mit and google links discuss EGS which stands for Enhanced Geothermal System. Neither article is a refereed technical report. So I cannot determine what makes it 'enhanced' in a technical sense. There is, of course, no existing geothermal energy industry. Only existing geothermal installations. Each installation appears to be uniquely designed for its peculiar location.

Both articles appear to equate 'better' and 'high grade' with higher temperature, so BGs report concerns something out of the box of ordinary thinking. A well known technical problem with geothermal is that the thermal fluid is water. Water is a polar liquid. Hot water has a great capability to desolve naturally occurring minerals, which then flow a short distance in the drill pipe, cool a bit, and deposit out of solution. This clogs the pipe rather quickly. This phenomenon is unknown in petroleum wells, but is a big problem for geothermal wells. Neither article describes or discusses this issue to my satisfaction.

Two short quotations from the mit article:

1) Of particular importance is to demonstrate that EGS technology is scalable and transferable to sites in different geologic settings.

2) The shallow, extra-hot, high-grade deposits in the west should be explored and tested first.

Scalability has not been established. The feasibility of EGS is dependent on local geological conditions. There is no mentioned of how it being enhanced affects its feasibility.

BigGav's new information is about a new idea (new to me, anyway) that deliberately targets low temperature heat. This has the possibility of keeping the wells unplugged longer. It has the down-side that thermodyanmic efficiency is much smaller. But if, in Australia in this artesian basin, they can get EROI that keeps them in business, then good for them.