When navigating unfamiliar territory, a map is extremely handy. For those navigating the relatively uncharted terrain of geothermal energy extraction in Australia, the path may just have become a lot clearer. The Finlaysons checklist details, on a state-by-state basis, the regulatory approvals developers have to obtain in order to establish geothermal energy plants, thereby paving the way for a less ad-hoc and improvised process.

Such a checklist was needed, Ms Reznikov explains, because no full-scale geothermal plants have yet been built in Australia and most project managers and regulators involved in geothermal development have therefore never had to go through the approval processes before.

“That means that for a large number of the legal requirements that are set out in environment protection legislation, water access legislation and others, no-one has even considered how they apply to a geothermal project, or even whether they apply to a geothermal project,” says Ms Reznikov.

“The purpose of the checklist is to give project managers a head start in terms of identifying which approvals they need, which regulators to be talking to, and what exemptions might apply, and an idea of how far in advance they need to make the relevant applications,” Ms Reznikov continues.

Upon its initial release in April 2010, the geothermal checklist was applicable only to South Australia. Since then, four new checklists have been devised for use in New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia and Tasmania.

Each state-specific checklist covers a broad range of subject matter – including geothermal energy regulation, water access, environmental authorisations, planning and development permits, and tenure. Native title and Aboriginal heritage, electricity regulation, dangerous goods and radioactive materials are also covered.

The idea for the checklist emerged when Finlaysons was approached by geothermal development company Petratherm to prepare a checklist for one of its projects. Petratherm was impressed with the results and recommended to Australia's two peak geothermal bodies, the Australian Geothermal Energy Association (AGEA), and the Australian Geothermal Energy Group (AGEG), that they ask Finlaysons to prepare a generic list for the whole industry. Petratherm assisted Finlaysons in the composition of the checklist by providing details about a prototypical geothermal project development, from exploration through to proof of concept, pilot plant, demonstration plant and full-scale plant.

Ms Reznikov says Finlaysons then looked at each stage of development and identified all the permits, licences, approvals, consents and authorisations that would need to be obtained in order to proceed with and complete the project.

The checklist underwent a rigorous peer review before it became available industry wide. With the assistance of AGEA and AGEG, Finlaysons sent the checklist to geothermal operators and relevant government departments in each state for commentary.

“Most of the commentary confirmed that our research was spot on,” says Ms Reznikov. In addition to confirming that Finlaysons was on the right track, the peer review also garnered information from regulators about what they look for in an application. This information was then able to be built into the checklist, thus making it a more comprehensive document.

While the Finlaysons checklist, free to members of AGEA and AGEG, is likely to make geothermal exploration and development somewhat easier in Australia, it still remains a challenging endeavour.

Ms Reznikov says that one of the obstacles that geothermal developers face is the fact that most Australian environmental protection and water access legislation was written before geothermal technology was developed. As a result, Ms Reznikov points out, there are requirements that apply to geothermal operations that were not necessarily what was intended.

“For instance, requirements to have a water allocation to take water out of a well were most likely intended to regulate water that was being removed from aquifers to be used (for instance in crop irrigation) and consumed,” describes Ms Reznikov. “But geothermal operations involve injecting the water back into the ground after the heat has been used to generate the electricity on the surface, so the amount of water ‘consumed’ is very small (or nothing – i.e. what comes out goes back in.)”

While some states have water access legislation that takes this into account, says Ms Reznikov, those that do not will require a large water allocation to cover the volumes of water being extracted from the production wells. “This can cause problems if the area has limited volumes available for allocation – there is even the potential for it to stop a geothermal project going ahead”.

Certainly there is concern within the geothermal community regarding these types of obstacles, but the availability of the geothermal checklist should make navigating them less difficult.

Given that the multi-jurisdiction checklist was released in November 2010, it is still too soon to gauge a response from the geothermal industry, but it is expected to be a welcome and useful tool.