Geothermal. Cheap. Abundant. Cheap.

With reporting by Molika Ashford
(Part 1 of 3 on Geothermal Energy)
As America’s love affair with coal cools off, geothermal energy is getting hot, hot, hot.
Why? Because the secret is out of the bag: geothermal is cheap and abundant.
For $800 million to $1 billion in R&D funding – spread out over 15 years -- geothermal could be deployed on a scale that would produce more than 100,000 MW of additional new (low-emissions) capacity in the US by 2050.
That’s less than the price of one 275 MW clean-coal plant and more than 360 times more energy.
The best part?
The availability of the geothermal resource base is ginormous: 130,000 times America's current yearly consumption of energy. The technology has also developed rapidly. The latest and most promising are Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS). And most of the key technical requirements to make EGS economical over wide swathes of the country are already in place.
(It helps that the drilling and reservoir technologies used to mine heat from the Earth through EGS are similar to those used for oil and gas.)
Those findings come straight from an influential DOE-funded MIT report released last year, called The Future of Geothermal Energy (pdf).
And just last week, the DOE tapped Ormat Technologies of Nevada to test MIT's conclusions. To build the nation’s first commercial-scale EGS site and demonstrate its viability to power America.
And not just in regions blessed with bubbling-at-the-surface, energy-rich geysers. But all over.
Does that mean geothermal's time may have come, finally? Maybe. But how?
Enter: MIT vs. MIT
MIT has been in the business of forecasting the future of America's energy for quite some time.
Following a report on The Future of Nuclear Power, an interdisciplinary panel of experts was assembled to analyze The Future of Coal in a carbon-constrained world.
Meanwhile, another -- completely unrelated -- panel was put together to look at The Future of Geothermal Energy (pdf). It was the first serious American look at the energy source in some 30 years.
Both the coal and geothermal reports came out in early 2007. Just a few months apart. Both surmised that their respective natural resources could help power a cleaner America. Both recommended that new technologies be tested and improved to help their fuels mature into prime energy sources. And both told the US to build demonstration projects as a way for investments to come.
The demos would be the key to the future of their fledgling industries.
By the time MIT's coal report became public, however, a clean coal project was already under way. It was called FutureGen. But it had hit a giant snag. The cost of bringing it to life had become so expensive that even its fans at MIT had to frown upon its soaring costs. A giant disappointment.
And the DOE ended up clobbering it in the end – just last month – for being insufficiently realistic, rejecting the expensive $1.2 billion plant for a cheaper alternative.
Too bad. The demo was to show the whole world that coal could be clean. And now it’s dead. And the world of clean coal has been put on the energy back burner with a decidedly bleak outlook. So says MIT researcher Howard Herzog in this Scientific American article:
"There is no way we will get anything before 2012 on the same type of scale [as FutureGen] and I'm not convinced that anybody's going to be able to do it cheaper than FutureGen," Herzog says. Either "we have to see the coal industry dwindle and disappear or sit back and see what impacts we get from climate change, both of which are not good alternatives."
Meanwhile, the promise of a red hot geothermal future really has analysts and investors buzzing.
The EGS demo in Reno is on its way, thanks to support by the DOE for an agency investment of just $1.6 million.
And for what it's worth (we happen to think it's worth a lot), Google has named geothermal development an investment priority in its goal to make renewable energy cheaper than coal. Part of its RE<C initiative. It's a short list. Solar. Wind. And now, geothermal.
Future energy predictions are still largely premature, of course. But right now, the Google trifecta seems like the safest bet out there -- and geothermal the #1 dark horse to watch.










