Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Politics

Geothermal Could Be the Big Winner of This Election Cycle

Democrats and Republicans both love it. But will they find the money for it?

The Capitol and geothermal energy.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

As the 118th Congress prepares to clear the way for a new set of legislators who will be responsible for confirming cabinet picks, passing tax legislation, and whatever else the President-reelect throws at them, it is also quietly working on bills to ease the development path for the one form of clean, firm power that Republicans and Democrats can peaceably unite around: geothermal.

Geothermal has something to offer for everyone in Washington. “It’s a source of clean energy, which makes it appealing to Democrats,” Aidan Mackenzie, a fellow at the science and technology policy group the Institute for Progress, told me. It can also generate electricity 24 hours a day with no greenhouse gas emissions, thus potentially making it a key part of the decarbonized grid of the future.

For Republicans, it does all this while also employing the people, skills, and sometimes the actual gear of the oil and gas industry to drill deep into pockets of trapped heat, which are often in states Republicans control. For this reason, it “fits very well with ‘drill baby drill’ Republican ethos,” Mackenzie added.

This overlap has opened up space for bipartisan cooperation, especially on tailoring and rewriting permitting rules for the industry. This week, the House passed two bills with essentially unanimous Republican and some Democratic support: the HEATS Act, which exempts some geothermal exploration activity from permitting requirements, and the CLEAN Act, which mandates more geothermal lease sales by the Department of the Interior.

At the same time, a group of moderate Democrats have pressed House and Senate leadership to pass the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024, proposed by Senators Joe Manchin and John Barrasso. That bill includes several policies either borrowed from the Senate’s bipartisan GEO Act or mirroring the new House bills, including measures to exempt some geothermal development from environmental reviews and establish an ombudsman to coordinate permitting. The bill has already passed the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, of which Manchin and Barrasso are the co-chairs, and negotiations to get a bill that could pass the House and a full Senate vote are ongoing.

Traditionally, geothermal has been limited by the availability of the resource, namely extremely hot water or steam trapped in the Earth’s surface, which is then tapped through drilling. Next generation technologies bring fluid to hot rocks underground, vastly expanding the potential of the technology.

“The U.S. electricity market is desperate for 24/7 new power,” Jeremy Harrell, chief executive officer of the conservative environmental group ClearPath, told me. The Department of Energy has estimated that so-called next generation geothermal could provide some 90 gigawatts of continuous clean energy generating capacity by 2050, which could help unlock truly decarbonized grids.

All of this makes the case for bipartisanship pretty clear. The HEATS and CLEAN Act were sponsored by Republicans Young Kim of California and Russ Fulcher of Idaho, while the GEO Act was sponsored by two Republicans, James Risch of Idaho and Mike Lee of Utah, alongside two Democrats, Martin Heinrich of New Mexico and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada. Two of those sponsors, Lee and Heinrich, will be the chair and ranking members of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, respectively, in the upcoming Congress.

“Scaling our investments in research, development, and demonstration, and reforming the way we permit geothermal projects on our public lands are bipartisan priorities,” Heinrich told me in an emailed statement. “As we approach the next Congress, I remain committed to putting geothermal projects on an equal footing with oil and gas projects on public lands and accelerating the deployment of advanced geothermal energy systems nationwide.”

Those oil and gas companies are also sometimes investors in geothermal projects, and in the case of enhanced geothermal technology, share workers, drilling techniques, and equipment. Enhanced geothermal startup Fervo, for instance, counts the fracking company Liberty Energy among its investors. Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright, is Liberty’s CEO.

Something else that may benefit geothermal in the years to come: It received relatively few benefits from the Inflation Reduction Act compared to other clean energy sectors, and therefore isn’t closely associated with a law passed on a partisan basis. “We notoriously got left out of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the IRA. That’s well documented,” Jeanine Vany, the co-founder of the closed-loop advanced geothermal company Eavor, told me.

Geothermal did get some money from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, including $84 million for pilot demonstration projects, Harrell pointed out. But that “wasn’t a ton,” he said, and there’s still a “a need for reasonable but targeted investments.” And while Republicans and Democrats may be able to play nice on reforming regulatory requirements for geothermal, agreeing to spend more money may be more difficult.

“The question is, are the two parties willing to strike a deal?” Mackenzie said. “For Democrats, it’s accepting permitting changes. For Republicans, it’s a question of whether they are willing to spend any money on this.”

Senator Heinrich has called on Senate appropriators to include $100 million for next-generation geothermal demonstration projects, an effort that was notably joined only by his fellow Democrats.

The Institute for Progress and Employ America, an economic policy group, have proposed funding the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, created by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, to help advance geothermal. The Office has already shelled out billions for advanced nuclear and carbon capture programs.

“It’s a question in an era where there’s a big focus of cutting back and not expanding,” Mackenzie told me. “Is there any actual room to get money out there?”

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect that Employ America is a partner on the proposal for the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations.

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Hotspots

Fox News Goes After a Solar Farm

And more of this week’s top renewable energy fights across the country.

Map of U.S. renewable energy.
Heatmap Illustration

1. Otsego County, Michigan – The Mitten State is proving just how hard it can be to build a solar project in wooded areas. Especially once Fox News gets involved.

  • Last week, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources said it wanted to lease more than 400 acres of undeveloped state-owned forestland for part of a much larger RWE Clean Energy solar project near the northern Michigan town of Gaylord.
  • Officials said they were approached by the company about the land. But the news sparked an immediate outcry, as state elected Republicans – and some Democrats – demanded to know why a forest would be cleared for ‘green’ energy. Some called for government firings.
  • Then came the national news coverage. On Friday, Fox News hosted a full four-minute segment focused on this one solar farm featuring iconoclastic activist Michael Shellenberger.
  • A few days later, RWE told the media it would not develop the project on state lands.
  • “[D]uring the development process, we conducted outreach to all landowners adjacent to the project location, including the Michigan Department of Natural Resources,” the company said in a statement to the Petoskey News-Review, adding it instead decided to move forward with leasing property from two private landowners.

2. Atlantic County, New Jersey – Opponents of offshore wind in Atlantic City are trying to undo an ordinance allowing construction of transmission cables that would connect the Atlantic Shores offshore wind project to the grid.

Keep reading...Show less
Policy Watch

How to Solve a Problem Like a Wind Ban

And more of this week’s top policy news around renewables.

Trump.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Trump’s Big Promise – Our nation’s incoming president is now saying he’ll ban all wind projects on Day 1, an expansion of his previous promise to stop only offshore wind.

  • “They litter our country like paper, like dropping garbage in a field,” Trump said at a press conference Tuesday. “We’re going to try and have a policy where no windmills are built.”
  • Is this possible? It would be quite tricky, as the president only has control over the usage of federal lands and waters. While offshore wind falls entirely under the president’s purview, many onshore wind projects themselves fall entirely on state lands.
  • This is where the whole “wind kills birds” argument becomes important. Nearly all wind projects have at least some federal nexus because of wildlife protection laws, such as the Endangered Species Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
  • Then there are the cables connecting these projects to the grid and interstate transmission projects that may require approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
  • I’m personally doubtful he will actually stop all wind in the U.S., though I do think offshore wind in its entirety is at risk (which I’ve written about). Trump has a habit of conflating things, and in classic fashion, he only spoke at the press conference about offshore wind projects. I think he was only referring to offshore wind, though I’m willing to eat my words.

2. The Big Nuclear Lawsuit – Texas and Utah are suing to kill the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s authority to license small modular reactors.

Keep reading...Show less
Q&A

Are Anti-Renewables Activists Going Unchallenged?

A conversation with J. Timmons Roberts, executive director of Brown University’s Climate Social Science Network


J. Timmons Roberts
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s interview is with Brown University professor J. Timmons Roberts. Those of you familiar with the fight over offshore wind may not know Roberts by name, but you’re definitely familiar with his work: He and his students have spearheaded some of the most impactful research conducted on anti-offshore wind opposition networks. This work is a must-read for anyone who wants to best understand how the anti-renewables movement functions and why it may be difficult to stop it from winning out.

So with Trump 2.0 on the verge of banning offshore wind outright, I decided to ask Roberts what he thinks developers should be paying attention to at this moment. The following interview has been lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less