GL North America Updated 2026-08-20

Greenland Geothermal Screening

Geothermal screening assessment identifies 4% prospective land reaching 185°C by 5.5 km depth in Greenland.

Key Geothermal Metrics

Land Reaching 185°C by 5.5 km Low Prospect
4%

Primary baseline screening criterion

Shallowest Depth to 200°C Deep Target
6.2 km

Minimum drill depth for high enthalpy

Peak Temperature at 5 km Depth Direct Heat
128 °C

Maximum modeled temperature

Typical Geothermal Gradient Continental Normal
23.2 °C/km

Average to 5 km depth (15°C surface)

Grid Connectable Prospective Area High Accessibility
81.6%

Hot territory within 50 km transmission

Stored Heat In-Place (3–7 km) 1 ZJ = 10²¹ Joules
180.7 ZJ

Thermal volume in place (>80°C baseline)

Depth vs. Temperature Matrix (% Land Area)

Proportion of national territory exceeding target isotherm at specified depth

0.1° Inversion Grid
Isotherm 3.0 km 4.0 km 5.0 km 6.0 km 7.0 km 8.0 km
150°C 0.2% 0.5% 0.7% 0.9% 1.3% 1.5%
175°C 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2%
200°C
225°C
250°C

4-Stage Geothermal Resource & Infrastructure Funnel

Progressive screening from gross national territory down to grid-connected & populated prospective zones

1 Whole country
2 166 086 km² 100%
2 Reaches 185°C by 5.5 km
86 643 km² 4%
3 ...and within 50 km transmission
70 701 km² 3.3%
4 ...and within 100 km town
59 478 km² 3.1%

Geological Setting & Subsurface Parameters

Lithology, basement thickness, stress and thermal boundary constraints

Median Depth to 200°C Isotherm 9.1 km
Best 10th Percentile Depth to 200°C 6.9 km
Median Temperature at 5 km Depth 85.4 °C
Best 10th Percentile Temp at 5 km 115.9 °C
Median Sediment Thickness 0.3 km
Sediment / Hard-Rock Well Share 26.6%
Territory Under 1 km Sediment Cover 87.7%
Lithostatic Pressure at 5 km Depth 138.6 MPa
Moho Crustal Discontinuity Depth 41.5 km
Thermal Lithosphere Thickness 94.7 km
Curie Temperature Isotherm Depth 30.2 km
Model Temperature Spread Uncertainty (200°C) ±1.1 km

Transmission Grid & Demand Colocation

Infrastructure interconnectivity and urban power demand proximity

High-Voltage Transmission Network Length 65 739 km
Land Area Within 25 km of Grid 68.2%
Land Area Within 50 km of Grid 81.6%
Land Area Within 100 km of Grid 90.9%
Average Proximity to Nearest Substation / Line 10.3 km
Urban Centers (>10,000 Population) 233
Total Urban Population 41.2 M
Prospective Resource Colocated Near Demand (>1M Pop) 70.3%

Target Sensitivity & Deep EGS Upside

Sensitivity of prospective resource area to adjusted depth and temperature thresholds

150°C Baseline at 5.5 km 6.4% of national territory reaches 150°C at 5.5 km depth
185°C Baseline at 7.5 km 7.2% of national territory reaches 185°C at 7.5 km depth

Global Peer Benchmarking (vs. 278 Assessed Jurisdictions)

Relative ranking distribution of Greenland across 11 standardized geothermal indicators

Greenland Rank Global Peer Spread
Shallowest 200°C depth
6.2 km Lower 50%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 26th percentile
Peak temp at 5 km
128 °C Lower 25%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 11th percentile
Prospective land area (>185°C at 5.5 km)
4% Lower 25%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 7th percentile
Stored heat in-place (3-7 km)
180.7 ZJ Middle 50%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 71th percentile
Typical geothermal gradient
23.2 °C/km Lower 50%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 33th percentile
Grid proximity (<50 km)
81.6% Top 25%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 82th percentile
Thin sediment coverage (<1 km)
87.7% Top 25%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 88th percentile
Curie isotherm depth
30.2 km Lower 50%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 34th percentile
Moho crustal thickness
41.5 km Lower 50%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 25th percentile
Model temperature uncertainty spread
±1.1 km Middle 50%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 47th percentile
Urban demand colocation
72.8% Top 25%
P0 (Lowest) P50 (Median) P100 (Highest) • 66th percentile
Asset-Level 3D Simulation Available

Need Interactive 3D Spatial Inversion for Greenland?

High-resolution 3D temperature cubes, localized Curie depth inversions, fault network stress tensors, and drilling capex curves for Greenland are accessible through our Premium & Enterprise subscription tiers.

Direct Founder Contact: founders@geothermalradar.com

Analytical Geothermal Assessment & Discussion: Greenland

Subsurface thermal interpretation, model uncertainty, infrastructure colocation, and resource quality analysis

Resource Overview

Geothermal assessment for Greenland indicates craton_shield geological controls governing subsurface heat transport, yielding 4% of land area reaching the baseline target of 185°C at 5.5 km depth.

Uncertainty & Model Variance

Thermal inversion across Greenland shows consistent model convergence with constrained standard deviations across deep crustal layers.

Grid & Infrastructure Colocation

National electrical transmission coverage positions approximately 81.6% of prospective geothermal ground within 50 km of existing high-voltage corridors.

Geological & Basement Setting

Subsurface lithology is characterized by craton shield dynamics with median sediment thickness of 0.3 km and crustal thickness of 41.5 km.

Stored Heat Volume

Accessible thermal energy in place between 3 km and 7 km depth above 80°C totals 180.7 Zettajoules (ZJ).

Peer Comparison

Benchmarked against 237 global assessment jurisdictions, Greenland demonstrates competitive positioning across heat flow, infrastructure, and basement competence indicators.

Target Sensitivity Analysis

Screening at 150°C baseline at 5.5 km increases prospective territory, demonstrating substantial deep EGS resource headroom.

Screening Methodology, Parameters & Limitations

This screening assessment for Greenland is generated from Geothermal Radar Data Pack 2026.1 utilizing global 0.1° hex-grid thermal inversion across 24 068 model cells (land area: 2 166 086 km²). Baseline prospective criterion is defined as reaching 185°C at or above 5.5 km depth with surface temperature normalized to 15°C.

  • Screening estimates represent regional-scale heat in place and do not replace localized 3D seismic or exploratory drilling.
  • Model uncertainties expand in regions with sparse deep boreholes and complex thrust fault kinematics.
  • Grid proximity indicators reflect line-of-sight distance to high-voltage transmission and do not account for local substation thermal capacity.
Need Detailed Asset-Level Due Diligence?

Access 3D temperature grids, drilling cost curves, and micro-siting GIS layers.

Request Full Technical Dossier