2011 Geothermal Technologies Program Peer Review Presentation summarizing relevance, proposed approach, and logistics of the Glass Buttes Exploration and Drilling.

The information given in this file pertains to Argonne life-cycle analyses (LCAs) of the plant cycle stage for a set of ten new geothermal scenario pairs, each comprised of a reference and improved case. These analyses were conducted to compare environmental performances among the scenarios and cases. The types of plants evaluated are hydrothermal binary and flash and Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) binary and flash plants. Each scenario pair was developed by the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) group using the Geothermal Electricity Evaluation Model (GETEM) as a way to identify plant operational and resource combinations that could reduce geothermal power plant LCOE values. Based on the specified plant and well field characteristics (plant type, capacity, capacity factor and lifetime, and well numbers and depths) for each case of each pair, Argonne generated a corresponding set of material to power ratios (MPRs) and greenhouse gas and fossil energy ratios.

The Geothermal Exploration Artificial Intelligence looks to use machine learning to spot geothermal identifiers from land maps. This is done to remotely detect geothermal sites for the purpose of energy uses. Such uses include enhanced geothermal system (EGS) applications, especially regarding finding locations for viable EGS sites. This submission includes the appendices and reports formerly attached to the Geothermal Exploration Artificial Intelligence Quarterly and Final Reports. The appendices below include methodologies, results, and some data regarding what was used to train the Geothermal Exploration AI. The methodology reports explain how specific anomaly detection modes were selected for use with the Geo Exploration AI. This also includes how the detection mode is useful for finding geothermal sites. Some methodology reports also include small amounts of code. Results from these reports explain the accuracy of methods used for the selected sites (Brady Desert Peak and Salton Sea). Data from these detection modes can be found in some of the reports, such as the Mineral Markers Maps, but most of the raw data is included the DOE Database which includes Brady, Desert Peak, and Salton Sea Geothermal Sites.

Between October 1, 2012 and Sept 30, 2013 NM Tech hydrology faculty and students, and personnel from the NM Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources conducted a 1-year study to assess the subsurface flow patterns and the sustainability of the Truth or Consequences geothermal system. This report presents a summary of our findings.

These files contain the geodatabases related to Brady's Geothermal Field. It includes all input and output files for the Geothermal Exploration Artificial Intelligence. Input and output files are sorted into three categories: raw data, pre-processed data, and analysis (post-processed data). In each of these categories there are six additional types of raster catalogs which are titled Radar, SWIR, Thermal, Geophysics, Geology, and Wells. These inputs and outputs were used with the Geothermal Exploration Artificial Intelligence to identify indicators of blind geothermal systems at the Brady Hot Springs Geothermal Site. The included zip file is a geodatabase to be used with ArcGIS and the tar file is an inclusive database that encompasses the inputs and outputs for the Brady Hot Springs Geothermal Site.

This dataset includes chemistry of geothermal water samples of the Eastern Snake River Plain and surrounding area. The samples included in this dataset were collected during the springs and summers of 2014 and 2015. All chemical analysis of the samples were conducted in the Analytical Laboratory at the Center of Advanced Energy Studies in Idaho Falls, Idaho. This data set supersedes #425 submission and is the final submission for AOP 3.1.2.1 for INL. Isotopic data collected by Mark Conrad will be submitted in a separate file.

This submission contains slow strain rates summed to radians over 30 second intervals [rad/s] derived from horizontal distributed acoustic sensing measurements (DASH) of Brady geothermal field during PoroTomo deployment (2016-Mar-14 to 2016-Mar-26). There is one file corresponding to each day written in *.mat format for use with Matlab. The format for the binary Matlab .mat files are defined at: https://www.mathworks.com/help/pdf_doc/matlab/matfile_format.pdf. One such file includes the following variables: 'flist': list of raw DASH files used in the summation 'time_tag_mdt': sample time tag in datetime format with hours given in 24-hr format (yyyy/MM/dd HH:mm:ss.SSSSSSS) 'time_tag_uts': sample time tag in Unix time 'strain_rate_summed_over30s_in_radians_per_second': slow strain rates summed over 30 second intervals in units rad/s 'sample_standard_deviation_in_radians_per_second': corresponding sample standard deviation of slow strain rates in units rad/s The PoroTomo final technical report, raw DASH data, and software repository are also available through the links below.

These files contain the geodatabases related to the Desert Peak Geothermal Field. It includes all input and output files used in the project. The files include data categories of raw data, pre-processed data, and analysis (post-processed data). In each of these categories there are six additional types of raster catalogs including Radar, SWIR, Thermal, Geophysics, Geology, and Wells. The files for the Desert Peak Geothermal Site are used with the Geothermal Exploration Artificial Intelligence to identify indicators of blind geothermal systems. The included zip file is a geodatabase to be used with ArcGIS and the tar file is an inclusive database that encompasses the inputs and outputs for the Desert Peak Geothermal Field.

This submission contains tarred pair directories for interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) data covering Coso Geothermal Field in California, USA. Explanation of pair subdirectories: Pairs are formed using the InSAR processing software GMT5SAR (Sandwell et al., 2011). Pair subdirectories are named by starting and ending epochs in YYYYMMDD_YYYYMMDD format. Each tarred pair directory contains GRD files for phase data (radians), unwrapped range change (drhomaskd, in m), and unwrapped range change rate (drange, in m/yr). The data are given in both latitude/longitude and Universal Transverse Mercator (Zone 11N). Raw Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data from the Envisat satellite mission operated by the European Space Agency (ESA) are copyrighted by ESA and were provided through the WInSAR consortium at the UNAVCO facility. Raw Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data from the Sentinel-1A satellite mission operated by ESA were available free of charge through the Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) at the Alaska Satellite Facility (ASF) and through the Sentinels Scientific Data Hub. References: Farr, T.G.; Rosen, P.A.; Caro, E.; Crippen, R.; Duren, R.; Hensley, S.; Kobrick, M.; Paller, M.; Rodriguez, E.; Roth, L.; Seal, D.; Shaffer, S.; Shimada, J.; Umland, J.; Werner, M.; Oskin, M.; Burbank, D.; Alsdorf, D. The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission. Reviews of Geophysics 2007, 45, RG2004. doi:10.1029/2005RG000183. Sandwell, D.; Mellors, R.; Tong, X.; Wei, M.; Wessel, P. Open radar interferometry software for mapping surface deformation. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 2011, 92, 234?234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2011EO280002. doi:10.1029/2011EO280002.

ArcGIS Map Package with MT Station Locations, 2D Seismic Lines, Well data, Known Regional Hydrothermal Systems, Regional Historic Earthquake Seismicity, Regional Temperature Gradient Data, Regional Heat Flow Data, Regional Radiogenic Heat Production, Local Geology, Land Status, Cultural Data, 2m Temperature Probe Data, and Gravity Data. Also a detailed down-hole lithology notes are provided.

This submission contains an ESRI map package (.mpk) with an embedded geodatabase for GIS resources used or derived in the Nevada Machine Learning project, meant to accompany the final report. The package includes layer descriptions, layer grouping, and symbology. Layer groups include: new/revised datasets (paleo-geothermal features, geochemistry, geophysics, heat flow, slip and dilation, potential structures, geothermal power plants, positive and negative test sites), machine learning model input grids, machine learning models (Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Extreme Learning Machine (ELM), Bayesian Neural Network (BNN), Principal Component Analysis (PCA/PCAk), Non-negative Matrix Factorization (NMF/NMFk) - supervised and unsupervised), original NV Play Fairway data and models, and NV cultural/reference data. See layer descriptions for additional metadata. Smaller GIS resource packages (by category) can be found in the related datasets section of this submission. A submission linking the full codebase for generating machine learning output models is available through the "Related Datasets" link on this page, and contains results beyond the top picks present in this compilation.

This report examines life cycle water consumption for various geothermal technologies to better understand factors that affect water consumption across the life cycle (e.g., power plant cooling, belowground fluid losses) and to assess the potential water challenges that future geothermal power generation projects may face. Previous reports in this series quantified the life cycle freshwater requirements of geothermal power-generating systems, explored operational and environmental concerns related to the geochemical composition of geothermal fluids, and assessed future water demand by geothermal power plants according to growth projections for the industry. This report seeks to extend those analyses by including EGS flash, both as part of the life cycle analysis and water resource assessment. A regional water resource assessment based upon the life cycle results is also presented. Finally, the legal framework of water with respect to geothermal resources in the states with active geothermal development is also analyzed.

Geothermometry Mapping of Deep Hydrothermal Reservoirs in Southeastern Idaho. Project final report with detail appendices.

Google Earth .kmz files that contain the locations of geothermal wells and thermal springs in the USA, and seafloor hydrothermal vents that have associated rare earth element data. The file does not contain the actual data, the actual data is available through the GDR website in two tier 3 data sets entitled "Compilation of Rare Earth Element Analyses from US Geothermal Fields and Mid Ocean Ridge (MOR) Hydrothermal Vents" and "Rare earth element content of thermal fluids from Surprise Valley, California"

Photos of core samples from Lanai Island. During the third phase of the Hawaii Play Fairway project, further exploration involved drilling a groundwater well in Lanai's Palawai Basin and performing more geophysical surveys. The project deepened an existing water well on Lanai. Drilling occurred 24/7 the entire month of June 2019 over which time Lanai Well 10 was deepened from 427 m to 1057 m, with continuous core collected. The roughly linear temperature gradient was an average of 42 degC/km, and a maximum bottom hole temperature, 66 degC. This gradient is more than twice the background for Hawaii and within a range of gradients measured in this depth range for some exploration wells within KERZ. The Hawaii Play Fairway project seeks to explore the geologic structures that exist in the caldera region of Hawaiian volcanoes; how those structures influence groundwater storage and flow; and how the magmatic heat from Hawaiian shield volcanoes cools over time. The Hawaii Groundwater and Geothermal Resources Center (Hawaii Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, University of Hawaii at Manoa) executed the Hawaii Play Fairway project. For more information, go to HGGRC's website that is linked in the resources.

This data submission includes several data components that were used to develop a conceptual model and power capacity-estimates of two low-temperature geothermal resources that define geothermal prospect A at Hawthorne, Nevada. Data are sourced from a combination of legacy publicly-available data and more recent data acquisition conducted by the US Navy Geothermal Program Office (2008-2013) and the Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy at the University of Nevada, Reno (2008-2010). Data sets include compiled fluid geochemistry data, down-hole temperature logs for wells in the vicinity of prospect A, 2 meter temperature survey data, temperature-spinner logs acquired in well HWAAD-2A, fracture picks from image log data acquired in wells HWAAD-2 and HWAAD-3, and X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) analyses on cuttings from wells HWAAD-2A and HWAAD-3. These data have been reviewed for errors and inconsistencies, but it is possible that few errors could still remain. The resource conceptual model and power capacity estimates are included in the final report to the US Department of Energy, and are presented in a manuscript by Ayling and Hinz. A link to the manuscript published in Geothermics is linked below in this submission.

Compilation of data (spreadsheet and shapefiles) for several low-temperature resource types, including isolated springs and wells, delineated area convection systems, sedimentary basins and coastal plains sedimentary systems. For each system, we include estimates of the accessible resource base, mean extractable resource and beneficial heat. Data compiled from USGS and other sources. General locations are provided in the spreadsheet; specific locations are provided in the associated shapefiles. The paper (submitted to GRC 2016) describing the methodology and analysis is also included.

Compilation of data (spreadsheet and shapefiles) for several low-temperature resource types, including isolated springs and wells, delineated area convection systems, sedimentary basins and coastal plains sedimentary systems. For each system, we include estimates of the accessible resource base, mean extractable resource and beneficial heat. Data compiled from USGS and other sources. The paper (submitted to GRC 2016) describing the methodology and analysis is also included. * A newer version of this data exists in a more recent submission. See the resources below for more information.

In this paper, we present an analysis using unsupervised machine learning (ML) to identify the key geologic factors that contribute to the geothermal production in Brady geothermal field. Brady is a hydrothermal system in northwestern Nevada that supports both electricity production and direct use of hydrothermal fluids. Transmissive fuid-fow pathways are relatively rare in the subsurface, but are critical components of hydrothermal systems like Brady and many other types of fuid-fow systems in fractured rock. Here, we analyze geologic data with ML methods to unravel the local geologic controls on these pathways. The ML method, non-negative matrix factorization with k-means clustering (NMFk), is applied to a library of 14 3D geologic characteristics hypothesized to control hydrothermal circulation in the Brady geothermal field. Our results indicate that macro-scale faults and a local step-over in the fault system preferentially occur along production wells when compared to injection wells and non-productive wells. We infer that these are the key geologic characteristics that control the through-going hydrothermal transmission pathways at Brady. Our results demonstrate: (1) the specific geologic controls on the Brady hydrothermal system and (2) the efficacy of pairing ML techniques with 3D geologic characterization to enhance the understanding of subsurface processes. This submission includes the published journal article detailing this work, the published 3D geologic map of the Brady Geothermal Area used as a basis to develop structural and geological variables that are hypothesized to control or effect permeability or connectivity, 3D well data, along which geologic data were sampled for PCA analyses, and associated metadata file. This work was done using the GeoThermalCloud framework, which is part of SmartTensors (both are linked below).

A map showing location of wells permitted, drilled and seismic test, as part of validation of innovative exploration technologies done for the Newberry Volcano project in 2012.

This submission includes composite risk segment models in raster format for permeability, heat of the earth, and MT, as well as the final PFA model of geothermal exploration risk in Southwestern Utah, USA. Additionally, this submission has data regarding hydrothermally altered areas, and opal sinter deposits in the study area. All of this information lends to the understanding and exploration for hidden geothermal systems in the area.

Research references to literature about the Newberry geothermal area, Oregon.

This submission includes all magnetotelluric (MT) transfer functions acquired during the 2014 EGS stimulation at Newberry Volcano in central Oregon as well as previously acquired MT data for the overall volcano. Plots of all data are provided (including forward response from a model used in a publication now in review in G-cubed). Also included is a kmz file giving all station locations.

The utility of passive seismic emission tomography for mapping geothermal permeability has been tested at San Emidio in Nevada. The San Emidio study area overlaps a geothermal field in production since 1987 and another resource to the south of the production field. Passive seismic data collections were completed at San Emidio in late 2016 by Microseismic Inc as part of a DOE project. The PSET results are being analyzed as part of the WHOLESCALE project. This submission includes P-wave velocity model data, and the passive seismic data with more information on each bellow.

The U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Vision (GeoVision) Study is currently looking at the potential to increase geothermal deployment in the U.S. and to understand the impact of this increased deployment. This paper reviews 31 performance, cost, and financial parameters as input for numerical simulations describing GDH system deployment in support of the GeoVision effort. The focus is on geothermal district heating (GDH) systems using hydrothermal and Enhanced Geothermal System resources in the U.S.; ground-source heat pumps and heat-to-electricity conversion technology were excluded. Parameters investigated include: 1) capital and operation and maintenance costs for both subsurface and surface equipment; 2) performance factors such as resource recovery factors, well flow rates, and system efficiencies; and 3) financial parameters such as inflation, interest, and tax rates. Current values as well as potential future improved values under various scenarios are presented. Sources of data considered include academic and popular literature, software tools such as GETEM and GEOPHIRES, industry interviews, and analysis conducted by other task forces for the GeoVision Study, e.g., on the drilling costs and reservoir performance.

In December 2016, 1301 vertical-component seismic instruments were deployed at the San Emidio Geothermal field in Nevada. The first record starts at 2016-12-05T02:00:00.000000Z (UTC) and the last record ends at 2016-12-11T14:00:59.998000Z (UTC). Data are stored in individual files in one-minute increments in SEGD and MSEED formats. See the metadata in GDR submission (linked below as "Seismic Survey 2016 Metadata at San Emidio Nevada") for details about the seismic station locations, seismic data logger specifications, instrumentation specifications, descriptions of data, a fracture finding summary, and the final report for the 2016 seismic survey done in San Emidio, Nevada.

Geothermal power plants typically show decreasing heat and power production rates over time. Mitigation strategies include optimizing the management of existing wells - increasing or decreasing the fluid flow rates across the wells - and drilling new wells at appropriate locations. The latter is expensive, time-consuming, and subject to many engineering constraints, but the former is a viable mechanism for periodic adjustment of the available fluid allocations. Data and supporting literature from a study describing a new approach combining reservoir modeling and machine learning to produce models that enable strategies for the mitigation of decreased heat and power production rates over time for geothermal power plants. The computational approach used enables translation of sets of potential flow rates for the active wells into reservoir-wide estimates of produced energy and discovery of optimal flow allocations among the studied sets. In our computational experiments, we utilize collections of simulations for a specific reservoir (which capture subsurface characterization and realize history matching) along with machine learning models that predict temperature and pressure timeseries for production wells. We evaluate this approach using an "open-source" reservoir we have constructed that captures many of the characteristics of Brady Hot Springs, a commercially operational geothermal field in Nevada, USA. Selected results from a reservoir model of Brady Hot Springs itself are presented to show successful application to an existing system. In both cases, energy predictions prove to be highly accurate: all observed prediction errors do not exceed 3.68% for temperatures and 4.75% for pressures. In a cumulative energy estimation, we observe prediction errors that are less than 4.04%. A typical reservoir simulation for Brady Hot Springs completes in approximately 4 hours, whereas our machine learning models yield accurate 20-year predictions for temperatures, pressures, and produced energy in 0.9 seconds. This paper aims to demonstrate how the models and techniques from our study can be applied to achieve rapid exploration of controlled parameters and optimization of other geothermal reservoirs. Includes a synthetic, yet realistic, model of a geothermal reservoir, referred to as open-source reservoir (OSR). OSR is a 10-well (4 injection wells and 6 production wells) system that resembles Brady Hot Springs (a commercially operational geothermal field in Nevada, USA) at a high level but has a number of sufficiently modified characteristics (which renders any possible similarity between specific characteristics like temperatures and pressures as purely random). We study OSR through CMG simulations with a wide range of flow allocation scenarios. Includes a dataset with 101 simulated scenarios that cover the period of time between 2020 and 2040 and a link to the published paper about this project, where we focus on the Machine Learning work for predicting OSR's energy production based on the simulation data, as well as a link to the GitHub repository where we have published the code we have developed (please refer to the repository's readme file to see instructions on how to run the code). Additional links are included to associated work led by the USGS to identify geologic factors associated with well productivity in geothermal fields. Below are the high-level steps for applying the same modeling + ML process to other geothermal reservoirs: 1. Develop a geologic model of the geothermal field. The location of faults, upflow zones, aquifers, etc. need to be accounted for as accurately as possible 2. The geologic model needs to be converted to a reservoir model that can be used in a reservoir simulator, such as, for instance, CMG STARS, TETRAD, or FALCON 3. Using native state modeling, the initial temperature and pressure distributions are evaluated, and they become the initial conditions for dynamic reservoir simulations 4. Using history matching with tracers and available production data, the model should be tuned to represent the subsurface reservoir as accurately as possible 5. A large number of simulations is run using the history-matched reservoir model. Each simulation assumes a different wellbore flow rate allocation across the injection and production wells, where the individual selected flow rates do not violate the practical constraints for the corresponding wells. 6. ML models are trained using the simulation data. The code in our GitHub repository demonstrates how these models can be trained and evaluated. 7. The trained ML models can be used to evaluate a large set of candidate flow allocations with the goal of selecting the most optimal allocations, i.e., producing the largest amounts of thermal energy over the modeled period of time. The referenced paper provides more details about this optimization process

The submission includes the labeled datasets, as ESRI Grid files (.gri, .grd) used for training and classification results for our machine leaning model: - brady_som_output.gri, brady_som_output.grd, brady_som_output.* - desert_som_output.gri, desert_som_output.grd, desert_som_output.* The data corresponds to two sites: Brady Hot Springs and Desert Peak, both located near Fallon, NV. Input layers include: - Geothermal: Labeled data (0: Non-geothermal; 1: Geothermal) - Minerals: Hydrothermal mineral alterations, as a result of spectral analysis using Chalcedony, Kaolinite, Gypsum, Hematite and Epsomite - Temperature: Land surface temperature (% of times a pixel was classified as "Hot" by K-Means) - Faults: Fault density with a 300mradius - Subsidence: PSInSAR results showing subsidence displacement of more than 5mm - Uplift: PSInSAR results showing subsidence displacement of more than 5mm Also, the results of the classification using Brady and Desert Peak to build 2 Convolutional Neural Networks. These were applied to the training site as well as the other site, the results are in GeoTiff format. - brady_classification: Results of classification of the Brady-trained model - desert_classification: Results of classification of the Desert Peak-trained model - b2d_classification: Results of classification of Desert Peak using the Brady-trained model - d2b_classification: Results of classification of Brady using the Desert Peak-trained model

This package contains USGS data contributions to the DOE-funded Nevada Geothermal Machine Learning Project, with the objective of developing a machine learning approach to identifying new geothermal systems in the Great Basin. This package contains three major data products (geophysics, heat flow, and fault dilation and slip tendencies) that cover a large portion of northern Nevada. The geophysics data include map surfaces related to gravity and magnetic data, and line and point data derived from those surfaces. Heat flow data include an interpolated map of heat flow in mW/m^2, an error surface, and well data used to construct them. The dilation and slip tendency information exist as attributes assigned to each line segment of mapped faults and geophysical lineaments. GDR submission contains link to official USGS data release. Additional metadata available on source DOI page.

Three shapefiles in this submission show the position of proposed seismic line surveys. The mid-crustal velocity anomaly file shows the extent of an anomalously low P-wave velocity zone in the subsurface. Two other files show the extent of known hydrothermal systems in the Roosevelt Hot Springs area. Another file shows the location of the proposed water pipeline to pump water from the supply wells to the deep drill site.

Newberry seeks to explore "blind" (no surface evidence) convective hydrothermal systems associated with a young silicic pluton on the flanks of Newberry Volcano. This project will employ a combination of innovative and conventional techniques to identify the location of subsurface geothermal fluids associated with the hot pluton. Newberry project drill site location map 2010. This submission contains a topographic drill site location map.

Drilling summary from validation of innovative exploration technologies for Newberry Volcano, including depths, dates, and drilling statistics from 2012

Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: 2012 GRC Paper Geothermal Exploration at Newberry

Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: DOE Geochemistry data from deep wells 55-29 and 46-16 at Newberry 2012

Report detailing data acquisition, quality, processing, and presentation for the gravity survey conducted on the Newberry Volcano. (Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: Gravity Report of Newberry prepared by Zonge GeoSciences 2012)

Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: LiDAR of Newberry Volcano 2012

Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: Lithology Reports of Temperature Gradient Wells

Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: Raw data used to prepare the Gravity Report by Zonge 2012

Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: Seismic data - raw taken by Apex Hipoint for 1st test 2012 (data in .ff format)

Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: Report of 4-D seismic Analysis by Apex HiPoint (Sigma3) 2012

Validation of Innovative Exploration Technologies for Newberry Volcano: Temperature Readings from 7 wells drilled to date by SMU 2012