The Geothermal Energy Opportunity (GEO) Act has recently been introduced in congress to help clear the regulatory burdens hindering the development of this potentially important resource.
The Energy Trifecta: Nuclear, Fossil Fuels…and Geothermal Energy
The Geothermal Energy Opportunity (GEO) Act has recently been introduced in congress to help clear the regulatory burdens hindering the development of this potentially important resource.
Posted by Leslie Eastman Monday, June 30, 2025 at 03:00pm 3 Comments
The U.S. stands at a pivotal crossroads in its energy future. As artificial intelligence (AI) accelerates its transformation of industries and daily life, the nation’s appetite for electricity is surging to unprecedented levels.
AI data centers are already consuming about 4% of U.S. electricity, with projections indicating this could rise to 12–15% by 2030. The explosive growth of AI, from large language models to autonomous vehicles, is placing strains on the power grid.
Based on some recent discussions I have had with friends and my geologist husband, I assert that geothermal energy deserves urgent and serious consideration alongside fossil fuels and nuclear power as the perfect “trifecta” for America’s energy strategy. Unlike intermittent renewables, geothermal offers stable, 24/7 baseload power… reliability that is essential for supporting the always-on demands of AI-driven data centers, our critical infrastructure, and the electricity needs of U.S. consumers.
Also, and most importantly, it leverages existing American expertise in drilling and subsurface engineering, providing a pathway for oil and gas workers use their talents to expand our nation’s energy options.
There have been some critical breakthroughs in recent years that make utilizing geothermal energy more effective and efficient. There have been significant advances in enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), which enable geothermal energy production in areas previously deemed unsuitable due to a lack of natural permeability or water resources. A DOE-funded project conducted by the University of Utah demonstrates the enormous potential for developing this particular energy source.
A major University of Utah-led geothermal research project, funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), achieved a critical breakthrough in April after hydraulically stimulating and circulating water through heated rock formations a mile and a half beneath its drill site in the Utah desert and bringing hot water to the surface. The test results are seen as an important step forward in the search for new ways to use Earth’s subsurface heat to produce hot water for generating emissions-free electricity. The successful well stimulations and a nine-hour circulation test were the fruits of years of planning and data analysis at the Utah FORGE facility near Milford, 175 miles southwest of Salt Lake City.
As highlighted in the recent Issues & Insights article, new geothermal projects are coming online with greater efficiency and lower costs, thanks to innovations such as closed-loop systems and enhanced geothermal systems.
These common drilling techniques should enable geothermal developers to reach “hot spots” located deeper below the surface than thought possible just a few years ago. They could also expand the map for geothermal development far beyond the Western states.
Small wonder that investor interest in geothermal energy has surged in recent years, with more than $1 billion raised since 2022. Tech companies on the hunt for suppliers of baseload electricity to power their data centers see the potential of geothermal energy. Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta – all heavyweights in the booming AI/data center sector – have all inked contracts with geothermal developers.
…Geothermal’s potential to join fossil fuels and nuclear energy in powering America’s economy in the years to come far exceeds anything weather-dependent wind and solar could ever match. With the House version of the budget reconciliation bill accelerating the phase-out of the subsidies that prop them up, these once-coddled industries are scrambling to stay relevant.
As the article notes, bureaucratic bungling has been the biggest hurdle for geothermal energy to overcome. Therefore, Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-UT) has introduced the Geothermal Energy Opportunity Act (GEO Act, H.R. 301), which aims to expedite the federal permitting process for geothermal energy projects.
She is also pairing it with another piece of legislation to help peel back the layers of regulatory tape.
…[T]he permitting process for geothermal energy production itself needs to be shortened, Garfield said, calling out the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, a 1970 law that requires the federal government to conduct an environmental review before moving forward with infrastructure projects.
{Deputy Director of the Utah Office of Energy Development Jake] Garfield said offering geothermal projects certain exemptions under NEPA would help the industry — like what’s being proposed by Maloy through her Geothermal Energy Opportunity Act, which requires the U.S. Department of Interior to process a geothermal drilling permit within 60 days.
Maloy is also sponsoring the Streamlining Thermal Energy through Advanced Mechanisms Act, which gives the geothermal industry the same flexibility as the oil and gas industry, cutting some of the regulations when pursuing a project on public land that’s already been studied or disturbed by industry.
With governments and private investors increasingly recognizing the potential of geothermal energy, I believe the sector is poised for significant growth in the coming years. As an added bonus, geothermal plants are not known to kill whales or bald eagles.
Image by perplexity.ai.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
While Geothermal is used successfully in Iceland and New Zealand (inter alia), we have had less success in Australia. Our Geothermal is not so much from volcanic types of sources but rather hot rocks, heated by radio-active decay and insulated. Attempts to access this have been stymied by depth and the issue of dealing with really high temperatures at those depths.
I am also unsure that, if you are worried in the short term about increased heat in the atmosphere, pumping heat out of the earth is a good idea! /sarc.
I am also unsure that, … pumping heat out of the earth is a good idea!
all that geothermal stuff is taking heat out of the earth! It’s going to freeze the earth and cause an ice age!
(just getting ready for the next panic)
But will the media claim that that’s CO2 spewing out of the (shown) equipment? They are fixated on CO2.
I always enjoyed the media picturing steam from the cat-cracker scrubber at the refinery to go with their stories about refinery pollution, and global warming.
Just a bit of a heads-up about this–I was involved in the Meager Creek Geothermal Project starting in 1978; I conducted trace element (Ra, Hg) studies, worked with Premier Geophysics on pole-pole and pole-dipole resistivity surveys, and was the site geologist doing all the downhole temperature measurements for several diamond drilling projects, including holes that went to a TD of over 12,000 feet. Meager 45 years later has never produced a kilowatt-hour of electricity despite being Canada’s best prospect.
This Utah project will be at the NE edge of the Basin and Range horst/graben structural field generated by the continental over-ride of the East Pacific Rise spreading ridge, most of which is in Nevada. If one compares Nevada geothermal to wind and solar one finds some similarities–this is a quote from Perplexity.ai obtained just now–
No source in the search results identifies a single geothermal power plant in Nevada that was developed and brought to production entirely without any government subsidy, grant, loan guarantee, or tax incentive. On the contrary, the pattern is that government support has been integral to the financing and construction of geothermal projects in the state.
If you are seeking a specific plant that is entirely unsubsidized, such a project is not documented in the provided sources or in public records up to 2025.
This comes from someone who could not be called an opponent of geothermal power; I have been heavily involved in it. But that does not prevent me from being an honest realist.
No source in the search results identifies a single geothermal power plant in Nevada that was developed and brought to production entirely without any government subsidy, grant, loan guarantee, or tax incentive.
So? That’s true for most power plants in the US of all types. There are a wide variety of taxpayer-funded incentives in your search for “entirely without any government subsidy, grant, loan guarantee, or tax incentive.”
That doesn’t mean geothermal can’t be profitable. Frankly, power companies would be stupid not to take advantage of government subsidies that have been created, regardless of the merits of the subsidy. Just like you and I would be stupid not to take advantage of deductions and credits in our income tax filings.
The Geysers in Northern California is the largest geothermal power complex in the world, with a nameplate capacity of 1.6 GW from 18 power plants. It’s been in operation since 1960, run by private companies. It happens to be in a rare and unique geothermal hotspot but as the article points out, with the advances in fracking technology over the last few decades, it’s not hard or expensive anymore to drill deeper to reach geothermal sources. These deeper-drilled power plants are still in the pilot phase but the potential for reliable and (eventually) relatively inexpensive electricity is enormous.
Fracking drills horizontally to follow shale layers
You are arguing with Perplexity; everything I included in italics was ai’s response to a simple question of whether it could find any operating geothermal plants in Nevada that did not come to production without government financial assistance. I quoted the answer without change or bias, which is simply a result of a quick thorough internet search that would have taken me hours. What I reported was just simple fact, and I was prompted because I know some of the company executives involved in geothermal power in Nevada and knew enough facts that prompted the question. Plus, it was obvious to me that ‘a mile and a half’ is nothing new in geothermal drilling, having taken downhole temperature readings at 13,000′ myself over 40 years ago.
The Geysers, Wairakei, and Devil’s Valley were in production when we started the Meager exploration; they were the only geothermal power plants in the world operating at that time. Like mines, the easy and profitable ones are found first. Like mines, as the easy ones get picked off it gets harder and more expensive to find the next one, and dreams of discovering something fantastic that nobody else has thought of yet lead to Busang (look it up, it will be a fun exercise).
I presented nothing against geothermal, merely that in the geologic province of the Utah discovery that prompted this article, there already are many operating power plants–all of which seem to have questionable viability without government subsidy (possibly because of bureaucratic hurdles emplaced by government, which government then has to fund the cost to clear?). You are invited to prove otherwise, especially if you venture your own money and go find, build and run it profitably yourself.
Ah yes Busang….. one of the more notorious gold deposit scams by
the late, unlamented Bre-X Corp….. Their chief geologist “allegedly” committed suicide by diving out of the helicopter carrying him.
If you haven’t already read it–you will enjoy this book.
https://www.amazon.ca/Bre-X-Dead-Story-Alfred-Lenarciak/dp/1491847883/ref=sr_1_5?crid=2OAQKQRG6WNIE&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.4SQx0UzT4z7A3OG11ulvPVXjtoHibmkfak-Q3yxSxkcDzFeMQofSA46IzPTpB70yZd_e9ITzgVsNnXILwm3SmoLNSMKL3OEetPgJwSd588dhhUkgVqCSreYkAmxZAu64XoM-Rt4_-PXyQ2PHEYcy-8LUqbXFCYuo_Xyod7aWxdWV5iyWxYFXMlRGoqnybygNIXK9yCPnZ0HSC_Ee-Izk9Pyuop0Ej8kUTOVGXKoA8riLKid-sZulSQn5_7nR8AAw8xIveNf2wc1_ASHVf8BVShO7nhDR7VkgM0T_OPN7BDc.MXjY5e5q-kNSbAk3AER-NhtOEznC3eozJX7qxgzNPFw&dib_tag=se&keywords=bre-x&qid=1751505718&sprefix=bre-x+%2Caps%2C186&sr=8-5
I’m not sure what’s perplexing. Just for fun I used a search worded similarly to yours:
Which power plants in Nevada operate entirely without any government subsidy, grant, loan guarantee, or tax incentive?
The Gemini AI result?
Based on the available information, it is difficult to definitively say which power plants in Nevada operate entirely without any form of government subsidy, grant, loan guarantee, or tax incentive.
QED
The new deep-drilled geothermal projects using modern drilling methods are still being built. It’s too soon to know how well they’ll work but several projects are underway, suggesting that it’s not a crazy idea to bilk taxpayers for subsidies, but potentially viable and profitable as the author of this article indicates. As much as I despise solar PV and wind farms, many (most?) are profitable now without subsidies. They’re just a poor substitute for reliable power. Geothermal on the other hand is reliable. And technological advancements are expanding the locations where they can be built, closer to existing grid infrastructure.
The reliability of geothermal has an achilles heel in the form of precipitation of dissolved minerals that we have to keep in mind; there are phase diagrams for all these fluids that never agreed to be violated. Dropping temperature and pressure has its consequences that cause a steady decrease in efficiency and reliability, hence the regular drilling of new wells as one commenter mentioned about the Salton Sea geothermal area.
Geochemistry being Science–the science can never be settled for this problem because it’s different for each site and changes with time within each one. Sort of like wind turbulence tearing blades apart and hail altering solar panel reliability, I guess.
Honest, like you I wish geothermal would work. It does work successfully for low grade projects, and likely because no phase diagram boundaries are crossed with heat extraction. Will have to think about that some more. But for now, both your and my AI searches have shown the same thing–that they seem to require someone else’s money to be built and run. I have to remember that I did get paid a fair bit during the part of my career spent in geothermal exploration, and other than from the low-grade heat-pump projects none of that has ever been paid back by profitable power production.
I just did another search prompted by that statement–and it indicates that every kwh of electricity added to the grid by geothermal in Nevada costs someone else money. As an honest realist as mentioned before, this is not comforting nor supporting that geothermal is competitively profitable.
In summary, Nevada geothermal producers have secured PPAs at prices above prevailing wholesale rates, reflecting both the premium for renewable, firm power and policy efforts to advance clean energy deployment in the state.
It gets worse–
Was The Geysers geothermal field developed without government assistance in the form of loans, loan guarantees, grants, or above-wholesale PPA’s?
The Geysers geothermal field was not developed without government assistance in the forms of financial incentives or above-wholesale power purchase agreements (PPAs):
In summary: The Geysers’ development relied on a mix of government-backed financial incentives and regulatory support, including loan guarantees, tax credits, and above-wholesale PPAs under PURPA
This sounds like another very expensive, decades-long, government boondoggle, that could not survive without subsidies during its entire operating life, similar to wind/solar/battery troika, which will have their subsidies eliminated in the very near future, after 50 years of temporary subsidies.
In volcanic places, like Island, there is oodles of experience with geo-thermal power plants, because plentiful heat sources are near the surface.The whole island runs in geothermal.
This is the kind of laws which really annoy me. Why not clear the regulatory burdens for everybody and all industries? It’s like that PLCAA to protect the firearms industry from stupid lawsuits. Why not all industries?
Because no one is dumb enough to sue auto manufacturers when a drunk kills someone. The courts aren’t stupid enough to let that happen. But guns? Icky, so go ahead.
Why do people get away with blocking nuclear and fossil fuel industries? Icky, go ahead. But geothermal energy? Sounds clean and green. This GEO Act sounds like someone wants to dump a lot of government money into it as part of the green scam.
Money. People don’t go to $100,000 a plate campaign dinners or donate $millions to PACs and not except something in return. Get politicians elected who will direct government regulations in a way that benefits the donor. That what is replacing capitalism.
Politicians should provide the subsidies out of their own campaign funds
And put all these bureaucrats out of work?
No way, Jose
They could be be employed to make ropes with which they could hang themselves. There: temporarily employment for an eternal solution, problem fixed.
sarc?
Whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting
What is the main hurdle, outside of purely geological considerations, for any geothermal project? I think water. I’m OK with geothermal but not at the expense of other interests.
Can you recycle the steam?
Some of the injection water is reused – condensed and reinjected. But there has to be makeup water as there are losses, and it gets too briny. I think there is always a heat exchanger between the super heated steam coming out of the ground and the working fluid that drives the turbine generator. Most of the water loss is in the cooling towers recondensing the working fluid, and I guess, the ground steam.
Perhaps one of our crowd who has direct knowledge will explain.
About 65% of the input heat is lost, per Carnot cycle
“Can you recycle the steam?”
Yes, some of it is (see Randels post),
the rest will be recycled by nature – going through the normal water cycle, it’s the biggest steam/heat engine on earth & moves mountains by erosion.
Simplified Water Cycle …
Each latent heat exchange transmits large amounts of energy to space
What is wrong with Coal, it has done the job for every single country that has used it in the cleaned up version.
Only fabric filter system can catch most of the sub-micron particles released by coal fired plants. This has been known for at least 50 years
Here’s a bit on installed geothermal in the Philippines where about 15% of their energy is provided by geothermal:
https://energytracker.asia/geothermal-energy-in-the-philippines/
The article shows the top ten countries for geothermal capacity installed and I was surprised to see that the USA has so much albeit still a small percentage of total energy. (Indonesia is second in installed capacity. Others are Turkey, Kenya, New Zealand and Mexico.
Geothermal energy in the Philippines is an essential part of the country’s renewable energy landscape. Its location along the Pacific Ring of Fire gives it access to a large quantity of geothermal resources, like 24 active volcanoes and numerous geothermal fields. As a result, it is one of the world’s top geothermal power producers and plans to expand its capacity in the coming years.
Compare production, MWh, not installed capacity, MW
For electricity, the trifecta is and will remain coal, gas, and nuclear. Hydro would probably be fourth, and then, maybe geothermal, if it can be done so that the economics work, which I’m skeptical of.
Hydro is the largest source of renewable energy at 14% of global electricity generation and 45% of total renewable energy in 2024.
Energy Institute ‘Statistical Review of World Energy’ (June 2025)
Again a down vote for stating something factual. Odd!
Story tip? I posted this over on the previous geothermal thread:
This gives a pretty good overview of the state of the art in geothermal:
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2025-06-02/100-billion-ghost-field-discovery-could-power-america-30000-years
Is Yellowstone a potential candidate?
Small yes, BIG NO. The Yellowstone Caldera is a large potential geothermal area, but strictly out-of-bounds to any commercial or industrial development due to its being protected as a park and any such development is vigorously opposed to protect the unique cultural and environmental value.
You are correct in all but one aspect.
I was not asking if Yellowstone SHOULD be considered, only asking if it was.
The deficiency in establishing proper context befalls me.
I can appreciate that. The answer still is no, it is not. You neither limited nor expanded the allowable reasons why in your question ‘Is Yellowstone a potential candidate’. The deficiency in your expecting me to understand your intended proper context with a 5 word question must then befall me.
Also, the small ‘yes’ was intended as the proper context answer; of course it would be a viable candidate when it is a field of geysers that large. I honestly thought anyone would see that; the opposition however would be vicious which is the part of the answer I elaborated on. There has been considerable drilling done in Yellowstone by USGS; the temperature profiles are stunning. You can find them online if you wish.
One more comment, intended jocularly–if I was able to read your mind, over internet, well enough to determine what you were thinking was proper context from that 5 word question—you should be very afraid of me!
From the third paragraph of the above article posted by Leslie Eastman:
“Based on some recent discussions I have had with friends and my geologist husband, I assert that geothermal energy deserves urgent and serious consideration alongside fossil fuels and nuclear power as the perfect “trifecta” for America’s energy strategy.”
Well, despite that assertion, the facts are that as of end-2023, some 63 years after the first US geothermal power plant became operational, geothermal energy provided only about 0.4% of the utility-scale electricity produced in the US (https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/geothermal/use-of-geothermal-energy.php ). This notwithstanding the enormous advancements in underground surveying and drilling and subterranean extraction technologies, as well as in steam turbine and generator technologies, over that time period.
If the potential for geothermal energy extraction was anywhere near comparable to that of fossil fuels and nuclear power in the US—as is rather carelessly imagined in the above article—economic market forces would have seen it more fully developed by now.
Geothermal used to create electricity is a failure economically.
I worked at the Geothermal plants at the Salton Sea in California.
Geothermal is no different than taking the lid off a pot of boiling water. Take the lid off and the pressure drops.
Geothermal always requires a new source hence at the Salton Sea they drill new well all year round. New wells require new pipelines and equipment.
The geysers in California is another example, the well went dry so now they pump water into the ground to turn into steam.
Each Geothermal well has unique chemical and physical properties hence the expense of engineering specific components for specific Geothermal sites
Proof that Geothermal is a failure, is all around us, there are no Geothermal plants except for a couple places.
Another quick AI search–there are 63 operating geothermal plants in the US, 209 operating coal-fired plants, and over 1900 operating gas-fired plants. As the first US geothermal power plant came on line some 65 years ago, plus the finding that no Nevada geothermal plant came online without government assistance, the numbers may well reflect geothermal economics.
Geothermal may or may not be worth moving forward but AI should not be the driving force. It is true AI will be needing lots of power and that is why they should be expected to help finance new fossil fuel and nuclear generation. We know they work, they are affordable, safe, reliable and dispatchable. My first question is once we tap into a reliable geothermal source how do we know it will remain there?