A vast pool of molten rock in the continental crust that underlies southwestern Washington state could supply magma to three active volcanoes in the Cascade Mountains Mount St. Helens, Mount Rainier and Mount Adams according to a new study that’s causing a stir among scientists

The link to the journal article and from the Hartford Courant’s political coverage (of all places). 

The study, published Sunday in the magazine Nature Geoscience, concluded that the magma pool among the three mountains could be the "most widespread magma-bearing area of continental crust discovered so far."
Other scientists dismiss the existence of an underground vat of magma covering potentially hundreds of square miles as "farfetched" and "highly unlikely." Rather than magma heated to 1,300 to 1,400 degrees, some think it could be water.
They also discount speculation that a so-called "super volcano" such as the one under the Yellowstone National Park area might be beneath the region. They say there’s no credible evidence to suggest a need to overhaul the volcanic hazard assessments for the three mountains.
Even so, the study is another piece of the puzzle as scientists try to understand the deep plumbing of volcanoes and, perhaps eventually, learn how to predict their eruptions better.
In the late 1980s, scientists discovered a massive underground electromagnetic anomaly known as the Southern Washington Cascades Conductor. But the two-year study published Sunday is the first to suggest that it may be the source of magma for Mounts St. Helens, Rainier and Adams.
"We believe our results speak for themselves and are reluctant to extrapolate from the conclusions reached in the paper," Graham Hill, the lead author of the study, said in an e-mail from New Zealand. The study was sponsored by GNS Science, the New Zealand equivalent of the U.S. Geological Survey, and Monash University in Australia.
The three volcanoes are along the edges of the Southern Washington Cascades Conductor, in a rough triangle with Mount St. Helens to the south, Rainier to the north and Adams to the east. They’re 50 or so miles apart.
Scientists think that each volcano has its own small magma chamber three miles or more directly beneath it. A large pool of magma 12 to 15 miles under the region’s surface supplies each of the shallower chambers, the new study theorizes.
"The take-home point is there is evidence of a primary magma pool that feeds the chambers underneath the volcanoes," said Matt Burgess, who worked on the study before becoming a hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in San Diego. "It’s one source all these volcanoes feed off."
Using sensitive instruments at 85 sites among the mountains including Mount St. Helens during its just-ended eruptive phase scientists studied the electric and magnetic fields of the Southern Washington Cascades Conductor, Burgess said.
"It’s up for debate, but it is reasonable to assume it is a large magma chamber," he said. "There is no other explanation for this."
Among the scientists who study volcanoes, the study has, in fact, touched off a major debate.
"Their interpretation is open to disagreement," said Seth Moran, a volcano seismologist with the USGS Cascades Volcano Observatory in Vancouver, Wash. "Other geophysical studies don’t support this theory."
Moran said the most telling evidence that the theory was wrong was the lack of any surface evidence, such as geothermal vents or hot springs, among the mountains that would indicate the presence of a super-heated underground magma pool.
"If there was such a large body of magma, you would find surface evidence," Moran said, adding that Yellowstone, with its geysers and hot springs, is a perfect example of the type of visible evidence that’s lacking in southwest Washington state.
Steve Malone, a professor emeritus at the University of Washington’s earth and space science department who’s studied the Cascade volcanoes for years, agrees.
"The geothermal evidence for what Graham suggests is nonexistent," Malone said. There is also no seismic evidence for such a magma pool, he said.
Twenty years ago, a study using "limited heat data" described a vast area of deep magma beneath the volcanoes in the Oregon Cascades, Malone said.
"Such hypotheses sometimes just fade away," he said. "It absolutely is not a reason at this point to re-evaluate hazard mitigation efforts."

Yet some of Malone’s colleagues agree with the study and Hill’s conclusions.
Olivier Bachmann, a geochemist at the University of Washington, said the data in the study were "pretty solid." He said there was other evidence, including geochemical evidence, to suggest that the Southern Washington Cascades Conductor might be a magma pool.
An underground anomaly like the Southern Washington Cascades Conductor has been discovered in the Andes Mountains in Chile. Studies there indicate that it’s a pool of magma, he said. Scientists on New Zealand’s North Island are doing similar research.
The lack of surface evidence is no reason to discount the possibility of a southwest Washington magma pool, Bachmann said, adding that the geysers and hot springs in Yellowstone, Iceland and New Zealand are over much shallower magma pools than the Southern Washington Cascades Conductor.
Bachmann called the Southern Washington Cascades Conductor a "mush zone," about 20 to 50 percent magma and the rest crystalline rock. The magma extruded at Mount St. Helens was filled with crystals, he said.
"The magma at Mount St. Helens is sticky, viscous, explosive and didn’t come directly from the (Earth’s) mantle," he said.
All the scientists, including Hill and Burgess, said there was nothing to suggest that a dangerous super volcano was underneath southwest Washington.
The Yellowstone super volcano is one of the largest on Earth, with a caldera, or depression, in the surface that covers 1,500 square miles. During its last eruption, 640,000 years ago, it released 8,000 times more lava and ash than the 1980 eruptions of Mount St. Helens did.
"There is no evidence to suggest there is a super volcano down below southwest Washington," Bachmann said.
As for the disagreement over whether the Southern Washington Cascades Conductor is a large magma pool or something else, Bachmann said that more studies needed to be done, such as surface heat flow studies. Drilling isn’t a possibility, he said.
"It would cost a lot and be too dangerous," he said.

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

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. 

AN ACT Relating to assessing the state’s geothermal resources for electrical power production; and creating new sections.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION. Sec. 1) (1) The legislature finds that the Pacific Northwest has unique geological features that include significant geothermal resources, and that other states and provinces in this region are actively exploring and developing these resources for energy production purposes. The legislature further finds that existing data and analyses of these resources is now largely outdated and that advances in technology, increased energy prices, and increased interest in low-carbon energy sources has increased interest by electric utilities and independent power producers in the state’s geothermal resources.

(2) The legislature therefore intends to authorize a comprehensive review of the state’s geothermal resources and make recommendations regarding policy measures to facilitate environmentally responsible development of these resources for electric generation and concentrated heating purposes.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 2) (1) The geothermal resource assessment committee is created.

(2) The committee is composed of the following members:

(a) The commissioner of public lands, or the commissioner’s designee;

(b) The energy policy division of the department of community, trade, and economic development;

(c) The chair of the energy facility site evaluation council;

(d) The state geologist within the department of natural resources;

(e) The chair of the utilities and transportation commission;

(f) Representatives of publicly owned and privately owned utilities;

(g) Representatives of independent power producers;

(h) Representatives of geologists from academic, research, and private sectors;

(i) Representatives of other interested sectors, including agriculture, forestry, and environmental;

(j) Representatives of tribal governments with significant geothermal resource interests; and

(k) Representatives of federal agencies with regulatory or land management responsibilities relating to the development of geothermal interests.

(3) The commissioner of public lands, or the commissioner’s designee, shall chair the committee. The commissioner of public lands shall select the committee members described in subsection (2)(f) through (k) of this section.

(4) The department of natural resources shall provide necessary staff and administrative support to the committee.

(5) The committee shall conduct a comprehensive assessment of the geothermal resources in the state and their potential for environmentally responsible development for power production purposes. The assessment must include at least the following:

(a) A characterization of the geothermal resources in the state and the potential for development for electrical generation and concentrated heating purposes based upon currently employed and projected technologies;

(b) The economic implications of this development potential, including community economic development, job creation, and state and local revenue benefits, including an assessment for each county in the state;

(c) A review of current lease payments on federal lands in the state for geothermal leasing, described by county;

(d) A review of state lands with geothermal development potential;

(e) A review of the effect of the state’s water resource laws and policies on the development of geothermal resources; and

(f) Recommendations for legislative and administrative actions based upon this assessment to encourage environmentally responsible geothermal resource development in the state.

(6) The committee shall provide the assessment and recommendations to the energy and fiscal committees of the senate and house of representatives by December 1, 2008.

The link to The Seattle Times Op/ED on their editorial page is here

The following is modified from the op/ed

The United States is frequently embarrassed over its energy policy.  The most recent occurrence was in the area of geothermal energy. Last fall, the Senate’s Energy and Natural Resource Committee sat through one of the best presentations on our nation’s geothermal energy potential. It was delivered by the president of Iceland.

He spoke to the expansion of geothermal energy in the western United States. That expansion is coming to Washington state. Our location on the edge of a regional “hot zone,” along with the accelerating interest in all forms of renewable energy, means that developers soon will be knocking at our doors.

Underground windmills, heat mining and enhanced geothermal systems are all names and references for geothermal energy. Instead of digging or drilling for gas or coal to burn and generate steam in order to turn a turbine, you tap the Earth’s natural heat to create energy. It works. And, it works today.

Power engineers consider it a mature technology — a demonstrated one — and most of the technology, though 20 years old, is available today off the shelf. Utilities show keen interest in it because it is steady, not intermittent like wind and solar. However, like those two energy sources, geothermal is renewable. It has high initial costs, roughly two-thirds coming from drilling. But, once built, it has no fuel costs.

The hot zone of California, Nevada (the Saudi Arabia of geothermal), Idaho and Oregon could produce tens of thousands of megawatts along the spine of the Sierra Nevadas and Cascades. Washington state sits on the edge of this hot zone. The 34 thermal hot springs throughout the state are just the surface of our potential.Yet, Washington state has zero megawatts of geothermal. “It also has zero planned, proposed or within the plant approval process, even though we have excellent potential,” laments Susan Petty, one of the world’s leading geothermal reservoir engineers. However, there is now news of International Paper assessing their geothermal potential with a partner.

Petty, who is based in Seattle, points out there is no current hard data on the exact nature of the state’s geothermal resources. But, working off 25-year-old geologic studies, it’s reasonable to say we are among the top 10 states.

Petty also notes Washington state is unprepared to respond or assist if a geothermal development permit were submitted today. This is major oversight that must be addressed.

Gov. Christine Gregoire is committed to renewable energy, but faced strong opposition over the Horizon wind farm outside of Ellensburg because of its size and profile. That would not be an issue with geothermal: It has the smallest surface footprint among renewable forms of energy; less space than the Seattle Center grounds would be needed to produce the energy equivalent of 65 wind turbines along the ridge line in Kittitas County.

Geothermal in Washington state also would generate solid, respected jobs in parts of the state that are seeking to expand their employment bases. The 1993 Whatcom County Report calculates 124 jobs in eastern Whatcom county.

Yet, we must not mislead ourselves into thinking geothermal is a clean and limitless energy (we did that with nuclear power in the 1950s). There are impacts. Water issues are the biggest concern, especially if developers work on the cheap and do not have the proper recovery technology. Carbon dioxide is produced, but the impacts are one-fifteenth to one-thirtieth that of natural gas, the cleanest of the abundant fuel sources currently in our portfolio.

If geothermal is done correctly and respectfully — no development on sacred sites or in wilderness areas and national parks — we can bring hundreds of megawatts online in Washington state. The discussion needs to begin now with the tribes, utilities, environmentalists and state agencies.

It is time for Washington state to recognize the great potential for what is being called “the forgotten renewable.” The underground windmills are waiting.

Lastly, an additional $9.4 million in related income to the county, plus royalty, ongoing O & M and property taxes reaching $14 Million a year at its peak.

These numbers are 15 years old but basic leasing and taxing regulations have not changed.  Revenue back to the local community from federal land holding lease receipts is a higher percentage because of the resource extraction aspect.

The Glitnir US Geothermal Report is a great overview, and offers some clear market insight.  Though the state could have 4% from geothermal, there is no real activity statewide. Critical to the report is its assertions of low cost geothermal production.

This final chart extracted from the MIT study reinforces the assertion that geothermal could meet 15-20% of the U.S. electrical needs by 2050.

Glitnir US Geothermal Report