The Geothermal Resource Portfolio Optimization and Reporting Technique (GeoRePORT) was developed with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office to assist in identifying and pursuing long-term investment strategies through the development of a resource reporting protocol. GeoRePORT provides scientists and nonscientists a comprehensive and quantitative means of reporting: (1) features intrinsic to geothermal sites (project grade) and (2) maturity of the development (project readiness). Because geothermal feasibility is not determined by any single factor (e.g., temperature, permeability, permitting), a site?s project grade and readiness are evaluated on 12 attributes pertaining to geological, technical, or socio-economic feasibility. In this paper, we present case studies showing how GeoRePORT can be used to compare geological, technical, and socio-economic attributes between geothermal systems. The consistent and objective assessment protocols used in GeoRePORT allow for comparison of project attributes across unique locations and geological settings. GeoRePORT case studies presented here outline the geological, socio-economic, and technical features of four individual geothermal sites: Coso, Chena, Dixie Valley, and White Sands Missile Range. The case studies illustrate the usefulness of GeoRePORT in evaluating project risk and return, identifying gaps in reported data, evaluating R&D impact, and gathering insights on successes and failures as applicable to future projects.

The Geothermal Resource Portfolio Optimization and Reporting Technique (GeoRePORT) was developed with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office to assist in identifying and pursuing long-term investment strategies through the development of a resource reporting protocol. GeoRePORT provides scientists and nonscientists a comprehensive and quantitative means of reporting: (1) features intrinsic to geothermal sites (project grade) and (2) maturity of the development (project readiness). Because geothermal feasibility is not determined by any single factor (e.g., temperature, permeability, permitting), a site?s project grade and readiness are evaluated on 12 attributes pertaining to geological, technical, or socio-economic feasibility. In this paper, we present case studies showing how GeoRePORT can be used to compare geological, technical, and socio-economic attributes between geothermal systems. The consistent and objective assessment protocols used in GeoRePORT allow for comparison of project attributes across unique locations and geological settings. GeoRePORT case studies presented here outline the geological, socio-economic, and technical features of four individual geothermal sites: Coso, Chena, Dixie Valley, and White Sands Missile Range. The case studies illustrate the usefulness of GeoRePORT in evaluating project risk and return, identifying gaps in reported data, evaluating R&D impact, and gathering insights on successes and failures as applicable to future projects.