New Mexico Geothermal Energy Working Group

May 11, 2004

Santa Fe, NM

Strategic Planning Meeting Summary

Geothermal Heat Pump Technology Session

The New Mexico Geothermal Energy Working Group held a strategic planning meeting for geothermal heat pump (GHP) technology in New Mexico. The following questions were posed to the Working Group by the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) to kick-off the discussion. The discussion was facilitated by Brian Johnson, EMNRD’s Geothermal Program Manager.

1. What is the appropriate name for GHP technology?

As a first step, the Working Group listed possible names that could be used to describe, market, or promote the technology. The Working Group then voted on the names. A cluster of three names stood out as being the preferred names, having received the most votes: Ground-source heat pump, Ground-coupled heat pump, and Geothermal heat pump. Vote tallies are shown in parentheses.

Page 1 of 5

  • Ground-source heat pump (7)
  • Mother earth heat pump (1)
  • Earth energy saver (1)
  • Ground-source exchangers
  • Heat transfer products (1)
  • Closed-loop heat pump
  • Ground-coupled heat pump (8)
  • Geoexchange (2)
  • Closed-loop
  • Geothermal heat pump (8)
  • Earth-driven heat pump
  • Earth-driven cooling and heating (2)
  • Coupled heat pump
  • Water-efficient heat pump
  • Geo-sink heating and cooling
  • Environment-coupled heating and cooling (3)
  • Loopy-tech
  • Make geo go (2)

Page 1 of 5

2. What is impeding GHP implementation?

As an initial attempt to identify barriers, the Working Group responded to the question by noting groups or reasons why they believe there is not further progress with GHP applications at this time.

  • Architectural and engineering firms
  • No training available
  • Little familiarity with GHP technology
  • Drillers
  • Mechanical contractors
  • Lack of market

3. What would successful effort in promoting GHP include?

The Working Group identified agencies, utilities, and companies important to geothermal in New Mexico.

  • Public outreach needed
  • GHP cheerleader needed
  • Governor Bill Richardson
  • State Senator Cynthia Nava (District 31, Las Cruces)
  • Connect renewable pieces that GHP can tie into
  • Statement needed from authority figure supporting GHP…then training to follow
  • Need utility company involvement
  • Fund case study, get results, then publish on website
  • Owners/end users make the decisions, not A/E firms
  • GHP attractive to long-term users
  • Schools
  • Government facilities
  • Hard to sell GHP: need a zealot!
  • Utilize shared savings contracts in combination with GHP projects
  • Concrete things are needed to support GHP implementation
  • Example: 10% renewable portfolio standard for solar and wind
  • Need mechanism to support GHP

Reported by:

Brian K. Johnson, PE, CEM

EMNRD

6/2/04

New Mexico Geothermal Energy Working Group

May 12, 2004

Santa Fe, NM

Strategic Planning Meeting Summary

Geothermal Direct Use & Power Generation Session

The New Mexico Geothermal Energy Working Group held a meeting to initiate a strategic planning process for geothermal resource development in New Mexico. The following questions were posed to the Working Group by the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) to kick-off the discussion. The discussion was co-facilitated by Brian Johnson, EMNRD’s Geothermal Program Manager, and Jim Witcher, Geothermal Project Manager, Southwest Technology Development Institute at New Mexico State University.

1. What geothermal technologies should be included?

As a first step, the Facilitators listed technology subdivisions and the Working Group identified specific technologies and related issues that should be included when we refer to geothermal.

Page 1 of 5

POWER GENERATION

  • Hybrid: solar/wood
  • Steam transmission
  • Cascading

DIRECT-USE

  • Milk drying
  • Mineral processing
  • DHE
  • Aquaculture
  • Greenhouse technology
  • Agricultural processing
  • Spas

EXTRACTION TECHNOLOGIES

  • Corrosion resistance/materials
  • Mineral recovery
  • Drilling
  • Reinjection

RESOURCE

  • Match with users & transmission
  • Exploration methods (economic development potential in nanotechnology)
  • Water use

RELATED POINTS

  • Stakeholder collaboration
  • CFR Process
  • Institutional/legal: taxes, etc.
  • Long-term potential
  • Basic data & research
  • Public education
  • Fossil fuel replacement (security)
  • Future technology adaptation with NM assets

Page 1 of 5

2. What is impeding geothermal development?

As an initial attempt to identify barriers, the Facilitators identified broad topic areas and the Working Group noted important components of those topics.

Page 1 of 5

TECHNOLOGY

  • Drilling is too expensive
  • Closely linked to R&D issues

RESOURCE

  • Water adjudication
  • Water rights
  • Closely linked to R&D issues (exploration)
  • Closely linked to LAND issues

INSTITUTIONAL

  • Leadership
  • No fast-tracking for approval processes
  • Difficulty of doing exploration under current state laws and regs. Also development. Difficulties compounded by backlog in state agencies, etc.
  • Bureaucracy (transactional costs)
  • Legislative requirements on agencies
  • Government priorities

AWARENESS

  • Public perception
  • Need to educate public
  • Negative impression
  • Local support

LAND

  • Lack of water at good heat sources
  • Land ownership
  • Land access
  • Closely linked to RESOURCE issues

ENVIRONMENT

  • Public opposition, valid or invalid, due to asthetic, environment, or other social reasons
  • Environmental perceptions

FINANCING

  • Investment risk
  • Money
  • Capitalization
  • Production tax credit

ECONOMICS

  • Tax structure
  • Energy bill
  • Royalties
  • No return on PPA by utility
  • Drilling costs too expensive, leading to high costs
  • Upfront costs and lack of, or perverse, incentives
  • Need incentives tailored to geothermal resources

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT (R&D)

  • Lack of funding (research)
  • Lack of knowledge about state geothermal resources
  • Lost knowledge from past exploration
  • Lack of exploration
  • Closely linked to RESOURCE issues (exploration)
  • Closely linked to Technology issues

INFRASTRUCTURE

  • Transmission upgrades

Page 1 of 5

3. What organizations affect geothermal development?

The Working Group identified agencies, utilities, and companies important to geothermal in New Mexico.

  • Public Regulation Commission
  • Office of the State Engineer
  • Geothermal developers:
  • Vulcan
  • Calpine
  • Ormat
  • Federal Minerals Management Service
  • Public Service Company of New Mexico
  • Geothermal Resource Council
  • Texas-New Mexico Power
  • New Mexico Congressional Delegation
  • Local communities that can benefit
  • Example: Eastern Plains Council of Governments (EPCOG) supports wind
  • Example (geothermal): T or C Chamber of Commerce to support spas

4. What innovations should be used?

As a first step towards removing barriers to geothermal development, the Working Group stated actions that should be taken.

  • Lobbying to legislature
  • Expedite permitting process
  • Geothermal Information Clearinghouse
  • Collaboration with all stakeholders involved
  • Example: USDA Forest Service program, Region 3 (unique)
  • Example: PNM “Project Power”
  • Involvement with Clean Energy Development Council
  • Reference: Governor’s Executive Order
  • Green tariff recommended
  • Hold decision-makers event
  • Example: Leadership conference, NM Institute of Mining and Technology

Reported by:

Brian K. Johnson, PE, CEM

EMNRD

6/2/04

Page 1 of 5