I gave links to all the numbers and data that I used, so don't try and pass this off as BS, when you simply do not know what you are talking about.
For example:
You keep saying that geothermal electricity can only be used if the geothermal plant is located near an urban area. What are you making that erroneous assumption on?
What does the source of fuel/heat have to do with the transmission of electricity to a distant location?
Answer: none. The problems of transmitting electricity are unrelated to the type of fuel used to produce the electricity. Evidence: Colstrip Power Plant, Montana, Jim Bridger PP, Wyoming, Navajo PP, Az., Springerville PP, Az., Four Corners, N.M. plus the geothermal plants I named. All are located 100's of miles from major urban areas, yet all manage to supply a portion of the countries total electrical requirements.
Now, for the last time (I hope) I will state what I have been saying all along: 1) Geothermal produces more electricity then you originally gave it credit for and 2) the location of a geothermal plant is immaterial to the possibility of supplying energy into the system (yes costs will be higher, but it poses no technological problems.)
Now, read some of the links that I have posted and educate yourself on the subject or you will just continue to look foolish.
And I am not a big advocate of geothermal electricity because it is a very expensive, I just try to place facts out for people to consider. But some are not willing to look at simple facts when they are presented to them.
No, Mikey, I'll say no such thing. I took the time to do a little of my own homework, and found that the TOTAL INSTALLED GEOTHERMAL CAPACITY of the USA is 3000 megawattss (i.e. the equivalent of 3 "standard nuclear reactors", but that only 2000 megawatts is available. This contributes 0.2% of the US's installed electrical capacity (based on 2001 numbers) and a damned close match for my estimation based on your posting.
IOW, geothermal is just as miniscule a source of power as I thought.