[Geysers] Casper Trib article

[David Schwarz]

   Here's a link to the original press release by Steve M. Green, the
inventor and, apparently, sole proponent of this plan:
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS134398+11-Nov-2008+PRN20081111.

   I hate to resort to ad hominem attacks, but who is this guy?
What's his background that he has this incredible, planet-saving
insight that has been either missed or irresponsibly dismissed by all
of the professional geologists and physicists in the world, who have
dedicated their entire lives to the study of their fields?  A
"self-proclaimed problem solver"?

   Here's the bio from his own press release: "From NASCAR racing to
world-record-holding Tornado Hunter, and creating
breakthrough inventions such as his new Water Bomber which will help
save life and property while helping to prevent the displacement of
people during major wildfires, Steven M. Green has lived a life
extraordinaire. He passionately strives for paradigm-shifting
achievements that according to Green have the potential to save the
planet. Green currently lives in Canton, Ohio, where he
is working on promoting his energy plan to key government, media and
the alternative energy industry leaders."

   At least he's modest.

   I'm sorry, but he doesn't sound like a geophysicist to me.  Maybe
I'm wrong, but if I were a geophysicist trying to sell the story he's
selling, I'd be sure to mention it in my bio.  To me, he sounds like a
guy who read some facts that he understood at only a superficial level
and put them together to arrive at a ridiculous conclusion.  Somehow,
I bet that his lobbying campaign doesn't include anything approaching
a rigorous engineering analysis of the cost and feasibility of the
project he's proposing, nor of its realistic yield.  Yes, if you could
harness all the energy of an active volcano, you could get a lot of
power.  Good luck 1) doing so cost-effectively 2) doing so sustainably
and 3) doing so at all, or even coming close.

   As popular as it apparently is to think so, the world's scientific
and engineering communities do not consist of idiots.  If they haven't
latched onto this plan, then maybe, just maybe, it's not as brilliant
as its creator says it is.

   While I'm casting aspersions on people I don't know, I find the
complete lack of skepticism by the Tribune reporter pretty appalling.
I realize that it's unreasonable to expect every journalist who writes
about science to have a thorough understanding of the subject, but I
_do_ expect them to ask some pretty detailed questions and do some
thorough investigation when someone comes to them claiming to have
found a solution to all of the world's energy problems.  That's a
pretty outlandish claim, and at least as far as his press release and
this article are concerned, it's not backed up with a shred of
evidence, much less anything convincing.  The Tribune might as well
have just reprinted his press release for all the legwork that went
into their piece.  I understand that sloppy, lazy journalism has
become the rule of the day, but this is really above and beyond.

   If I make a press release tomorrow that I, computer scientist,
software developer, and problem solver extraordinaire, have come up
with a means by which we can feed everyone in the world, and all we
have to do is level New York City, I'd like to think that I'd be met
with a little more skepticism than, "Perhaps the logistics are smaller
than the cultural leap it would take to tackle such world-scale
problems."  Yes.  If only people would get over their silly reluctance
to sacrifice two million acres of some of the most beloved and
spectacular wilderness in the world--on the word of a single
self-proclaimed expert--maybe the human race could finally start
making some real progress.

   I can't help but think that some people living around the park,
tired of various environmentalist groups imposing restrictions on
their lives and livelihoods (banning snowmobiles, changing visitation
rules, introducing and/or protecting species that impact ranching, and
so on), think they've finally found a way to stick it to them: Tell
them that they can have clean, green energy, but it'll cost them their
beloved wilderness, mountains, forests, wildlife, geysers--all of it.
That's certainly the impression I get from the gleeful, petty tone of
some of the comments on the article's web site, and I wonder if the
lack of skepticism in the article isn't due to that sentiment being
shared by the Tribune staff and editorial board.  If so, it's
misguided and the article only makes them look foolish.  If not, I'm
at a loss to explain how you don't put a little more effort into
investigating a guy with dubious credentials who claims he can save
the world.

David Schwarz