IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v161y2022ics030142152100570x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Converting oil wells to geothermal resources: Roadmaps and roadblocks for energy transformation

Author

Listed:
  • Nadkarni, Kabir
  • Lefsrud, Lianne M.
  • Schiffner, Daniel
  • Banks, Jonathan

Abstract

Geothermal energy systems can make it possible to source sustainable, zero-carbon heat through geothermal direct use. Jurisdictions with mature oil industries and well characterized reservoirs often have the greatest capacity to transition to geothermal energy, yet the same jurisdictions are also most likely to oppose it. Despite technical capabilities, studies show that public perception and policy can be significant limiting factors in geothermal development. We examine how stakeholders' discourses, networks, and resources interact over time to impact the success or failure of geothermal development within France and Alberta as two oil producing regimes. We found that these three elements of agency (discourse, resources, and networks) converge in France versus diverge in Alberta, and that their convergence is defined by their positive interaction with one another over time. We glean important lessons for policymakers interested in promoting energy transformation based on this analysis of the elements of agency in France and Alberta's geothermal case. The three policy recommendations are: policy for mobilizing third-party resources across the stakeholder network to support innovation; policy for aligning discourse about energy use across networks beyond the energy sector; and policy for enabling discourse about new energy resources that recognizes its distinctiveness from other resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Nadkarni, Kabir & Lefsrud, Lianne M. & Schiffner, Daniel & Banks, Jonathan, 2022. "Converting oil wells to geothermal resources: Roadmaps and roadblocks for energy transformation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:161:y:2022:i:c:s030142152100570x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112705
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142152100570X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112705?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Purkus, Alexandra & Barth, Volker, 2011. "Geothermal power production in future electricity markets--A scenario analysis for Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 349-357, January.
    2. Thomas Pregger & Tobias Naegler & Wolfgang Weimer-Jehle & Sigrid Prehofer & Wolfgang Hauser, 2020. "Moving towards socio-technical scenarios of the German energy transition—lessons learned from integrated energy scenario building," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(4), pages 1743-1762, October.
    3. Ouellette, A. & Rowe, A. & Sopinka, A. & Wild, P., 2014. "Achieving emissions reduction through oil sands cogeneration in Alberta’s deregulated electricity market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 13-21.
    4. Caroline A. Bartel & Raghu Garud, 2009. "The Role of Narratives in Sustaining Organizational Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 107-117, February.
    5. Hester, Annette & Lawrence, Leah, 2010. "A sub-national public-private strategic alliance for innovation and export development: the case of the Canadian province of Alberta's oil sands," Documentos de Proyectos 3760, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    6. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy & Peter Karnøe, 2010. "Path Dependence or Path Creation?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 760-774, June.
    7. Leitch, Aletta & Haley, Brendan & Hastings-Simon, Sara, 2019. "Can the oil and gas sector enable geothermal technologies? Socio-technical opportunities and complementarity failures in Alberta, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 384-395.
    8. Sara Hastings-Simon, 2019. "Industrial Policy in Alberta: Lessons from AOSTRA and the oil sands," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 12(37), November.
    9. Kubota, Hiromi & Hondo, Hiroki & Hienuki, Shunichi & Kaieda, Hideshi, 2013. "Determining barriers to developing geothermal power generation in Japan: Societal acceptance by stakeholders involved in hot springs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1079-1087.
    10. Hähnlein, Stefanie & Bayer, Peter & Ferguson, Grant & Blum, Philipp, 2013. "Sustainability and policy for the thermal use of shallow geothermal energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 914-925.
    11. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    12. Reber, Timothy J. & Beckers, Koenraad F. & Tester, Jefferson W., 2014. "The transformative potential of geothermal heating in the U.S. energy market: A regional study of New York and Pennsylvania," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 30-44.
    13. Unruh, Gregory C., 2000. "Understanding carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 817-830, October.
    14. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    15. Guzović, Zvonimir & Rašković, Predrag & Blatarić, Zoran, 2014. "The comparision of a basic and a dual-pressure ORC (Organic Rankine Cycle): Geothermal Power Plant Velika Ciglena case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 175-186.
    16. Oberg, Achim & Lefsrud, Lianne & Meyer, Renate E., 2021. "Organizational (issue) field perspective on climate change," economic sociology. perspectives and conversations, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, vol. 22(3), pages 21-29.
    17. Malafeh, Sam & Sharp, Basil, 2015. "Role of royalties in sustainable geothermal energy development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 235-242.
    18. Scholten, Daniel & Bazilian, Morgan & Overland, Indra & Westphal, Kirsten, 2020. "The geopolitics of renewables: New board, new game," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    19. Moya, Diego & Aldás, Clay & Kaparaju, Prasad, 2018. "Geothermal energy: Power plant technology and direct heat applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 889-901.
    20. Seyboth, Kristin & Beurskens, Luuk & Langniss, Ole & Sims, Ralph E.H., 2008. "Recognising the potential for renewable energy heating and cooling," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 2460-2463, July.
    21. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.
    22. Tchanche, Bertrand F. & Lambrinos, Gr. & Frangoudakis, A. & Papadakis, G., 2011. "Low-grade heat conversion into power using organic Rankine cycles – A review of various applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3963-3979.
    23. Harrestrup, M. & Svendsen, S., 2014. "Heat planning for fossil-fuel-free district heating areas with extensive end-use heat savings: A case study of the Copenhagen district heating area in Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 294-305.
    24. Houldsworth, Mark & McDevitt, Paul K., 1982. "Geothermal energy : Non-electric potential in the USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 203-211, September.
    25. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    26. Madhawa Hettiarachchi, H.D. & Golubovic, Mihajlo & Worek, William M. & Ikegami, Yasuyuki, 2007. "Optimum design criteria for an Organic Rankine cycle using low-temperature geothermal heat sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1698-1706.
    27. Francesco, Tinti & Annamaria, Pangallo & Martina, Berneschi & Dario, Tosoni & Dušan, Rajver & Simona, Pestotnik & Dalibor, Jovanović & Tomislav, Rudinica & Slavisa, Jelisić & Branko, Zlokapa & Attilio, 2016. "How to boost shallow geothermal energy exploitation in the adriatic area: the LEGEND project experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 190-204.
    28. Quoilin, Sylvain & Broek, Martijn Van Den & Declaye, Sébastien & Dewallef, Pierre & Lemort, Vincent, 2013. "Techno-economic survey of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 168-186.
    29. Benjamin Huybrechts & Helen Haugh, 2018. "The Roles of Networks in Institutionalizing New Hybrid Organizational Forms : Insights from the European Renewable Energy Cooperative Network," Post-Print hal-02312044, HAL.
    30. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gianfreda, Angelica & Scandolo, Giacomo, 2023. "A worldwide analysis of the energy regulatory tasks and activities through the lenses of entropy and unsupervised statistical learning," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
    2. Martina Tuschl & Tomislav Kurevija, 2023. "Revitalization Modelling of a Mature Oil Field with Bottom-Type Aquifer into Geothermal Resource—Reservoir Engineering and Techno-Economic Challenges," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-27, September.
    3. Guo, Yanlong & Xu, Yishuo & Wang, Huajun & Shen, Jian & Zhao, Sumin, 2023. "Experimental investigation of water-rock reaction for the reinjection of sandstone geothermal reservoirs: A case from Neogene Guantao Formation in Tianjin," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 203-214.
    4. Gola, Gianluca & Di Sipio, Eloisa & Facci, Marina & Galgaro, Antonio & Manzella, Adele, 2022. "Geothermal deep closed-loop heat exchangers: A novel technical potential evaluation to answer the power and heat demands," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 1193-1209.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Yuqing & Liu, Yingxin & Dou, Jinyue & Li, Mingzhu & Zeng, Ming, 2020. "Geothermal energy in China: Status, challenges, and policy recommendations," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Anderson, Austin & Rezaie, Behnaz, 2019. "Geothermal technology: Trends and potential role in a sustainable future," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 18-34.
    3. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    4. Kuokkanen, A. & Nurmi, A. & Mikkilä, M. & Kuisma, M. & Kahiluoto, H. & Linnanen, L., 2018. "Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1513-1522.
    5. Li, Francis G.N. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Strachan, Neil, 2015. "A review of socio-technical energy transition (STET) models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 290-305.
    6. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    7. Ben Zhang & Lei Ma & Zheng Liu, 2020. "Literature Trend Identification of Sustainable Technology Innovation: A Bibliometric Study Based on Co-Citation and Main Path Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    9. Leitch, Aletta & Haley, Brendan & Hastings-Simon, Sara, 2019. "Can the oil and gas sector enable geothermal technologies? Socio-technical opportunities and complementarity failures in Alberta, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 384-395.
    10. Edsand, Hans, 2016. "Technological Innovation Systems and the wider context: A framework for developing countries," MERIT Working Papers 2016-017, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    11. Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob, 2016. "Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1833-1844.
    12. Monk, Alexander & Perkins, Richard, 2020. "What explains the emergence and diffusion of green bonds?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    13. Haley, Brendan, 2014. "Promoting low-carbon transitions from a two-world regime: Hydro and wind in Québec, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 777-788.
    14. Safarzyńska, Karolina & Frenken, Koen & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2012. "Evolutionary theorizing and modeling of sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1011-1024.
    15. Jens Hanson & Markus Steen & Tyson Weaver & Håkon E. Normann & Gard H. Hansen, 2016. "Path creation through branching and transfer of complementary resources: the role of established industries for new renewable energy technologies," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20160310, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    16. Edsand, Hans-Erik, 2019. "Technological innovation system and the wider context: A framework for developing countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    17. Auke Hoekstra & Maarten Steinbuch & Geert Verbong, 2017. "Creating Agent-Based Energy Transition Management Models That Can Uncover Profitable Pathways to Climate Change Mitigation," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-23, December.
    18. Turnheim, Bruno & Nykvist, Björn, 2019. "Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 775-788.
    19. Gianfreda, Angelica & Scandolo, Giacomo, 2023. "A worldwide analysis of the energy regulatory tasks and activities through the lenses of entropy and unsupervised statistical learning," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
    20. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:161:y:2022:i:c:s030142152100570x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.