08-16-2018, 06:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by ironyak
geochem - those analyses in Table 1 were of scale material collected from various places in the PGV power plant - not from brine samples.
Thanks geochem, clearly my mistake. I felt like something was amiss in my early morning post - caffeine first from now on.
However, I would still question if PGV brines really contain that much less of the elements you mentioned as compared to Geyser's geothermal field. Pulling from a better (if old) source on PGV brine analysis, arsenic is given as 0.09 - 0.4 ppm, compared to 0.2 ppm at Geysers, mercury is given as <0.001 - <0.05 ppm, compared to 0.005 ppm. Ammonia is however much, much lower at PGV at <0.01 - 0.1 ppm compared to 194 ppm.
For these samples from these early wells at PGV, arsenic could be twice as high and mercury ten times as high as compared to the values given for Geyser's, yes? Seems hard to say we don't find high levels of toxic elements like arsenic at PGV given these values.
https://evols.library.manoa.hawaii.edu/b...tement.pdf
geochem - if that was the [gold and silver] concentration in the brine, there would be a lot more geothermal wells in Puna than there are today...
We all know a lot more geothermal wells in Puna is the goal regardless of if there is enough literal gold in dem der wells, right? That 500MW and inter-island cable plan just doesn't die easily I guess.
It's always nice to chat geothermal with you. I'm sure we'll being hearing more about this in the near future.
Bumping this in the hope Geochem sees it - got to make sure he grades my corrections, or I'll have to dig wells for a living
Last bump as geochem was just here, then have to consider this avoiding the question?