TERRA-GEN DIXIE VALLEY
OperatingGeothermal power plant
- Capacity
- 61 MW
- Primary fuel
- Geothermal
- County
- Churchill County
- Operator
- TERRA-GEN OPERATING COMPANY
- Status
- Operating
- Commissioned
- 1988
- EIA plant ID
- 52015
- Generators
- 2
- Technology
- Geothermal
- Net generation (2024)
- 341 GWh
- Capacity factor (2024, EIA nameplate)
- 55%
- Data vintage
- EIA-860 2024 final; EIA-923 2022-2024 final
- Coordinates
- 39.9663, -117.8557
TERRA-GEN DIXIE VALLEY, a 61 MW Geothermal power plant in Churchill County, Nevada. Operated by TERRA-GEN OPERATING COMPANY, commissioned 1988.
How TERRA-GEN DIXIE VALLEY compares
With 61 MW of capacity, TERRA-GEN DIXIE VALLEY ranks 27th among the 50 operating power plants Bywatts maps in Nevada and 2nd of the 8 operating Geothermal plants in the state. It accounts for about 22% of Nevada's operating Geothermal capacity and 0.5% of all operating capacity in the state. Nationally it is the 11th-largest of the 34 operating Geothermal plants in the database. Commissioned in 1988, it is older than 81% of the 49 operating Nevada plants with a recorded commissioning year. It shares Churchill County with 4 other operating plants, including STILLWATER FACILITY and ENEL SALT WELLS LLC.
EIA-860 lists 2 generators at the site with 71 MW of nameplate capacity, all geothermal technology (this page's HIFLD capacity figure is 61 MW). Net generation was 341 GWh in 2024 (a 55% capacity factor), down 20% from 2022. Its generators came online between 1988 and 2012.
Grid neighborhood
The nearest named substation is DIXIE VALLEY (230 kV), under 0.1 miles away.
Computed by Bywatts from HIFLD power plant and substation records and EIA-860/923 survey data; distances are straight-line. Sources and methodology
Weather peril exposure
TERRA-GEN DIXIE VALLEY is a 61 MW geothermal power plant in Churchill County, NV, operated by TERRA-GEN OPERATING COMPANY, commissioned in 1988. Churchill County carries low modeled catastrophe exposure in the FEMA National Risk Index, scoring 1.2 of 5 at the 6th national percentile. Earthquake is the leading peril, rated Relatively Moderate by FEMA at the 96th percentile.
The Bywatts loss layer is calibrated to solar PV hardware, so it is not applied to a geothermal plant. The ratings below are the FEMA National Risk Index county hazard ratings for this location.
Churchill County hazard ratings
| Peril | FEMA rating | National percentile | Peril score | Events per year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earthquake | Relatively Moderate | 96th | 4.8 of 5 | 0.03 |
| Riverine flooding | Relatively Low | 84th | 4.4 of 5 | 0.21 |
| Wildfire | Relatively Low | 63rd | 3.5 of 5 | <0.01 |
| Heat wave | Very Low | 63rd | 3.5 of 5 | 4.6 |
| Winter weather | Relatively Low | 51st | 3.0 of 5 | 7.3 |
| Hail | Very Low | 15th | 1.6 of 5 | 0.05 |
| Lightning | Relatively Low | 13th | 1.5 of 5 | 18.1 |
| Strong wind | Very Low | 10th | 1.4 of 5 | 0.13 |
| Ice storm | Very Low | 3rd | 1.1 of 5 | 0.01 |
| Tornado | Very Low | 2nd | 1.1 of 5 | 0.09 |
Perils not assessed in Churchill County
These perils carry no usable National Risk Index figure for this county, so they are excluded from the scoring rather than scored zero. A zero would claim the peril was assessed and found benign.
| Peril | Why it is not scored |
|---|---|
| Hurricane | FEMA rating is "Not Applicable" for this county |
| Coastal flooding | FEMA rating is "Not Applicable" for this county |
Model hail, wind and flood exposure for Churchill County in the weather risk calculator
Ratings are the FEMA National Risk Index county hazard ratings; the peril score is a Bywatts transform of the FEMA national percentile. Full data sources and the solar vulnerability methodology are in the weather risk calculator.
Modeled estimate for screening and negotiation. Built from FEMA National Risk Index county hazard data and a solar vulnerability layer documented above. Not a quote, a binder, or actuarial advice, and not a substitute for a carrier's own model. Hazard data: FEMA National Risk Index December 2025, synced 2026-07-24. Resolution is county level, not site level.