Next-Generation Geothermal Research

Summary#

The Next-Generation Geothermal Research and Development Act would amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 and the Energy Policy Act of 1992. It would direct new and expanded federal research, grant, data, and resource-assessment work; its stated goal is to support next-generation geothermal systems in different conditions. The bill has not become law, and its passage is uncertain.

  • The Department of Energy (DOE) must support a research, development, demonstration, and commercial-application program within its Geothermal Technologies Office. The bill defines “next-generation geothermal systems” to include enhanced geothermal, closed-loop, and certain supercritical systems.
  • DOE must award milestone-based grants for deep-drilling projects at specified stages, and grants for commercial-readiness and surface-facility innovations. For commercial-readiness grants, the federal share may not exceed 80% of project costs.
  • DOE must award competitive, merit-reviewed grants to establish a center of excellence and support research at FORGE sites. The bill also requires at least one FORGE site to be able to test next-generation systems in supercritical conditions within one year after enactment.
  • DOE must periodically update a geothermal data repository, including with publicly available subsurface data. It must make an agreement with the Interior Department on sharing and collecting geothermal development data. Interior must commission deep exploration boreholes more than 8 kilometres deep in representative geological provinces.
  • The US Geological Survey must update resource assessments and develop methods to assess next-generation geothermal resources, including supercritical systems. DOE must report on progress every two years and on water use within five years.

What it means for you#

  • Researchers, universities, national laboratories, and companies: Some may apply for grants, but awards are not guaranteed. The bill gives priority to certain applicants and projects. It does not set all application details or award amounts.
  • Federal agencies: DOE and Interior would have new duties. The US Geological Survey would have assessment deadlines. The bill does not specify how many staff these tasks would require.
  • State, local, and Tribal governments and entities: A center of excellence would provide technical and other assistance and could partner with Tribal entities and governments. The bill does not guarantee any particular government or entity a grant or role.
  • Public and taxpayers: Some project data must be shared publicly to the maximum extent practicable, and borehole data must be posted on the repository. The bill does not directly change household energy bills, taxes, or benefits, and it does not require geothermal projects to be built.
  • Current law: The bill refers to existing geothermal programs, FORGE sites, a data repository, and resource assessments. The underlying Acts were not supplied, so their current requirements—and exactly how these amendments change them—could not be verified.

Money#

The bill authorizes funding but does not provide a cost estimate or itself appropriate the money.

  • It authorizes $5 million per year for fiscal years 2027–2031 for the new program.
  • It separately authorizes “such sums as are necessary” for programs under the relevant subtitle for fiscal years 2026–2031, available until spent.
  • These authorizations do not establish how much Congress will actually appropriate. The bill also does not estimate agency staffing or other implementation costs.

What is unclear#

  • The bill leaves grant application details, award amounts, and many program decisions to the Secretary of Energy.
  • It does not specify when or how often the deep boreholes must be drilled, or how many are required.
  • It does not explain how project data sharing will address limits on data availability or what information will be withheld, if any.
  • The bill does not define every technical term used, including “unique geodynamic settings,” or explain how the new work will fit with existing programs.
  • The dates for required reports and assessments run from enactment; the bill does not set a separate start date for the program.

Case for#

  • The bill appears intended to address gaps in research and data that may slow development of geothermal systems in different geological conditions.
  • Deep boreholes, shared data, and updated resource assessments could give researchers and project developers better information about heat and underground conditions.
  • Milestone-based grants tie support to stages of deep-drilling work. Grants for commercial and surface-facility improvements could also target practical barriers to operating projects.
  • A center of excellence could coordinate research, training, and technical help across federal agencies, research institutions, industry, and governments.

Case against#

  • The bill creates substantial new duties for federal agencies without estimating their staffing needs or total cost. The larger authorization for existing subtitle programs has no specified dollar limit.
  • The bill sets some deadlines but leaves many implementation choices to the Secretary, including grant details and what additional technologies or topics to include.
  • Public data sharing is required only to the maximum extent practicable for certain grants; the bill does not clearly ensure that all useful project data will be available.
  • The bill requires assessments and research, but does not ensure that the work will lead to commercially viable projects or address all local concerns about development.