Just $3.3 billion in R&D spending could propel geothermal energy to be the cheapest energy technology, even beating fossil fuels on a cost-per-kilowatt-hour basis, according to a new study. “Current capacity doesn’t give you that much insight into what technology will win the race,” Schilling said. “Instead, investors should be looking at the shape of the performance trajectory.”
The study included data from the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory on the cost per kilowatt-hour at active power generation projects in 2005:
"It doesn’t make that much sense to be putting that much money in fossil fuels,” she said. “If that money were directed to geothermal, it could move a lot faster. Solar is so far away from being cost effective, and tremendously far away from being efficient. Right now the bigger and quicker payoff is geothermal.”
- Geothermal, $0.031 to $0.08
- Wind, $0.043 to $0.055
- Biomass, $0.066 to $0.08
- Solar, $0.11 to $0.31
- Hydroelectric, $0.006
- Coal $0.021
- Nuclear, $0.022
Last year, Google (Nasdaq:GOOG) announced plans to invest $10 million in enhanced geothermal systems and to pressure the federal government to provide more funding for the sector (see Google pushes for enhanced geothermal).
Two other recent studies also touted the benefits of geothermal (see MIT report says geothermal power not to be ignored and New USGS study pumps geothermal).
“I would not count wind out. I think it’s a good idea to have a slightly diversified energy portfolio,” she said. “But wind and geothermal are in a completely different class than solar thermal and solar photovoltaics. It will be a long time before they could be competitive.”
... the companies most equipped to develop geothermal are oil and gas developers, who would benefit the least from geothermal’s success, she said.
Please read full from Cleantech