HR-8790-119
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsored by Pat Harrigan (R-NC)
What it does
This bill would amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to expand federal research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities for next-generation geothermal energy technologies, including enhanced geothermal systems, closed-loop geothermal systems, and supercritical geothermal systems. It would establish a new center of excellence, authorize competitive grants to universities and private companies, require a quadrennial geothermal resource assessment update (including U.S. territories), and mandate periodic progress reports to Congress. The bill would authorize $150 million per year for fiscal years 2027 through 2031 — totaling $750 million — drawn from existing Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy appropriations.
Who benefits
University research programs and national laboratories with geothermal expertise, who would receive competitive grants and center-of-excellence funding. Private-sector geothermal energy companies and public-private partnerships seeking commercialization support. Workers in the geothermal energy industry and students entering geothermal-related fields through workforce development programs. Communities in geothermal-rich regions (particularly the western U.S., Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories including Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) that could benefit from expanded local energy production. Fossil fuel and mining data holders whose existing subsurface data would be integrated into a public repository, potentially increasing the value and use of that data. Utilities and electricity consumers in regions where geothermal could diversify and stabilize the power supply.
Who is hurt
Other renewable energy research programs within the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, since the $750 million authorization is drawn from that office's existing appropriations rather than new money — potentially crowding out solar, wind, or other programs. Competing energy technology sectors that may lose relative federal research support. Taxpayers broadly, who bear the cost of the authorization. Water users in arid western states, where geothermal development may compete for limited water resources (though the bill requires a water-use study). Landowners and communities near proposed supercritical exploration boreholes, who could face surface disturbance or induced seismic activity risks.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that geothermal energy is a firm, 24/7 renewable power source that could provide baseload electricity without the intermittency challenges of solar and wind, and that next-generation technologies could unlock geothermal potential across the entire continental United States rather than just volcanic regions. They contend that the U.S. currently lags behind countries like Iceland and Kenya in geothermal deployment, and that targeted federal research investment — with an 80/20 cost-sharing requirement for commercial grants — leverages private capital while reducing early-stage technology risk. They also point to the bill's data-sharing provisions, which would repurpose existing subsurface data from oil, gas, and mining operations at no additional cost.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the $750 million authorization is redirected from existing Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy funds, meaning it would reduce resources available for more mature renewable technologies like solar and wind that are already cost-competitive and rapidly deployable. They contend that next-generation geothermal technologies — particularly supercritical systems — remain largely unproven at commercial scale, making large federal commitments premature, and that the private sector should bear more of the risk for speculative technologies rather than relying on an 80% federal cost share. They further argue that induced seismicity risks from deep drilling and hydraulic stimulation, documented at prior enhanced geothermal sites, are not adequately addressed in the bill's framework.
Constitutional context
This bill is a straightforward exercise of Congress's spending and Commerce Clause powers (Art. I, §8) to fund energy research and development through existing federal agencies. No significant constitutional tension is present: the bill directs agency activity through explicit statutory authorization, which directly addresses the major questions doctrine concern raised in West Virginia v. EPA (2022) by providing clear congressional direction rather than relying on broad agency interpretation.
Checks and balances
The Executive Branch (Department of Energy and Department of the Interior) gains new program authority and grant-making power, but Congress retains oversight through mandatory biennial progress reports, a five-year water-use report, and the requirement that appropriations flow through the existing Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy budget structure.
Historical precedent
The FORGE (Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy) program, established under the Department of Energy in 2014, represents a direct predecessor — this bill expands and reauthorizes that framework to include next-generation and supercritical geothermal technologies.