European Geothermal Congress 2019

Den Haag, The Netherlands, 11-14 June 2019

Geothermal Energy Use, Country Update for Slovenia

Dušan Rajver1, Andrej Lapanje1, Nina Rman1, Joerg Prestor1

1
Geological Survey of Slovenia, Dimičeva 14, 1000 Ljubljana
[email protected]

Keywords: geothermal resources, direct uses, effects of thermal waters were performed (Lapanje &
reinjection, ground-source heat pumps, development, Rman, 2009). The real systematic explorations began
Slovenia. much later in 1974 after the first oil crisis. The present
status of direct heat use and development in the last
ABSTRACT three years is presented in the paper. However,
In geothermal energy use in Slovenia in its northeastern geothermal energy use in Slovenia (with surface of
part, belonging to the Pannonian Basin geothermal 20.273 km2) has been statistically followed by
region, practically no progress was achieved in Geological Survey of Slovenia on regular basis since
geothermal development during the last three years, 1994 with update reports presented at World
since not a single new geothermal borehole was drilled Geothermal Congresses (Rajver et al., 2015 and
there. Two boreholes (for a doublet system) for the references therein), while at European Geothermal
planned district heating of Murska Sobota town are still Congresses since 2013.
inactive since 2015. Most production wells there tap
Very probably it’s not expected that at the present state
thermal water from the Miocene sand aquifers, that is
of knowledge any electricity production from
from Mura Fm. with temperatures of 54 to 62 °C and
geothermal in Slovenia could be realistic by 2025. Due
from Špilje Fm. with up to 76 °C. The installed capacity
to lack of natural steam reservoirs, geothermal energy
and annual energy use of all 31 users in the country
in Slovenia cannot be converted in Dry Steam or Flash
amounted to 62.43 MWt and 578.6 TJ. More efficient
Steam power plants into electric power. Only binary
use of thermal water is evident at some sites due to
technology is promising, but it is also disputable,
implementation of concession fees in 2015 for thermal
temporal as well as geologically. The government
water utilization, which led to lower annual energy use
supports in principle the direct use of geothermal
in 2018 compared to 2016-2017, owing to a bit lower
energy through different projects where few leading
pumped volumes and more correct data. Greater
agencies are involved in geothermal development,
progress is evident in shallow geothermics, where the
principally in shallow geothermics. So, private
number of smaller ground-source heat pump (GSHP)
companies and energy consulting agencies are involved
units of typically 12 kW reached around 11,182 with
in demonstration projects for greater ground-source
135.6 MWt capacity and 683.3 TJ/yr energy use (Dec.
(geothermal) heat pump (GSHP) development. The
2018). The number of bigger GSHP systems with heat
goal of appropriate ministries is also to raise the general
pumps of rated power over 20 kW is in constant
public awareness to deal more carefully with energy
increase during the last 14 years, resulting in 49.5 MWt
consumption. Leading companies and institutes
and 132.7 TJ/yr, with some 588 HP units sold so far,
involved in geothermal development are: Geological
mostly in public or private buildings. The total numbers
Survey of Slovenia, Petrol-Geo d.o.o. (as subsid. of
in 2018 for both deep and shallow geothermics were
Petrol d.d.) and several small business enterprises.
247.47 MWt and 1,516.79 TJ/yr (421.33 GWh/yr).
Drilling activity for direct heat use was much lower Emphasis of direct use of geothermal energy is on
than in previous period, with only 0.15 km in total of 3 exploitation of low temperature resources for space and
reinjection boreholes at Izlake, with no production district heating, for greenhouses and thermal spas.
boreholes nor temperature gradient ones. It’s expected During the last 18 years the direct use showed only
that energetic renovation of older buildings and slight and changing increase and recently just a stagnant
installation of the GSHP units will continue in the state with exception of the GSHP units. The reasons
future as one of the obligations to reach the renewable depend on the locality. Overexploitation of geothermal
energy targets. resources in some localities of the north-eastern part of
the country (Kralj and Kralj, 2000; Rman, 2014; Rman
1. INTRODUCTION et al., 2012 and references therein) is one of the
Geothermal resources in Slovenia were described problems, plus some occasional technical difficulties,
already before the 20th century. Development in the 18th and weak incentives for efficient use of the resources.
and 19th century led to emergence of health resorts at An increase of experience is evident at many direct heat
eight different locations and, at the same time, the first users, notably with introduction of heat exchangers and
investigations into the origin, chemistry and healing heat pumps for the improvement in using the available
1
Rajver et al.

heat in a better way, and not to discard it at a too high (c) EGS (HDR systems) at least 4 km deep in low
temperature. GSHP sector is the only category showing permeable metamorphic or magmatic rocks: the
a strong steady growth. Pohorje granodiorite massif and the Pre-Neogene
basement of the Mura-Zala basin.
2. GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES AND
POTENTIAL According to the current geological knowledge these
reservoirs are very limited in space. New geological
A description of geology, geothermal resources and
investigations and geothermal wells should be targeted
potential is given in the previous country updates
on finding a geothermal aquifer with a wellhead fluid
(Rajver et al., 2015, 2016 and references therein).
temperature high above 90 °C and a yield above 25 kg/s
Geological and tectonic setting of Slovenia is quite
which allows the binary cycle utilization. This may also
complicated as it is subdivided into several tectonic
be achieved by using EGS technology. However,
units with different hydrogeological properties and
deeper wells would be needed to reach at least the 150
geothermal conditions (Figure 1). In the northeast, the
°C isotherm.
Mura-Zala basin (the southwestern part of the
Pannonian basin) and the Eastern Alps (incl. magmatic 2.2 Resources and potential for direct use
rock complex) are parts of the European plate.
Predominately carbonate Southern Alps, the External The northeastern part has been intensively investigated
and the Internal Dinarides and the Adriatic foreland in recent years within the European projects
represent parts of the Adriatic microplate. More TRANSTHERMAL (Lapanje et al., 2007), T-JAM
information on geological aspects is described in papers (Lapanje et al., 2010; Nádor et al., 2012),
by Ravnik et al. (1995), Placer (2008), Pleničar et al. TRANSENERGY (Rman et al. 2015), GeoMol
(2009) and references therein. The 24 thermal (natural (Diepolder et al., 2015) and project in progress
and captured) springs have constant temperature close DARLINGe (Website 1). Efforts are put also in
to or above 20°C, with 36°C as a maximum, however, promotion of more sustainable exploitation by applying
there are several drilled localities where no surface new reinjection wells in the future based on materials
thermal manifestations previously existed, and the prepared during the project activities. Better insights
thermal water was discovered during the oil and gas are gained in characteristics of the geothermal field,
drillings (Lapanje and Rman, 2009). Details about the hydrogeological conditions of eastern Slovenia and
geothermal field of Slovenia and geotectonic potentials for direct heat utilization (Rman, 2014; Rman
background are described by Ravnik (1991), Ravnik et et al., 2015; Tóth et al., 2016). The area has an elevated
al. (1995), Rajver et al. (2012), Diepolder et al. (2015). surface heat-flow density (HFD), above 100 mW/m2,
Geothermal resources in the Pannonian and Krško with expected temperatures above 80°C at 2 km depth
basins have been studied in more detail (Rajver et al., east of the Maribor - Ptuj towns line (Rman et al.,
2002; Rajver and Ravnik, 2003; Rman et al., 2015). 2012). All production wells there exploit thermal water
from Neogene aquifers with exception of those in
2.1 Potential for geothermal power production Maribor (number 12, in Figure 1). About 20 inactive
Natural steam reservoirs at relatively shallow depths and some 11 new potential wells exhibit the wellhead
haven’t been detected yet. In the SE part of the Pomurje temperatures of 20 to 72°C and have a total maximum
area (NE Slovenia) high temperature resources are yield of 281 kg/s, resulting in the ideal thermal power
unproven but hypothetically expected in deeper fault of 23.9 MWt. The geothermally most utilized
zones in the Pre-Neogene basement (for details see northeastern area that belongs to the Mura-Zala basin is
Rajver et al., 2016). It is the area south of the Ljutomer- filled by Neogene marine and fresh water sediments.
Balaton fault where the Pre-Neogene basement consists Clays and marls predominate, with intercalations of
of clastic and carbonate rocks, expected to be more porous sands and sandstones, where mineral, thermal
fractured in places for eventual exploitation of medium and thermo-mineral waters are found. The most
or high enthalpy geothermal resources. Geothermal and extensive Upper Pannonian-Pontian geothermal sandy
hydrogeological characteristics of this NE part indicate aquifers, which are widely utilized by Hungary and
potential geothermal resources, technically exploitable Slovenia, are composed of 50 to 300 m thick sand-
for electricity production, but only with restrictions prone units that are found in depth interval of about 0.7
(Rajver et al., 2012). The perspective geothermal to 1.4 km in the interior parts of the Pannonian basin,
reservoirs are (for localities’ details see Rajver et al., with temperatures from 50 to 70 °C (Nádor et al., 2012).
2016):
Hydraulically connected sandy lenses of the Upper
(a) hydrothermal reservoirs in depths less than 3 km and Pannonian-Pontian Mura Fm. represent the best
at temperature high above 80 °C: aquifers of the yielding low temperature geothermal aquifer in the
Lendava, Špilje and Haloze formations, NE of Murska sedimentary basin in Slovenia. It is utilized at Banovci
Sobota and near Lendava. (number 8 in Fig. 1), Dobrovnik (10), Lendava (5 and
6), Mala Nedelja (7), Moravske Toplice (1, and 3),
(b) hydrothermal reservoirs in depths of 3 to 6 km and Tešanovci (2), Murska Sobota (4), Ptuj (11) and
at temperature above 150 °C: carbonate rocks of the Renkovci (29). The best production wells have flow
Pre-Neogene basement in the Radgona-Vas tectonic rates of up to 30 kg/s, however, the average flow rate
half-graben and in the Boč-Ormož antiform. barely exceeds 10 kg/s per well. Isolated turbiditic
sandstone aquifers of the Middle and Upper Pannonian
2
 Rajver et al.

Lendava Fm. are exploited at Banovci, Lendava, Mala 2.3.2 Water – water systems (GSHPw)
Nedelja, Moravske Toplice and Murska Sobota in The northeastern part of Slovenia (Pannonian basin)
depths of 0.8 to 1.6 km (Rman et al., 2012). The share appertains to a major groundwater basin with relatively
of this water with temperature as high as 68 °C in the high recharge (100–300 mm/year) in Quaternary and
mixture produced from multiple-formations screened shallow Tertiary layers. The rest of the Slovene
wells is less than 5% mostly. The rather limited territory is of complex hydrogeological structure with
Badenian to Lower Pannonian Špilje formation very high recharge (>300 mm/year). About 7% of the
sandstone aquifer discharges thermomineral water rich territory is covered by extensive and highly productive
in CO2 in Radenci (9) and with organic substances at gravel and sand alluvial aquifers which are very
temperatures up to 76 °C in Moravske Toplice. Since favourable for open GSHP systems. The major cities
76 °C is the highest wellhead temperature at 2 wells are situated on these alluvial plains. The temperature of
there, it is a signature that no thermal water comes from groundwater is characteristically between 10 and 15 °C.
horizons deeper than ca 1700 m (Fig. 3). Groundwater table is 2 m to 25 m deep and the water
quality is rarely aggressive. Individual open vertical
In the SE part of the country the thermal water is mostly
systems can be successfully used also in the areas of
found in the Krško sedimentary basin along its southern
inter-granular aquifers of medium hydraulic
edge in the Mesozoic carbonate rocks beneath the
conductivity and above the fissured aquifers of medium
Tertiary cover. A small Čatež geothermal field in the
hydraulic conductivity (dolomitic aquifers). Limestone
eastern part of the basin is characterized by elevated
aquifers cover 35% of the territory where the
geothermal gradient (>60 mK/m). The maximum depth
groundwater accessibility is rather low and conditions
of the wells is 0.7 km, and they produce thermal water
not favourable for open vertical systems. Closed
from Triassic dolomite with annual yields ranging from
vertical systems are more applicable. Similar
ca 1 to 13 kg/s (numbers 23, 24, 25 in Fig. 1), while at
conditions are for the other 35% of territory with only
Šmarješke Toplice (19) up to 15 kg/s per well.
minor and discontinuous aquifers (flysch layers, marl,
sandstone, siltstone, claystone) where closed vertical
2.3 Potential for ground-source heat pumps and horizontal systems are mostly applicable.
2.3.1 Ground - water systems (GCHPh and GCHPv) Temperature distribution at a depth of 250 m below the
Clastic rocks cover over half of the Slovene territory, surface (Fig. 8) shows the best conditions for GSHP
carbonate rocks about 40%, while pyroclastic, systems, especially deeper BHEs (somewhere >20 °C)
metamorphic and crystalline rocks less than 8%. For in the NE part, and elsewhere only average
horizontal heat exchangers suitable rocks are sand and temperatures between 10 and 16 °C.
sandy clay, flysch rocks such as sandy marls or loose
2.3.3 Thermal energy storage
sandstone and sandy claystone. For vertical heat
exchangers (or BHEs) the most suitable are dolomite, Very few attempts were made to explore the possibility
dolomitic limestone and limestone, and most of of aquifer thermal energy storage systems (ATES) in
magmatic and metamorphic rocks. Fig. 2 shows Slovenia up to date, and we are not aware they were
geological and hydrogeological potential for the GSHP exploited at all. Groundwater flow velocities are
applications that include the ground-coupled heat pump characteristically rather high in most alluvial aquifers,
(GCHP) types of installation (horizontal and vertical). reaching the magnitude of 10 m/day which could not be
Shallow karstic underground is neither very favourable so favourable for conventional ATES. Nevertheless,
for vertical systems presenting the uncertainty in specific conditions should be explored locally.
drilling, with prediction in higher drilling costs. According to the hydrogeological setting in Slovenia
and pretentiousness of ATES technology, borehole
thermal energy storage (BTES) could be applied in
higher extent than ATES.

3
Rajver et al.

Figure 1: Generalized geological map of Slovenia with localities of direct heat use in 2018 (geology after Poljak,
in Rajver et al., 2016).

Figure 2: Potential for the GSHP applications in Slovenia (improved after Prestor et al., 2012).

4
 Rajver et al.

Figure 3: Production geothermal wells and natural thermal springs, in use in 2018 in Slovenia (status: Dec. 2018);
Expected temperatures at 2000 m depth beneath the surface.

Figure 4: Main utilization types for direct heat use of geothermal energy (thermal water) in Slovenia (status: Dec.
2018); numbers are the same as in Fig. 1.

5
Rajver et al.

3. GEOTHERMAL UTILIZATION these DH plants is 447.772 TJ/yr (124.381 GWh/yr). Of

these (Table C), in 2018, the space heating itself took
There is no electricity generation from geothermal 144.408 TJ (40.113 GWh) of geothermal heat, DH
resources in Slovenia up to date. Geothermal utilization sensu stricto 18.098 TJ (5.027 GWh), air conditioning
of thermal water heat is based on direct use from 55 28.249 TJ (7.847 GWh), greenhouses 21.503 TJ (5.973
production wells plus 3 thermal springs, implemented GWh), snow melting 14.641 TJ (4.067 GWh), bathing
at 31 localities. At 3 localities, which were reported for and swimming (incl. balneology) 178.951 TJ (49.707
EGC 2016, geothermal energy is not used anymore. GWh) and domestic hot water (DHW) heating 41.921
Due to economic reasons the Benedikt municipality and TJ (11.645 GWh).
Komunala Murska Sobota switched to another energy
source for their district heating systems, while the small
Toplice Kopačnica pool was closed by the nearby
municipality Gorenja Vas. Therefore, since the EGC
2016 report no new direct heat users have emerged in
Slovenia. Figure 4 shows main utilization types for
direct heat use.

In Slovenia, geothermal energy is estimated to currently

supply for direct heat uses and geothermal (ground-
source) heat pump (GSHP) units at least 1,516.79 TJ/yr
(421.33 GWh/yr) of heat energy with corresponding
installed capacity of 247.47 MWt. Of these values direct
use is 62.43 MWt and 578.57 TJ/yr (160.71 GWh/yr, by
23% more than in 2015), and the remainder, 185.04
MWt and 938.23 TJ/yr (260.62 GWh/yr, by 35% more
than in 2015) are GSHPs (Table E). Since 2013 the Figure 5: Geothermal direct use applications in a period
GSHPs are the main application of use with more than 1994-2018 (total capacity in 2018: 247.47 MWt).
50%, followed by geothermal “DH plants” (according
to explanation to tables C, D1 and D2), geothermal heat
in agriculture, then in balneology, individual space
heating with DHW, air conditioning and snow melting
at all those users not already included in the DH plants
networks (Tables C and D1; Figures 5 and 6). Since few
years ago we follow the thermal water extraction by the
monitoring system, established at 23 localities, and we
receive pretty much correct values from the other 8
users, only few corrections had to be made for values
as back as to 2015. The values for capacity and energy
supplied by the GSHP units are quite correct as we try
to determine as much exact number of units sold
(installed) as possible.

3.1 Geothermal district heating

When speaking about geothermal district heating (DH) Figure 6: Geothermal direct use applications in a period
1994-2018 (total energy used in 2018: 1516.79 TJ).
sensu stricto, only one plant is considered in Slovenia
at present (Table D1), in Lendava (number 6 in Figures 3.2 Agriculture (greenhouses) and industry
1 and 4), where several public buildings (school,
kindergarten, etc.) and blocks of flats (total 50,000 m2) In eastern Slovenia the heating of greenhouses using
are heated under the Petrol Geo d.o.o. (subs. of Petrol geothermal water began in 1962 at Čatež (number 23 in
d.d.) authority. Namely, in Murska Sobota the Fig. 1). It was performed there by the Flowers Čatež
residential areas and a theater under Komunala Co. on 4.5 ha for cultivation of flowers. At Tešanovci
authority are not heated geothermally anymore (due to near Moravske Toplice (number 2) the Grede
unfavorable concessions fees introduced), nor at Agricultural Co. uses the already thermally spent water
Benedikt in a small scale for few public buildings, both flowing from Moravske Toplice (Terme 3000) with
since 1st Jan. 2016. The future of geothermal DH there 40°C to heat 1 ha of greenhouse for tomato production.
remains uncertain. However, following the At Dobrovnik (number 10), the greenhouses of 4 ha by
explanations for Tables C and D1, there are 16 users Ocean Orchids Co. cultivate orchids, both for domestic
with geothermal DH plant network. These are 15 spas and foreign markets. At Renkovci (number 29),
and/or thermal resorts with bathing/swimming pools greenhouses of 4 ha were built 6 years ago for tomato
and balneology facilities, where besides space heating and exotic fruit cultivation. The total geothermal energy
(and at five users also cooling), also greenhouses (at used in 2018 in greenhouses (15.5 ha) was 111.529 TJ
two users), and snow melting (at three users) are (30.98 GWh). Without two greenhouses (5.5 ha) as part
accounted for. The total geothermal energy used for of DH plants (Tešanovci and Čatež, numbers 2 and 23),
6
 Rajver et al.

geothermal energy used at Dobrovnik and Renkovci reconstruction of swimming pools and a resort/health
greenhouses (total 10 ha) was 90.026 TJ (25.008 GWh) center. Apart from geothermal heat for bathing and
(Table C). Total value is slightly higher compared with swimming, already reported for the 15 users within the
26.194 GWh in 2015, due to improved temperature DH plant networks, this category is also operational at
difference used at Tešanovci and Dobrovnik (numbers 10 other users: Hotel Diana in M. Sobota (number 4 in
2 and 10, resp.), and owing to corrections for Čatež Figures 1 and 4), Radenci (9), Zreče (13), Rogaška
already made. At Čatež, the Terme Čatež d.d. has all Slatina (15), Snovik (16), Laško (20), Bled (26),
production boreholes closely spaced which exploit the Portorož (28), Hotel Cerkno (27) and Izlake (31). Of
same fractured Triassic dolomitic aquifer. The total values, the used geothermal heat there amounted
geothermal use for industrial process heat does not exist to 18.377 TJ (5.105 GWh) in 2018.
anymore since January 2009.
Snow melting of the sidewalks using geothermal heat
3.3 Individual space heating of buildings with from the already utilized thermal water was applied
domestic hot water heating within the doublet system in Lendava (number 6 in Fig.
1), with about 0.074 TJ in 2018. Snow melting was
Space heating is implemented at 20 localities (Fig. 4), more applied under two football grounds at Hotel Vivat
predominantly thermal spas and resorts, mostly through at Moravske Toplice (number 3) with 0.412 TJ, and
heat exchangers (e.g. Moravske Toplice, Banovci, under three football grounds at Čatež (number 23) with
Terme Lendava, Ptuj, Maribor, etc.) or geothermal heat 14.155 TJ. Altogether the used geothermal heat is
pumps (e.g. Cerkno, Hotel Diana in Murska Sobota, 14.641 TJ (4.067 GWh), included within DH plants,
Izlake, Vrhnika, Dobova Paradiso, etc.). The GHP units compared to 0.667TJ in 2015.
usually of bigger capacity are installed in case of too
low thermal water temperature for this type of use. The Air conditioning (AC or cooling) of the hotels’ spaces
total geothermal energy used for space heating in 2018 using geothermal heat is not well documented and is so
was 161.336 TJ (44.816 GWh). Without 15 users, far operational only at six localities: Moravske Toplice
already accounted for as “DH plants” (and excluding Terme 3000 (number 1 in Fig. 1) and Hotel Vivat (3),
Tešanovci greenhouse), geothermal energy used at in hotels at Bled (26), Dolenjske Toplice (22),
other five localities (Hotel Diana in M. Sobota, Izlake, Topolšica (18) and Rimske Terme (21), contributing
Dobova AFP, Hotel Cerkno and Vrhnika, numbers 4, about 32.866 TJ in 2018 (9.129 GWh), compared to
31, 25, 27 & 30, resp. in Fig. 1) for space heating and 5.53 GWh in 2015. Only Bled is the site not included
DHW amounted to 17.775 TJ (4.938 GWh) (Table C). already within the DH plant networks, and geothermal
Total value is lower compared with 59.1 GWh in 2015. heat for AC was there 4.617 TJ (1.283 GWh) in 2018.
Since 2015 space heating with geothermal heat was
introduced only at Topolšica (18 in Fig. 1). The DHW 3.5 Geothermal heat pumps
heating is included in these values at one locality
(Cerkno, number 27), while for the other 15 users the At 12 health or spa resorts, already belonging to the DH
DHW heating is already included as part of DH plants’ plant networks, plus at Hotel Diana (Murska Sobota),
at hotels at Radenci, Snovik, Laško, Bled and Izlake
network. However, for 10 users it was possible to
(numbers 4, 9, 16, 20, 26, 31) and at Siliko Vrhnika
calculate separately geothermal energy used for DHW
(number 30), the GHPs, typically of bigger capacity
heating, some 42.768 TJ in 2018 (11.88 GWh), while at
(13.2 MWt altogether), are used in an open loop system
other six users it is included in the space heating values
and couldn’t be evaluated separately. for raising the thermal water temperature for further use
in swimming pools and space heating or just to maintain
3.4 Bathing and swimming pools with balneology, the water temperature in swimming pools, and for
air conditioning and snow melting DHW heating. Their contribution in used geothermal
energy is already accounted for within other
Geothermal heat used for bathing and swimming (incl. applications.
balneology) was in front of all other types in 2018.
There are 15 thermal spas and health resorts, and Geothermal energy use for space heating and cooling in
additional 10 recreation centres (8 of them as part of the small decentralized units in Slovenia is becoming more
hotels’ accommodation) where swimming pools with a popular and widespread. The market boom in larger
surface area of about 51,600 m2 and volume of 67,160 scale began during the last 10 to 15 years after some
m3 are heated by geothermal water directly or more slow period in the early 1990's with low interest in
commonly indirectly through heat exchangers or GHPs. GSHPs due to high initial costs, high price of electricity
Wellhead water temperatures in thermal spas range and low prices of oil and gas. The ubiquitous heat
from 23 to 62°C, of course, inflow temperatures in content within the uppermost part of the Earth’s crust is
lower range are utilized. The total geothermal energy available practically everywhere in Slovenia except
used for bathing and swimming amounted to 197.328 perhaps in the higher mountainous levels (Fig. 2).
TJ in 2018 (54.813 GWh). At some users improvements Depending on local conditions the GSHP units consist
were achieved by better temperature range utilization, of closed loop GCHP (horizontal and vertical heat
first of all at Moravske Toplice (Terme 3000), and at collectors) ones, or open loop groundwater heat pumps
Banovci using heat exchangers, while at Dobrna using (GWHP). Technical, environmental and economic
GHPs. Utilization at Rimske Terme (number 21 in Fig. incentives can be considered advantageous for more
1) has been established again following a general rapid introduction of the GSHP systems. This is also
7
Rajver et al.

backed by support programs from utilities and from the

government through subsidies or credits.

The estimation of exact number of GSHP units

presently installed in Slovenia was not easy task,
nevertheless quite correct numbers are established
despite no available national statistics exist. The HP
units’ sales give practically all the quantity for their
estimation, and we successfully acquire them from
domestic producers and numerous merchant agents of
imported units. As of 31st Dec. 2018, there are about
11,182 operational small GSHP units (typical 12 kW)
that extracted 683.25 TJ (189.792 GWh) of geothermal
heat in 2018. Of these, 46.3% are open-loop systems
that extracted about 352.89 TJ from shallow
groundwater, 42.4% are horizontal closed-loop (with
251.53 TJ), and 11.3% are vertical closed-loop systems
(with 78.83 TJ). Closed-loop units together removed
330.36 TJ/yr from the ground. There are also bigger Figure 7: Shares of geothermal energy used in Slovenia
capacity GSHP units (>20 kW) installed within about in categories of direct use in 2018 (status 31st Dec.
588 systems in public and other buildings, which 2018).
extracted 254.98 TJ in 2018. It is discovered year by
Considerations on high enthalpy geothermal resources
year that not all of them are operational. Of them, 465
in Slovenia were initiated in previous years whether
units are open-loop water-water type (79.1%), 91 units
there are possibilities for electricity production in the
are vertical closed-loop (15.5%) and 32 (5.4%) are
north-eastern part (Pannonian basin) where the highest
horizontal closed-loop systems. With total 11,770
temperatures at depths of 3.5 to 4.5 km are encountered.
GSHP units some 938.227 TJ (GWh) of heat was
The capacity of deep wells, also existing ones, is yet to
extracted in 2018, while 67.68 TJ/yr of heat was
be determined and tested, or new deep exploration
rejected to the ground in the cooling mode, mostly by
(wild cat) boreholes should be drilled at appropriate
GWHP and vertical GCHP systems. Capacity factor for
sites, which must be previously confirmed by better
the small GSHP units is 16.0%, and for the bigger units
geophysical (seismic, microseismic, microgravimetric,
(>20 kW) is 16.3%, the lowest among all the
MT) investigations with a goal to create an EGS.
application types, reflecting that small and big units
usually utilize a rather narrow temperature difference The investments in geothermal (Table F) are just
(< 4 deg.) and for individual heating also the shortest approximate and incomplete, since many direct users
time of full load operating hours, which means not more and those of shallow geothermal don't report such data.
than 6 months with 12 h/day in Slovenian climate Nevertheless, the trend was slowed down with almost
conditions, therefore, usually less than 2000 h/year. no research and surface exploration and practically
without exploration or production drilling. Also, there
4. DISCUSSION was much less construction of new buildings and
The distribution of capacity and annual energy use for swimming pools at thermal resorts or spas. Since 2015
various direct use applications as presented in Table C also no geothermal gradient boreholes have been drilled
are practically all based on data from the users. The in Slovenia.
total thermal capacity currently installed for direct use
5. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND FUTURE
of geothermal energy in Slovenia amounts to roughly
PROSPECTS
62.43 MWt, including GHPs at thermal spas. The
annual energy use at 31 localities amounted to 578.57 Three users in northeastern Slovenia do have plans for
TJ (160.71 GWh), which is by 23.5% higher than in reinjection of thermally used water due to clear
2015 (468.56 TJ as corrected value). It is a consequence evidence regional trend of decreasing of the thermal
of some ups and downs at several users. Annual energy water level. At Čatež geothermal field two wells will be
use (Fig. 6, 7) is now lower for individual space heating, abandoned, and a new make-up well is being drilled this
DH sensu stricto and greenhouses, and higher for air year. At Snovik one well will be remediated. No other
conditioning, bathing with balneology, snow melting projects are underway for further geothermal direct use
and DHW heating in comparison with situation in 2015. development. In the NE part of the country the Petrol
However, the GSHP sector exhibits the largest share Geo d.o.o. (in Lendava) has improved some old oil
(61.9%) in direct use, compared to 59.7% in 2015. wells into geothermal ones which can be used for
aquaculture or greenhouses. The exploration wells at
Janežovci near Ptuj, near Korovci and at Mislinjska
Dobrava still wait for appropriate financial support to
develop the site and to start producing.

8
 Rajver et al.

5.1 Thermal water direct use on promotion and fostering of utilization of shallow
geothermal sources, more precisely:
A doublet scheme is operational in Lendava downtown.
In north-eastern Slovenia the localities are the most (a) GRETA (Near-surface Geothermal Resources in the
vulnerable to overexploitation of thermal water as most Territory of the Alpine Space) involved 12 partners
users capture water from the same aquifer. The problem from six Alpine countries and had these objectives: (i)
has yet to be tackled with needed care. In this sense it identify near-surface geothermal energy potential in the
is unfortunate that the Murska Sobota municipality has Alpine Space, (ii) foster exchange of knowledge and
not completed the extension project for the DH system best-practices on a transnational basis, (iii) integrate
there with inclusion of previously drilled two boreholes near-surface geothermal energy into environmental
in the northern parts of town (Rman et al., 2012). policy instruments. This is also for Slovenia an
Thermal capacity of the new doublet could reach 4 important contribution in stronger implementation of
MWt and geothermal energy use 8.8 GWh/year. It could the GSHP technology within the RES energy plans
have been the second doublet system operating in the (Prestor et al., 2018).
country provided it becomes active at all in future.
(b) GeoPLASMA-CE (Interreg CE project) involves 11
The Interreg project DARLINGe, running between partners from six Central European countries and deals
2016 and 2019, significantly contributed to a better with different aspects of shallow geothermal use for
resource assessment of eastern and northeastern heating and cooling in both, urban as well as non-urban
Slovenia. A harmonized geological 3D model was regions in Central Europe. New management strategies
extended to Croatia, a benchmarking assessment was for a reasonable and sustainable use of shallow
performed at new sites and a numerical model focused geothermal application will be explored in 6 different
on reinjection possibilities is being built. Main results pilot areas located in Germany, Czech Republic,
will be available in summer of 2019. The effects of Poland, Slovakia, Austria and Slovenia. The project
current thermal water abstraction on the hydraulic state aims at generating web-based information systems for
of the Mura Fm. aquifer were simulated by a regional visualization of shallow geothermal potentials and risks
mathematical model of groundwater flow enabling of use. It also intends to initialize an expert platform for
calculation of different development scenarios, connecting experts and stakeholders in the field of
predictions and control of impacts (Nádor et al., 2012, shallow geothermal use in CE.
Rman et al., 2015; Tóth et al., 2016). Trends in
geothermal are focused on enhancing the cascade direct Application of larger and more advanced systems is
use, lowering the outlet thermal water temperature, evident by good practices of GSHPs in the last decade.
promoting higher efficiency of installed capacity for Since 2013 we made a systematic overview and inquiry
direct use, effective problem solutions, regarding for objects with installed GSHP units of bigger rated
thermal water scaling and degassing, as well as power. These plants are rarely included in any records
performing new research for potential geothermal sites because the owners (investors) do not obtain funds from
and implementation of doublets. As the number of users financial incentives such as smaller individual plants.
increases, interference between them has already been Industrial objects with such installations are therefore
noticed. Besides, increased demand for thermal water not in the records, but they represent a significant share
from the same aquifers causes negative quantitative in energy use and installed rated power. Of these bigger
trends, and potential disputes between nearby users. systems some 465 water-water type systems are found,
Almost all thermal water users now have an operating plus 91 vertical closed-loop and 32 horizontal closed-
production monitoring established and from now on loop systems. Few bigger open-loop systems have 4
resource assessment and state evaluation will be much production and 4 reinjection wells or more. Similarly,
more reliable to plan the measures which are really the biggest closed-loop system near Maribor has 24
needed to reach both, environmental and energy goals. BHEs (150 m depth each), another system in Koper has
Reinjection should become nationally supported to 58 BHEs (with depths of 18 to 32 m).
preserve the existent capacities of thermal water, and
Our effort to distinguish the numbers of the GSHP units
many activities are now being taken also from the user’s
with rated power of >20 kW from the total number is
side to raise funds from its establishment.
quite tedious, since it is difficult to find appropriate
The planned extension to about 7 geothermal DH objects with such installations, but as a first attempt
systems (sensu stricto) in Slovenia by 2016 (Dumas et Figure 8 shows the first ca 180 systems with GSHP
al., 2013) proved to be unrealistic, as the extensions at units of bigger power, with addition of so far known
Murska Sobota and Benedikt and new plants at hydrothermal HP units. Data for this figure are
Turnišče and Ormož just did not happen. No major collected on a voluntary basis.
investments are planned in these communities.
As regard to GSHPs contribution the Heat Pumps
5.2 Ground source heat pumps Barometer (EurObserver, 2018, Table 3 therein) shows,
to our opinion, just slightly lower numbers of GSHP
There were several projects in the past in Slovenia, units in operation in 2016 and 2017 for Slovenia than
however, two were running in the last 3-year period. ours, but also too low numbers of sold GSHP units than
GRETA is officially finished in March 2019 and are ours, especially in 2017 (Table 2 therein). Figures 9
GeoPLASMA-CE in autumn 2019. They are focused to 11 show the trend of all GSHP units (in number,
9
Rajver et al.

capacity and energy use) since our first data acquisition characterization of the most important cross border
in 1994. Great technological improvements are evident geothermal reservoirs was effectuated on the high
with air-water HP units. The HP producers state they expert level. This is the basis for self-confidence and
sell at least 5-times more air-water HP units than encouragement to develop these resources till 2020 and
geothermal HPs, and some of them claim this ratio is beyond, following both energy and environmental
12:1 in favor of air-water HPs. goals. We can conclude that without these activities any
further development of cross border thermal reservoirs
6. CONCLUSIONS would be highly unpredictable or unsecure. In this
programming period 2014 – 2020 we can expect
Owing to lower annual flowrates from several wells at
successful development towards common
different users, which is an evidence of delivered transboundary management. Further development in
maximum allowed pumping quantities, and some the next programming period should provide best
technical difficulties, direct heat use from thermal water
practices of doublet technologies in the Pannonian
does not show any clear increase on yearly basis. The
basin sediments, monitoring and reporting and
GSHP market is more predictable, as its growth rises
benchmarking of sustainability of the resources’
for about 78.65 TJ (21.85 GWh) every year in the last
managements. Supporting the research and
5-year period. Actual (Dec. 2018) contribution in direct development activities focused on reinjection
heat use from deep geothermal energy reached 578.57 technology/well completion in Neogene intergranular
TJ (160.71 GWh) and thermal energy used by all GSHP
aquifers of the Pannonian basin is highly expected.
units so far reached 938.23 TJ (260.62 GWh) yearly, all
together 1,516.79 TJ (421.33 GWh or 36.228 ktoe).
Consequently, target values from draft of renovated
NREAP-SI (NREAP, 2010) are still quite distant and a REFERENCES
lot of effort will be needed in this programming period
Diepolder, G. et al. (the GeoMol team): The 3D
and beyond 2020.
geological modeland geopotentials of the Mura-
The lower annual energy use in 2018 compared to Zala Basin, in: GeoMol-Assessing subsurface
2016-2017 is also a consequence of increased potentials of the Alpine Foreland Basins for
efficiency of geothermal energy use, and this is the sustainable planning and use of natural resources,
most important achievement and significant step Diepolder, G. (Ed.), 146-156, Bayerisches
forward for the sustainability and development of the Landesamt für Umwelt BEA, Augsburg, (2015).
potential for new users. It is a consequence of a huge Dumas, P., Angelino, L., Boissavy, C.: Geothermal
effort made by the authorities and Geological Survey of District Heating. Analysis of Geothermal District
Slovenia. It was based on several activities that were Heating market in Europe. EGEC market report
conducted in the last several years: 1) setting up 2013/2014, third ed. (2013), 21-33.
numerical model of the most important reservoir in
northeastern Slovenia, 2) benchmarking of EurObserv’ER: Heat pumps barometer. EurObserv’ER
management efficiency of all users, 3) setting up the project, (Nov. 2018), 1-14.
most important indicators of efficient management for Kralj, P. and Kralj, P.: Overexploitation of geothermal
the concession contract, 4) joining data from different wells in Murska Sobota, northeastern Slovenia,
authorities and joined evaluation, 5) granting the Proc. of the World Geothermal Congress 2000,
decrees for the users for establishing their monitoring Kyushu-Tohoku, Japan, (2000), paper #0434, 837-
programs and reporting templates. 842.
With continuation of these activities we can expect Lapanje, A., Baek, R., Budkovič, T., Domberger, G.,
significant improvement also in following years. It was Goetzl, G., Hribernik, K., Kumelj, Š., Letouze, G.,
also an effort made to improve the requirements for Lipiarski, P., Poltnig, W. and Rajver, D.:
water reinjection, especially regarding fissured and Geothermal resources of northern and north-
karstified aquifers. eastern Slovenia, RRA Koroška, GeoZS,
Dravograd, Ljubljana, (2007), 126 p.
We were faced with ample lack of data and information
that are needed to reveal the environmental status of Lapanje, A., Rajver, D., Székely, E., Kumelj, Š.,
geothermal groundwater resources, to set the Mozetič, S., Juhász, I., Bányai, P., Tóth, L. and
environmental goals, to set the critical points when the Hamza, I.: Review of geothermal energy
additional or supplementary measures would have to be utilization in north-eastern Slovenia and south-
implemented and to set up the sustainable management western Hungary, GeoZS, MAFI, (2010), available
of these resources. Activities in the last years revealed on http://www.t-jam.eu/.
deteriorating status of thermal water resources at Lapanje, A. and Rman, N.: Thermal and thermomineral
different locations and at a regional level in water, in: The geology of Slovenia, Pleničar, M.,
northeastern and eastern Slovenia. It was recognized Ogorelec, B. and Novak, M. (Eds.), Geological
that the common understanding of natural systems Survey of Slovenia, Ljubljana, (2009), 553-560.
extending across the state borders was essential for
sustainable transboundary resources management.
Very important progress was made where common
10
 Rajver et al.

NREAP: Action plan for renewable energy sources for Rajver, D., Lapanje, A., Rman, N., Prestor, J.:
a period 2010-2020. Ministry for infrastructure, Geothermal energy use, Country update for
(2010), Ljubljana, 134 p. (in Slovene). Slovenia. Proc. of the European Geothermal
Congress 2016, Strasbourg, France (2016), 1-18.
Nádor, A., Lapanje, A., Tóth, G., Rman, N., Szöcs, T.,
Prestor, J., Uhrin, A., Rajver, D., Fodor, L., Muráti, Rajver, D., Rman, N., Lapanje, A. and Prestor, J.:
J. and Székely, E.: Transboundary geothermal Geothermal development in Slovenia: Country
resources of the Mura-Zala basin: a need for joint update report 2010-2014. Proc. of the World
thermal aquifer management of Slovenia and Geothermal Congress 2015, Melbourne, Australia
Hungary, Geologija, 55/2, Ljubljana, (2012), 209- (2015), paper #1034, 1-14.
224. doi:10.5474/geologija.2012.013
Ravnik, D.: Geothermal investigations in Slovenia (in
Placer, L.: Principles of the tectonic subdivision of Slovene, with English summary). Geologija, 34,
Slovenia. Geologija, 51, Ljubljana, (2008), 205- (1991), 265-301. doi:10.5474/geologija.1991.006
217. doi:10.5474/geologija.2008.021
Ravnik, D., Rajver, D., Poljak, M., and Živčić, M.:
Pleničar, M., Ogorelec, B. and Novak, M. (Eds.): Overview of the geothermal field of Slovenia in the
Geologija Slovenije = The geology of Slovenia. area between the Alps, the Dinarides and the
Geological Survey of Slovenia, Ljubljana, (2009), Pannonian basin. Tectonophysics, 250, (1995),
612 pp. 135-149. SSDI 0040-1951(95)00031-3
Prestor, J., Rajver, D., Pestotnik, S. and Lapanje, A.: Rman, N.: Analysis of long-term thermal water
Low-temperature geothermal energy. abstraction and its impact on low-temperature
Inexhaustible energy source just below our house intergranular geothermal aquifers in the Mura-Zala
(in Slovene), Geological Survey of Slovenia, basin, NE Slovenia, Geothermics, 51, Amsterdam,
Ljubljana, (2012), booklet. (2014), 214-227.
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2014.01.011
Prestor, J., Nádor, A., Lapanje, A., Rman, N., Szőcs, T.,
Černák, R., Marcin, D., Benkova, K., Götzl, G., Rman, N., Lapanje, A., Rajver, D.: Analysis of thermal
Weibold, J., and Bruestle, A.-K.: A comprehensive water utilization in the northeastern Slovenia,
overview on the existing regulatory and financial Geologija, 55/2, Ljubljana, (2012), 225-242.
barriers on geothermal energy utilization in doi:10.5474/geologija.2012.014
Austria, Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia. Proc. of
Rman, N., Gál, N., Marcin, D., Weilbold, J., Schubert,
the European Geothermal Congress 2013, Pisa,
G., Lapanje, A., Rajver, D., Benkova, K. and
Italy (2013), 1-14.
Nádor, A.: Potentials of transboundary thermal
Prestor, J., Zosseder, K., Böttcher, F., Schulze, M., water resources in the western part of the
Capodaglio, P., Bottig, M., Rupprecht, D., Pestotnik, S., Pannonian Basin, Geothermics, 66, (2015), 88-98.
Maragna, C., Martin, J.C., Durst, P., Casasso, A., doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2015.01.013
Zambelli, P., Vaccaro, R., Huggenberger, P., Spinolo, F.,
Padoan, M., Baietto, A., Gilbert, J.: Harmonized Tóth, G., Rman, N., Rotár-Szalkai, Á., Kerékgyártó, T.,
guidelines for legal and technological procedures. Szőcs, T., Lapanje, A., Černák, R., Remsík, A.,
GRETA project, Deliverable D2.3.1 – Definition Schubert, G., NádorM A.: Transboundary fresh
of the guidelines for legal and technological and thermal groundwater flows in the west part of
procedures, (2018), 1-34. the Pannonian Basin, Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 57, (2016), 439–454. doi:
Rajver, D., Ravnik, D., Premru, U., Mioč, P., Kralj, P.: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.021
Slovenia, in: Atlas of Geothermal Resources in
Europe, Hurter, S. and Haenel, R. (Eds.), European Website 1: http://www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-
Commission, Research Directorate-General, projects/darlinge
Publ.No. 17811, Luxembourg, 92 p., 89 plates,
(2002).
Rajver, D., and Ravnik, D.: Geothermal characteristics Acknowledgements
of the Krško basin, Slovenia, based on geophysical The authors are grateful to all direct heat users who
research. Phys. Chem. Earth, 28, (2003), 443-455. provided data on their direct heat use of geothermal
doi:10.1016/S1474-7065(03)00064-0 energy, as well as to all heat pump producers who
Rajver, D., Lapanje, A. and Rman, A.: Possibilities for delivered some data on GSHP units sold in the country,
electricity production from geothermal energy in and to owners and managers of many objects for
Slovenia in the next decade (in Slovene), specific data on the GSHP units of bigger rated power
Geologija, 55/1, Ljubljana, (2012), 117-140. installed. The authors appreciate help of Petra Meglič
doi:10.5474/geologija.2012.009 for preparing the Figure 1.

11
Rajver et al.

Figure 8: Distribution of the first 190 installations with collected detailed data on GSHP systems with rated power
of at least 20 kW, by type of installation, and 6 known hydrothermal HP unit systems (data collected on a
voluntary basis). The isotherms show temperature at 250 m depth.

Figure 9: Trend of numbers of operational GSHP units (both small and big rated power) since 1994.

12
 Rajver et al.

Figure 10: Trend of total thermal capacity of operational GSHP units (both small and big rated power) since
1994.

Figure 11: Trend of shallow geothermal energy used by operational GSHP units (both small and big rated power)
since 1994.

13
Rajver et al.

Tables A-G

Table A: Present and planned geothermal power plants, total numbers

Total Electric Power Share of geothermal in total

Geothermal Power Plants
in the country electric power generation

Capacity Production Capacity Production Capacity Production

(MWe) (GWhe/yr) (MWe) (GWhe/yr) (%) (%)

In operation
3941 15003
end of 2018

Under construction
/ /
end of 2018

Total projected
4226 3 13935 4
by 2020

Total expected
4627 3 15412 4
by 2025

Under development
In case information on geothermal licenses is available in your country, please specify here
the number of licenses in force in 2018 (indicate exploration/exploitation if applicable):
Under investigation

All values: a 100 % share from the Nuclear PP is taken into account (both 50 % Slovenian plus 50% Croatian ownership)
Production values: Net generation (transferred to the network)
3,4Source:
Capacity in 2018: Indikativna elektroenergetska bilanca 2018, and Poročilo o stanju na področju energetike v Slovenije
2017. Total net generation published on pages ENTSO-E. - An internal study by the EIMV manufacturer; values in the
table represent values for scenario 3 from the Development Plan. This plan was approved by the Ministry but has not
yet been published on the website, as it is in the process of designing (for data 2020 and 2025)

Table B: Existing geothermal power plants, individual sites

No plants

Table C: Present and planned deep geothermal district heating (DH) plants and other uses for heating and
cooling, total numbers

Geothermal heat in Geothermal heat for Geothermal heat in

Geothermal DH plants
agriculture and industry buildings balneology and other

Capacity Production Capacity Production Capacity Production Capacity Production

(MWth) (GWhth/yr) (MWth) (GWhth/yr) (MWth) (GWhth/yr) (MWth) (GWhth/yr)

In operation
46.89 124.38 8.72 25.01 2.52 4.94 4.30 6.39
end of 2018

Under constru-
ction end 2018

Total projected
by 2020

Total expected
by 2025

14
 Rajver et al.

Table D1: Existing geothermal district heating (DH) plants, individual sites

Geoth. Total Geoth.

Year 2018
Cooling capacity capacity share in
Locality Plant Name commis- CHP production
installed installed total prod.
sioned (GWhth/y)
(MWth) (MWth) (%)

Banovci-Veržej Terme Banovci 1990 N N 3.198 4.8 13.7361 99

Čatež Terme Čatež 1979 N N 9.227 15.51 22.7964 89

Dobova Dobova Paradiso 2010 N N 1.216 1.326 0.5667 91

1855/
Dobrna Terme Dobrna N N 0.483 0.57 1.9682 85?
1979

Terme Dolenjske 2003

Dolenjske Toplice N Y 2.524 4.26 5.0633 55?
Toplice /2008

Lendava Terme Lendava 1997 N N 1.745 2.5 7.3798 86

Lendava Petrol dd/Petrol

2007 N N, RI 2.209 5.0 5.0273 97
Geo d.o.o.

Mala Nedelja BioTerme 2007 N N 1.506 2.726 0.7564 60

Terme & MTC

Maribor 1996 N N 0.380 0.707 0.3481 60?
Fontana

1986/
Moravske Toplice Terme 3000 N Y 11.055 15.0 28.1572 99
1989

Moravske Toplice Terme Vivat 2006 N Y 3.295 4.409 6.7803 100

Podčetrtek Terme Olimia 1988 N N 1.570 1.72 7.3741 86

Ptuj Terme Ptuj 1980 N N 1.500 3.1 6.5792 50?

Rimske Toplice Rimske Terme 2010 N Y 1.423 2.384 4.2211 93

Terme Šmarješke
Šmarješke Toplice 1987 N N 2.583 3.183 3.8271 98
Toplice

Tešanovci Grede 2002 N N 0.753 0.753 4.5789 100

Topolšica Terme Topolšica 1982 N Y 2.209 3.304 5.2012 90?

total 46.888 71.253 124.381 90

Table E: Shallow geothermal energy, ground source heat pumps (GSHP)

Geothermal Heat Pumps (GSHP), total New (additional) GSHP in 2018

Number Capacity Production Number Capacity Share in new

(MWth) (GWhth/yr) (MWth) constr. (%)

In operation 11770 185.04 260.62 940 24.46 4 to 5

end of 2018

Projected total 13650 230 324

by 2020

15
Rajver et al.

Table F: Investment and Employment in geothermal energy

in 2018 Expected in 2020

Expenditures Personnel Expenditures Personnel

(million €) (number) (million €) (number)

Geothermal electric power 0 0 0 0

Geothermal direct uses est. 1 23 est. 0.80 23

Shallow geothermal est. 10 130 est. 11 130

total 11 153 11.8 153

Table G: Incentives, Information, Education

Geothermal electricity Deep Geothermal for Shallow geothermal

heating and cooling

Financial Incentives Scheme of Energy Advice

– R&D (EnSVet), Eco Fund

Financial Incentives DIS: Project investment for DIS, LIL

– Investment agriculture
LIL: yes; RC: no

Financial Incentives no no no
– Operation/Production

Information activities yes yes, through media Brochures (Preinvestment

– promotion for the public analysis for shallow
geothermal applications)

Information activities yes, articles and media public reports (explanation) yes, through public media
– geological information

Education/Training no yes, through different yes, through different

– Academic studies studies

Education/Training no Yes, workshops yes, Chamber of engineers

– Vocational (explanation) (education)

Key for financial incentives:

DIS Direct investment support FIT Feed-in tariff -A Add to FIT or FIP on case
the amount is determined
LIL Low-interest loans FIP Feed-in premium by auctioning
RC Risk coverage REQ Renewable Energy Quota O Other (please explain)

16