Report on recommendations from social sciences and humanities for increasing societal readiness of geothermal energy technologies

Intern gebruik GEOTHERM-FORA Deliverable D5.3 Report on recommendations from social sciences and humanities for increasing societal readiness of geothermal energy technologies Katrin Kieling, GFZ Helmholtz-Centre for Geosciences Adele Manzella, CNR Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Anna Pellizzone, Scientific Advisor for the Italian National Research Council and Bassetti Foundation ETS Melanie Rohse, Anglia Ruskin University 2 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH Project Full Title: Support stakeholder’s fora on geothermal systems Project Acronym: GEOTHERM-FORA Title: Report on recommendations from social sciences and humanities for increasing societal readiness of geothermal energy technologies Lead beneficiary: GFZ Contributing beneficiaries: CNR Related work package: WP 5, Task 5.3 Submission date: 31/07/2025 Security class: Public Dissemination level: all Partners, EC and General Public DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17491062 License information: CC_BY_4.0 Recommended Citation: Kieling, K., Manzella, A., Pellizzone, A., Rohse, M., The Horizon Europe GEOTHERM-FORA project: Deliverable D5.3 - Report on recommendations from social sciences and humanities for increasing societal readiness of geothermal energy technologies. Zenodo, 2025, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17491062 ORCID: Katrin Kieling 0000-0003-0182-5090 Adele Manzella 0000-0002-2367-0969 Anna Pellizzone 0000-0001-8737-917X Melanie Rohse 0000-0002-8613-2092 Revision history Author Delivery date Summary of changes and comments Version 0.1 K. Kieling Table of contents, first inputs Version 0.2 A. Manzella 17 Oct 2025 Revision Version 0.3 A. Pellizzone 20 Oct 2025 Revision Version 0.4 Melanie Rohse 22 Oct 2025 Revision Final version Katrin Kieling 31 Oct 2024 Implement changes suggested by reviewers and provide version 1.0 Name Function Date Deliverable responsible GFZ, Katrin Kieling Task leader 31 Oct 2025 WP leader CNR, Adele Manzella WP Lead 17 Oct 2025 Project Coordinator EGEC, Philippe Dumas Coordinator Funded by the European Union from the Horizon Europe programme under the grant agreement n° 101075400. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or CINEA. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. 3 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH Table of contents Table of contents ..................................................................................................................................... 3 1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 4 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 5 3 Approaches and Sources of Information ........................................................................................ 6 3.1 Set-up of a ETIP Geothermal Working Group on Social Sciences and Humanities ................ 6 3.1.1 First SSH WG meeting, November 2024 ............................................................................ 6 3.1.2 Second SSH WG meeting, May 2025 ................................................................................. 8 3.2 Collaboration in the SET-Plan Tasks Forces on Cross Cutting Issues ..................................... 8 3.3 Analysis of Implementation plans by the SSH CENTRE consortium ....................................... 9 4 Recommendations for EC policy makers ...................................................................................... 11 4.1 Recommendations from the ETIP working group discussions ............................................. 11 4.1.1 Follow a holistic societal perspective .............................................................................. 11 4.1.2 Communicate the competitive advantage of geothermal technologies ......................... 12 4.2 Cross-cutting Task Force Priorities for R&I for Societal Needs ............................................ 13 4.3 Recommendations for the integration of SSH in the SET-plan’s implementation plans ..... 14 4.3.1 Implications for the Geothermal Implementation Plan .................................................. 16 5 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 17 7 Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... 18 4 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH 1 Executive Summary The project GEOTHERM-FORA aims at facilitating Research and Innovation activities in geothermal systems by supporting the work of two geothermal fora, already established: The European Technology and Innovation Platform on Geothermal (ETIP-G) and the Geothermal Implementation Working Group (IWG). This report produced as part of the GEOTHERM-FORA project, offers critical insights on enhancing the integration of social sciences and humanities in research, innovation and development of geothermal energy solutions. As climate change and energy transition continue to be pressing global challenges, this report highlights the need for innovative approaches that leverage social sciences and humanities to improve market dynamics and stakeholder engagement in geothermal initiatives. The recommendations stem from comprehensive discussions within the ETIP Geothermal Working Group on Social Sciences and Humanities, as well as collaborative efforts in the SET-Plan Task Forces addressing the societal implications of energy technologies. Multiple stakeholder meetings and analyses emphasised the importance of adopting a holistic societal perspective, which involves transparent communication about the competitive advantages of geothermal systems. Key recommendations include: 1. Adopt a Holistic Societal Perspective: Encourage researchers, developers, operators, and policymakers to incorporate social and cultural factors in geothermal technology deployment, ensuring that proposed solutions resonate with communities and stakeholders. 2. Communicate Advantages: Develop targeted communication strategies that articulate the environmental, social and economic benefits of geothermal technologies, whilst being transparent about uncertainty, thereby fostering greater public understanding and sound opinion, as well as enhancing political support. 3. Integrate SSH Insights into Implementation Plans: Ensure SSH considerations are embedded into the SET-Plan’s Geothermal Implementation Plan, thereby aligning technological advancements with societal needs and expectations. 4. Target and measurement definitions: Key Performance Indicators should be established considering social embedding. The Geothermal Implementation Plan should define targets and ensure their monitoring. Societal Readiness Level (SRL) indicators could be a way to include SSH target definitions in a standardised form. 5 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH 2 Introduction The European Commission has set ambitious targets to drive the energy transition to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ultimately achieve climate neutrality. The European Green Deal 1 and the REPowerEU plan 2 have emphasised the need for a transition to clean, reliable and affordable renewable energy technologies. In this context, geothermal heat and power has been identified as a key contributor to replacing fossil fuels. At the same time, the EC has promised a "just transition" that leaves no one behind, ensuring that regions in transition are adequately supported in this process and that citizens are not overly burdened by a possible increase in energy costs. Given the significant changes that the energy transition will impose on society, and the speed at which these changes will need to take place in order to achieve climate neutrality by 2045, it is important to focus not only on the technological challenges, but also on how these technological solutions can be widely deployed in society, adapted and supported by citizens, and ultimately integrated into the market. Geothermal energy provision can make a significant contribution to the energy transition. The Implementation Plan 3 of the Geothermal Implementation Working Group (Geothermal IWG) envisages for 2050 that geothermal heat supplies more than 25% of Europe’s demand for space heating and cooling, and more than 25% in the agricultural sector (greenhouses) and 5% in industrial sectors in the low to medium temperature range as well as 10% of the power production in SET Plan countries from geothermal power. Geothermal technologies offer a wide range of different solutions, the performance of which is often dependent on geological conditions. However, specific local citizens’ and communities’ needs are also important in determining the technology that best meets the demand in terms of cost-effectiveness or the distribution of demand over different time scales (day/night or summer/winter), and also in terms of environmental factors such as land use. In addition, social acceptance is often cited as a non-technical barrier to geothermal development. This is why the European Technology and Innovation Platform on Geothermal Energy (ETIP Geothermal, hereafter ETIP) and the Geothermal IWG are recognising the need to strengthen the integration of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) in the research and innovation efforts for geothermal energy in Europe. This report will describe two initiatives that started within the timeframe of the GEOTHERM-FORA project and that should ensure that the interconnections of civil society as a whole are taken into account when increasing the share of geothermal energy utilisation: the ETIP geothermal Working group on Social Sciences and Humanities and the SET-plan Working Group on Cross Cutting Issues that focusses on societal needs. Additionally, this report makes reference to a recent study by the SSH CENTRE project, that provides recommendations for the integration of SSH in the implementation plans of the SET-Plan. The report shortly describes the nature of these three approaches and sources of information. As a second key point, this report shall provide first recommendations for EU policy makers to improve energy supply from geothermal following a holistic societal perspective and to communicate the competitive advantage of geothermal technologies. 1 European Commission. (2019). The European Green Deal. COM/2019/640 final. European Commission. 2 European Commission. (2022). REPowerEU Plan. COM(2022) 230 final. European Commission. 3 Geothermal Implementation Working Group. (2023). Implementation plan. SETIS. https://setis.ec.europa.eu/document/download/f74cb5d6-30d8-492c-a5289652a0d4b6c1_en?filename=Implementation%20Plan%20Report_IWG%20Geothermal.pdf; last accessed 07 Apr 2025. 6 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH 3 Approaches and Sources of Information 3.1 Set-up of a ETIP Geothermal Working Group on Social Sciences and Humanities The importance of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) was already highlighted by the work of the Working Group (WG) on “Market Uptake of ETIP-DG, which included, among others, the topics of social welfare and dissemination and communication. The preliminary activities of this WG contributed to the first edition of the ETIP Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda 4 (SRIA). Also in the second edition of the SRIA for the ETIP Geothermal 5 , the significance of developing geothermal energy technologies with and for society is highlighted, and an increase in efforts to engage with the public and raise awareness for geothermal externalities and benefits is requested. Nevertheless, a strong cooperation between the geoscientific and engineering professions (STEM: Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) and the social science and humanities professions (SSH) is limited to selected projects and initiatives. Therefore, the ETIP Geothermal decided to establish a special SSH working group (SSH-WG) to address the challenges of holistic societal engagement for the sustainable and responsible development of geothermal technologies. In 2024, ETIP Geothermal has invited its members to join this new working group. The SSH-WG comprises members of the ETIP Geothermal and focus more strongly on the integration of social sciences and the societal factors that influence the development and application of geothermal technologies. The working group met for the first time in November 2024 and launched a discussion on the challenges geothermal energy technologies face in society, on the key topics that need to be addressed by research and development, and on the messages that should be conveyed to society. In a second meeting in May 2025, the concepts of societal readiness level and practical approaches to engaging with schools and communities were debated. This way, the working group provides a platform for researchers, operators and consultants working in social sciences, and also functions as a forum to advice the Geothermal ETIP community on SSH topics. 3.1.1 First SSH WG meeting, November 2024 The first SSH WG meeting was held in November 2024 online. At first, the motivation for establishing the SSH working group, as described above, was presented to the group by Katrin Kieling (HelmholtzCentre for Geosciences, GFZ), and the context within the ETIP Geothermal working groups was provided. Following, three keynote talks were presented to initiate the discussion about challenges and potential research topics with regard to social sciences and humanities in the development of geothermal energy technologies. Melanie Rohse (Anglia Ruskin University) presented “Prioritise Inclusive, Early, and Continuous Societal Engagement to Maximise the Benefits of Geothermal Technologies”. The presentation focused on the findings from an SSH / STEM collaboration that was recently published in Rohse et al, 4 European Technology and Innovation Platform on Deep Geothermal (ETIP-DG) (2018). “Strategic research and innovation agenda”. Brussels, April 2019, ISBN 9788879580373, https://etip-geothermal.eu/front/wpcontent/uploads/SRIA_ETIP-DG_web-1.pdf , last accessed 09 May 2025. 5 European Technology and Innovation Platform on Geothermal (ETIP-G) (2023). “Strategic research and innovation agenda”. Brussels, November 2023, ISBN - 978-2-9601946-3-0, https://etip-geothermal.eu/front/wpcontent/uploads/SRIA_2023_Final_ForWeb_compressed.pdf , last accessed 09 May 2025. 7 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH 2023 6 . The authors recommend that policymakers ensure decision-making in energy transformation becomes more inclusive, fostering a wider discussion of the energy transition with and for society, up to the inclusive engagement of local communities in individual geothermal projects. They also state that local and regional actors should foster processes of co-creation and societal engagement, clearly moving beyond pure information and consulting at planning stage. The chapter gives examples for case studies, where such an early co-creation and societal engagement has taken place providing practical insight. It also mentions which risks exists when communities are not engaged, providing examples from experience. Following the authors, the collaboration between STEM and SSH scientists can help to break down barriers between disciplines and thereby facilitate the achievements of the abovementioned recommendations. Adele Manzella (Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, CNR-IGG) and Anna Pellizzone (Fondazione Giannino Bassetti) presented an excerpt from the second edition of the book “Geothermal Energy and Society” (at the time still in progress and published in 2025 7 ), which they were both co-editing with Agnes Allansdottir. The book explores the intersection of geothermal energy technologies and their societal implications. It provides a comprehensive framework for understanding how geothermal resources are harnessed for electricity generation, heating, and cooling, while examining the social, environmental, and policy contexts that shape their development. The book integrates perspectives from geology, engineering, sociology, and economics, and features updated global case studies that highlight community engagement, regulatory challenges, and public perception, outlining how citizen engagement practices are currently institutionalised in different geothermal countries. Compared to the first edition of the book, case studies from Chile, Mexico, and the UK have been added, with the UK and Chile being countries where only one power plant has been built so far, and society has very limited experience with regard to geothermal energy utilisation. Finally, Amel Barich (Geothermal Research Cluster GEORG) gave an overview of the guidance compiled within the CROWDTHERMAL project on “Social License to Operate for geothermal energy projects”. While the concept of Social License to Operate (SLO) has been developed in the mining industry, it can equally be applied to geothermal projects, which seek societal support and aim to maintain it. This is essential for ensuring the successful deployment of geothermal technology and achieving its legitimacy as a viable clean alternative energy solution. In Barich et al., 2022 8 , a conceptual model for SLO in the geothermal energy sector is developed, based on three case studies, working group discussions, and surveys. Amel Barich highlighted that SLO is a multiscale and multilevel concept, since the entire geothermal industry can earn a social license from the broader public, but single projects still need to obtain a social license at a local community level. With increasing SLO, the expectations that the community or the public has towards a company are increasingly fulfilled and the attitude of stakeholders is moving from mere acceptance to approval to psychological identification, and the company/developer/operator is rather considered a part of the community. Findings from the CROWDTHERMAL project also confirm that innovative participatory financial schemes, such as crowdfunding of geothermal projects, can facilitate participatory and transparent process during project development, thereby improving the SLO. 6 Rohse, M. et al. (2024). Prioritise Inclusive, Early, and Continuous Societal Engagement to Maximise the Benefits of Geothermal Technologies. In: Crowther, A., Foulds, C., Robison, R., Gladkykh, G. (eds) Strengthening European Energy Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66481-6_3 7 Manzella, A. et al. (eds) (2025). Geothermal Energy and Society: Technology, Methods, and Applications. Lecture Notes in Energy, 67, 470 pp. Springer International Switzerland AG, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-03181920-9 8 Barich, A., Stokłosa, A. W., Hildebrand, J., Elíasson, O., Medgyes, T., Quinonez, G., Casillas, A. C., & Fernandez, I. (2022). Social License to Operate in Geothermal Energy. Energies, 15(1), 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15010139 8 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH 3.1.2 Second SSH WG meeting, May 2025 The second SSH WG meeting was organised as a webinar and the recording is available on YouTube. Details and the recording link is available at https://etip-geothermal.eu/press-release/webinarrecording-presentations-now-available-how-to-engage-with-society-and-build-public-support-forgeothermal-energy/ . After a short introduction of the SSH WG and the agenda by Katrin Kieling, two topics were presented by members of the WG: Alessandro Sciullo, University of Turin (Department of Culture, Politics and Society) presented “Socioenvironmental conditions for the implementation of geoDHC networks in Europe”. The presented studies were carried out in the frame of the SAPHEA project, dealing with market uptake of geothermal energy in district heating and cooling (DHC) in Europe. In the project, the societal perspectives on integration of geothermal in DHC networks have been addressed with two different tools: (1) stakeholder analysis and engagement and (2) the concept of societal readiness. Stakeholder analysis and engagement focused on the three levels of engagement, i.e., information, consultation and decision, establishing easy-to-use tools for district heating operators to facilitate the processes. SAPHEA has applied these tools for a district heating project in Poland. Societal readiness is an innovative way to address or assess the extent to which a specific society is ready to accept, adopt and implement a specific technology, posing two main questions: (1) How ready is the society to adopt a low carbon technology? (2) Is a low-carbon technology ready for societal implementation? Although being a powerful concept, the approach of societal readiness levels (SRL) still needs to be further developed and operationalized. Methods to measure society’s readiness still need discussion and agreement within the SSH community. This is also reflected in the Horizon Europe work programme of 2025, foreseeing eight calls on Societal Readiness Pilots. In SAPHEA, the SRL scale has been simplified to five levels and adapted for use in geothermal district heating and cooling projects. Jerome Azzola and Judith Bremer from the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), presented “Engaging Schools and Communities in Geothermal Monitoring - Case Studies from the DeepStor Research Infrastructure”. The deployment of geothermal technologies in the Upper Rhine Valley is impacted by public opposition, with public concerns mainly revolving around risks of induced seismicity. In the context of the development of a deep geothermal storage project on the KIT campus, DEEPSTOR, the KIT team suggested a transparent and active exchange with citizens through collaboration and participatory monitoring of seismicity. In the case study, the seismometers used for the monitoring was giving insights into how seismicity is monitored and what levels of seismicity are observed. This not only increases transparency but also promotes dialogue and fosters informed opinion forming for individuals. 3.2 Collaboration in the SET-Plan Tasks Forces on Cross Cutting Issues The Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan aims to achieve the EU’s energy and climate goals and make Europe a global leader in clean energy and energy efficiency technologies. The SET Plan does this by helping to coordinate national research and innovation (R&I) activities in developing lowcarbon energy among SET Plan countries. Further, the SET-Plan aligns EU and national R&I priorities with its agenda. Mostly, this is done via 15 Implementation Working Groups (IWGs), each focusing on one key technology, such as the Geothermal IWG. In 2024, the Communication on the revision of the Strategic Energy Transition (SET) Plan called for the establishment of five time-bound Task Forces dedicated to cross-cutting topics for the energy technologies of the SET-Plan: 1. Circularity and materials substitution 9 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH 2. Research and innovation (R&I) for societal needs 3. Digitalisation 4. Skills 5. Access to market The general objective of the task forces is to co-create technical recommendations in order to advance the work of the SET-Plan according to the five cross-cutting topics. The task-force topics and their members are described on the SETIs website: https://setis.ec.europa.eu/about-set-plan/taskforces_en Each of the Task forces need to deliver concrete outputs to tackle the SET Plan. The envisaged recommendations include: • At EU-level o New EU-legislative developments o Priorisation of EU funding • For the core SET-plan stakeholders (IWGs and ETIPs) o R&I activities on the cross-cutting issues o Avoid duplication of existing activities It should be highlighted that the cross-cutting task forces do not have the purpose of identifying recommendations for a single energy transition technology such as geothermal energy, but rather identify challenges, priorities and possible solution pathways for a range of actors of the energy transition. At the time of writing this report, the work of the task forces is not yet completed, therefore the priorities listed here may differ from the final recommendations that the task force is due to provide in December 2025. Based on the priorities communicated by the various SET-plan stakeholders during the first workshop in December 2024 (see section 4.2), a first draft for recommendations has been formulated and discussed during an online task force meeting in March 2025. During this meeting, draft recommendations were discussed, reorganised, and additions have been suggested. A revised document with recommendations has been created based on this discussion. This background document is currently (October 2025) under revision, and a consolidated set of recommendations will be finalised by November 2025, in time for the SET-Plan conference. After that, the final version of recommendations should be reviewed once more by the task force members, before the SET-Plan Steering committee endorses the recommendations to be considered in the implementation plans of the IWGs. 3.3 Analysis of Implementation plans by the SSH CENTRE consortium SSH CENTRE (Social Sciences and Humanities for Climate, Energy aNd Transport Research Excellence) is a Horizon Europe funded project that engages directly with stakeholders across research, policy, and business (including citizens) to strengthen social innovation, SSH-STEM collaboration, transdisciplinary policy advice, inclusive engagement, and SSH communities across Europe, accelerating the EU’s transition to carbon neutrality. One of the activities of the project is the effective design of strategies for citizen engagement in EU R&I activities. The project is committed to strengthening the component of Social Science and Humanities in strategic EU programmes, such as the SET-Plan. In this context, the project consortium has reviewed 12 Implementation Working Plans with respect to the extent to which Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) considerations had been accounted for thus far, and 16 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH energy technologies and clearly go beyond financial support and consider a range of processes, such as regulation, governance mechanisms and decision-making processes. Multi-Scalar implementation: Implementation Plans should adopt a multi-scalar approach that extends from the EU and national level to the sub-national, regional and local level in which technologies are to be implemented. The complexity of the locations in which the technologies are implemented should be considered in order to reflect the context in which development projects are located. 4.3.2 Implications for the Geothermal Implementation Plan The revised Geothermal Implementation Plan of 2023 (Implementation Working Group, 2023) very briefly describes the priorities for research and Innovation in geothermal energy. Key activities have been defined for each of the four technological priorities and are described qualitatively. Reference to topics involving Social Sciences and Humanities is restricted to the chapter “Non-technical barriers/enabler & cross cutting topics”. While there is little detail provided concerning the inclusion of SSH, several key activities are mentioned and it is clearly pointed out that these are relevant for all the technological innovations. The level of detail in describing non-technical cross-cutting issues is similar to that for the technological issues. For the next revision of the Implementation Plan, it seems advisable to provide a more detailed description. Policy alignment can be worked out by putting not only the European Green Deal into context, but also the Net-zero Industry Act, the Critical Raw Materials Act, NextGenerationEU, REPowerEU, and the Fit-for-55 package. For key activities, it could be highlighted how different policies and policy-makers can contribute to a quicker roll-out of the innovations. Additionally, a multi-scalar approach to consider sub-national levels of implementation could be considered. Specifically for geothermal energy, differences between heating, cooling and thermal storage applications, that are often located within an urban environment, and power generation, that is more often situated in sub-urban or rural areas, should be reflected upon. While the societal embedding of the technological developments might be less pronounced in the 2023 Geothermal Implementation Plan, it is indicated that all technological advances need to be combined with the investigation of non-technical issues, including awareness of local communities, public acceptance, and involvement of stakeholders in sustainable geothermal solutions. Life Cycle Impact Assessments (LCIA) taking into consideration environmental, social, ethical, political, economic, and legal aspects are mentioned, as well as regulatory aspects. However, no SSH targets are defined with regard to societal embedding neither are Key Performance Indicators or monitoring processes described. As discussed within the ETIP Geothermal working group on SSH, Societal Readiness Levels (SRL) could be an innovative way to address or assess the extent to which a specific society is ready to accept, adopt and implement a specific technology. However, as a first step, more specific definitions of the different SRLs for geothermal energy technologies need to be defined and objective indicators and measurements of SRL need to be agreed upon. 17 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH 5 Conclusions From the discussion within the ETIP-Geothermal working group on SSH, and the SET-plan’s cross cutting task force on R&I for Societal Needs, a clear overlap between the priorities identified by the research community specialised on geothermal energy and the more general SET-plan community is visible in the recommendations. Both groups identified the points 1. Adopt a Holistic Societal Perspective: Encourage researchers, developers, operators, and policymakers to incorporate social and cultural dimensions into plans for geothermal technology deployment, ensuring that proposed solutions resonate with communities and stakeholders. This includes concepts as Social License to Operate, inclusive approaches like citizen science and participatory financing models. 2. Communicate Advantages: Develop targeted communication strategies that articulate the environmental and economic benefits of geothermal technologies, whilst being transparent about uncertainty, thus fostering greater public understanding and acceptance, but also political support. Further, there is a general recommendation from the SSH CENTRE that was generalized for the SETPlan community but holds true also for the geothermal energy R&I community: 3. Integrate SSH Insights into Implementation Plans: Ensure SSH considerations are embedded into the SET-Plan’s Geothermal Implementation Plan, thereby aligning technological advancements with societal needs and expectations. 4. Target and measurement definitions: Key Performance Indicators should be defined with regard to social embedding. The Geothermal Implementation Plan should define targets and ensure their monitoring. Societal Readiness Level (SRL) indicators could be a way to include SSH target definitions in a standardised form. Given that neither the ETIP-G working group has reviewed the recommendations in detail, nor the SETplan’s cross-cutting task force on R&I for Societal needs has finalised its recommendation, yet, further refinement of these recommendations may be necessary. However, the topics to which the above recommendations relate are recurrent in the discussions. Researchers, innovators and applicators of geothermal energy from STEM and SSH agree that these are important steps in increasing the use of geothermal energy technologies. Finally, while these recommendations are formulated for geothermal energy, they may also be valuable for other renewable energy technologies facing similar challenges and opportunities. 18 | D 5.3 – Recommendations from SSH 7 Acknowledgements Figures in this report have been generated with the help of napkin.ai/. The authors are grateful to Melanie Rohse, Associate Professor of Sustainable Communities at Anglia Ruskin University, for her comprehensive review of the report and comments.