The government is proposing to double geothermal energy use by 2040 to “accelerate energy resilience.”
Its just-launched draft geothermal strategy also includes growing Aotearoa’s position as a “world leader” in geothermal innovation, and collaborating with tangata whenua to “strengthen regional economies and te Ōhanga Māori.”
The strategy is out for public feedback. Consultation closes at 5 pm on 12 September.
The Science Media Centre asked experts to comment.
Associate Professor David Dempsey, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Canterbury, comments:
“I like the ambition of this Geothermal Strategy, particularly how it sets itself a target – in this case, doubling geothermal generation by 2040. It’s ambitious but not impossible. NZ more than doubled its geothermal fleet between 2005 and 2015 with new plants at Rotokawa, Kawerau and Ngatamariki.
“How the nation is going to achieve this doubling is unclear. Geothermal’s low-hanging fruit – the “hot and shallow” resources – are gone. Tourism-focused systems like Rotorua will remain protected. The strategy focuses (a lot) on supercritical geothermal, but a GNS-commissioned report suggests this won’t be available until 2037 at the earliest.
“So, the new geothermal generation may have to come from overlooked, lower temperature systems. Those might require hybrid-style plants that pair geothermal with solar or bioenergy to make the electricity less expensive. Or develop other revenue earners at the site, like production of food-grade CO₂.
“Enhanced geothermal systems aren’t mentioned in the strategy – but these are close to commercial deployment in the US. These can be operated flexibly to provide peak-time power and buffer intermittent renewable energy on still, cloudy days. However, they, alongside supercritical, will have to be carefully managed because induced seismic activity is a risk.”
Conflict of interest statement: David receives funding from MBIE to undertake geothermal research.
Dr Isabelle Chambefort, Energy Futures Theme Leader, Earth Sciences New Zealand (formerly GNS Science), comments:
“What an exciting time! The strategy lays the groundwork for a national, forward-looking and collective approach to the next-generation of geothermal energy. It reflects a major shift in thinking, and we’re proud of the role Earth Sciences NZ has played, and will continue to play, in supporting geothermal development in Aotearoa New Zealand.
“We see this strategy as marking a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reshape how New Zealand approaches energy, and we welcome the strong commitment from government to make this a reality. We are glad to see geothermal recognised not just for its electricity generation potential, but for its value as taonga and as reliable source of low-carbon heating and cooling that can be utilised by industry.
“Earth Sciences NZ welcomes the proposal to improve data access as a particularly important component. It will help attract investment, unlock new IP, and accelerate innovation in geothermal. Data access remains a cornerstone of our sustainable energy future.
“We also welcome the recognition of strong well-funded science as being key to securing the ongoing innovation and technology needed for the growth of the country.
“We are especially pleased to see the emphasis on supercritical geothermal. This globally significant innovation is a key pillar of the strategy, and a critical area for investment if New Zealand is to remain a leader during this global geothermal renaissance – and become a leader in a global energy breakthrough.
“The collaborative spirit shown by the government and the sector in developing this strategy is vital. The same collective spirit has been vital in the past and has enabled the sector to reach its level of global recognition. The door is open for Earth Sciences NZ to work even more closely with the sector, generating knowledge and value for the benefit of New Zealand’s economy and international standing.
“The feedback period is a valuable opportunity to refine and strengthen the strategy, and we encourage everyone connected to the sector to submit their thoughts. A wide range of voices will help ensure the final version is meaningful, effective, and embraced by all. and
“With this strategy, we’re laying strong economic and cultural foundations, not just for our tamariki, but for future generations around the world.”
Conflict of interest statement: No conflicts of interest.
Professor Barry Barton, School of Law, Politics and Philosophy, University of Waikato, comments:
“Interest in geothermal from central government is new; for many years it has been regional councils that have made all the running. Today’s proposals could be significant in several ways.
“It is strong in recognizing the value of direct use of geothermal energy for various heating needs; electricity generation is useful but it’s not the only use for geothermal, or even the most effective.
“Likewise it’s welcome that the proposals recognize the strong Māori role in geothermal, and the unresolved claims against the Crown that the Waitangi Tribunal has before it.
“The draft also recognizes the role that geothermal may play in the uptake of innovative carbon dioxide removal methods; and it flags real questions about access to data.
“But the proposals don’t say much about how regulatory settings would be improved, mainly because what the government intends to replace the RMA is far from clear. (Geothermal is primarily regulated under the RMA.)
“As for the desire to test supercritical geothermal resources, there are sure to be big resources deep down, and they are enticing, but how to drill for them and recover heat is a complete unknown; the extraordinary temperature and pressure will require major advances in drilling and production technology.”
Conflict of interest statement: “I have no conflicting interests in the geothermal sector.”
Dr John O’Sullivan, Co-Director of the Geothermal Institute, Faculty of Engineering, University of Auckland, comments:
“The Government’s draft Geothermal Strategy is a landmark moment for Aotearoa New Zealand. It signals a long-overdue recognition of geothermal energy as a cornerstone of our energy mix and its important role in the future. The strategy’s ambition is matched by its potential impact—driving innovation and research, regional economic development, and global leadership in geothermal energy.
“At the Geothermal Institute, we see this as a catalyst for action. The sector is ready, the talent is emerging, and the technology is advancing. But success depends on sustained investment in research, education, and workforce development. We must build the technical capability to deliver on this vision—especially in partnership with Māori, industry, and local communities. I was really encouraged to hear the Government emphasise education and career pathways for our young people in geothermal.
“New Zealand has the chance to lead globally in geothermal innovation and training. This strategy is the roadmap. Now we must commit to walking it—together.”
Conflict of interest statement: “None – apart from working in the industry that will be affected by the Strategy.”
Dr Nona Taute, Lecturer in Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Auckland, comments:
“In all, the strategy effectively outlines the need for a more strategic approach to geothermal development from the Government’s position. It highlights many beneficial outcomes for Aotearoa, all of which are true and realistic. The Action Plan Goals are, for the most part, entirely sensible and should not garner much opposition from stakeholders in the industry. While I did not see anything that concerns me, I would like to offer some additional considerations as discussed herein.
“Broadly, I offer answers to the following questions:
1. Does the strategy and proposed action plan create the right settings to enable tangata whenua to realise their aspirations for geothermal resources in their rohe?
2. Are there opportunities for our geothermal sector that we haven’t considered?
3. Are there challenges for our geothermal sector that we haven’t considered?”
What does sustainability involve?
“The vision to become a global leader in sustainable geothermal development is commendable and certainly achievable under a united and coordinated approach. However, I believe the term “sustainable” needs to be fleshed out. While I imagine (or hope) that economic prosperity and the environmental sustainability of our geothermal reservoirs and surface features are at the forefront of what the strategy refers to as “sustainable”, there are other factors that I would like to see explicitly included. It is my view that we should be a global leader in sustainable geothermal development, not only in the technical or monetary sense, but also in the sense of social and cultural intangibles. The strategy highlights the importance of Māori culture in geothermal tourism. That importance should be carried through to our view of geothermal project success to lead the world in Indigenous empowerment beyond the show of Māori arts in tourism.”
How to achieve true and inclusive sustainability:
“I offer something that I have developed over the past several years – a means to practically apply Māori cultural values (both tangible and intangible) to the decision-making processes of geothermal management and development. I developed a streamlined quadruple-bottom-line (environmental, cultural, social, economic) impact assessment tool that is specifically tailored to geothermal development in the Taupō Volcanic Zone. This tool will inform holistic and culturally aligned decisions in future projects, navigating uncertainty in what is contextually important to tangata whenua.
“Ensuring the protection of our geothermal taonga for the nation is one thing, giving effect to the historical relationship between iwi Māori and their geothermal taonga is another. There are numerous examples of historical geothermal developments that severed these relationships and belittled the stewardship and rangatiratanga of hapū. Providing for iwi-developer partnerships is commendable and a step towards better maintaining stewardship and rangatiratanga. However, it is important to remember that these partnerships are between developers and small representative groups who may not carry the same values and priorities as those they represent. There will always be a need (as demonstrated by the ongoing Taheke 8C Geothermal Project) to look beyond representative groups to the values demonstrated by wider iwi populations, thereby minimising the occurrence of hapū internal disarray and potential backlash. My tool can navigate those values to ensure that they are accounted for.”
Where can we account for a true indication of cultural sustainability?
“The consenting process is a bottleneck for most projects, whether it is through traditional processes or through the Fast-Track process. The practice of cultural impact assessment (which holds increasing influence for consenting authorities) is ad-hoc, uncertain, and largely ineffective. It does not provide clear or practical solutions for developers or consenting authorities. In the Action Plan Goals of the strategy, there is focus on ensuring regulatory processes are fit-for-purpose. The cultural aspect of the consenting process is certainly one area that needs to be more fit-for-purpose. My tool offers this structure in determining who should be involved, what values need to be considered, how those values can be measured, and how those values can be practically and realistically preserved or enhanced.
“I hereby propose that the Minister consider incorporating this tool (or something of equivalence) to the regulatory process of impact assessment and resource consenting. Please reach out if you would like to explore this proposal in detail.”
No conflicts of interest.