This report says its technomics are based on those from Franzmann et al. (2025) - but those cost estimates are 2050 projections - not current costs. So what's the deal?
04.03.2026 15:57 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0This report says its technomics are based on those from Franzmann et al. (2025) - but those cost estimates are 2050 projections - not current costs. So what's the deal?
04.03.2026 15:57 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0NOAA announces planned rollback of North Atlantic right whale protections www.mainepublic.org/environment-...
04.03.2026 12:57 β π 56 π 37 π¬ 5 π 13
Reference:
Limberger, J., Calcagno, P., Manzella, A., Trumpy, E., Boxem, T., Pluymaekers, M. and van Wees, J.D., 2014. Assessing the prospective resource base for enhanced geothermal systems in Europe. Geothermal Energy Science, 2(1), pp.55-71.
Estimated LCOE maps for geothermal electricity for (a) 2020, (b) 2030 and (c) 2050. [Limberger et al. 2014.]
LCOE reductions over time is driven by improved drilling productivity.
Current and near term geothermal LCOE remains high in most geo's.
(erratum - this should be 10 inches, not 10cm)
04.03.2026 12:16 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Great review!
03.03.2026 20:57 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0So - YMMV
03.03.2026 15:25 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0This model seems to underestimate current drilling costs by about half - which is not crazy given how old the estimates are.
03.03.2026 15:25 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0
Which is a global assessment and its LCOE estimates are based on a 2050 target cost, not a current cost.
In addition, the drilling cost estimate formulae come from a 2013 Department of Energy spreadsheet model that in turn is based on cost estimates from 2006 + an inflator.
So I tracked down where their assumptions are coming from. The whole analysis is really based on this paper
Franzmann, D., Heinrichs, H. and Stolten, D., 2025. Global geothermal electricity potentials: A technical, economic, and thermal renewability assessment. Renewable Energy, 250, p.123199.
Yup.
03.03.2026 10:22 β π 3 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
I read it fairly quickly but I think itβs very optimistic and a bit confused.
It conflates the current cost of hydrothermal from places like Iceland and California with what geothermal would cost in most of Europe.
Iβd like to see their model assumptions - they donβt seem based.
Anything is possible but the company has not been forthcoming with performance data.
The only reason we know the low output of the first well is through German regulatory data.
Good overview article from BCG - interesting how Finland added 3GW of electric boilers to help balance supply and demand in a high renewables grid.
www.bcg.com/publications...
All the useful idiots talking about the fragility of the renewable energy supply chain may be about to get a lesson in how vastly more fragile the fossil supply chain is.
28.02.2026 21:40 β π 6 π 0 π¬ 0 π 1Yeah this is favorable geology - open loop. Wells are drilled but they haven't reported generation yet. Don't know the drill cost - one was to 5km and one to 2.5km (if I remember correctly)
28.02.2026 21:24 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
And since this is getting some views - here is a piece I wrote on the basics of enhanced geothermal if you want to learn a bit more on the economics.
www.linkedin.com/pulse/note-f...
Michael Barnard (who I think is too negative on geothermal for electricity) - wrote this on Eavor specifically:
cleantechnica.com/2026/01/15/w...
More on the physics:
www.resfrac.com/blog/why-dee...
Eavor's pilot well in North Germany is currently producing at a rate of 0.5MW after spending likely $100-200M drilling the initial wells. It *might* increase to 6MW with more drilling.
28.02.2026 13:53 β π 7 π 0 π¬ 3 π 0Fervo is likely in the $150-$250/MWh using 10cm diameter fracked geothermal in shallow Utah hot rock (180+ degrees at 3.5km) - with favorable heat recharge and large fracked volumes. (And experienced, very productive drilling crews.)
28.02.2026 13:46 β π 11 π 0 π¬ 2 π 1
Closed loop geothermal is demonstrably uneconomic for electricity generation and probably uneconomic for heat generation in almost all of Europe.
If you don't want to frack (and I think you do) - you *have* to find natural geology with good circulation (e.g. the South German geothermal belt).
This poorly informed nytimes article on closed loop geothermal is a perfect example of why you need specialist reporters covering energy topics or else you just get warmed over regurgitation of company talking points.
www.nytimes.com/2026/02/28/b...
Overlooked and overexploited: Extensive conversion of grasslands and wetlands driven by global food, feed, and bioenergy demand @pnas.org π www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
27.02.2026 23:08 β π 17 π 9 π¬ 1 π 0
Boston Metal has a well progressed unique tech for electrochemical steel making
Yes itβs raised a lot of capital and progress has been slower than hoped - but it works and could decarbonize the global steel industry.
Gotta fund the Florida sugar barons so they can keep their SuperPac donations up.
23.02.2026 14:45 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Not a great take since it fails to acknowledge how risky relying on imported LNG is.
20.02.2026 14:50 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0One of the small joys of life: finding out that the old shoe that fit you perfectly hasn't been discontinued, so you can get another pair :)
16.02.2026 11:41 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
Great perspective on Dutch geothermal energy strategy from two ex-oil + gas authors.
> Focus on district heating schemes from known-good shallow-ish geothermal.
> Stop wasting money on deep closed loop hopium projects.
(Google translate from Dutch)
energeia-nl.translate.goog/geothermie-v...
Data from this presentation by Bundesverband Geothermie
www.stichtingdap.nl/wp-content/u...