is not abundant and again, not costeffective since it has harmful effects to different aspects, be it in the short or long-term.
8. He.E is the cheapest among the three.
No. Similar to G.E, construction of a dam is expensive. It takes up a lot of time to build
too: the Itaipu dam in Brazil took 18 years and caused increased costs. And even though
He.E is cheap, there are still the countless downsides the come with it. (Environmental
impact, risks of droughts, etc.)
Other info n disadvantages of Hydroelectric Energy and Fossil Fuels that may
be used during ze debate:
Hydroelectric:
1. Normal water levels can heavily impact energy production.
2. Unsafe. In 2022, Hoover Dam exploded due to equipment failure and caused a fire.
3. Increased risk of flooding in lower elevations.
Fossil Fuels:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Oil spills-Impact on marine life
Deforestation for mining practices
Health risks for workers
Pricey
GLOSSARY
Accretion - accumulation of particles into a massive object by gravitationally attracting more
matter into an accretion disk.
Fossil Fuels – materials that contain Carbon and Hydrogen and may be burned to provide heat
and electricity.
Frictional Heating - denser core material sinking to the center of the planet, causing friction.
Greenhouse Gases - gases in the earth's atmosphere that trap heat. (CO₂, Methane, etc.)
Hydroelectric Energy - a form of energy that harnesses the power of water in motion—such as
water flowing over a waterfall—to generate electricity.
Location-specific – the state wherein something is conditional or dependent on location.
Radioactive Decay - the process by which an unstable atomic nucleus loses energy by radiation.
Renewable – the capability of being renewed or reproduced.
REFERENCES:
https://news.stanford.edu/2019/05/23/lessons-south-korea-solving-geothermals-earthquakeproblem/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2emissions/#:~:text=Annual%20global%20emissions%20of%20carbon%20dioxide%201940%2D
2022&text=Since%201990%2C%20global%20CO%E2%82%82%20emissions,5.01%20GtCO%
E2%82%82%20in%202021%2C%20respectively.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data
https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-07-19/explosion-at-hoover-dam-promptsemergency-response