Geothermal energy is a resource that has the potential for development in many countries around the world. Despite its versatility and economic viability, this resource faces numerous obstacles that hinder its deployment and capacity for achieving a similar market share as other renewable and clean energy sources. Both technical and non-technical barriers can be highly detrimental to the implementation of geothermal projects. A social license to operate (SLO) is a tool that can help the deployment of geothermal energy. As a new concept, SLO is little developed in the business literature but is still being adopted in many industries. Its main challenges reside in its context-dependence and the lack of clear frameworks to utilize it. This paper introduces, in a first known attempt, through a qualitative approach, a conceptual model of the social license to operate in the geothermal energy sector. For its development, three case studies, working group discussion and surveying were conducted in the framework of the H2020 funded CROWDTHERMAL project, which aims to empower EU citizens for direct participation in geothermal projects through crowdfunding. Findings of this paper also drew on existing general conceptual models of the SLO, and experiences from other sectors that have developed their own SLO models. The paper contributes to a more contextualized understanding of the social license within the geothermal sector and sheds the light on practices and challenges that influence the acquisition and maintenance of SLO in geothermal energy projects and initiatives.

One of the major challenges regarding energy transition is to create active support towards renewable energy installations on a local level. The CROWDTHERMAL project presents practical approaches for involving local stakeholders in different measures in order to develop acceptable solutions. Based on technical evidence and data from concrete case studies, the project shows ways how community funding can increase social acceptance towards geothermal energy installations. The presented solutions are based on alternative financial schemes studies and risk mitigation analysis in geothermal projects.

Policy Highlights: To achieve the recommendation stated in the chapter title, we propose the following: Policymakers should mandate that energy decision-making processes be more inclusive, supporting both geothermal representation in large-scale energy deliberation and the inclusive engagement of local communities in individual geothermal projects. Policymakers should foster inclusive societal engagement that goes beyond the minimal requirements of consulting and informing at planning stage, to incorporate processes of deliberation and co-creation with local communities. Geothermal industry actors should practise inclusive societal engagement which is early, continuous, and sensitive to the technical specificities (e.g. local resource, subsurface uncertainties) and social challenges (e.g. low public awareness) of geothermal technologies. Language alignment activities and mutual expert elicitation can support the exchange of knowledge across social-technical disciplines, bridging disciplinary siloes to tackle the problem above.

How can we not afford to scientifically probe magma? Fifteen years of accidental drilling encounters with magma have shown that it can be done safely with recovery of magmatic and partial melt samples quenched in situ. More could be gained if preceded by thorough scientific preparation and followed by long-term monitoring. Through the panoply of instruments now available, we can measure temperature, pressure, strain, heat and mass transport and changes over time. In 2009, the Iceland Deep Drilling Program well #1 reached rhyolitic magma at 2100 m depth under Krafla Caldera. The project was exemplary in sharing provocative results, but only hints at what is possible. Equilibrium temperatures were estimated by traditional petrologic techniques to be 850 – 1100 C. Pressure estimates range from 40 – 90 MPa with both extremes seemingly problematic, because for the first time we know the depth of a magma body to 4 significant figures. The lowest value is below lithostatic and the highest could be inherited from deeper levels. Now it appears that the lower pressure is what magma “feels”. But without drilling, would traditional estimates be good enough? Magma is somewhere between 1500 – 4000 m depth and with temperature corresponding to some type of magma? Actually, we would not even know that shallow magma is there but now in hindsight we see it geophysically. Ground-truth testing is how methodologies are improved. Our situation is like speculating about the nature of the Moon without sampling it. The cost of probing Earth’s magma is high and the probability of success uncertain, but far less so on either count than for extraterrestrial exploration. On Earth we are more restrained by self-imposed limits than by our technical capabilities. Besides understanding the differentiation of our planet, we have two compelling reasons for bold exploration: 1) We need the baseload, magma resource with its far higher temperature, energy density, and more extensive thermal fracturing than conventional geothermal; 2) We need to raise the level of reliability of eruption forecasts by testing our magma-dynamic models directly, thereby saving countless lives. As with other endeavors that are expensive for a single country to undertake but that benefit all humankind, a way forward is through an international infrastructure, where teams of scientists can conduct experiments with magma and superhot fluids. This is analogous to particle accelerators and the complement to outer space travel: inner space. The Krafla Magma Testbed is a much-needed step and an opportunity for all planetary, magma, volcano, and hydrothermal scientists to test their methods and ideas. KMT will drill a doublet of wells to magma for long-term monitoring and experimentation, respectively. The project, now organized as a legal entity within the Iceland Geothermal Research Cluster (GEORG), in partnership with the National Power Company of Iceland (Landsvirkjun), Iceland Energy GeoSurvey (ISOR), and a multinational team of scientists and engineers, under the aegis of the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP), is ready. Magma could have been intentionally explored before. It is time to ask, “Why not now?”