2015 Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal 

Power Production Report
Contents

Geothermal Power Industry Highlights ........................................................................................................4

International .............................................................................................................................................4

United States.............................................................................................................................................4

Methodology and Terms...............................................................................................................................5

Geothermal Resource Types and Their Definitions for U.S. Projects .......................................................5

Tracking Projects through the Development Timeline .........................................................................6

Planned Capacity Addition (PCA) and Resource Capacity.....................................................................6

Geothermal Resource Types and Their Definitions for Global Projects...................................................6

International Geothermal Power Update.....................................................................................................8

U.S. Geothermal Power Update..................................................................................................................12

Market Summary ....................................................................................................................................12

Developing Projects................................................................................................................................13

Global Technology and Manufacturing Update..........................................................................................15

Appendix 1: U.S. Developing Project List....................................................................................................18

Appendix 2: New Power Plants to Come Online in 2014............................................................................20

References ..................................................................................................................................................21

Written and Prepared by Benjamin Matek, Geothermal Energy Association

February 2015

Acknowledgments:

GEA would like to sincerely thank its member companies, as well as other organizations and individuals, 

for their cooperation and assistance in gathering the information used in this report. GEA would also like 

to thank members of its Science and Technology Committee for reviewing this publication before 

release. 

GEA would like to thank Sam Abraham for contributing his beautiful photography for use in this 

publication.

Cover Page Top & Bottom Left: Menengai, Kenya; courtesy of Sam Abraham

Cover Page Bottom Right: Salton Sea Geothermal Resource Area, California; courtesy of CalEnergy
Please Note: The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this report are entirely those of the author and should 

not be attributed in any manner to the Geothermal Energy Association, to its affiliated organizations, or to members of its 

Board of Directors. The Geothermal Energy Association does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication 

and accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any consequence of its use. Any reference to any specific commercial product,

process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply an 

endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by GEA. GEA does not assume, and hereby disclaims, any liability that may result 

from any reliance on or use of any information contained in this publication, or for any loss or damage caused by errors or 

omissions in this publication.
Geothermal Power Industry Highlights

International

 GEA data shows a total of 21 new power plants came online in 2014 adding about ~610 MW of 

new capacity to electricity grids globally. According to GEA statistics this is the most capacity to 

come online in one year since 1997.

 This is the third year in a row the global geothermal industry has sustained a growth rate of 5%.

 The global market is at about 12.8 GW of operating capacity as of January 2015, spread across 

24 countries.

 This year the global geothermal market was developing about 11.5-12.3 GW of planned capacity 

spread across 80 countries.

 Based on current data the global geothermal industry is expected to reach between 14.5 GW 

and 17.6 GW by 2020.

 Overall if all countries follow through on their geothermal power development goals and targets 

the global market could reach 27-30 GW by the early 2030s.

 Flash technologies, including double and triple flash, make up a little less than two thirds of the 

global market (58%), while dry steam is about a quarter (26%) and binary is a remaining 15%. 

The last remaining 1% includes back pressure and other developing and experimental types of 

geothermal technologies.

 The United Nations this year formed a Global Geothermal Alliance. This alliance was signed by 

23 countries. The alliance is a partnership platform among governments for working to reduce 

the investment risks associated with exploratory drilling, along with the associated costs, which 

have constituted a main obstacle to geothermal power expansion and offers.

 The World Bank estimates as many as 40 countries could meet a large proportion of their 

electricity demand through geothermal power.

 Communities and governments around the world have only tapped 6.5% of the total global 

potential for geothermal power based on current geologic knowledge and technology. 

 Since 2005, over 160 geothermal power projects have been built adding an additional 4 GW to 

electricity grids across the globe. 

United States 

 The U.S. industry had about 3.5 GW of installed nameplate capacity and 2.71 GW of net capacity 

at the end of 2014.

 In total the U.S. market had about 1,250 MW of geothermal power under development with 

about 500 MW stalled in Phase 3 waiting for power purchase agreements (PPAs). These are 

projects that could be brought online in 17-33 months, or sooner with the appropriate power 

contracts.

 Since 2005, the United States has built over 38 geothermal power projects adding nearly 700 

MW to the U.S. electricity capacity. 
Methodology and Terms 

To increase the accuracy and value of information presented in its annual U.S. Geothermal Power 

Production and Development Report, the Geothermal Energy Association (GEA) developed a reporting 

system known as the Geothermal Reporting Terms and Definitions in 2010. The Geothermal Reporting 

Terms and Definitions serve as a guideline to project developers in reporting geothermal project 

development information to the GEA. A basic understanding of the Geothermal Reporting Terms and 

Definitions will also aid the reader in fully understanding the information presented in this annual 

report.

The Geothermal Reporting Terms and Definitions serve to increase reporting clarity and accuracy by 

providing industry and the public with a lexicon of definitions relating to the types of different 

geothermal projects, and a guideline for determining which phase of development a geothermal 

resource is in. These two tools help to characterize resource development by type and technology. 

They also help to determine a geothermal project’s position in the typical project development timeline.

Geothermal Resource Types and Their Definitions for U.S. Projects

In reporting a project in development to the GEA, the developer of a geothermal resource is asked to 

indicate which of the following definitions the project falls under:

Conventional Hydrothermal (Unproduced Resource): the development of a geothermal resource 

where levels of geothermal reservoir temperature and reservoir flow capacity are naturally sufficient to 

produce electricity and where development of the geothermal reservoir has not previously occurred to 

the extent that it supported the operation of geothermal power plant(s). Such a project will be labeled 

as “CH Unproduced” in this report. 

Conventional Hydrothermal (Produced Resource): the development of a geothermal resource where 

levels of geothermal reservoir temperature and reservoir flow capacity are naturally sufficient to 

produce electricity and where development of the geothermal reservoir has previously occurred to the 

extent that it currently supports or has supported the operation of geothermal power plant(s). Such a 

project will be labeled as “CH Produced” in this report. 

Conventional Hydrothermal Expansion: the expansion of an existing geothermal power plant and its 

associated drilled area so as to increase the level of power that the power plant produces. Such a 

project will be labeled as “CH Expansion” in this report.

Geothermal Energy and Hydrocarbon Co-production: the utilization of produced fluids resulting from 

oil and/or gas-field development for the production of geothermal power. Such a project will be labeled 

as “Co-production” in this report.

Geopressured Systems: the utilization of kinetic energy, hydrothermal energy, and energy produced 

from the associated gas resulting from geopressured gas development to produce geothermal 

electricity. Such projects will be labeled as “Geopressure” in this report.

Enhanced Geothermal Systems: the development of a geothermal system, where the natural flow 

capacity of the system is not sufficient to support adequate power production but where hydraulic 

fracturing of the system can allow production at a commercial level. Such a project will be labeled as 

“EGS” in this report.
Tracking Projects through the Development Timeline

In addition to defining their projects according to the above list of definitions, GEA also asks developers 

to indicate projects’ current status in the project development timeline using a four-phase system. This

system captures how much and what type of work has been performed on that particular geothermal 

resource up until the present time. These four phases of project development are:

Phase I: Resource Procurement and Identification

Phase II: Resource Exploration and Confirmation

Phase III: Permitting and Initial Development

Phase IV: Resource Production and Power Plant Construction

Each of the four phases of project development is comprised of three separate sections, each of which 

contains phase sub-criteria. The three separate sections of sub-criteria are resource development, 

transmission development, and external development (acquiring access to land, permitting, signing PPAs 

and EPC contracts, securing a portion of project financing, etc.). For a project to be considered as being 

in any particular phase of development a combination of sub-criteria, specific to each individual project 

phase, must be met.

Planned Capacity Addition (PCA) and Resource Capacity

Finally, at each phase of a project’s development a geothermal developer has the opportunity to report 

two project capacity estimates: a Resource Capacity estimate and a Planned Capacity Addition (PCA) 

estimate. At each project phase the geothermal resource capacity estimate may be thought of as the 

megawatt (MW) value of the total recoverable energy of the subsurface geothermal resource. It should 

not be confused with the PCA estimate, which is defined as the portion of a geothermal resource that “if 

the developer were to utilize the geothermal resource under its control to produce electricity via a 

geothermal power plant . . . would be the power plant’s estimated installed capacity.” In other words, 

the PCA estimate is usually the power plant’s expected estimated installed capacity. In the case of an 

expansion to a conventional hydrothermal geothermal plant, the PCA estimate would be the estimated 

capacity to be added to the plant’s current installed capacity. In each phase of development the 

resource and installed capacity estimates are given different titles that reflect the level of certainty of 

successful project completion. The different titles as they correspond to the separate phases are as 

follows:

Phase I: “Possible Resource Estimate” and “Possible PCA Estimate” 

Phase II: “Possible Resource Estimate” and “Possible PCA Estimate”

Phase III: “Delineated Resource Estimate” and “Delineated PCA Estimate”

Phase IV: “Confirmed Resource Estimate” and “Confirmed PCA Estimate”

This section outlines how the Geothermal Reporting Terms and Definitions influence the reporting and 

presentation of project in development information in this report. For a detailed explanation of each 

phase of development and the outline of its sub-criteria please consult GEA’s Geothermal Reporting 

Terms and Definitions.

Geothermal Resource Types and Their Definitions for Global Projects

While projects in the GEA’s Annual U.S. Geothermal Power Production and Development Report are 

defined by several phases of development (Prospect and Phases 1-4) as defined by GEA’s 2010 New 

Geothermal Terms and Definitions, this report uses much broader terms to define where a project 

tracks in its development because of the vastly different development models to construct geothermal 
power plants outside the U.S. These terms include Prospect, Early Stage, Under Construction, On Hold, 

Canceled, and Operational. The breadth and diversity of geothermal project tracking throughout the 

world makes labeling projects under a specific Phase incredibly difficult. Therefore, for the purposes of 

this report, projects are defined by much broader categories in order to maintain the integrity of the 

information regarding a project’s forward progress. 

Geothermal ‘Prospects’ are defined to be areas in which little exploration has taken place, and the 

country’s government has tendered the property to a private company, government agency or 

contractor to conduct further exploration. Although geophysical features or prior exploration might 

indicate the presence of a geothermal resource at the site, past exploration may not have determined 

the economic feasibility of a geothermal power plant at the property tendered. 

‘Early Stage’ projects are defined to be projects where some aspects of a resource are identified and the 

initial stages of explorations and construction are underway. This term could mean but is not limited to, 

the first exploration wells drilled, project funded, and/or significant knowledge of the geothermal 

resource attained.

Projects ‘Under Construction’ are projects where physical work to build the actual power plant has 

begun. Many definitions of ‘Under Construction’ do include production drilling. However, GEA looks at 

the projects on a case by case basis to determine if production drilling is enough to determine ‘Under 

Construction’ status. Based on the available information, sometimes a project must begin physical work 

on the power plant to be considered in this stage of development. ‘Under Construction’ is roughly 

equivalent to GEA’s Phase 4 of a project’s development but may contain elements of Phase 3 depending 

on the geothermal market and location of the plant.

‘Operational’ plants are contributing electricity to a customer who agreed to purchase the power prior 

to the plant’s construction. ‘Under Construction’ and ‘Operational’ are determined by information 

reported publically on company websites, press releases, government or academic reports, or media 

articles, interviews with company representatives, or other public sources of information.

Projects ‘On Hold’ are when forward progress on the projects has halted for any number of reasons not 

limited to land or religious disputes, loss of project funding, or an agreement that fell apart.

Projects ‘Canceled’ are projects where the government, project developer, or contractor decided to 

make no more forward progress on a geothermal project in the immediate future and withdrew from 

developing that geothermal prospect into a power plant.

For this report, GEA collected two numbers for each project in cases where both were available: a

“Resource Capacity Estimate” and a “Planned Capacity Addition” (PCA) estimate. At each project phase 

the geothermal resource capacity estimate may be thought of as the megawatt value of the total 

recoverable energy of the subsurface geothermal resource. It should not be confused with the PCA 

estimate, which is the portion of a geothermal resource that would be the power plant’s resulting 

estimated installed capacity if the developer were to utilize the geothermal resource under its control to 

produce electricity. In other words, the PCA estimate is usually the power plant’s expected installed or 

nameplate capacity. In the case of an expansion to a conventional hydrothermal geothermal plant, the 

PCA estimate would be the estimated capacity to be added to the plant’s current installed capacity. 
International Geothermal Power Update

Figure 1: International Geothermal Power Nameplate Capacity (MW)

Note: PCA (Planned Capacity Additions), pilot plants and utility scale geothermal plants built in the first half of the 20th century 

and then decommissioned are not included in the above time series.

Geothermal power industry global in 2014 sustained a 5% growth rate for the third year in a row. The 

world market reached upwards of 12.8 GW (gigawatts) of geothermal power operational throughout 24 

countries. The majority of this new capacity became operational in Turkey, Kenya, Indonesia, and the 

Philippines with a total of about 610 MW of new power brought online in 2014. As of the end of 2014, 

there are also 11.5-12.3 GW of capacity additions in 80 countries and 630 projects. Fourteen of those 80 

countries are expected to bring 2 GW of power online over the next 3-4 years based on current 

construction. Looking at projects in the pipeline, it is expected that the geothermal industry will 

continue to grow at a steady pace globally. The longer development time frames of geothermal projects 

make them somewhat more immune to the booms and busts of the global energy space.

GEA forecasts the global market will reach between 14.5 to 17.6 GW by 2020. The 14.5 GW forecast is 

comprised of announced completion dates of plants already under construction, therefore, extremely 

conservative. Since projects normally take about 2-3 years to construct, and the forecast goes out five 

years, more projects will likely announce construction over the next year or two, increasing the tail end 

of this forecast. The 17.6 GW forecast, is much more likely. This number is comprised of plants with 

announced completion dates and/or under construction. This growth will come from European, East 

African, and South Pacific markets as these regions lead geothermal’ s growth by substantial capacity 

additions in the next five years. 

This growth supported by the World Bank and other multi-lateral organizations focused on early risk 

mitigation. For example, the World Bank’s Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) has 

mobilized $235 million through the Clean Technology Fund toward scaling up geothermal energy. This is 

part of their Global Geothermal Development Plan (GGDP). Projects identified in Latin America including 

Mexico, Chile, Nicaragua, Dominica and St. Lucia and the Caribbean are expected to or already received 

14.5 GW

12.8 GW

17.6 GW

 -

 2,000

 4,000

 6,000

 8,000

 10,000

 12,000

 14,000

 16,000

 18,000

Megawatts

Current Geothermal Power Capacity

Potential Capacity Additions of Plants Under Construction

Potential Capacity Additions of Plants with Announced Completion Dates
funding from this program to move projects forward. To date, ESMAP has identified 36 geothermal 

fields in 16 countries where surface exploration has been completed and additional financing is needed 

in the near future to confirm the commercial viability of geothermal resources. ESMAP also estimates as 

many as 40 countries could meet a large proportion of their electricity demand through geothermal 

power.2

Meanwhile, governments around the world implemented policies to increase renewable domestic 

electricity generation as part of the solution toward lowering the emissions that contribute to global 

warming. The result was expanded geothermal production and development across the globe, and 

based on the additional projects already in process, it looks like the trajectory will continue for at least 

another decade.

For example the United Nations this year formed a Global Geothermal Alliance signed by 23 countries. 

This alliance will work to reduce the investment risks associated with exploratory drilling along with the 

associated costs which have constituted a main obstacle to geothermal power expansion. The Alliance

offers a partnership platform among governments, international financing institutions, private sector 

investors and other stakeholders to provide customized support in addressing key challenges.

Geothermal power has continued to heat up in Latin America and several countries have set national 

geothermal goals. For example, El Salvador plans 40% of energy to come from geothermal power by 

2020. Mexico wants to get 35% of its energy from renewables including geothermal power. Nicaragua 

plans to build another 100 MW in the next 15 years. Others such as Costa Rica and Guatemala have not 

set a specific geothermal goal but already have several plants under construction.

East Africa is another regional hotbed for activity. Kenya, Rwanda, Ethiopia and Tanzania all have set 

geothermal power goals. While not making the chart (Figure 2) below, Ethiopia plans to have an 

additional 1,000 MW built by the early 2020s; the country’s Corbetti geothermal field, one of the largest

in the world, is currently under development. Meanwhile Tanzania plans to build 180 MW over the next 

few years. Overall if all countries follow through on their geothermal power goals the global industry 

could reach 27-30 GW by the early 2030s.

 

Many important geothermal markets have announced development goals. Some are more realistic than 

others; Indonesia seems unlikely to reach the goal set several years ago due to reports of permitting 

delays. Still, it is likely that many of these resources will be developed by the 2030s and the increasing 

importance of developing clean energy sources to combat climate change globally is expected to 

contribute to the demand for new geothermal power plants globally through the 2030s.

Figures 3 and 4 depict estimated current nameplate capacity by country. According to GEA research, 

new power plants came online in the U.S., the Philippines, Mexico, Germany, Kenya, and Turkey in 2014. 

Kenya, Turkey, Ethiopia, and Germany are quickly developing geothermal power infrastructure. In 

addition, it is likely within the next decade or so the Philippines, Indonesia or the European Union could 

each roughly equal the U.S. in installed capacity. By looking at projects in the pipeline, other smaller 

countries are likely to become more established geothermal power markets as the percentages of their 

power from geothermal resources increase due to increased development.

Figure 5 depicts developing capacity of geothermal power projects by country and by amount of 

projects for select countries that are developing 50 MW or more according to GEA data. Several 

characteristics affect the amount of power or projects a country is developing, including but not limited 
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

10

to its climate goals, its size, discovered resources, amount of geothermal leases made available to 

developers and the structure of a country’s power market.

Figure 2: Important Geothermal Markets Announced Planned Capacity Additions & Targets

Note: “Nearterm Goals” includes government and private sector development goals. Mexico has set a general renewable 

energy goal of 35% of generation from renewables by 2024; however, this goal is not geothermal specific. The U.S. goal is 

Imperial Irrigational District’s objective of building out geothermal capacity at the Salton Sea Resource Area by 2032. 

According to estimates from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reflecting current geologic 

knowledge, there are 200 GW of traditional hydrothermal geothermal resources identified globally. 

Therefore, communities and governments around the world have only tapped 6.5% of the total global 

potential for geothermal power based on current geologic knowledge.3

Figure 3: Established Geothermal Power Markets Installed Capacity (MW)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Megawatts

Installed Capacity Announced Developing Capacity Annnounced Nearterm Geothermal Goals

3525

1915

1380

1005 970 940

660 600 540 410

210 205

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

United

States

Philippines

Indonesia

Mexico

New

Zealand

Italy

Iceland

Kenya

Japan

Turkey

Costa Rica

El Salvador
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

11

Figure 4: Developing Geothermal Power Markets Installed Nameplate Capacity (MW)

Note: Estimates on data labels for Figure 3 & 4 are rounded to the nearest ‘5’ MWs and ‘nameplate capacity’ is often used to 

derive these estimates but also ‘net capacity’ is used when nameplate is not available. 

Figure 5: Developing Projects and Capacity by Country or Territory

Note: A full international project list is published in conjunction with this report. The extraordinary amount of developing 

capacity for Indonesia could possibly be the result of the backlog of projects in the country stalled by prolonged PPA 

negotiations, delayed permits related to the usage of conservation or protected areas and resistance from local residents.

110

95

55

45

30 25 25

15

8

1 1 0.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Nicaragua

Russia

Papua New

Guinea

Guatemala

Portugal

China

Germany

Guadeloupe

Ethiopia

Austria

Australia

Thailand

3

7 6

12

5 6

8

19

4 4

7

3

59

8

5

16

29

59

22

83

10

62

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Bolivia

Djibouti

Argentina

Australia

Nicaragua

Vietnam

India

Germany

Columbia

Costa Rica

Guatemala

Armenia

Chile

Mexico

New Zealand

Iceland

Philippines

Turkey

Kenya

United States

Ethiopia

Indonesia

Number of Projects

Developing Megawatts

Developing MW Number of Projects
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

12

U.S. Geothermal Power Update 

Market Summary

Overall the U.S. market hovers just over 3.5 GW of operating nameplate capacity and just over 2.7 GW 

of net capacity. While this number is higher than previous year estimates, only a couple MW of new 

geothermal power came online in 2014. The revised upward estimate is a reflection of GEA’s efforts to 

synchronize old data with government and international sources such as the International Energy 

Agency and the U.S. Energy Information Administration, in addition to new data from several of our 

member companies. Previous operating capacity data in GEA’s database proved to be out of date and 

was revised.

Figure 6: U.S. Industry Geothermal Nameplate & Net Capacity

Note: PCA (Planned Capacity Additions), pilot plants and utility scale geothermal plants built in the first half of the 20th century 

and then decommissioned are not included in the above time series. 

Source: GEA & EIA4

In total the U.S. market had about 1,250 MW of geothermal power under development with about 500 

MW stuck in Phase 3 waiting for PPAs. These are projects that could be brought online in 17-33 months, 

or sooner with the appropriate power contracts. The expansion of the U.S. geothermal sector was 

hindered by little growth in demand for new power, legislative uncertainty about the Production Tax 

Credit (PTC) and Investment Tax Credit (ITC) and unbalanced mechanisms for valuing baseload power

and integration costs in California (where a significant amount of U.S. geothermal resources are 

located). As a result, the U.S. market did not expand or grow in 2014 with the exception of a small plant 

in California.

In 2014, some speculate projects paused as developers waited to see the results of the PTC/ITC debates 

in Washington D.C. Unfortunately, the legislation that did pass created more adversity for the industry 

 -

 500

 1,000

 1,500

 2,000

 2,500

 3,000

 3,500

 4,000

 Nameplate Capacity Summer Net Capacity Winter Net Capacity

PTC, ITC, 

RPS(s)

CA’s GRDA

PURPA Industry 

Coupled

Case 

Studies 

GRED I, II, III
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

13

than did it relieve any financial burdens as Congress only extended the PTC tax credit for several weeks

until the end of 2014. What did happen this year was a significant amount of consolidating and 

restructuring in the U.S. geothermal market as companies wait for better times or restructure 

themselves in stronger positions. Several smaller geothermal developers were purchased by larger 

geothermal power companies as companies sought to better position themselves. For example, U.S. 

Geothermal (HTM) purchased Earth Power Resources, and Ormat (ORA) purchased the remaining 

American geothermal projects from Alternative Earth Resources. Other companies began to sell off their 

remaining U.S. assets and focus efforts on overseas projects, where the geothermal market is booming. 

Alterra (MGMXF) sold its operating Soda Lake plant to Cyrq Energy and Ram Power (RPG) sold its 

developing geothermal field at The Geysers to U.S. Geothermal (HTM).

Despite the flat growth, there are policies that could create new opportunities for geothermal power in 

the western states, for example if enacted, Governor Jerry Brown’s announcement of a 50% RPS goal for 

California. Governor Brown also signed into law A.B. 2363 earlier in 2014 which will require the 

California Public Utilities Commission to establish the appropriate adders (integration cost) for each 

technology that must be used when evaluating bids for long term wholesale power contracts. The 

geothermal industry is hopeful this bill will add the appropriate costs to intermittent power sources due 

to their variable deliverability, so baseload renewables like geothermal and biomass power can compete 

for PPAs with Investor Owned Utilities on a more accurate comparison of the full cost for power. Some 

believed this to be one reason why geothermal companies were not winning as many contracts in 

California in the past. 

At the federal level, the geothermal industry will be closely watching the results of the EPA Clean Power 

Plant rule final result. If this rule is successfully implemented, states which contain geothermal resources 

but have not developed them yet may consider developing their geothermal resources to meet carbon 

reduction requirements. 

Despite the slow growth development-wise, in terms of new geothermal technologies, the U.S. 

continued to be a world leader and innovator. Department of Energy’s Geothermal Technologies Office 

(GTO) continues to make advancements on mineral extraction and recovery from geothermal power 

plants. GTO spent $4 million in 2014 to assist in developing technologies for mineral recovery from lowto moderate-temperature geothermal resources. Geothermal brine has the potential to contain 

relatively high concentrations of rare earths and other valuable materials.

GTO also launched its The Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE). The 

Observatory will be a research site in the United States that allows scientists and engineers to develop 

and test new technologies for Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS).The purpose of FORGE is to 

accelerate cutting-edge geothermal research that, by the conclusion of the project, could lead to 

replicable, commercial pathways to EGS and the growth of geothermal energy in more regions of the

United States.

Developing Projects

As shown in Figure 8, the amount of developing geothermal projects fell in recent years partly due to 

projects reaching completion and to the industry consolidation discussed in earlier section. Some

companies reported to GEA they are returning federal or state leases on sites they have deemed

uneconomical to develop at this time, though they may be revisited in the future when market 

conditions change. The economics of a geothermal power project resemble that of mining or an oil and 

gas project more closely than other renewables such as wind and solar. Geothermal resources need to 
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

14

be discovered, drilled for, and extracted. Therefore, when leases are returned it doesn’t necessarily 

mean the industry is shrinking. Purchasing and returning leases is a normal exploration cycle that 

geothermal developers go through as they search for prime geothermal resources. Holding onto 

geothermal leases costs money. It may be more economical in the long return to return a lease and 

revisit that property at a later date when market conditions change. 

Figure 7: Developing Planned Capacity Additions & Nameplate Capacity by State

Note: Planned Capacity Additions (PCA) is the power plants estimated installed capacity.

Figure 8: Number of Developing Projects by State

Note: In the past few years, demonstration and exploration projects have occurred in additional states such as Washington, 

Texas, North Dakota, Louisiana, Montana, Mississippi, and Wyoming.

88

855

5 10 0 20

168 99 18 24 6

2760

0 1

47 77

580

35 0 4

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Planned Capacity Additions (MW) Installed (Nameplate) Capacity

4

16

1

2 2

11

23

16

5

1

7

25

1

5

2

13

45

19

3

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

2015 2014
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

15

Global Technology and Manufacturing Update

The types of conventional geothermal power technologies are: dry steam, flash and binary. The 

technology of choice for a geothermal power plant depends on the characteristics of the geothermal 

resources. Binary plants are used with lower temperature resources while flash and dry steam plants are 

used with higher temperature resources. Flash and dry steam technologies continue to be the more 

prevalent and the most developed. Flash technologies, including double and triple flash, make up a little 

less than two thirds of the global market (58%), while dry steam is about a quarter (26%) and binary is a 

remaining 15%. The last remaining 1% includes back pressure and other developing types of geothermal 

technologies. Figure 9 shows the change in the geothermal power market by turbine technology over 

time.

Figure 9: Operating Capacity by Technology Type

In general, the geothermal turbine market has several companies who provide equipment for higher 

temperature projects; these companies include Toshiba, Mitsubishi, and Fuji. The lower temperature 

Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) market is mostly accounted for by one manufacturer, Ormat Technologies

Inc. (ORA). Several smaller manufactures of ORC technologies just began to enter the geothermal 

market recently or are capitalizing on specific niches. For example, Ormat has provided the turbines for 

about 85% of the ORC market. Meanwhile, Exergy has recently entered the geothermal ORC market 

signing nearly a dozen turbine deals over the last few years. Lastly in the niche geothermal market,

ElectraTherm continues to be one of the leaders in designs for co-produced fluids geothermal facilities. 

Figures 10, 11, and 12 display some of the latest GEA data on the geothermal equipment suppliers

market by project and by MW. Toshiba provided nearly a quarter of the global equipment in MWs. 

Ormat has provided equipment to substantially more projects than nearly any other company but these 

are often smaller binary projects; thus their MW count is smaller. In total when looking at the global 

turbine market by MWs, the leaders are Toshiba (24%), Mitsubishi (21%), Fuji (20%) and Ormat (13%). 

 -

 2,000

 4,000

 6,000

 8,000

 10,000

 12,000

 14,000

Installed Capacity (MW)

Single Flash Dry Steam Double Flash Binary Triple Flash Back Pressure EGS
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

16

Figure 10: Major Geothermal Equipment Suppliers Megawatts Operating and Project Count

Other geothermal equipment providers who don’t have enough capacity to fit onto this chart or have 

only just entered the geothermal market include but are not limited to: Kaluga Turbine, Turboden, Atlas 

Copco/Mafi Trench, ElectraTherm, Elliot Turbomachinery, Exergy, Pratt & Whitney and Siemens.

In general, GEA expects that the binary market will continue to grow substantially in tandem with the 

flash and dry steam markets. In Europe and the U.S., binary projects are the main power plant type 

under construction while regions such as East Africa and the South Pacific have numerous flash and dry 

steam plants under development. Other countries in places such as South and Central America have 

only started exploring and studying their geothermal resources, but it is expected these regions will 

develop a diverse mix of binary, flash and dry steam projects. In conclusion, there are significant 

geothermal resources under development across the temperature spectrum in many regions around the 

world.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Projects Operating

Megawatts Operating

MWs Operating Estimated Project Count
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

17

Figure 11: Geothermal Equipment Suppliers as Percent of Global Market by Projects

Figure 12: Geothermal Equipment Suppliers as Percent of Global Market by MW

Mitsubishi, 18%

Ormat, 26%

Toshiba, 9%

Fuji, 14%

Ansaldo/Tosi, 

10%

General 

Electric, 5%

TAS Energy, 2%

Alstom, 3% Other, 14%

Mitsubishi, 

21%

Ormat, 13%

Toshiba, 24%

Fuji, 20%

Ansaldo/Tosi, 

9%

General 

Electric, 

6%

TAS Energy, 1% Alstom, 2%

Other, 3%
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

18

Appendix 1: U.S. Developing Project List

Project Name Developer Estimated Capacity (MW) Location (State, County) Project Phase

Walker Ranch Agua Caliente, LLC 30 ID, Cassia Phase 3

Bottle Rock Expansion Bottle Rock Power 55 CA, Lake Phase 1

Black Rock 1-2 CalEnergy 159 CA, Imperial Phase 3

Black Rock 5-6 CalEnergy 235 CA, Imperial Phase 3

Wildhorse Calpine 48 CA, Sonoma Phase 1

Four Mile Hill Calpine 55 CA, Siskiyou N/A

Telephone Fiat Calpine 55 CA, Siskiyou N/A

Buckeye North Geysers Calpine 57 CA, Lake N/A

Glass Mountain Calpine - CA Phase 1

Akutan Geothermal 

Project

City of Akutan 10 AK, Aleutians East 

Borough

Phase 2

City of Aspen 

Geothermal Project

City of Aspen - CO, Pitkin Phase 2

Lightning Doc 2 Cyrq Energy 6 NM, Hidalgo Phase 2

Abraham Cyrq Energy - UT, Millard Prospect

Alvord Cyrq Energy - OR, Harney phase 1

Cricket Cyrq Energy - UT, Millard prospect

DeArmand Cyrq Energy - UT, Iron Prospect

Drum Mountain Cyrq Energy - UT, Millard Prospect

Klamath Plant Cyrq Energy - OR, Klamath Phase 2

Pavant Cyrq Energy - UT, Millard Prospect

Thermo 2 Cyrq Energy - UT, Beaver Phase 1

Thermo 3 Cyrq Energy - UT, Beaver Phase 1

Thermo 4 Cyrq Energy - UT, Beaver Phase 1

Thermo Central Cyrq Energy - UT, Beaver Prospect

Thermo Greater Cyrq Energy - UT, Beaver Prospect

Newberry Davenport Newberry 

Holdings/AltaRock Energy

- OR, Deschutes Phase 2

Harmon Lake Enel North America 15 NV, Churchill Phase 1

Surprise Valley Enel North America 15 CA, Modoc Phase 2

Cove Fort 2 Enel North America 20 UT, Beaver, Millard Phase 1

Imperial Wells Power EnergySource 85 CA, Imperial Phase 1

Lower Klamath Wildlife 

Refuge

Entiv Organic Energy 5 CA, Siskiyou Phase 2

Klamath Hills Entiv Organic Energy 8 OR, Klamath Phase 2

Apache County Project GreenFire Energy 5 AZ, Apache Phase 1

Olene KBG Klamath Basin Geopower 25 OR, Klamath Phase 3

Olene Gap Kodali, Inc. 17 OR, Klamath Phase 2

Kodali Raft River Kodali, Inc. - ID, Cassia Prospect

Gerlach Power Kodali, Inc. - NV, Washoe Phase 1

Kodali Dixie Valley 2 Kodali, Inc. - NV, Churchill Prospect

Kodali Dixie Valley 1 Kodali, Inc. - NV, Churchill Prospect

Desert Queen Magma Energy (U.S.) 

Corp

- NV, Churchill Phase 1

Granite Springs Magma Energy (U.S.) 

Corp

- NV, Pershing Phase 1

McCoy Magma Energy (U.S.) 

Corp

- NV, Churchill, Lander Phase 1

Soda Lake East Magma Energy (U.S.) 

Corp

- NV, Churchill Prospect

Soda Lake South Magma Energy (U.S.) 

Corp

- NV, Churchill Phase 1

Poncha Hot Springs Mt Princeton Geothermal 

LLC

10 CO, Chaffee Phase 2

Mt Princeton Mt Princeton Geothermal 

LLC

10 CO, Chaffee Phase 2

OM Power OM Power 1, LLC. 11 OR, Klamath Phase 3

Goose Lake Ormat Nevada Inc. - OR, Lake Prospect

Carson Lake Ormat Nevada Inc. - NV, Churchill Phase 2

CD4 (Mammoth 

Complex)

Ormat Nevada Inc. - CA, Mono Phase 2

Kula Ormat Nevada Inc. - HI, Big Island Prospect

Midnight Point Ormat Nevada Inc. - OR, Lake Phase 2
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

19

Dixie Meadows Ormat Nevada Inc. - NV, Churchill Phase 2

Truckhaven Ormat Nevada Inc. 30 CA, Imperial Phase 1

Mount Spurr Ormat Nevada Inc. - AK Phase 1

McGinness Hills 

Expansion

Ormat Nevada Inc. 24 NV Phase 4

North Valley Ormat Nevada Inc. 55 NV, Washoe, Churchill Prospect

Agua Quieta Ormat Nevada Inc. - NV, Churchill Phase 1

Argenta Ormat Nevada Inc. - NV, Lander Prospect

Silver Lake Ormat Nevada Inc. - OR, Lake Prospect

Twilight Ormat Nevada Inc. - OR, Deschutes Phase 2

Ulupalakua (Maui) Ormat Nevada Inc. - HI, Maui Phase 1

Foley Hot Springs Ormat Nevada Inc. - OR, Lane Phase 1

Summer Lake Ormat Nevada Inc. - OR, Lake Phase 1

Tungsten Mountain Ormat Nevada Inc. - NV, Churchill Phase 2

Crump Geyser Ormat Nevada Inc. 

(Crump Geothermal 

Company, LLC)

10 OR, Lake Phase 2

Wister - Phase I Ormat Nevada Inc. 30 CA, Imperial Phase 2

Tuscarora - Phase 2 Ormat Nevada Inc. - NV, Elko Phase 2

Pagosa Waters Pagisa Verde 4 CO, Archuleta Phase 2

Calipatria: Mineral 

Extraction Facility

Simbol Materials - CA, Imperial Phase 4

Town of Rico Project Town of Rico - CO, Dolores Prospect

Geysers Project (aka 

WGP Geysers)

U.S. Geothermal 26 CA, Sonoma Phase 3

Lee Hot Springs U.S. Geothermal - NV, Churchill Phase 1

Raft River Unit II U.S. Geothermal 26 ID, Cassia Phase 2

Hot Springs Point 

(Crescent Valley)

U.S. Geothermal - NV, Eureka Phase 1

San Emidio Phase III U.S. Geothermal 17 NV, Washoe Phase 1

Vale Butte U.S. Geothermal - OR, Malheur Prospect

Neal Hot Springs II U.S. Geothermal 28 OR Phase 2

Gerlach U.S. Geothermal 18 NV, Washoe Phase 2

San Emidio Phase II U.S. Geothermal 11 NV, Washoe Phase 3

Raft River Unit III U.S. Geothermal 32 ID, Cassia Phase 1

Granite Creek U.S. Geothermal - NV, Washoe Phase 1

UND Coproduction University of North 

Dakota

0.25 CA, Imperial Phase 1

UND Low Temp Project University of North 

Dakota

0.35 ND, Stark Phase 1

Note: This list is accurate as of January 2015. Some of the Phase 4 projects may have come online in early 2015
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

20

Appendix 2: New Power Plants to Come Online in 2014

Country Region Field Plant

Nameplate 

Capacity 

(MW)

Primary Plant 

Type

Plant Owner 

or Operator

United States North America OR - Klamath 

Falls OIT 1.5 Binary

Oregon 

Institute of 

Technology

Japan Asia Oguni Town, 

Kumamoto Oguni Town 2.0 Single Flash

Waita 

Geothermal 

Power Plant, 

Chuo Electric 

Power Co

Japan Asia Ibusuki Ibusuki 1.5 Binary Geonext 

Corporation

Indonesia South Pacific West Java -

Pengalengan Cibuni 2.0 N/A PLTP

**United 

States North America CA - Surprise Valley

Paisley 

Geothermal 2.0 Binary Surprise Valley Electric Corp.

Germany Europe Taufkirchen/ 

Oberhaching

Taufkirchen/ 

Oberhaching

Plant

4.3 Binary Daldrup & 

Söhne AG

Germany Europe Sauerlach Sauerlach 5.0 Binary

SWM –

Stadtwerke 

München

Indonesia South Pacific West Java Ulumbu 5.0 Single Flash PLN

Turkey Europe AydinGumuskoy Gumuskoy 1 6.6 Binary BM Enerji

Turkey Europe AydinGumuskoy Gumuskoy 2 6.6 Binary BM Enerji

Turkey Europe Aydin-Salavatil Dora 3U2 20.0 Binary Menderes A.S.

Kenya Middle 

East/Africa Olkaria Olkaria 3 Plant 3

22.0 Binary Ormat

Turkey Europe ManisaAlesehir TR1 24.0 Binary Zorlu Enerji

Turkey Europe AydinGermencik Kerem 3 24.0 Binary Maren Enerji

Turkey Europe AydinGermencik Germencik 3 26.0 Binary Guris Holdings

Italy Europe Mt. AmiataBagnore Bagnore 4 40.0 Single Flash Enel Green 

Power

Kenya Middle 

East/Africa Olkaria Olkaria 2 Plant 3

35.6 Single Flash KenGen

*Philippines South Pacific Southern 

Negros Nasulo 49.4 Single Flash

Energy 

Development 

Corporation

Indonesia South Pacific Patuha Unit 1 55.0 Single Flash PT. Geo Dipa 

Energy

Kenya Middle 

East/Africa Olkaria Olkaria I Unit 4 70.0 Single Flash KenGen

Kenya Middle 

East/Africa Olkaria Olkaria I Unit 5 70.0 Single Flash KenGen

Kenya Middle 

East/Africa Olkaria Olkaria IV 140.0 Single Flash KenGen

Note: Net Capacity is used when Nameplate or Installed Capacity is not available. 

*This plant was built from equipment salvaged from the North Negros geothermal plant. GEA data was adjusted to reflect the 

decommissioning of the older plant.

**The Paisley project began commissioning but is not fully commercially operational yet. 
Annual U.S. & Global Geothermal Power Production Report February 2015

21

References

 

1 Energy Information Administration (EIA). “Form EIA-860 detailed data.” October 10, 2013. 

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia860/ (Accessed January 28th, 2015).

2 The World Bank. “Geothermal Energy: Expansion Well Underway in Developing Countries” December 3, 2014. 

http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2014/12/03/geothermal-energy-expansion-well-underway-indeveloping-countries (Accessed February 9th, 2015). 

3 Goldstein, B., et al. 2011: Geothermal Energy. “Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change 

Mitigation.” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://srren.ipccwg3.de/report/IPCC_SRREN_Ch04.pdf

4 Energy Information Administration (EIA). “Form EIA-860 detailed data.” October 10, 2013. 

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia860/ (Accessed January 28th, 2015).