Hi Samantha,

Thank you for your summary and questions.

To answer, I would like to focus on the third question: What are the advantages or
disadvantages regarding the environmental impacts of onshore and offshore wind
farms?

I did some research on both onshore and offshore wind farms, and I found the
differences to be quite interesting, specially all related to offshore. I think building
wind farms over is quite challenging and I am amazed about how technology has
helped us develop new methods of construction and installation. I believe the most
interesting aspect about offshore turbines is that they are much bigger than
onshore, because of this they can produce more electricity. Besides this, offshore
wind speeds don’t vary as much and are generally faster than onshore which helps
with reliability of power generation. (Brunel, 2021) Moreover, another benefit of
offshore wind farms is that they could be capable of providing shelter from
hurricanes by reducing their wind speeds.

Now, focusing on environmental disadvantages (both onshore and offshore), I

found the following:

The main complain of onshore wind farms is the noise pollution during
construction and the effect that it has for humans and the surrounding environment.
According to Colby, “onshore wind farms tend to have a more adverse
environmental impact than offshore wind farms, in terms of the materials used to
construct them, installation and operation processes, and maintenance.” (Colby,
2019)
On the other hand, there are fewer complaints about offshore wind farms because
they are located much further away from humans. Nonetheless, there has been
evidence of “minor adverse effects to marine animals and their habitats attributed
to the operation and construction of some and offshore wind farms”. (Colby, 2019)
Finally, a major environmental impact of both onshore and offshore turbine is the
pollution caused by the manufacturing and recycling of rotor blades.

References:
Brunel. (2021, May 19). The pros and cons of onshore & offshore wind.
https://www.brunel.net/en/blog/renewable-energy/onshore-offshore-
wind
Colby, J. (2019, November 29). Wind Power: Onshore vs Offshore Wind Farms.
ArcGIS StoryMaps.
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/b96f4db23c4449849deb60c0953b25
09
Hi Christian,

Thank you for your detailed summary.

I’d like to focus on your third question: Do you think that geothermal energy can be
a solution to the problem of environmental pollution despite the intensive use of
steel and diesel that drives the drilling of wells?

Personally, I’m not so sure about geothermal being the best solution for clean
energy. While it is true that the pollution emitted from this type of energy is
minimal when compared to fossil fuels, its environmental impact may be more
noticeable than other renewable sources.

As mentioned in the article regarding the drilling of geothermal wells, “the

production of steel (used for wells casing) and production of diesel and its on-site
use for powering the drilling rig represent the two key sources of environmental
impacts.” They both contribute to 85%+ of the categories of acidification, climate
change, particulate matter, photochemical ozone formation, etc.

However, there are other disadvantages of geothermal energy on top of the use of
steel and diesel. During digging, certain harmful gasses can be released into the
atmosphere and pollute the air. Moreover, locations of geothermal energy power
plants are linked to emissions of silica and sulfur dioxide. “The reservoir may also
contain toxic heavy metals such as arsenic, boron, and mercury.” (Rinkesh, 2020)

Another disadvantage of geothermal energy is that due to the alterations of the

Earth’s surface when digging/drilling it has the risk of triggering earthquakes. With
enhanced geothermal power plants, the problem is worse since water is forced into
the Earth’s crust to create fissures for a greater exploitation. (Geothermal
Electricity Production Basics, n.d.)

Because of these problems, I believe other renewable energies might be more

suitable to fight climate change and pollution.

References:
Geothermal Electricity Production Basics. (n.d.). NREL.
https://www.nrel.gov/research/re-geo-elec-production.html
Paulillo, A., Striolo, A., & Lettieri, P. (2019). The environmental impacts and the
carbon intensity of geothermal energy: A case study on the Hellisheiði plant.
Environment International, 133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105226
Rinkesh. (2020, May 8). Various Disadvantages of Geothermal Energy. Conserve
Energy Future. https://www.conserve-energy-
future.com/Disadvantages_GeothermalEnergy.php
HI Maria,

Thank you for your summary. I found your second question quite interesting.

Seismic risk refers to the probability of a site being negatively affected by any
seismic hazard, such as an earthquake. (Geo Forward, 2021)

An example of drilling holes and pumping hot/cold fluids in the subsurface is an

enhanced geothermal system. Its objective is to produce “a network of fractures in
hot rock that is otherwise too impermeable for water to flow through.” With this
network it is possible to use two wells an create a heat exchanger: cold water is
pumped down one well, the Earth warms it up and hot water is extracted up the
other well. The water is pumped at high a pressure forcing fractures to open or
creating new fractures. The fractures can cause small earthquakes that have no
impact, but the problem is when the earthquakes triggered are big ones.  (Stanford
University, 2019)

After doing some research, I found that one big earthquake caused by a
geothermal plant took place in Pohang, South Korea. With a magnitude of 5.5, it is
the second largest earthquake in the country's modern history. But how did this
happen?
It started fine with injecting fluid at high pressure down one well and creating the
network of fractures. However, water injected in the other well began to activate a
previously unknown fault that crossed right through the well. “Pressure migrating
into the fault zone reduced the forces that would normally make it difficult for the
fault to move.” (Stanford University, 2019) At the beginning of this, there were small
earthquakes that lingered for weeks after the pumps were turned off. As time went
by, earthquakes kept getting bigger and bigger, and finally, the pressure from the
fluid injections triggered the earthquake.

I was really surprised with this case. It makes me wonder if it could have been
somehow avoided. And if it can be made sure it doesn’t happen again.

References:

Geo Forward. (2021, June 24). Seismic Risk Definition.

https://www.geoforward.com/seismic-risk-definition/
Stanford University. (2019, May 24). Solving geothermal energy’s earthquake problem.
Stanford News. https://news.stanford.edu/2019/05/23/lessons-south-korea-
solving-geothermals-earthquake-problem/

Hi Lesly,

Thank you for your summary.

Regarding your third question: Do you think it is possible to achieve the goal of the
administration of U.S. President Biden to produce 30GW of wind energy by 2030?
What are tools that should be used to achieve this goal?

Biden’s plan of 30GW of wind energy by 2030 is quite ambitious, especially

considering the time frame. For this plan to be successful it is expected to install 21
GW of offshore wind turbines in the next 9 years. An investment of more than 100
billion dollars is also required, so that offshore wind industry can grow from the
current 42MW. Besides this, “policy commitments, federal lease takes, and supply
chain activities will also be necessary to fuel the growth of US wind industry.”
(Tisheva, 2021)

Moreover, another important factor to consider is that this plan aims to create tens
of thousands of jobs in the sector, in fact, “more than 44,000 people are expected
to be employed in offshore wind by 2030.” (Buljan, 2021)

Nonetheless, I’m not really sure that this goal can be achieved in less than a decade.
As stated by reporter Tisheva, “the US is likely to fail in achieving President Joe
Biden’s offshore wind target.” The main reasons for this is that there are still
bottlenecks that make the execution of Biden’s plan more difficult, such as
“complex and long permitting processes, a lack of manufacturing facilities,
US−flagged installation and poor power transmission infrastructure.” (Tisheva,
2021) Aside from this, while the costs of offshore wind remain considerably high,
their turbines technology is better than onshore; and although costs are projected
to fall in the coming years, it is possible that offshore wind will stay considerably
expensive.
Therefore, more than 9 years may be needed to achieve this goal, however, it is
extremely important that they continue with it. In fact, the success of this plan
would mean step closer to the next objective: 110 GW or more of offshore wind
capacity by 2050.

References:

Buljan, A. (2021, March 30). US Jumpstarts Offshore Wind, Targets 30 GW by 2030.

Offshore Wind. https://www.offshorewind.biz/2021/03/30/us-jumpstarts-
offshore-wind-targets-30-gw-by-2030/
Tisheva, P. (2021, July 28). US seen to reach 21 GW of offshore wind by 2030, short of
target. Renewablesnow.Com. https://renewablesnow.com/news/us-seen-to-
reach-21-gw-of-offshore-wind-by-2030-short-of-target-749065/