[Update] Think Big Norwich: Why Not Community Geothermal?

Map of the Proposed Heat District in 2010 Norwich Energy Committee Report

One of the reasons I plan to vote against Article 8 is that the Town Facilities Working Group gave no consideration to a geothermal heating district. Unbeknownst to me, the Energy Committee backed the idea of a heating district for the Village in a 2010 report. That report, as well as a pilot project in Massachusetts, are the reasons for this update. Time to dust off that 2010 report and do some legwork!

Back in February, I wrote a blog post about West Union, Iowa, population of about 2,500. In 2014, it created a municipal heating district that provides geothermal heating and cooling to about 60 businesses within three blocks of the city’s main square. In that post, I wondered why the Town was not considering that option. Instead, Article 8 proposed Tracy Hall go it alone and create a single user geothermal system.

In that post, I said.

Perhaps,Town officials are not thinking big enough with their geothermal proposal for Tracy Hall on the ballot for Town Meeting. Imagine, instead, a community geothermal project, available to homes, churches, and businesses within a couple of blocks of Tracy Hall. Talk about a reduction in carbon footprint!

2010 Norwich Energy Committee Report

My post had one error (at least), however. I was unaware that the Town has previously considered community geothermal. The Norwich Energy Committee assessed the prospects of a geothermal heat district for the Village in a 2010 Report. The Report’s conclusion: the project deserved further study.

I don’t recall any public official mentioning the 2010 Report in any public presentation to voters about Article 8. Please correct me if I am wrong because it seems like a significant oversight.

The Town’s consultant, Energy Efficient Investments (EEI), did not mention the 2010 Report in its presentation to the Selectboard on January 15. There, it dismissed the concept of a heating district. At about 49 minutes in on the CATV video, Mike Davey of EEI wonders whether businesses would want to be customers and whether the Town wanted to a public utility.

Because EEI gets paid only if Article 8 is approved, its advice about geothermal heating districts is possibly not disinterested. In fact, EEI’s speculation about lack of consumer interest runs counter to the survey results published in the 2010 Norwich Energy Committee Report.

Consumer Interest

The 2010 Report saw the “largest hurdle” to a district heat project as gaining “acceptance of a large enough share of the consumers in the district to allow the concept to be feasible.” A survey indicated that 56% of the property owners responding were interested in the concept. A mere 8% said no.

2010 Norwich Energy Committee Report at 21.

Fast forward to 2020. I am going to go out on limb and posit that because of increased concern about climate change, most property owners in Village would be very interested in a geothermal system.

A Village heating district deserves more study. Seems like a good task for Norwich’s share of the new Regional Energy Coordinator position. Under the draft agreement, Norwich is entitled to approximately 472 hours of work from that person per year. See Selectboard packet for July 8, 2020 at page 38. Note, however, that TRORC may dump Norwich from the pilot program, for the sin of asking too many questions. See Selectboard packet for July 22 meeting.

Massachusetts

A Massachusetts gas utility is exploring district heating using geothermal. In January 2020, public radio station WBUR reported that Eversource proposed “three different pilot projects to Massachusetts regulators in order to prove that [geothermal] networked systems are feasible.”

The Geo Micro District feasibility study by the nonprofit HEET heavily influenced Eversource’s thinking. The feasibility study “explores whether replacing segments of the aging natural gas infrastructure in Massachusetts with ground source heat pump technology can meet heating and cooling needs at various building densities,” according to a news release by HEET announcing its receipt of the APA Sustainable Communities Division award.

The Norwich Village obviously has no gas lines. However, as noted in the 2010 Norwich Energy Committee Report the water lines serving the Village provide a means of delivering geothermal heating and cooling to buildings. Former Selectboard member Steve Flanders revisited that concept in his April 2020 memorandum to the Selectboard. The Board declined to hear a short presentation.

Also, the HEET feasibility study focused on a prototype geothermal system serving a single street segment. See picture above. Importantly, Norwich may soon get an opportunity to build its own geothermal street segment. The School Board is thinking about a sewer connection to Hartford. Digging a trench along the Main Street side of the Green for a sewer line also presents a piggyback opportunity to install a geothermal line. Such a geothermal line has the potential to serve Tracy Hall, Marion Cross School, the business block opposite the Green, as well as St. Barnabas Church.

Thanks for reading my blog. If you want to subscribe, please submit your email address in the subscribe box in the right hand column above.