Washington Energy Services covers June 3rd GEA Workshop

The Washington Energy Services newsfeed gave a brief plug to the June GEA event in Seattle.

Seattle will have the opportunity to highlight its clean energy credentials next month when it hosts a major event for the geothermal energy industry.
The Geothermal Energy Association (GEA) will hold a Technology, Finance and Development Workshop in the city on June 3…. Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and a variety of other local officials are expected to be on hand at the event.

The link to the article is here.

 

For more information on the GEA Workshop, try this link

Image Problems with this blog

Dear Readers,

We would like to apologize for the loss of images to this blog.  Unfortunately a web programmer attempting to work on a different website (www.geothermalinnovation.org) inadvertently accessed North of the Hot Zone and erased the images and some of the links.

We are trying to correct this problem, but as some of the entries were original research it will take some time.  We are actively soliciting an intern who will work on this problem as part of a larger geothermal internship.

if there are any images or data referred to on this blog that you would like to have resolved sooner, please contact Lawrence Molloy directly at Lawrence@northofthehotzone.com

Seattle June 3rd, GEA Finance Workshop

GEA U.S. Technology, Finance, and Development Workshop Agenda has finally been released.  Mayor Greg Nickels of Seattle will open the conference.  State Senator Adam Kline will also talk about recent legislative activities. DOE will be represented by Ed Wall, Director of Geothermal Energy

8:00 am Opening Keynote presentations, Karl Gawell, GEA, Moderator
Greg Nickels, Mayor of Seattle, WA, confirmed
Senator Adam Kline, State of Washington, confirmed
Representatives of Federal and State officials, invited
8:25 am Geothermal 101: Understanding geothermal resources and technology
Susan Petty, AltaRock Energy, confirmed
8:45 am Washington State Geothermal Status and Roadmap
Dave Norman, Washington State Geologist, confirmed
Dave Sjoding, Washington State University, confirmed
9:15 am BREAK
9:30 am Ormat, Gold Level Sponsor, Morning Keynote
9:45 am New Geothermal Projects Under Development: Leading Project Developers Discuss the Status of
Their New Geothermal Projects and Keys to Successful Project Development
Ken MacLeod, Western GeoPower, confirmed
Michael Hayter, Raser Technologies, confirmed
Dan Schochet, Ram Power, confirmed
Hank Sennott, Enel NA, tentative
Phil Messer, PBS&J, tentative
Saf Dhilon, U.S Geothermal, tentative
10:45 am New Geothermal Technology Panel: New and future developments in geothermal technology are
described and discussed
Ed Wall, DOE, Panel Chair:
13
Paul Thomsen, Ormat, confirmed
Halley Dickey, TAS, confirmed
Lou Capuano, ThermaSource, confirmed
Charles Baron, Google, confirmed
Kevin Wallace, Power Engineers, confirmed
David Paul, UTC power, tentative
11:45 LUNCH 
12:30 pm Community/Environmental/Tribal: Invite environmental leader to speak on role of geothermal
and environmental issues; invite community official where geothermal is used or being developed to
discuss local issues/benefits
Panel Chair: Karl Gawell, GEA
Ross Macfarlane, Climate Solutions, confirmed
Laurie McClenahan Hietter, RMT, confirmed
Roger Taylor, State, Local & Tribal Deployment, National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
confirmed
Michael O?Connell, Stoel Rives, LLP, confirmed
Additional environmental, community or tribal views (lRachel Shimshak, Renewable NW
Projects, Nancy Hirsch, NW Energy Coalition, Tony Usibelli, WA State Energy Office, Dan
Ritzman, Sierra Club, Becky Kelly, Washington Environmental Council, Diana Enright, Oregon
Department of Energy, Shoshone Tribe, invited)
1:20 pm Transmission: Status and Outlook for Federal and State Actions to Ensure Adequate Transmission
for New Renewable Power Projects
Jonathan Weisgall, MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, confirmed
1:40 pm Federal Stimulus and Other Support
Ed Wall, Geothermal Technologies Program Director, U.S Department of Energy,
confirmed
2:00 pm UTC Power, Gold Level Sponsor, Afternoon Keynote
2:15 pm BREAK
2:30 pm Financing Geothermal Projects: Status of Federal and State Incentives, Approaches to
Project Financing, and More…
Mark Taylor, New Energy Finance, confirmed
Tom King, U.S Renewables Group, confirmed
CJ Arrigo, Glacier Capital Partners, confirmed
John McIlveen, Jacobs and Company Securities, Inc., confirmed
3:30 pm Overcoming the legal/regulatory hurdles to new geothermal development
Jerry Fish, Stoel Rives, confirmed
John Pierce, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich Rosati, confirmed
Kermit Witherbee, BLM Geothermal Program Manager, confirmed
Bob Fujimoto, U.S Forest Service, to be invited
4:30pm Geothermal Energy from a Utility/Power Company Perspective
Chad Teply or Mark Tallman, PacifiCorp, confirmed
Craig Collar, Snohomish PUD, confirmed
Steve Ponder, NV Energy, confirmed
Additional Representative (Ben Farrow, Puget Sound Energy, Murray Grande, NCPA, and John
Pease, Bonneville Power Administration, invited)

Geothermal competing with low cost Hydro in Washington State

In an article covered by the Idaho Business Review, the prospects of geothermal in Washington State are contrasted against cheap hydropower. 

"For states like Idaho, Washington and Oregon, which are dominated by relatively cheap hydro power, the competition is low-cost power,” said Doug Glaspey, COO of Boise-based U.S. Geothermal. “In California, energy costs are around $100 per megawatt. In Idaho, people don’t want to pay any more than $60 or $70 per megawatt.”

The link to the article is here

New York Times endorses Geothermal

In a well written piece, the New York Times January 13th, 2009 editorial page spoke singularly to the merits of geothermal.  Usually geothermal is mentioned in passing with wind, solar and bio-fuels.  Link is here.  Editorial is

To most people the word “geothermal” means hot springs and geysers — like parts of Iceland or Yellowstone National Park where water is heated by the presence of magma near the surface of the earth. But the earth’s heat lies below everywhere, and it offers a virtually untapped energy reserve of enormous potential with a very short list of drawbacks.

In 2006, a panel led by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology surveyed the prospects for electricity production from enhanced geothermal systems. Its conclusions were conservative but very optimistic. The panel suggested that with modest federal support, geothermal power could play a critical role in America’s energy future, adding substantially to the nation’s store of renewable energy and more than making up for coal-burning power plants that would have to be retired.

Following up on the M.I.T. study and a separate survey of its own, the Bureau of Land Management issued a decision last month that would open up as many as 190 million acres to leases for geothermal exploration and development. These lands are mostly in the West, where hot rock lies closer to the surface than it generally does in the East.

There is a lot of research yet to be done about geothermal sources, new techniques for deep drilling and energy generation at the surface. But the basics are clear enough. Water is injected deep into the earth where it absorbs heat from the surrounding rock. As the fluid returns to the surface, that heat is used to generate electricity. The fluid is then re-injected. The system forms a closed loop. It creates almost no emissions and is entirely renewable. It also occupies a smaller surface area than either solar or wind power.

Still, large-scale commercial production is at least a decade away and will require improvements on currently available technology. Geothermal development also will mean still more competition for scarce water, more holes in the ground and more roads to service those holes.

The M.I.T. report’s statement that the success of geothermal production “would parallel the development of the U.S. coal-bed methane industry” is no doubt meant to be reassuring. Yet in parts of the West, coal-bed methane has been an environmental disaster, both for fragile landscapes and the wildlife that depend on them.

Geothermal development must not be allowed to foster another drilling free-for-all of the kind we’ve seen during the past decade. Done right, it could help free the country of the grievous environmental burden of coal-burning power plants. Done wrong, it could create grievous environmental problems of its own. Mindful of the dangers, the next administration should commit to developing this extraordinary resource

Washington State Job Generation - 444 Permanent Jobs

The Federal EIS predicts that 1,860 temporary construction jobs will be generated to develop 600 MWe within the State.  That would result in 444 permanent maintenance jobs and almost $40 Million dollars salaries per annum.

 

The analysis is located on page 487 of the third appendix.  The link is here.

Lease application analysis in Mt. Baker Snoqualamie Forest

The Programmatic EIS looks at 9,000 plus acres requested for development in an area proximal to the North Cascades National Park.  This project is a development proposed by Vulcan Power.  The analysis begins on page 351

The pending noncompetitive lease applications were filed by Vulcan Power Corporation in 2000. It is expected that issuing all of the leases in this area would result in two binary power plants at capacities of 30 and 20 megawatts. It is expected that a 30 megawatt plant would result in 15 acres of land disturbance, and a 20 megawatt plant would result in 10 acres of land disturbance for a total disturbance of 25 acres. Existing Forest Service roads would be used to access the sites.  Exploration activities for a 20 megawatt plant and a 30 megawatt plant is expected to involve approximately 12 temperature gradient holes, disturbing approximately 0.15 acre each, for a total disturbance of approximately 2 acres.

Four pending lease applications are included within this area:
• WAOR 056025 – 2,403 acres comprise portions of three adjacent sections of land and a full fourth section 0.25 mile to the west. The legal description of this land is (1) T38N R8E S36; (2) T38N R9E S19, “part so of wilderness”; (3) T38N R9E S30, parts E2, E2W2,Lots 1-4; (4) T38N R9E S31, parts E2, E2W2, Lots 1-4.

• WAOR 056027 – 2,560 acres comprised of four contiguous sections of land. The legal description of this land is (1) T37N R8E S11; (2) T1S T37N R8E S13; (3) T37N R8E S14; (4) T37N R8E S24.

• WAOR 056028 – 2,544.970 acres comprised of four contiguous sections of land. The legal description of this land is (1) T37N R8E S10, “pt outside NRA”; (2) T37N R8E S15; (3) T37N R8E S22; (4) T37N R8E S23.

* WAOR 056029 – 1,941.920 acres comprised of four contiguous sections of land with a portion of each excluded due to the excluded land being a National Recreation Area. The legal description of this land is (1) T37N R8E S16, “pt outside NRA”; (2) T37N R8E S17, “pt outside NRA”; (3) T37N R8E S20, “pt outside NRA”; (4) T37N R8E S21, “pt outside NRA”.

The lease sites range in elevation from 800 feet to 3,400 feet above mean sea level and are traversed by several creeks, roads and trails. Other land uses include several gravel pits and quarries. There are no known buildings within the lease sites or within 0.5 mile of any of the lease sites.

Interior opens additional lands in the Cascades

The U.S. Dept. of Interior has moved forward with opening additional lands for geothermal development in the Cascades.  The action follows on a multi year EIS conducted by Interior.  Lands available for leasing will NOT include Wilderness areas and National Parks.  Initial lease sales will take place in December, 2008 for properties on the eastern slope of the Southern Cascades in Central Oregon and Idaho.  Additional properties throughout the Western United States, and Washington can be nominated by geothermal developers. 

A link to the Dept. of Interior report is here.

From the Interior Press Release

….the initiative could produce 5,540 megawatts of new electric generation capacity from geothermal resources by 2015. That’s enough to meet the power needs of 5.5 million homes. The plan also estimates an additional 6,600 megawatts by 2025 for a total of 12,100 megawatts – enough to power more than 12 million homes.
When put into action by a Record of Decision, the plan would identify about 118 million acres of Bureau of Land Management managed public lands and 79 million acres of National Forest System lands for future geothermal leasing….

USGS issues new Geothermal Assessment - Washington State has 30,000 MW potential of EGS

In the first comprehensive assessment since 1978, the US Geologic Survey has issued a new survey of the hydrothermal and EGS potential of the Western United States.  Building from recent assessments by the Western Governors Association, State Geologic Surveys, private data and federal assessment they issue conservative, mean and low probability estimates.  The study included resources greater than 90 degrees C and up to a depth of 6km.  Pristine lands and lands proximal to National Parks were excluded.  A total of 241 geothermal sites were identified.

 

Washington State’s identified resources are 0.25% of the national assessment and expand to 1.25% of the potential when EGS is included.

Washington State’s "Geothermal Deposits" credited to Glaciers?

The Greenwash Brigade, part of NPR’s Public Insight Network discuss Washington State’s strong renewable portfolio standards.  They also refer to numerous renewable projects underway.

We have 39 geothermal, solar, wave energy and wind projects in some forward marching phase, with 18 fully operational.

Gifted with massive coastal wave energy, the windy (and thankfully sunny) eastern part of Washington and geothermal deposits (thanks to glaciers), we are using a suite of public policy tools, including the dreaded Initiative process, to move inexorably towards a clean energy economy in the Pacific NW.

Geothermal deposits (thanks to glaciers)?

Alta-Rock acquires exclusive geothermal rights to 263,000 acres in Western Washington

In an agreement with a major timber company, Alta-Rock has acquired the geothermal rights to 263,000 acres in Western Washington.  While the full geothermal potential of these resources is not known, their proximity to the I-5 transmission corridor greatly favors their development compared to Eastern Washington geothermal resources.  The full scope of lease rights extend to 650,000 plus acres in several western states.

The press release via EarthTimes is here

SNOPUD Geothermal Activities

Snohomish Pubic Utility District, the 12th largest in the nation has embarked on an aggressive geothermal development strategy within their service area.  With a goal of 90 MW by 2020, they are well on their way with significant early milestones in 2007 and 2008.  From a presentation by SNOPUD’s Craig Collar

    • Updated GIS database utilizing data from historical BPA studies
    • Existing data review
    • Temperature with depth maps
    • Geochemistry
    • Geology
    • Fracture/fault mapping
    • Seismic data
    • Stress/tectonic regime
    • Transmission lines
    • Access/land availability
    • Gathered new geochemistry data from springs and wells
    • Preliminary costs: exploration, wells, plant
    • Potential exploration/development options

SnoPud Geothermal Workshop a Success

Over 65 participants attended the Geothermal Workshop for utilities hosted by Snohomish PUD in Everett last week.  During the day and a half event on both power generation and ground source heat pumps the focus was on the state of the industry and the opportunities now for advancing geothermal in Washington State.

The two most important Washington State specific geothermal findings were SnoPud’s  goal of 90 MW from Geothermal in the Cascades by 2020 and the estimate by the National Geothermal Resources Council that Washington State’s geothermal potential could be double previous estimates and exceed 600 MW.

The event was opened by SnoPud Director Steve Klein and Congressman Jay Inslee (via recorded video).  Congressman Inslee, whose district includes part of the service district of SnoPud, talked about making Washington State a geothermal leader and was looking forward to "cut(ting) the ribbon on the first plant" .  Congressman Inslee has also arranged for $500K in funding to assist SnoPud in developing their geothermal plan.

However, the state faces a significant challenge as resource estimates are from a 1979 study.  "Comprehensive research and exploration have not been done (in Washington State)" according to GRC Executive Director Curt Robinson.  And yet, he felt confident enough to cast an estimate of 600 MW, primarily in the Cascades and Central Washington. 

Western Washington’s geothermal potential remains unknown and is largely masked by the rainfall on the western slopes of the Cascades.  Experts still feel that several sites may exist along the I-5 transmission corridor, a critical factor in the siting of any geothermal plant.

Development costs have soared in recent months as capital, material and exploration costs have significantly spiked. Guy Nelson with the Geothermal Working Group stated that the current rule of thumb is now $4 Million per MW.  Geothermal power can range from 6.6 to 11.6 cents per kiloWatt hour.

Rural PUD’s also learned about the new loan assistance program by the USDA for ground source heat pumps.  This program offers a great opportunity for Eastern Washington utilities to help homeowners install and finance home heat pumps that are critical for utilities interested in peak shaving, and homeowners interested in significantly reducing their home heating and cooling costs.

Representatives from Seattle City Light, Tacoma Power and Skamania PUD were in attendance, as was State Senator Adam Kline.  Senator Kline is talking to Senate leadership about introducing the Geothermal Study Bill again this year.   He is confident that a straight forward study bill (no policy, regulations, funding or taxes) that explores both power generation and heat pumps will garner strong interest by legislators throughout the state. 

2008 GEA Report; Washington State - 1 unspecified project

The GEA has released its latest production and development report.  Link is here.  Nationally, growth is project at ~20% since the beginning of 2008.  Washington State garners a reference to one project around Mt. Baker.  No MW power output is assigned. 

August 11th Geothermal Meeting Location & Agenda

Electric Utilities’ Roles in Promoting Geothermal Technologies

August 11-12, 2008
2320 California Street – Everett (Snohomish County Public Utility District)

Map to location pdf is here Traffic can be heavy heading North across the county line.  Plan accordingly.  Bus Service from Seattle is the Sound Transit 510, Schedule is here.  Carpooling can be good time to catch up with people you know.

The topics are salient to where Washington State is vis a vis geothermal.  SnoPud is to be commended for appropriately framing and hosting the event.  Link to SNOPUD Press Release is here

August 11

9:00 Registration

9:30 Opening Remarks: Steve Klein, General Manager SNOPUD and Congressman Phil Inslee US House of Representatives

9:45 Panel Discussion: “Geothermal Potential In the Pacific Northwest” Susan

  • Petty, AltaRock Energy, Inc, Chair
  • Curt Robinson, Geothermal Resources Council
  • John Martinsen, SNOPUD
  • Kermit Witherbee, Bureau of Land Management
  • Bill Lum WA State Department of Ecology

11:15 Break

11:30 “Developing, Building and Operating Geothermal Power Plants” Guy Nelson, Team Leader, Utility Geothermal Working Group

12:15 Luncheon Presentation: “Geothermal Technologies and Utility Leadership Roles in Promoting Rural Development; Dan Bowers, USDA

1:30 “Geothermal Heat Pumps: Benefits and Issues”, Paul Bony, ClimateMaster

2:00 Panel Discussion: “Utility Perspectives” Craig Collar, SNOPUD Chair

  • Craig Collar, Snohomish PUD
  • Marilynn Semro, Seattle City Light
  • Jerry Brown, Palo Alto Utilities
  • Garth Larson, PacifiCorp

3:30 Break

 

3:45 “Risks and Rewards of Including Renewables in a Utility’s Resource Portfolio” Brian Walshe, ALTERA Energy

4:15 Products and Services Panel, Guy Nelson, Utility Geothermal Working Group

  • John Pierce, WSG&R
  • Susan Petty, AltaRock Energy
  • Paul Bony, ClimateMaster

5:15 Adjourn for the Day

August 12

7:30 am Continental Breakfast

8:00 “A Tale of Two Buildings” Guy Nelson, UGWG

8:30 “GHP Analytical Tools” Katherine Johnson, Market Development Group

9:15 Geothermal Technologies in Waste Heat Recovery Applications, Guy Nelson, UGWG

9:45 Breakout Sessions: “How Do We Get More Cost-Effective Geothermal Projects Into the Market?”

  • Utility Perspective
  • Regulatory/Government Perspective
  • Customer Perspective

10:45 Break

11:00 Reports from the Breakout Sessions

Noon Adjourn

Federal Programmatic EIS Public Session - Monday July 28th, 2008

Few members of the public attended the Monday evening event at the University Library in Seattle.  According to an attendee, federal BLM and Forest Service representatives outnumbered the public two to one.  Public attendees included at least one European power developer exploring the process in the Western United States.  Questions by the public did not convey any concerns about geothermal energy, but focused on government process and leasing rights.There were several other citizens of the state in attendance.

SnoPud to hold Geothermal Workshop August 11 & 12 in Everett

 

The first Geothermal workshop in Washington State will take place August 11 and 12 in Everett.  Coordinated by Snohomish Public Utility District, hosts include the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, American Public Power Association and the Western Area Power Administration.

The cost of the workshop is $125.

The target audiences for this workshop is utility staff who are interested in learning about geothermal technologies – including geothermal heat pumps (GHP) and geothermal power production – and who want to compare them with other resource options, or who want to learn how to improve on existing programs. Through presentations, case histories, and demonstrations, attendees will learn:

- New drilling and installation techniques

- Cost comparisons of geothermal power and other resource options

- Cost effectiveness tests of GHP from the utility and customer perspectives

- Case histories of GHP systems energy savings over conventional HVAC systems

 

To learn more about the event contact - Guy Nelson, UGWG (541) 994-4670 energyguy@utilityforum.com

Seattle PI Columnist ponders Geothermal

Bill Virgin, columnist at the Seattle PI included geothermal in his latest article where he looked at geology and tax policy in Washington State on oil and gas. He broaches geothermal at the end while interviewing State Geologist Ron Teissere.

How about geothermal to produce electricity? Think of Mount St. Helens as the world’s largest geothermal demonstration project.

"That’s where we’re seeing a lot of inquiry," Teissere says. "I think there are a lot of people on the landscape looking around."

But he adds, "The places where you’re likely to drill into steam are in the national parks. In the national forests there might be some lesser opportunities."

Geothermal doesn’t need geyserlike flumes of steam to provide useful energy. "There are high-temperature rocks at depth in Eastern Washington," he says. Water can be injected into those rock formations, heated and brought to the surface….

Geothermal EIS Public Meeting in Seattle July 28th, 5:30 - 7:30

The BLM and Forest Service will hold one of 13 public meetings in Seattle on July 28, 2008 at the University Branch of the Seattle Public Library, (5009 Roosevelt Way, N.E. - just north of the University of Washington).

The preferred Alternative in the Draft PEIS considers all public lands and National Forest System lands with potential for geothermal development available for leasing except those that are withdrawn or administratively closed to geothermal leasing. The Draft PEIS also evaluates another alternative based on public input gained during scoping that would limit geothermal leasing for electrical generation to areas near transmission lines.

Written comments on the Draft PEIS may be submitted by any of three methods:
- e-mail - geothermal_EIS@blm.gov
- fax - 1-866-625-0707
- US Mail - Geothermal Programmatic EIS, c/o EMPSi, 182 Howard Street, Suite 110, San Francisco, California 94105

Geothermal Washington - an update

Geothermal Washington is a short and focused programmatic effort by Climate Solutions to advance geothermal power in Washington State.  The Pacific Northwest is experiencing a renewed push in geothermal — except in Washington State.  The Cascade Range is a known volcanic region and has strong geothermal potential. 

Starting in August of 2007, Lawrence Molloy began a dedicated effort on advancing geothermal. The focus was on three areas: 1) public awareness and acceptance, 2) technology development and 3) power purchase agreements. The logic was that work in these three areas would collectively advance the cause of geothermal.

Central to this effort is a blog “North of the Hot Zone” that discusses the geothermal potential in Washington State. The name refers to Washington State’s location relative to the vast geothermal reserves of Nevada, California and Oregon.

Progress has been modest. Public awareness in Washington State has been made through an op/ed, several articles and a blog. Decision makers are now aware of Washington State’s geothermal potential and development activity in proximal states and provinces. High-level discussions are taking place about direct geothermal investment in the central Cascades, and there is serious consideration of a geothermal study bill by the State legislature.

A proposed geothermal technology prize has been developed. It has been vetted by both geothermal experts and prize consultants. A proper high-temperature pump is seen as the technological gap hindering broader use of geothermal in 49 states according to MIT’s landmark Geothermal Study. Funding for the prize has been considered by high net worth individuals but not yet accepted. Next steps include a one-day design meeting currently scheduled for February 2009, and to be co-hosted by Stanford University’s Geothermal Program.

An effort to increase actual development and purchase of geothermal has focused on direct development or purchase by Seattle City Light. This effort has met with little interest on the part of the utility. A larger effort with a collective purchase of geothermal by 100 major cities was proposed to the Clinton Foundation and the National Conference of Mayors through staff of the Seattle Mayor’s office. Conceptually robust, it has lacked interest by critical players to warrant further development.

Activity 1: Public Awareness

This activity focused on building awareness in Washington State to both the general public and decision makers.

Actions

· A basic blog discussing the geothermal potential of Washington State was created. Titled “North of the Hot Zone,” it covered geology, projects, market potential and legislation. It linked to press coverage and had an excellent map compilation.

· A geothermal brownbag was hosted by Northwest Energy Coalition and Washington Environmental Council. 25 attendees heard from geothermal expert Susan Petty on the geothermal potential in the Pacific Northwest.

· Op/Ed; written by Lawrence Molloy and titled “Sitting on a Hot Energy Source.” It was run by the Seattle Times on January 4, 2008 The op/ed did inspire Dave Gehring of the Manufacturing Industrial Council, which is now planning an October meeting on geothermal.

· McClatchy Newspapers picked up the topic following the op/ed, and the article by Les Blumenthal was run in the Tacoma Tribune, Bellingham Herald, the Wenatchee World and the Seattle Times. The Columbian had an editorial that was picked up in the State Editorial coverage by the Seattle Times. Seattle-based Real Change covered the brownbag in January. There were also articles in GoSkagit. Several blogs have picked up on the coverage. Media Exposure: Total circulation for all newspapers is ~300,000. Blog hits barely exceeded 1,000.

· State Senator Adam Kline (D-37) introduced a study bill which failed to leave committee. He has signaled that he will run the bill again in the 2009 session. Discussions have begun with WEC and WCV for possible support of the bill.

Activity 2; Increasing Development of Geothermal

Though a mature technology (since 1913), geothermal development has not been commercially standardized. Increased site development would lead to standardization of technology, processes and components resulting in a lower delivered cost. To that end. an effort was made to increase investment in geothermal locally and nationally.

Actions

· Seattle City Light was approached to discuss geothermal within the context of the resource development plans. Progress was very limited due to the utilities reluctance to explore any new source supply other than hydro.

· A national concept for a bulk geothermal purchase managed through a collective renewable energy credit (REC) was conceived and scoped out with Bonneville Environmental Foundation. Conceptually robust, the idea garnered little interest. It has not been pursued. The concept was as follows:

· An effort coordinated by the National Conference of Mayors, Clinton Climate Initiative, and the Bonneville Environmental Foundation to arrange for the formation and execution of a national utility buyers’ consortia on geothermal energy. An initial group of 100 cities would purchase 2,000 MW of electricity that would come on line starting in 2015. This effort would increase geothermal capacity in the United States by 25% and provide technological standardization to reduce the cost of producing geothermal energy by 1/2 cent per kW hour. The project would be built on the current philanthropic model of the Clinton Foundation and their Clinton Climate Initiative. The National Conference of Mayors would execute the project as part of their Climate program. If it was successful, the project would have had some ambitious outcomes:

o $6 Billion investment over the next 15 years in geothermal energy

o A clearer understanding of geothermal development in the United States

o A national increase of 25% of the geothermal capacity

o Standardization of surface technology - reducing production costs by 1/2 cent per kWe

o Better understanding of geothermal reservoir dynamics

Activity 3: Technology Development

Critical to the broader use of geothermal is commercial standardization of related power technologies. Through lower development costs, geothermal would become more competitive with fossil fuel and other renewable energy resources. A thorough technological assessment was conducted of surface and subsurface challenges were conducted.

The absence of a robust down hole electrical, submersible pump was identified as a major technological gap. The introduction of such a pump to the market would significantly broaden the development range of geothermal, as well as allow for the study of geothermal reservoir mechanics, a process and art that needs to be refined before EGS can be nationally applied.

Working with a prize expert and consulting geothermal experts a prize concept was developed (see attached pdf).

The applicability of a prize concept for a down hole pump is excellent because of its discrete focus, engineering reality and technology multiplier. The metaphorical equivalent of such a pump is the development of the hypodermic needle. Once available, it would be possible to withdraw fluids for use and evaluation, as well as deliver drugs.

Though no major donor has been identified, we have engaged in initial discussions with staff representing several high net-worth individuals interested in technology prizes.

Development of actual pump specifications (diameter, temperature range, power rating, pumping capacity, sensors, etc) is an important next step. A one-day design meeting has been proposed. Stanford University’s geothermal program has agreed to co-host the meeting with its annual workshop, to be held in Palo Alto, CA in February, 2009. (see attached pdf)

Outcomes

· Public awareness has been increased (marginally). Critical decision makers are aware and actively exploring the development of geothermal in Washington State.

· State agencies have signaled their interest in a study bill for development of the resource at some point in the future.

Future (likely) Outcomes

· A one-day Geothermal Manufacturing Meeting in Seattle, October, 2008

· A one-day City Government Meeting on Geothermal, Seattle, October, 2008

· Introduction of a Geothermal Study Bill in the State Legislature

· Possible development of 15 to 50 MW of baseload electricity in the Cedar River

Resources

Most of this work has been conducted pro-bono by Lawrence Molloy. External media assistance in blog development, economists, organizers and public affairs has been largely paid out-of-pocket by Lawrence Molloy. He is not seeking re-imbursement for his time or funds.

Additional programmatic work and consultants have been put under contract for a program administration handled by Climate Solutions.

Initial support has been provided by the Tagney Jones Family Fund and Alta-Rock Energy. Tenprivate individuals have donated an additional 1,000.00.

Next Steps

· Identify a high net worth individual, foundation or corporate interest willing to fund the geothermal prize.

· Raise $60K for the Prize Design Meeting at Stanford University (see attached “Geothermal Next Steps” pdf)

· Retire remaining Geothermal Washington Programmatic debt of $4,100