major milestone

Houston geothermal startup selects Texas location for first energy storage facility

Houston startup Sage Geosystems has tapped a utility provider for an energy storage facility in the San Antonio metro area. Photo via sagegeosystems.com

Houston-based geothermal energy startup Sage Geosystems has teamed up with a utility provider for an energy storage facility in the San Antonio metro area.

The three-megawatt EarthStore facility will be on land controlled by the San Miguel Electric Cooperative, which produces electricity for customers in 47 South Texas counties. The facility will be located in the town of Christine, near the cooperative’s coal-fired power plant.

Sage says its energy storage system will be paired with solar energy to supply power for the grid operated by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT). The facility is set to open later this year.

“Once operational, our EarthStore facility in Christine will be the first geothermal energy storage system to store potential energy deep in the earth and supply electrons to a power grid,” Cindy Taff, CEO of Sage Geosystems, says in a news release.

The facility is being designed to store geothermal energy during six- to 10-hour periods.

“Long-duration energy storage is crucial for the ERCOT utility grid, especially with the increasing integration of intermittent wind and solar power generation,” says Craig Courter, CEO of the San Miguel Electric Cooperative.

Trending News

A View From HETI

Researchers from the University of Houston believe that aligning state recycling policies could create a circular plastics economy. Photo courtesy UH.

The latest white paper from the University of Houston’s Energy Transition Institute analyzes how the U.S. currently handles plastics recycling and advocates for a national, policy-driven approach.

Ramanan Krishnamoorti, vice president for energy and innovation at UH; Debalina Sengupta, assistant vice president and chief operating officer at the Energy Transition Institute; and UH researcher Aparajita Datta authored the paper titled “Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for Plastics Packaging: Gaps, Challenges and Opportunities for Policies in the United States.” In the paper, the scientists argue that the current mix of state laws and limited recycling infrastructure are holding back progress at the national level.

EPR policies assign responsibility for the end-of-life management of plastic packaging to producers or companies, instead of taxpayers, to incentivize better product design and reduce waste.

“My hope is this research will inform government agencies on what policies could be implemented that would improve how we approach repurposing plastics in the U.S.,” Krishnamoorti said in a news release. “Not only will this information identify policies that help reduce waste, but they could also prove to be a boon to the circular economy as they can identify economically beneficial pathways to recycle materials.”

The paper notes outdated recycling infrastructure and older technology as roadblocks.

Currently, only seven states have passed EPR laws for plastic packaging. Ten others are looking to pass similar measures, but each looks different, according to UH. Additionally, each state also has its own reporting system, which leads to incompatible datasets. Developing national EPR policies or consistent nationwide standards could lead to cleaner and more efficient processes, the report says.

The researchers also believe that investing in sorting, processing facilities, workforce training and artificial intelligence could alleviate issues for businesses—and particularly small businesses, which often lack the resources to manage complex reporting systems. Digital infrastructure techniques and moving away from manual data collection could also help.

Public education on recycling would also be “imperative” to the success of new policies, the report adds.

“Experts repeatedly underscored that public education and awareness about EPR, including among policymakers, are dismal,” the report reads. “Infrastructural limitations, barriers to access and the prevailing belief that curbside recycling is ineffective in the U.S. contribute to public dissatisfaction, misinformation and, in some cases, opposition toward the use of taxpayers’ and ratepayers’ contributions for EPR.”

For more information, read the full paper here.

Trending News