Drilling 125 wells for 400MW of power seems like a pretty poor return. Although it's hard to tell as the article doesn't go into much detail around the depth of those wells.
If we knew something that had all the perks of oil and none of the disadvantages, we would be all hooked on it. All clean energy are trade-off's compared to oil.
Solar ? Short lifespan, land occupation, requires mining, the sun does not always shine, not much energy so you need a lot Wind ? Lifespan, much skill to build and to maintain, the wind does not always blow, not much energy so you need a lot Nuclear ? Big upfront cost, need skilled workforce to build and maintain Geothermal ? Big cost for not so much energy ?
All of those need a good grid too
Almost everyone I know of who has had solar panels for a long time reports they last a lot longer than promised. And even if some part breaks, it can be replaced. You don’t need to repeat the whole time and expense of acquiring the land, building the facility, grid interconnect and permitting. This means humanity gets a dividend in energy over the very long term, which balances favorably against the upfront cost.
The issue of intermittency is more valid. It can be mitigated with battery storage, which has its own cost and downsides, but the chemistries are advancing rapidly, so I think the future is bright for energy abundance.
It was not to detract from the need for new and renewable sources of power, but rather surprise at how little power you get from each well, and the cost of drilling each of them.
So does oil.
What oil actually depends on is a transportation network, and aside from trains and pipelines, that's pretty flexible too.
That's 400 MW of 24/7 baseload power. Forever, for free.
The nuclear power lobby is scared shitless of geothermal generation becoming not just viable but proven, because "cheap baseload" is just about the one thing that NPPs are actually pretty damn good at.