Re: More on Ecological Economics.

From: Ian St. John (
Date: 06/21/04

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:13:25 -0400

Sigvaldi Eggertsson wrote:

> "Ian St. John" <> wrote in message
> news:<kjpBc.3069$>...
> Bob Kolker wrote
> >
> Check: (
> for further information on the use of Geothermal heat to heat houses
> and generate electricity.

Actually, I have an excellent presentation from "The Learning Channel" on
the issue. Would you like a copy? Mostly it is the equivalent of "district
heating' for both housing heat and domestic hot water. The concentration of
citizenry in Reykjavik helps. However, all electricity, portable fuels, etc
are separate from the house heating issue.

>>> In Ratkjvic Iceland there is not a single furnace. All heating is
>>> done by hot water heated by geothermal heat. All electricity is
>>> geothermally generated. All we have to do is spend the money to
>>> drill the Mohole and the heat is waiting for us to use. If the
>>> Icelanders can do it, so can we.

Note the indents!

> 90% of the electricity produced in Iceland comes from hydro-electric
> sources.

Actually: ( source )

fossil fuel: 0.1%
hydro: 82.5%
other: 17.5% (geothermal) (2001)

There is quite a bit of untapped hydro potential so it is the liikeliest
source of any future increase. Note that there are *three* indents in the
above paragraph. That is, it is Roberts claim, not mine. Note the spelling
of Reykjavik for example. Would I be that wrong? And his suggestion of
drilling "into the moho"! What a looon.

The point here is that Robert was stating that everything should be electric
and then gave Iceland geothermal as an example, so I was being sarcastic.
His 'blinders' are still on, though so if I give other sarcastic answers,
please take them with a grain of salt. And I didn't even go into hydrogen
power in Iceland.

Have no fear. I am quite aware of Iceland and it's developments, though I
hear less about the 'teething problems' that I assume they are having than
the promotional stuff. I just didn't want to get detailed and thus spoil the
point of the sarcasm.

>> So you're saying that in iceland, geothermal heat is electrik? Or
>> "could" be electrik? OR the icelanders are doing it all wrong?
>> Perhaps you should clarify your clarification.
>> Why do you dismiss solar, wind, cellulose ethanol, tidal, biodiesel,
>> "anything into oil", etc?? Surely you see that there is no one single
>> 'answer'?
>>> Bob Kolker