Skip to main content

Just In

KenGen Risks Losing Olkaria Geothermal Wells Over Licence Error

KenGen Risks Losing Olkaria Wells Over 18-Year Licence Blunder Kenya Electricity Generating Company (KenGen) faces a serious legal and operational risk at Olkaria after an error in the coordinates of its geothermal licence left part of the company’s wells, steam infrastructure and other assets outside its legally recognised area. The licensing mistake, made nearly two decades ago, remains unresolved despite the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum acknowledging the problem in 2017.  The dispute has raised questions about the security of KenGen’s investments, the government’s management of geothermal resources and the potential consequences for Kenya’s electricity supply. Olkaria is the country’s most important geothermal centre and accounts for the overwhelming majority of Kenya’s installed geothermal generation capacity.  Licence Error Exposes Strategic Assets The problem dates back to September 19, 2008, when the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum issued KenGen a licence covering ...

The "Heat-as-a-Service" (HaaS) Business Model: Geothermal Without the CAPEX Nightmare

Heat-as-a-Service takes geothermal from a capital-intensive power project to a financeable, contract-based heat utility: instead of selling electrons, you sell stable, decarbonized heat under long-term contracts that match what industrial customers and investors actually want.

Image: A thematic picture of a geothermal power plant

By shifting risk and ownership away from end users and toward specialised developers and infrastructure capital, it can unlock geothermal in markets where electricity tariffs are low but demand for reliable, low-carbon process heat is strong.

From kWh to “heat-as-a-service”

Traditional geothermal projects earn revenue by selling electricity into a grid, often at wholesale prices that barely cover high up-front drilling and plant costs unless there is a feed-in tariff or premium.Many industrial users, however, do not need electricity; they need heat for processes like brewing, greenhouse climate control or pulp and paper production, and they currently buy that heat indirectly via fossil fuels.

The Heat-as-a-Service (HaaS) model reframes geothermal as a service rather than an asset. A developer finances and builds the wells and surface equipment, then sells delivered heat at the fence line—typically hot water or steam at a specified temperature and flow—under a long-term contract that resembles a heat power purchase agreement (PPA). Customers pay a predictable per‑megawatt‑hour heat price or capacity fee without putting the project on their own balance sheets, while developers earn annuity-like cash flows backed by real assets.

Baseload Capital’s portfolio approach

Baseload Capital illustrates how this business model is being deployed in practice. Founded in Sweden as a specialised investment entity, Baseload raises capital through equity and green bonds and channels it into geothermal “heat power” projects worldwide, with subsidiaries in Iceland, Japan, Taiwan and the United States that develop and operate local plants.The parent company focuses on financing, market analysis and technical know‑how, while Baseload Power subsidiaries secure resources, permits, land leases and off‑take agreements for heat and/or power.

Their approach treats geothermal projects as part of a global portfolio, spreading geological and policy risk across multiple countries and customer types. 

Why heat, not just power?

Several forces push developers toward heat-as-a-service rather than pure electricity generation. First, industrial and district heating customers value heat at the point of use more highly than grid operators value additional bulk electricity, especially in markets with low wholesale power prices or high renewable penetration. Selling heat can therefore produce higher effective revenues per unit of geothermal energy, which improves project economics without requiring subsidies.

Second, heat demand is often flatter and more predictable than electricity prices. Breweries, greenhouses and paper mills run thermal processes with relatively steady profiles, making it easier to design baseload or mid‑load geothermal supply and match it with long‑term take‑or‑pay contracts.[2] Third, for many industrial users, decarbonising process heat is a harder problem than buying renewable electricity certificates, so geothermal HaaS can be marketed as a turnkey decarbonisation solution that helps them hit climate targets without building new assets themselves.

Case study: industrial heat and data centres

While much of Baseload Capital’s public messaging focuses on power, their contracts often blend electricity and heat sales, and some newer deals highlight the service mindset. In Taiwan, Baseload signed a corporate PPA with Google to supply about 10 MW of geothermal capacity to power data centres and offices, with Google also taking an equity stake to catalyse market development.The project will roughly double Taiwan’s currently operating geothermal capacity once it comes online, and it is structured around long‑term delivery of firm, clean energy rather than spot power sales.

Although that agreement is framed as a power PPA, it shows how large technology buyers—effectively sophisticated HaaS clients—are willing to sign long‑term contracts for 24/7 clean supply when the product matches their operational needs. The same logic applies to industrial heat customers: a brewery or greenhouse does not want to own wells and turbines; it wants guaranteed thermal output, with performance and resource risk pushed back onto a developer who can diversify across multiple projects.

Financing HaaS: green bonds and infrastructure capital

For CFOs and infrastructure funds, HaaS looks familiar: it turns a complex technical project into a contracted infrastructure asset with project-financeable cash flows. Baseload Capital, for instance, has issued green bonds whose frameworks describe investments in geothermal heat and power projects that meet specific environmental and reporting criteria.[8][2] Bond proceeds help finance early‑stage drilling and plant construction, while long‑term heat or power contracts anchor the revenue side.

This structure opens geothermal to capital pools that might otherwise shy away from exploration risk. Investors like Baker Hughes have made strategic investments in Baseload to accelerate next‑generation geothermal technologies from pilot to commercial scale, explicitly citing the company’s portfolio model and project pipeline. By aggregating multiple HaaS-style projects under one platform, Baseload can spread risk and offer investors exposure to a diversified set of contracts rather than a single risky well.

Contract structures and risk allocation

At the contract level, HaaS deals typically resemble power purchase agreements but with heat-specific parameters. Key elements include contract term (often 10–20 years), minimum contracted capacity or energy, price escalation mechanisms, performance guarantees and force majeure clauses that address resource variability or operational issues. The developer is usually responsible for drilling, plant construction, operation and maintenance, and bears the risk that the resource underperforms; the customer commits to buying a defined amount of heat or paying a capacity charge even if their demand fluctuates, within agreed flexibility bands.

This allocation suits both sides. Industrial customers avoid up‑front capex and technical risk, while developers can finance wells and plants based on contracted revenue rather than uncertain spot markets. The model also allows creative structures like “as-a-service” subscriptions where smaller customers share a common resource via a local district heating network or cluster of industrial users. As markets mature, secondary investors can buy into operating HaaS assets, providing exit options for early-stage developers and recycling capital into new projects.

Case study: waste heat and low-temperature resources
Another practical application of HaaS is in capturing waste heat or low‑temperature geothermal resources that would be uneconomic if used solely for power. Baseload describes “heat power” as an affordable form of renewable energy that can be harnessed from either geothermal or waste heat streams, with its subsidiaries working with local communities and power companies to permit and operate such plants. In these cases, the product sold might be both electricity and heat, or in some configurations primarily heat into a district heating system.

By wrapping this into a service contract, developers can make use of marginal resources that traditional utilities ignore. For example, a low‑temperature well that cannot justify a full power plant might still deliver valuable heat to a greenhouse cluster if the developer handles the capex and sells thermal energy under HaaS agreements.This expands the addressable resource base and helps make geothermal viable in markets where grid prices alone would not support investment.  

Unlocking low-price electricity markets

One of the core promises of HaaS is that it decouples geothermal economics from wholesale electricity prices. In markets with cheap power—due to hydro, coal or heavily subsidised generation—selling electricity from a new geothermal plant can be uncompetitive, especially without policy support. However, industrial heat users in the same markets may still pay high effective prices for fossil-based heat once fuel costs, carbon prices and logistics are factored in.

By targeting these customers directly and selling heat, HaaS can unlock revenue streams that do not depend on grid parity. The model is particularly attractive where carbon pricing, ESG pressures or corporate net‑zero commitments make low-carbon heat a premium product. Infrastructure funds and VCs evaluating HaaS deals will ask the familiar questions: how strong are the counterparties, what is the regulatory stability, and how well are resource and construction risks mitigated? But if those boxes are ticked, HaaS can look like any other contracted infrastructure opportunity.  

 Challenges and limitations

Despite its promise, Heat-as-a-Service is not a panacea. Geothermal risk remains real: drilling can fail, resources can underperform, and local opposition or permitting delays can derail projects.[2] Service contracts shift some risk from customers to developers, which means developers need strong technical capabilities, conservative resource assessments and contingency plans to avoid under‑delivery and penalties.

Contracting industrial heat also raises practical issues. Customers may be reluctant to commit to 15–20‑year deals if their own production plans are uncertain, or they may demand flexible volumes that complicate project sizing and financing.Regulators in some jurisdictions may not yet recognise or support third‑party heat utilities, creating legal and tariff uncertainties. And while data‑centre PPAs and similar deals show corporate appetite for contracted clean energy, building similar demand for geothermal heat will require education and demonstration projects.  

Outlook for HaaS in geothermal

Even with these challenges, the trendline is clear. Specialised investors like Baseload Capital are building portfolios of geothermal heat and power assets, backed by green bonds and strategic partners, and targeting customers ranging from utilities to tech companies and industrial heat users. As more projects demonstrate reliable service under long‑term contracts, Heat-as-a-Service could become a standard way to structure geothermal development, especially in markets where electricity prices alone cannot justify new plants.

For CFOs, VCs and infrastructure funds, HaaS reframes geothermal as an infrastructure and services play rather than a pure resource gamble. Projects can be sized and staged to match specific contracts, with risk diversified across multiple assets in different markets.[ For industrial customers, it offers a path to decarbonise heat without the capex nightmare of owning wells and plants, turning geothermal into a subscription-like service rather than a one‑off mega‑project. Whether HaaS becomes the dominant model will depend on how quickly developers can prove performance, standardise contracts and build trust—but the case studies emerging today suggest this is one of the most promising ways to bring geothermal out of the niche and into mainstream climate and infrastructure portfolios.



Source: This article was researched and written by Robert Buluma 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Jicarilla Apache Geothermal Study Wins $2.5 Million Grant

Jicarilla Apache Nation Launches $2.5 Million Geothermal Feasibility Study The Jicarilla Apache Nation in northern New Mexico has launched a major investigation into its geothermal energy potential after receiving a $2.5 million grant from the State of New Mexico. The funding will support a detailed feasibility study examining whether underground heat resources on tribal lands could be developed for electricity generation, direct heating, or other energy applications. The initiative represents an important step in the Nation’s efforts to understand and diversify its energy resources. Although the Jicarilla Apache Nation has not yet committed to building a geothermal facility, the study could provide the geological, technical, and economic information required for future investment decisions. The project is particularly significant because the Nation already has extensive experience with subsurface exploration through its oil and gas activities. Existing geological records, drilling inf...

Ijen vs Zanskar: Blind Geothermal Energy Discovery and Development

Ijen’s Blind Geothermal System vs. Zanskar’s AI-Discovered Resources: Two Models for Finding Hidden Heat The geothermal industry is entering a new phase in which the most valuable resources may no longer be the fields marked by obvious hot springs, geysers, fumaroles, or steaming ground. Increasingly, developers are targeting “blind” or hidden geothermal systems,reservoirs that lack clear surface expressions but can still contain the temperature, permeability, and fluid needed for commercial power generation. Two examples illustrate how different parts of the industry are approaching this challenge. In Indonesia, the Blawan-Ijen geothermal field in East Java was developed through geological interpretation, magnetotelluric imaging, conceptual modelling, and drilling. The project is now operating commercially, with its first phase delivering approximately 35 MW to the Java grid under a 30-year power purchase agreement.  In the United States, Zanskar Geothermal & Minerals is using...

Vercana Electric Rig Advances Geothermal Brine Lithium Extraction Economics

Electric-Rig Direct Lithium Extraction From Geothermal Brine: The Economics of Vercana Versus Ormat Vulcan Energy Resources is pursuing an integrated model that combines geothermal drilling, direct lithium extraction, renewable electricity and industrial heat. Through its Vercana subsidiary, the company is also using electric drilling equipment designed to support the development of its Lionheart project in Germany’s Upper Rhine Valley. The approach differs from the conventional geothermal model represented by Ormat Technologies, whose core business remains geothermal power generation, equipment, project development and energy storage rather than commercial lithium recovery from geothermal brine.  The economic question is broader than whether an electric drilling rig costs less to operate than a diesel rig. The more important issue is whether electric drilling, geothermal energy and direct lithium extraction can create a more valuable integrated project than a conventional geotherm...

Western Geothermal Power Transmission Roadmap Toward 2030

Geothermal Power in the Western United States: A Transmission and Planning Roadmap to 2030 Introduction The Western United States is approaching a decisive period for geothermal power. Electricity demand is rising because of data centers, industrial electrification, population growth, electric vehicles and the replacement of retiring fossil-fuel generation. At the same time, utilities are under growing pressure to add clean resources that can operate reliably when solar and wind output declines. Geothermal power is well positioned to fill this role. Unlike weather-dependent generation, geothermal plants can provide firm electricity for long periods, support grid reliability and reduce the amount of storage required in deeply decarbonized power systems. However, the industry’s expansion will depend on more than subsurface heat and drilling technology. By 2030, transmission access, resource planning, project finance, permitting and utility procurement will determine whether geothermal be...

Billionaire Families Bet on Advanced Geothermal Energy Investments

Billionaire Geothermal Families Bet on Geothermal Billionaire families and private investment offices are placing increasingly large bets on geothermal energy, especially on technologies designed to make the resource available in more locations. Their investments are helping finance enhanced geothermal systems, advanced drilling, closed-loop designs, and other approaches that could transform geothermal from a regionally concentrated power source into a globally scalable clean-energy industry. The investment surge reflects a broader change in the energy market. Electricity demand is rising because of artificial intelligence, data centers, industrial electrification, electric vehicles, and the expansion of digital infrastructure. At the same time, utilities and large corporations need power that is reliable around the clock. Solar and wind remain essential to the clean-energy transition, but their output varies with weather and time of day. Geothermal could complement these technologies ...

Next-Gen Geothermal Funding 2026: VCs, Banks, Government Capital

Who Is Really Funding Next-Gen Geothermal in 2026? Next-generation geothermal has moved beyond laboratory research into a capital-intensive commercialization phase. In 2026, the most important financing is no longer coming from one investor category: venture capital funds are financing drilling, subsurface modelling and hardware; strategic energy companies are providing equipment, project access and market credibility; banks are beginning to lend against contracted projects; and governments are absorbing exploration and first-of-a-kind technology risk. The strongest financing activity is concentrated in the United States and Canada, but Europe is becoming increasingly important through Germany-based deployment, European Union grants, UK innovation support, and strategic participation from European energy companies. The central investment question is changing from “Can this technology work?” to “Can the developer deliver repeatable, financeable projects at commercial cost?” The 2026 fun...

Global Geothermal Investment 2026: 15 High-Growth Markets

Global Geothermal Investment 2026: 15 Markets Where Developers Should Look Next Geothermal energy is entering its most investable decade yet, with developers, drilling contractors, turbine suppliers and private capital providers scanning a widening map of opportunities beyond the traditional “big five” producers.  This article profiles 15 markets where project pipelines, policy signals, resource quality and technology readiness converge to create compelling entry points in 2026 and beyond.  Why 2026 Is a Turning Point for Geothermal Capital Global geothermal investment is accelerating as governments seek firm, low‑carbon baseload to back up variable wind and solar, while advanced drilling and subsurface engineering lower costs and expand the resource base. Market analysts project the geothermal energy market to reach roughly USD 13.56 billion by 2030, up from about USD 9.81 billion in 2025, implying sustained double‑digit growth in development spend. Capital is flowing not onl...

Alberta Geothermal Startup Phase Secures Funding for High-Temperature Drilling Sensors

Alberta’s Phase Targets a Critical Geothermal Drilling Barrier With High-Temperature Sensors Alberta is using its deep oil-and-gas expertise to pursue a new opportunity beneath the surface: geothermal energy. Among the companies receiving support through Emissions Reduction Alberta’s Drilling Technology Challenge is Edmonton-based Phase Advanced Sensor Systems Corp., which is developing a high-temperature downhole pressure sensor for enhanced geothermal systems. The project addresses a problem that could determine whether deep geothermal energy becomes commercially viable: operators need reliable, accurate information from wells exposed to extreme heat and pressure. Phase plans to demonstrate a sensor capable of operating at temperatures above 200°C, with testing planned at 200°C, 250°C and 275°C.  The project has a total value of approximately C$1.57 million, including C$420,000 in ERA funding, according to Alberta’s project information.  Dealroom reported the award as approx...

Unlocking Impermeable Geothermal Reservoirs: Hydraulic Stimulation, Menengai and Olkaria

Unlocking the Impermeable Reservoir: Lessons from a 30-Year Reservoir Engineer An Alphaxioms interview with Richard Joseph Holt, Principal Consultant in Reservoir Engineering at RESPEC . Context: Menengai East and Olkaria Central. Every geothermal developer knows the moment.  The rig is gone and the money is spent. The well is drilled to depth, the temperature is there, and then the well will not flow. The heat is real, but the connection between the well and the reservoir is not. Wells like this sit at the centre of one of the most important questions in geothermal development: what do you do with a tight reservoir? Walk away and drill again, or find a way to unlock what is already there? To explore the question, Alphaxioms spoke with Richard Joseph Holt, Principal Consultant in Reservoir Engineering at RESPEC . Richard brings 30 years of global experience in geothermal energy.  We framed our questions around two settings, Menengai East and Olkaria Central, and asked him how ...

Menengai Geothermal Project Delays Expose Kenya’s Broken Steam Supply Model

Menengai’s Broken Promise: How Kenya’s Geothermal Model Lost the Steam Thematic image of the Olkaria Geothermal Field  Kenya’s Menengai geothermal project was sold as a model of modern public-private partnership. The state would carry the difficult and expensive burden of geothermal exploration and drilling. Private power producers would then build, own and operate power plants. Geothermal Development Company would supply the steam; the independent power producers would convert it into electricity; Kenya Power would buy the output. On paper, the arrangement was elegant. In practice, Menengai has exposed a far more uncomfortable reality: Kenya’s public steam-supply model is not delivering the certainty it promised. Menengai Phase I was designed to produce 105 megawatts from three 35 MW plants. GDC’s own project page says the three plants were awarded to Globeleq Menengai Geothermal, Sosian Menengai Geothermal Power and OrPower Twenty Two under a build-own-operate structure. Yet the ...