Presented at “Short Course VI on Utilization of Low- and Medium-Enthalpy Geothermal Resources and Financial

Aspects of Utilization”, organized by UNU-GTP and LaGeo, in Santa Tecla, El Salvador, March 23-29, 2014.

GEOTHERMAL TRAINING PROGRAMME LaGeo S.A. de C.V.

RISKS AND RISK MITIGATION IN GEOTHERMAL DEVELOPMENT

Paul K. Ngugi
Geothermal Development Company Limited
Nairobi
KENYA
[email protected]

ABSTRACT

Geothermal projects are designed to be within time, budget, planned specification

and legal and regulatory provisions while meeting the project objectives. The
geothermal development is exposed to various risks of varying degrees throughout
all its phases and stages of development. The resource risk distinguishes
geothermal projects from others projects. This persists through all phases and
stages of development. It takes several forms including resource existence and
size, suitability, sustainability and utilization challenges. Other risks include way
leaves, market, financing, commercial and macro-economic risks.

Comprehensive and detailed surface studies, numerical simulation and interference

tests during resource utilization are cheaper ways that inform the possibilities of
occurrence of various forms of resource risk and provide information for
formulation of resource risk mitigation strategies. Coupled with reservoir
monitoring and incremental development, resource risk can be managed
effectively. Undertaking a baseline environmental and social studies can avoid
project disruption and law suits against the project. Deliberate engagement of the
host community can bring about the positive understanding of the project and buy
in.

Conservative assumptions and use of time and financial contingencies are essential
in deriving a tariff that safeguards investors’ interest, use of generation tax credit,
concessional financing such as green funds and carbon credit help improve project
financial competitiveness, power purchase agreement shield the investor from the
market risk inflation and foreign exchange risks.

1. INTRODUCTION

The objective of undertaking a geothermal power project is to generate power for consumers on a
value for money basis, generate return for the investor over the hurdle rate and service debts from
lenders and suppliers when they become due, while still making sufficient funds to meet operational
and maintenance cost. For these goals to be met, a demand for the power must exist, a resource
characteristics are suitable and can sustainably be exploited for the economic life of the project within
the legal and environmental framework has to be identified, a matching proven technology to develop
and exploit the resource must exist at a competitive price, investors, lenders, off-takers and
technologists must be available for the project to take effect. The probability that the project will be

1
Ngugi 2 Risk mitigation in geoth. development

implemented according to plan and meet the desired goals without a hitch or glitch is highly unlikely.
Therefore forestalling risks, estimating impacts and defining responses to emerging issues is an
essential aspect of project management. Risk may be defined as the chance that an investment's
actual return will be different than expected.

Risk involves a state of uncertainty where some of the possible outcomes are undesirable (Hadi et al.,
2010). Figure 1 (red) shows the resource uncertainty versus investment cost (blue) for the various
geothermal development phases and stages. The figure show that the uncertainty decreases overtime
and as the project progress. However, the uncertainty is not totally eliminated. On the other hand the
investment cost progressively increases as the project progresses.

Development Stage 0 2 4 6 8
Data Review
100%
Detailed Surface
Study
EXPLORATION

Project Preparation 80%

RESOURCE

Exploration Drilling

Appraisal 60%
APPRAISAL
RESOURCE

Feasibility Study

40%
Production Drilling

Detailed Design
CONSTRUCTION

20%
Project Construction

Commissioning

FIGURE 1: Development resource uncertainty and investment cost against project progress

2. LAND ACCESS AND WAY LEAVES

Like all other physical projects, land is a required for the geothermal project to establish the wells,
road infrastructure, the power plant and the power evacuation system. As human populations increase,
land which is a constant production factor continues to become scarce and precious. Geothermal
development therefore is in competition with other land uses. Land access and way leaves is one of
the most sensitive aspects of the geothermal project especially because it causes the project to results
in resettling people out of the project area.

Land negotiation can be protracted stalling or delaying the project. Implementing an attractive
resettlement package, providing adequate time to procure land and deliberate strategic stakeholder
communication programs are vital for the success of the project. Ultimately, government support may
be necessary when a need arises for compulsory acquisition of land (Government of Kenya, 1982).

3. RESOURCE RISKS

The one risk that distinguishes a geothermal project from all other power projects is the resource risk.
All other risks are generally well understood, can be quantified and therefore addressed. Every
geothermal field is unique. In addition, sections of a geothermal field may exhibit different
characteristics and or different development challenges. In Kenya for instance, the three geothermal
fields so far drilled do not bear similar reservoir characteristics. In particular, the greater Olkaria
Risk mitigation in geoth. development 3 Ngugi

geothermal field, has different section of the fields have exhibited different characteristics and within
the same sections it has been observed that some wells have different chemistry, well output,
temperature, pressure, enthalpy and drilling challenges. The resource risk is not only confined to the
resource exploration and appraisal development stage but in general persists throughout the entire
economic life of the project although of varying degrees. The resource risk falls into several
categories some of which are existence, resource size, suitability, and utilization challenges.

3.1 Existence

It is not sufficient that a geothermal prospect possesses magnificent surface manifestations such as
geysers, fumaroles, hot springs, steaming and altered grounds or mud pools. To prove commercial
viability of a resource, drilling of deep wells is required. Infrastructure such as roads, water system
and other supporting facilities are required for drilling of exploration wells. Further, funds are
required for drilling of wells, mobilization and demobilization of drilling equipment. The
mobilization and demobilization costs may be sizable. This is the first stage of the project that
requires significant funds. At this stage, uncertainty of the outcome is highest. To increase the
probability of successfully drilling a discharging well, various studies are undertaken. The studies are
aimed at estimating or predicting the existence of a heat source, reservoir temperature, existence of
reservoir fluids and recharge mechanism and geological structures to support evolution of a
geothermal reservoir and depth of the reservoir.

The studies that are undertaken include geological and hydrogeological studies, gravity measurement,
resistivity measurement, sampling of fumaroles gas seepages, chemistry of borehole fluids and
temperature measurement. The encountering magmatic gases indicate possible existence of a heat
source, geothermometry analysis undertaken with the chemistry of the sampled fluids provides insight
to the possible reservoir temperature, micro-seismic activities may indicate where the fluid movement
exists (target for drilling) and the possible reservoir depth and resistivity anomalies may indicate the
possible areal size of the resource. High seepage of reservoir gases may indicate possible high
permeability a precursor for large output wells and chemistry of the sampled fluids indicate the upflow
within the system or possible development problems such as scaling. Temperature gradient
measurements are used to estimate top of the reservoir. Geophysical measurements also help indicate
the top of the reservoir thus aid in designing well casing programs.

It is the strength of convincing detailed surface studies tha exploration wells are sited. In the event
that none of the three wells typically drilled at this stage are productive, then further development is
halted until a review of the data is undertaken. On the other hand, if one well discharges fluid, the
resource is said to be proven. It is common practice to assume a low success rate for the exploration
wells to reflect the level of risk in a financial model.

To motivate privates sector and governments to invest in this stage of development, the African Union
Commission with the support of donor community have devised a grant termed Geothermal Risk
Mitigation Fund (GRMF) available only to a few countries in Eastern Africa. The grant is designed to
meet part of the infrastructure cost as well as the cost for the drilling of exploration well. An
additional component may be available to the investors if the project progresses to appraisal drilling.

3.2 Suitability

It is not uncommon for wells that have discharged fluid to be plugged because the fluids they
produced are corrosive, or remain idle due to temperature inversion or cyclic discharge as well scaling.
There are generally three technologies employed in the exploitation of the geothermal resource for
electric power generation namely steam turbine/ flush technology, binary technology and a hybrid
model.
Ngugi 4 Risk mitigation in geoth. development

Temperature, pressure, enthalpy and permeability are the major criteria for suitability of a resource.
The higher the temperature/pressure, the better is the resource. Low yielding wells with low
temperature increases capital investment because a larger number of wells would be required for a
particular plant size. Permeability influences the well capacity which is a product of fluid mass and
enthalpy. High mass flow and enthalpy results in wells with high potential power potential. Large
amounts of non-condensable gases, corrosive nature of fluids and potential to develop scaling reduces
the value of the resource.

The cost of drilling accounts for the greater resource development cost and is further influenced by the
depth of the resource. Deep seated resource or high drilling costs can inhibit the development of a
resource.

Investing in studies which lead to siting of high yielding wells with high temperature/ pressure and
avoiding drilling in areas with potential for scaling improves financial performance for the project.
Conservative assumptions on well productivity are essential when projecting capital cost and tariff.

3.3 Size

After drilling a successful discovery well, there

remains a great uncertainty as to what resource area
exists with exploitable fluid characteristics (Sanyal
and Koenig, 1995). Resistivity measurements used
to make initial resource size estimates are known to
deviate from reality (Hadi et al., April 2010). Figure
2 shows a typical resistivity profile used for siting
wells. Further appraisal wells are drilled in order to
delineate the areal area of the resource and to
confirm suitability of the resource. Conceptual FIGURE 2: Resistivity profile used for siting
models updated using data from exploration wells wells (Hadi et al., 2010)
can greatly improve the success of siting subsequent
wells. However, the risk of drilling unsuccessful well remains significantly high. Provision for failed
wells in the financial models is necessary to accommodate this risk.

3.4 Sustainability

The economic life for geothermal power projects is typically 20 to 30 years. For the entire period,
steam/ brine has to be guaranteed. Ordinarily, the steam pressure and or well yields decline slightly
before stabilizing. Potentially all fields can degenerate significantly by way of decline in pressure/
well yield, adverse fluid chemistry change (Sanyal and Koenig, 1995), or incursion by cooler fluids.
Together, these factors either require additional capital investment to make-up for steam/ brine decline
or increase operational costs.

Selection of turbine inlet pressure versus wellhead pressure is essential to provide allowance for
decline. Development of well calibrated numerical reservoir model to tract well output, resource
quality and reservoir response under various exploitation scenarios will provide great insight to the
probability of adverse reservoir occurrences. Undertaking incremental development will limit capital
exposure to loss arising from these types of risk while providing adequate time to study and
understand the resource response to utilization. Integration of hot and cold reinjection as informed by
the numerical simulation can greatly help to avert pressure decline and check well yield decline. A
reservoir monitoring program that includes well productivity testing, downhole temperature
measurement, enthalpy measurement and fluid chemistry analysis is a must during resource utilization.
Risk mitigation in geoth. development 5 Ngugi

The financial model used for project evaluation and approval should include make-up wells, and
undertake a sensitivity analysis on profitability under various development scenarios.

3.5 Development and utilization challenges

Even after a commercial resource has been discovered through drilling and delineated, some
production wells within the delineated area will have dismal performance. Some will have cold
inversion, cyclic pressure regime and below average yields. Others may show scaling tendency.

Experience has shown that there is a learning curve required in optimally developing a resource. In
Kenya, Olkaria greater geothermal field has been under development for the last 60 years since the
drilling of the first two well in 1956 – 1958. Over this period, observations have shown different
sections of the greater Olkaria geothermal system to have very attractive characteristics while others
with non-commercial characteristics. In the early stages of Olkaria development, the field was drilled
to the shallow steam dominated reservoir section. These wells over time have shown noticeable
decline in yield. On the other hand, it has become apparent that deeper wells have demonstrated better
yields.

Geothermal resources are by nature fractured. Fractured systems are good for well yields but result in
increased drilling cost. Major loss of drilling fluid circulation causes problematic drilling due to poor
hole cleaning and extended cementing jobs. Sloughing formation can significantly increase drilling
cost thereby compromising project profitability or leading to abandonment. Experience in drilling
serves to reduce drilling challenges and costs.

Scaling increases the operational cost due to use of chemical inhibitors or mechanical cleaning.
Entrained solids within steam can create challenges of deposits on steam turbine members, non-
condensable gases can create stress related cracking or premature failure of equipment. Selection of
materials for the construction of the plant and its accessories is therefore very important.

4. TECHNICAL RISKS

Financiers are risk averse and they would be cautious when faced with untested technology that may
jeopardize recovery of their credit/investment. Technology is used to explore, access by drilling and
utilize geothermal resource in power generation. Geothermal conventional steam turbines and binary
technology are now fully reliable. Selection of manufacturers who have a successful history and long
term business outlook is a prerequisite. Experienced geoscientists and drilling personnel are essential
for success of the project. Use of experts is useful for peer review. Warrants and guarantees are
instruments used to shield investors.

5. SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS

Environment and social economic issues (Naito, 1995) are very sensitive and can lead to a viable
project not being approved, being denied financing and disbursement of funds. It is one area that
many world governments control and regulate through legislation and have governmental bodies
monitoring on a continuous basis. For electricity generation projects in Kenya, an environmental
permit must be issued by National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA). Further, most
financial institutions will require an environmental audit during project appraisal and implementation
with a requirement to meet certain standards. Most financial institutions have employed specialists
with environmental and social expertise for this purpose.
Ngugi 6 Risk mitigation in geoth. development

It is customary to carry out baseline environmental and social studies alongside detailed surface
exploration studies. Upon successful surface exploration, a social environmental impact assessment
study would be carried out before commencement of any site development. Prior to project ground
breaking and during the life of the project investor representatives will engage host communities on a
continuous basis by holding open gatherings to build project awareness, receive concerns, complaints
and community based proposals for corporate social responsibility. In addition, weather stations are
erected within and outside of the project area to monitor various factors of the project that could affect
the environment. In addition, various environmental audits are carried out regularly to establish data
and basis for corrections where standards are not met. Incorporating mechanism to comply with
environmental regulations benchmarked to international standards is the best way to mitigate this risk.

6. MARKET RISK

Ultimately except where government provides subsidies, the end user pays for all the costs arising
from electricity provision and therefore their need for power, willingness and ability to pay are
influencing factors for a successful project. Besides demand, access to the market may be curtailed by
lack of the necessary infrastructure including transmission and distribution network. It is the demand
for affordable electricity that drive developments and in the absence of this demand the project assets
will be without any return.

The feasibility study includes undertaking electricity supply and demand analysis and forecast as a
basis for justifying further development. In addition, a long term power supply contract (Power
Purchase Agreement) on a take or pay basis transfers the market risk from the investors and lenders to
the off taker.

7. FINANCING RISK

All other types of risk eventually translate to financial risks. Investors and debt providers therefore
have to identify and evaluate risk before they can commit financial resource to the project.

Additionally, project implementers have to be aware of and contend with the risk associated with their
choice of debt providers. Kenya has largely relied on bilateral and multilateral financial institutions
for financing its power projects. In a number of cases, this financing has disaster. In point from the
1990’s, is where a geothermal project stalled for 10 years essentially because the government then was
perceived as not subscribing to various political ideologies acceptable to the financier’s sponsors.
Even though the steam was available and tendering documents had been prepared, the Country could
not raise funding from its traditional partners leading to the prolonged delay. In another instance, a
project solely financed from a bilateral arrangement with only one financier on board stalled.
Disbursements of funds to the project were stopped midstream, while all contractors and consultants
were on site, simply because there was social agitation fronted by some non-governmental
organization. The ensuing uncertainty lasted several years and during that period, the project accrued
huge standby costs. Consequently, project became a loss making venture. A classical case was where
the project capital cost tripled and the projected implementation time went from about two year to
seven years. This arose from the financier demand that a study be made to ascertain steam which was
already availability at the wellhead. The financier declined to allow an award for building an
additional unit to the contractor who had constructed the previous two units, yet they were on site
waiting to demobilize. The financier directed that a fresh competitive bid be undertaken and
opportunity of constructing the third unit at a cheaper price lost and the project rendered loss making.
In one other case, a financial delayed disbursed until the project had progressed 70% thereby
inconveniencing the borrower.
Risk mitigation in geoth. development 7 Ngugi

Keen interest that certain financiers place on social resettlement programs can attract unjust
enrichment from undeserved compensation. In one project in Kenya, certain people migrated into the
project area, when they became aware that an appraisal program had successfully been carried out, and
that the lender would require their full compensation for resettlement as a condition for funding.

About 25 years ago, arising from perceived corruption within the government, along with the
unexplained murder of the a senior government official, a key lender declined to serve as principal
financier for further geothermal development in Kenya and refused to negotiate a new credit until
action was taken. As a result the geothermal development suffered delays (Geothermex Inc., 2010).

Typically geothermal projects have long lead times and the capital outlay is largely upstream. Further,
the earlier stages of development are mainly financed using equity which is expensive as compared to
debt. The high upfront costs combined with long lead times can influence cost of financing in a
manner not favorable the project (Gehringer and Loksha, 2012). Further, capital budgeting tools used
to compare projects namely IRR and payback period may show that geothermal projects are
unfavorable.

Matching your financers’ lending criteria vis-à-vis your project and country issues as the foregoing
shows is crucial for the success of a project. Pooling lenders rather than using one lender spreads the
risk of financiers’ failures. It is important to have contingent measures to meet financing gaps in the
absence of lenders or delay in disbursement.

Concessional financing through cheap loans from governments, green funds, carbon credits, tax
holidays and generation tax credit where available help to improve the competiveness of geothermal
projects thus making them attractive to financing.

8. OFF-TAKER DEFAULT RISK

Steam supply
Figure 3 shows the transaction GDC

model for the first 100 MW

Menengai Project in Kenya used by PSSA Steam payment
Geothermal Development Company
PPA wheeling
(GDC). The model shows the Construction EPC Contract Generation Off-take
KPLC
Transmission
KETRACO
EPC contractor IPP
various key parties involved in the
transaction. Off-take risk Financial Agreement O&M Contract
encompasses the risk of failure by
the off-taker to take power due to
reasons concerning dispatch, Debt financiers Equity Providers O&M
transmission line congestion, line Lenders Shareholder Self/ contractor

failure and the risk that the off-taker

may be unable to make the agreed FIGURE 3: Transaction model used by Geothermal
payment in a timely fashion Development Company of Kenya
(Gehringer and Loksha, 2012).

This risk is borne by the off taker in addition to the market risk. The off-taker through the power
purchase agreement is obligated to procure a form of guarantee to safeguard against its failures. The
guarantee may be in the form of bank guarantee, letter of credit or for government agencies they may
procure partial risk guarantees. The power purchase agreements in Kenya are structure on a take or
pay basis. Further, the off-taker is tasked to procure a sovereign guarantee or letter of comfort that
becomes applicable should the off-takers default result in termination of the power purchase
agreement.
Ngugi 8 Risk mitigation in geoth. development

9. POWER GENERATOR DEFAULT RISK

The obligation of the power generator falls into two categories, the fuel supply and energy conversion
or power generation. Fuel supply entails availing steam or brine by way of prospecting, assessing and
drilling while energy conversion entails designing and construction of the power plant, operating and
maintaining it over the power purchase agreement period. As it were, the generator bears the resource
risk, construction, operations and maintenance risks. In addition, by entering in a power purchase
agreement, the generator is liable for liquidated damages in the event they do not meet their obligation
as stipulated in the power purchase agreement.

The construction risks can be in the form of delays or time overruns, budget overrun or plant
underperformance or malfunctions during commissioning. Time overruns and plant
underperformance attract penalties while budget overrun strain the project capital needs and erode
profitability. The plant design, construction delays and underperformance risks are passed over by the
generator to a qualified engineer-procure- construct (EPC) contractor through a lump-sum, time based
and turnkey contract. Time and budget overruns are also mitigated by providing contingencies.

The investors risk paying penalties during periods of plant downtime. Proper operations of power
plant ensures revenues for all. However, prolonged breakdown and other downtime can compromise a
return on investment and the ability of the plant to service its loan and generate sufficient funds to
keep it in good operating conditions. The risk of operation and maintenance is therefore real and lasts
for a long time. To mitigate the risk, adequate budgets and stock of spares and consumables are
required. Proper preventive and maintenance schedules undertaken in time are essential. Outsourcing
overhauls can help reduce risks and attractive personnel benefits can help recruit competent staff and
retain them.

The generator will employ various insurance instruments to transfer risks related to their default.

10. FORCE MAJEURE

Force majeure are event that occur without being caused by any action or inaction by any of the
contracting parties or there agents which prevent one or all parties from fulfilling their obligations
under the contract. These events include war, strikes, crime, hurricane, flooding, earthquake and
volcanic eruptions. For such events to be declared an act of forced majeure, the cause must not be as a
result of a failure of the party declaring it, nor must it be predictable or preventable.

The effects can be temporary and possible to remedy without serious erosion of projected economic
benefits. In this case each party involved takes liability of the losses arising from the force majeure.
Certain obligations are waived especially relating to time aspects but the parties continue with the
project. Where possible the parties insure such risks. Where the project can be remedied but the
economic conditions of the project have been adversely eroded, the aggrieved party may seek buyout.
Abandonment is an option where the project cannot be rescued.

11. INSTITUTIONAL RISKS

Both investors and the financiers will be concerned with the capacity of the institutions in the entire
electricity generation and distribution value chain including contractors and lenders. Figure 3 shows
the value chain for the Menengai first 100 MW project. GDC will avail steam which the independent
power producer (IPP) will convert to electricity. The IPP will further contract an EPC contractor to
construct the plant for them and seek funding from prospective lenders. The electricity will be sold to
Risk mitigation in geoth. development 9 Ngugi

Kenya Power and Lighting Company Limited (KPLC), the off take power, and power will be
evacuated using Kenya Electricity Transmission Company Limited (KETRACO) transmission
infrastructure. Any of these organizations can cause the failure of the project. The key concern in
evaluating the organization’s risk includes the experience of the organization to undertake its role, the
financial capacity to undertake the projects and to endure financial shock that may arise during the
project implementation and the human resource capacity to undertake, manage and operate the
projects. Use of joint venture partnerships and consultants can alleviate financial and human capacity
deficits.

12. MICRO-ECONOMIC RISKS

In Kenya, generation costs are pegged to the US dollar in order to shield both the power off taker and
the generator from currency exchange risks. However, the consumers pay for the electricity in the
local currency. The cost of the exchange rate variation is assessed on a monthly basis which is then
billed to the consumers directly.

Over time inflation erodes money value such that a fixed amount of money will buy fewer goods in
the future. If left unaddressed, inflation can erode the investors return on investment and may lead to
poor management and maintenance of the power plants. In Kenya, the cost of inflation is an aspect of
the power purchase agreement and is adjusted on an annual basis.

13. CHANGE IN LAW RISK

Imposition of legal requirements such as expansion or increase in taxes and royalties after the power
purchase agreement has been signed whose compliance would result into material difference in the
investors return can compromise the project financial integrity. Provisions are provided in the power
purchase agreement that should such events occur the investor shall qualify for a review of the tariff.

14. LEGAL AND REGULATORY RISKS

All investments will result in various business transaction and contractual relationships. Potentially all
these transactions and relationships could give rise to disputes necessitating arbitration and or court
adjudication. Therefore investors and financiers would be concerned whether justice can be served
and be enforced by evaluating institutions and national policies.

Countries that uphold independent judiciaries, enter into varies treaties and memberships of
international bodies provide comfort to investors and lenders. Investors may avoid investing in
countries where the risk is very high.

15. POLITICAL RISKS

The 25 year economic life of a geothermal project will see several changes of government. Elections
particularly in Africa often times result in civil disobedience and may at times degenerate to civil war.
Incoming governments are likely to formulate new policies if only to make political statements or may
altogether vary policies seriously impacting existing and future developments. Investors and
financiers seriously worry over whether they will be able to repatriate their investment to their country
of origin, convertibility of the local currency to other currencies without making serious exchange
losses or restriction and whether investment owned by foreigners will not be expropriated by rogue
Ngugi 10 Risk mitigation in geoth. development

governments. Investors and financiers would require transparent and fair taxation policies. Further
these policies should be long term and predictable.

Countries that seek political stability and put in place transparent systems for decision with checks and
balances reduce the political risk. Partial risk guarantees and political risk insurance are used to
safeguard against this risk.

16. CONCLUSIONS

The overarching goal of a geothermal development is the successful implementation of the project that
will generate a good return to its owners as well as meeting its other financial obligations. The
geothermal development is exposed to various risks of varying degrees throughout all its phases and
stages of development. The resource risk is one of the major risks in a geothermal development. It
persists through all phases and stages of development and takes the form of resource existence and
size, suitability, sustainability and utilization challenges. Other risks include way leaves, market,
financing, commercial and macro-economic risks.

Studies, in particular comprehensive detailed surface studies, numerical simulation and interference
tests are very useful for informing the possibilities of occurrence of the various forms of resource risk.
This enables formulation of resource risk management strategies. Incremental development and
reservoir monitoring are highly recommended to ensure resource sustainability. A deliberate and
purposeful baseline environmental and social studies, host community engagement and diligent
environmental management program are essential for reducing project interruption. Incorporating
green funds, resource risk mitigation grants and carbon credit help the project to be financially
competitive against other sources of energy. The feasibility study includes establishing electricity
supply and demand. Insurance, partial risk guarantee, sovereign guarantee and letter of comfort are
some of the instruments used to mitigate against some of the development risks. Power purchase
agreement help shield the investors from the market risk, inflation and foreign exchange risk.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author thanks United Nations University – Geothermal Training Program, Management of
Geothermal Development Company Limited (GDC) for providing the opportunity to write this paper
and the GDC’s Corporate Planning Team who critically reviewed the manuscript.

REFERENCES

Gehringer, M., and Loksha, V., 2012: Geothermal handbook: Planning and financing power
generation. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank Group,
Washington DC, United States, Energy Sector Management Assistance Program technical report
002/12, 164 pp. Web: http://www.esmap.org/Geothermal_Handbook

Geothermex Inc., 2010: An Assessment of Geothermal Resource Risks in Indonesia. Report prepared
for the World Bank, 2-18. Web: http://www.ppiaf.org/sites/ppiaf.org/files/publication/REPORT_
Risk_Mitigation_Options_Indonesia.pdf

Government of Kenya, 1982: Geothermal Act. Laws of Kenya. Website: http://www.kenyalaw.org:

8181/exist/kenyalex/actview.xql?actid=CAP.%20314A
Risk mitigation in geoth. development 11 Ngugi

Hadi, J., Quinlivan, P., Ussher, G., Alamsyah, O., Pramono, B., and Masri, A., 2010: Resource risk
assessment in geothermal greenfield development; An economic implications. Proceedings World
Geothermal Congress 2010, Bali, Indonesia, 5 pp. Web: http://www.geothermal-energy.org/pdf/IGA
standard/WGC/2010/0709.pdf

Naito, T., 1995: Project finance for geothermal power projects. Proceedings World Geothermal
Congress 1995, Firenze, Italy, 2883-2887. Web: http://www.geothermal-energy.org/pdf/IGAstandard/
WGC/1995/4-Naito.pdf

Sanyal, S.K., and Koenig, J. B., 1995: Resource risk and its mitigation for the financing of geothermal
projects. Proceedings World Geothermal Congress 1995, Firenze, Italy, 2911-2915. Web: http://
www.geothermal-energy.org/pdf/IGAstandard/WGC/1995/4-Sanyal2.pdf