Be sure to check out the full report here:
www.iea-gia.org/activity-rep...
05.03.2026 15:19
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
Be sure to check out the full report here:
www.iea-gia.org/activity-rep...
Side note: my team and I outlined some of our thoughts on geothermal-AI synergies here:
cascadeinstitute.org/technical-pa...
Second - software innovation will compound hardware advances.
AI is already being used to improve oil and gas drilling. And given the scale of the industry, the training data that's being generated is *enormous*.
Maybe AI productivity improvements are showing up in places
The IEA Geothermal TCP released a new report, and there's a few points I think deserve attention.
First - excitement around drilling isn't contingent on a silver bullet.
There's a broad portfolio of solutions emerging - from incremental to radical.
Why do new technologies look chaotic?
Because we don't know what works. So engineers must explore the entire design space. That variety makes it hard to generalize about emerging technologies.
Airborne wind energy is a perfect example.
New piece: petermassie.substack.com/p/why-new-te...
Agreed - few sites would be analogous in the long run. But that's how technologies start - in ideal niches. Prove the tech, drive down costs, and deploy into more marginal resources.
Can you flip me the link to the EIA 860 data? I'm not able to find the data for Cape Station
Nope. It's more of an accounting issue in the model.
Taxes are lumped in to LCOE. So the project looks more expensive, but is actually generating higher returns.
That is a little surprising.
My initial thought is that the model could be optimizing for return, and adjusting factors like well field redevelopment.
Incurring higher costs through more frequent redrilling might be justified if revenues are higher.
Something to look into.
Speak of the devil - Fervo CEO emphasizing this point
It will be interesting to see how LCOEs change as learning rates drive down costs vs. rising costs from marginal resources.
All against a backdrop where future baseline for 'economic' baseload is uncertain
Aljubran has done some great work on this.
But honestly, economics could be much worse and still be competitive.
The cost of baseload is rising. Gas turbines have 2x'd in cost, and that's without CCUS. I've seen estimates for ON's SMR demo @ $150-180/MWh
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
And I would expect LCOE would be relatively insensitive to changes in ORC price given high capacity factor.
The assumptions look strong. I can't speak to reservoir design features like well spacing, but others are familiar from ATB scenarios.
If I had to pick at something, ORC cost *might* be low - costs are difficult to source. But given high temp, ORC costs could very well be on the lower end.
The author's published technical work at the Stanford Geothermal Workshop - pretty much *the* place to do so: pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/db/GeoCo...
Drilling matters too. Expect we'll see continued improvements with existing materials, and seeing interesting variations of energy drilling emerge.
In the longer term, watch high temperature materials and tools that can unlock superhot rock and 10X power production per well.
I think optimizing reservoir creation is vital - achieving high flow rates across different geologies is key to scale.
We've seen relentless improvement in shale productivity that's driven down capex through learning by doing.
If geothermal can replicate that, things get interesting fast.
Next-gen geothermal might be cheaper than you think.
Independent modelling based on Fervo suggests capex is just US$5600/kW, with LCOE of US$85/MWh. That's present costs, not projected.
Massive implications for the future of energy.
softwareengineerprogrammer.github.io/GEOPHIRES/Fe...
Emerging technologies often trigger strong reactions: excitement, skepticism, dismissal.
But how should we actually evaluate something that looks unconventional, implausible or sensational?
New essay in Configurations on airborne wind energy and the role of method in technology assessment:
“Technology X is too expensive.”
Compared to what? Which technology exactly?
How is it used? Where is it deployed?
Most arguments about energy tech gloss over those questions - but they define a technology's value.
New essay in Configurations:
petermassie.substack.com/p/a-technolo...
RBC Energy Report on Canada' geothermal power opportunity:
"If Canada does not act... it risks becoming a technology taker rather than a technology maker in a sector where Canadian subsurface expertise and geological endowment offer natural advantages."
www.rbc.com/en/thought-l...
Projections about the future might be contentious.
But the data about what's happening today is pretty clear.
Last week, Chamath Palihapitiya wrote a powerful narrative on solar - and I generally agree with it.
But the narrative isn't universal. Solar's value depends on context - especially rooftop solar.
So I wrote a bit on the nuance of rooftop solar's value
petermassie.substack.com/p/wheres-the...
#Geothermal costs due to plummet. pv-magazine-usa.com/2026/02/02/n...
Canada exports raw power.
Sounds great, but we're missing out.
AI gives Canada a chance to refine crude electrons into high-value services—without raising rates—if we require data centres to bring new clean supply online.
My latest in @hilltimes.com 👇
www.hilltimes.com/story/2026/0...
Drilling might be mature - but there's still major opportunities for innovation!
And a key benefit: they lock in to future improvements in the emissions intensity of the grid.
Emissions intensity of an ICE are fixed for life
Full report here: docs.nrel.gov/docs/fy26ost...
The labs formerly known as NREL just released their 2025 Geothermal Market Report.
This chart on EGS costs jumps out immediately. Massive and rapid cost decline in just five years.
If you think Venezuelan oil will compete with Canada - you must also believe there's a business case for a pipeline to Canada's West coast.
It's difficult to imagine industry prefers to invest in expanding production in Venezuela > creating value from existing Canadian assets
