Hot steam: A drill rig creates a test well to determine the geothermal resource at Neal Hot Springs, where U.S. Geothermal plans to build a supercritical binary cycle power plant.
U.S. Geothermal

Energy

Geothermal Plant Gets Funding

DOE funds will help finance construction of a geothermal facility using advanced technology.

  • Friday, June 18, 2010
  • By Prachi Patel

The U.S. Department of Energy has offered a $102.2 million loan guarantee, its first for geothermal energy, to U.S. Geothermal, based in Boise, ID. The guarantee is designed to support construction of a 22-megawatt plant at Neal Hot Springs, near Vale, OR.

U.S. Geothermal will use a technology called supercritical binary cycle to convert geothermal heat into electric power. The technology has been around since the 1980s but hasn't been commercialized. The DOE's loan guarantee, which serves as a promise to back a loan in case the company defaults, could give venture capitalists and private investors confidence in investing in the geothermal technology.

Daniel Kunz, CEO of U.S. Geothermal, says the supercritical binary plant could be 10 to 20 percent more efficient than geothermal plants operating now. The plant, which is in three modules, will be built by Houston-based TAS Energy and transported to the geothermal site on flatbed trucks and strung together, Kunz says. "This modularity should allow us to compress the timetable and cost of deployment. The risks of construction should be lower."

The power plant is expected to be online in 2012. All of its power output will be sold to Idaho Power Company, the largest utility in Idaho, as part of a 25-year agreement.

Advertisement

Conventional binary geothermal power plants are a well-established technology to produce electricity from moderate-temperature resources between 93 ºC and 149 ºC. Hot water drawn up from underground reservoirs cycles through a heat exchanger, where it heats a working fluid that is kept physically separate. The working fluid, typically an organic chemical such as isopentane, boils at a lower temperature than water. As it vaporizes, the force of the expanding vapor spins a turbine that generates electricity.

Supercritical binary plants use a similar setup. The only difference is that the working fluid is pumped up to a pressure above the fluid's "critical pressure" before it flows into the heat exchanger. At this supercritical pressure, the fluid does not vaporize at a specific temperature. Instead, it gradually transitions from a liquid to a high-density vapor that gets lighter and lighter as it heats up. This lets the working fluid extract more heat from the hot water, increasing the power plant's efficiency.

Building costs for a supercritical plant can be higher than traditional binary plants because the heat exchangers and pipes have to be stronger to handle the higher pressure. But the federal loan guarantees will help U.S. Geothermal get access to the necessary capital.

A few small test plants (less than 100-kilowatt) using supercritical binary geothermal technology have been built and run without any difficulty, says Gregory Mines, a geothermal energy researcher at the Idaho National Laboratory. In the 1980s, the DOE and Electric Power Research Institute built a 50-megawatt supercritical binary plant in Heber, CA, that ran for about three years. U.S. Geothermal's plant "should hopefully provide financial people an assurance that it's not an off-the-wall technology, it's proven and viable," says Mines.

Print

Related Articles

Geothermal without the Earthquakes

An underground "heat nest" design avoids the need to fracture the rock.

Using CO2 to Extract Geothermal Energy

Carbon dioxide captured from power plants could make geothermal energy more practical.

Cheaper Geothermal

Fluid extracts more heat out of low-temperature wells.

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

RD

211 Comments

  • 596 Days Ago
  • 06/18/2010

Missing Cost

What happened to journalists asking the basic questions, like, how much will it cost?

The news release I found says "the 25-year levelized cost will be $117.25 per mWh" (or $0.11725 per kWh). Compare that to hydro or coal and one sees that this is an expensive option.

And, of course, taxpayers are subsidizing the risk.

Reply

RD

211 Comments

  • 596 Days Ago
  • 06/18/2010

More Costs

And taxpayers have given US Geothermal about $35 million in a grant.  So the actual cost is higher still.

Reply

reddevil

1 Comment

  • 595 Days Ago
  • 06/19/2010

Re: More Costs

put $$ for help saving the earth in the asset column of the balance sheet.

Reply

erbium

331 Comments

  • 593 Days Ago
  • 06/21/2010

And put $$$ for earthquakes

caused by geothermal plants

into the debit column

Plus since they don't use pipes the whole length of the underground loops, the water picks up minerals like arsenic that are emitted in the condenser steam.  Measurements of these are well known from plants such as the geothermal plants in new zealand.

These are lower than other types of power plants,

The nil carbon emissions are of course asset as mentioned.

Not all areas can use geothermal.  THe eastern half of the US is half as hot underground as the western half. 

If near populated areas the earthquakes, which are small, are a major concern.  Some plants have had operations curtailed due to local quakes.

It would likely be more expense but if the heating loops drilled underground were totally lined from input to output, instead of letting water percolate thru fractured rock, it might alleviate some of these concerns.

Reply

AnthonySpallone

1 Comment

  • 590 Days Ago
  • 06/24/2010

Geo-Terminal Energy

Geothermal energy sounds great in theory, but what do we know about the negative effects of this technology? I remember hearing word that there is a link between earthquakes and geothermal plants, I don't know if it's true, but it sounds probable. I say we stick with wind and solar, and convert to nanotube batteries.

Reply

Advertisement

MAGAZINE

Can We Build Tomorrow's Breakthroughs?

Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.

Videos

Printing Parts

More

Advertisement

Technology Review Lists

TR50

Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:

Amazon.com

Toyota

Akamai

Complete Genomics

More

Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement