Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Pauling, Hannah

Publications and source records attributed to Pauling, Hannah.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Techno-Economic Simulation Results Using dGeo for EGS-Based District Heating in the Northeastern United States

This dataset presents the results of techno-economic simulations performed using the Distributed Geothermal Market Demand Model (dGeo) to evaluate the feasibility of Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS)-based district heating in the Northeastern United States. Developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), dGeo is a geospatially resolved, bottom-up modeling framework designed to explore the deployment potential of geothermal distributed energy resources. The dataset, created as part of the Cornell EGS Ground-Truthing Project, provides census tract-level data that includes inputs and outputs such as thermal demand, road length, energy prices, geothermal system sizing, annual energy contributions from geothermal and natural gas peaking boilers, system capital costs (CAPEX), operation and maintenance costs (OPEX), and the levelized cost of heat (LCOH). Key simulation parameters include geothermal gradients, measured well depths, production temperatures, and district heating piping lengths based on S1400 neighborhood road lengths. The simulations assume a target bottom hole temperature of 80C and the development of new district heating networks in each census tract.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Pilgrim Hot Springs: GEOPHIRES Inputs and Outputs for Direct-Use Geothermal District Heating and Cooling

This dataset includes files for a techno-economic analysis conducted using the GEOPHIRES simulator to examine the feasibility of expanding a larger district heating site in a remote location: Pilgrim Hot Springs, Alaska. Files included here are GEOPHIRES inputs and outputs for five different scenarios with varying demand, cycle, and system design characteristics to analyze. Also included is the link to the GEOPHIRES GitHub, as well as a link to the dataset that contains the energy modelling used to determine the heating demand for the district. For a list of the differences between scenarios, see the included "Input Overview.txt" file. Fields included in the input files are: subsurface technical parameters, surface technical parameters, financial parameters, capital and O&M parameters, as well as simulation parameters. The output files are case reports that summarize all equipment, reservoir characteristics, costs, and heating profiles.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Derisking Superhot Geothermal Plays with Value of Information: Utilizing Play Fairway Analysis, Geophysics and Technoeconomics

This paper describes a methodology for evaluating how the play fairways analysis (e.g., favorability) can improve our chances of making geothermal development decisions. We make statistical resource assessments and couple them with technoeconomic analysis utilizing previous favorability work performed for the Newberry Volcano. We demonstrate how the favorability can be used in a decision analysis framework because the Newberry favorability also estimated an associated uncertainty. The specific decision considered is how large of a power plant to build, which is difficult given the uncertainty about the resource size. Our results focus on two resource types, hydrothermal and enhanced geothermal systems, and they demonstrate how estimates of the minimum, most likely, and maximum estimates of the geothermal resource (denoted as the P10, P50, and P90, respectively) can be used in a decision analysis framework. Lastly, the value of information results explore using favorability with and without the magnetotelluric and gravity data from the Newberry Volcano. As expected, the favorability is more reliable, according to our methodology, at indicating the resource size when it includes the two geophysical models.

enhanced geothermal system↗
DOE OSTI2024

DEEPEN: Final 3D PFA Favorability Models and 2D Favorability Maps at Newberry Volcano

Part of the DEEPEN (DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments) project involved developing and testing a methodology for a 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) for multiple play types (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical). This was tested using new and existing geoscientific exploration datasets at Newberry Volcano. This GDR submission includes images, data, and models related to the 3D favorability and uncertainty models and the 2D favorability and uncertainty maps. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology, detailed in the journal article below, is based on the method proposed by Poux & O'brien (2020), which uses the Leapfrog Geothermal software with the Edge extension to conduct PFA in 3D. This method uses all available data to build a 3D geodata model which can be broken down into smaller blocks and analyzed with advanced geostatistical methods. Each data set is imported into a 3D model in Leapfrog and divided into smaller blocks. Conditional queries can then be used to assign each block an index value which conditionally ranks each block's favorability, from 0-5 with 5 being most favorable, for each model (e.g., lithologic, seismic, magnetic, structural). The values between 0-5 assigned to each block are referred to as index values. The final step of the process is to combine all the index models to create a favorability index. This involves multiplying each index model by a given weight and then summing the resulting values. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology follows this approach, but split up by the specific geologic components of each play type. These components are defined as follows for each magmatic play type: 1. Conventional hydrothermal plays in magmatic environments: Heat, fluid, and permeability 2. Superhot EGS plays: Heat, thermal insulation, and producibility (the ability to create and sustain fractures suitable for and EGS reservoir) 3. Supercritical plays: Heat, supercritical fluid, pressure seal, and producibility (the proper permeability and pressure conditions to allow production of supercritical fluid) More information on these components and their development can be found in Kolker et al., (2022). For the purposes of subsurface imaging, it is easier to detect a permeable fluid-filled reservoir than it is to detect separate fluid and permeability components. Therefore, in this analysis, we combine fluid and permeability for conventional hydrothermal plays, and supercritical fluid and producibility for supercritical plays. We also project the 3D favorability volumes onto 2D surfaces for simplified joint interpretation, and we incorporate an uncertainty component. Uncertainty was modeled using the best approach for the dataset in question, for the datasets where we had enough information to do so. Identifying which subsurface parameters are the least resolved can help qualify current PFA results and focus future efforts in data collection. Where possible, the resulting uncertainty models/indices were weighted using the same weights applied to the respective datasets, and summed, following the PFA methodology above, but for uncertainty.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

De-risking superhot EGS development through 3D play fairway analysis: Methodology development and application at Newberry Volcano, Oregon, USA

The DErisking Exploration for multiple geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments (DEEPEN) project aims to de-risk exploration of geothermal plays in magmatic systems, with a focus on superhot and supercritical geothermal systems. This article presents advancements in geoscientific assessment of superhot enhanced geothermal system (EGS) resources as part of the DEEPEN project, particularly in exploration and identification of these systems. While there exists a general consensus on key components of conventional hydrothermal systems, there has not been a prior consensus on such components for EGS, let alone superhot EGS. The DEEPEN project identified these key components for superhot EGS plays, and used them to modify the traditional geothermal play fairway analysis (PFA) approach to identify favorable areas in superhot EGS plays in 3D. This was done through modeling both favorability and uncertainty separately for each key component of a superhot EGS play, incorporating diverse 3D geoscientific datasets, including geologic features, models produced from direct observations, single inversions, and joint inversions. The PFA is applied to Newberry Volcano as a form of validation. Finally, the results appear to validate the methodology, aligning with expectations derived from conceptual modeling, and highlighting the area targeted for EGS stimulation well NWG 55-29 as favorable, and suggesting potential additional areas worthy of exploration at Newberry.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Geothermal Play Fairway Analysis Best Practices

Play fairway analysis (PFA) is a methodology that can improve success rates for geothermal exploration drilling, thus reducing the costs of geothermal projects while facilitating development in new areas. It was originally developed for the oil and gas industry, but has been adapted for discovering geothermal resources over the last decade. The geothermal PFA methodology involves systematically screening a set geographic area for promising qualities typically related to the presence of heat, permeability, and fluid. Successful application of PFA can identify hidden hydrothermal systems. From 2014 to 2021 the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) supported the development of PFA for geothermal resources through awards to 11 research teams across the country. The goal of these projects was to advance and adapt PFA for geothermal exploration to produce regional-scale maps that reduce exploration uncertainty. This report is an outcome of the NREL-led PFA Retrospective project, which compiled, synthesized, analyzed the results of GTO's geothermal PFA program. Ultimately, we find that these projects greatly advanced approaches to geothermal exploration and resulted in extensive new data and new discoveries of unrecognized geothermal systems. We used the results to distill best practices in this report and to provide guidance for future applications of geothermal PFA.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Innovative Subsurface Learning and Hawaiian Exploration using Advanced Tomography (ISLAND HEAT) Phase 1 (Final Report)

The Innovative Subsurface Learning and Hawaiian Exploration using Advanced Tomography (ISLAND HEAT) project aims to leverage and enhance existing Hawai'i geothermal play fairway analysis (PFA) results and validate a conceptual model-driven, optimized, least-cost exploration and geophysical suite at a proven geothermal field with known permeability, the Puna Geothermal Venture, located in the Lower East Rift Zone. The abundance of geophysical scrutinization before, during, and after the 2018 Kilauea eruption at and around the broader Puna system offers a rare opportunity to elucidate geophysical expressions within a dynamic magmatic rift setting. Development of the methodology continues with its application at a second prospective site identified by the PFA, Mauna Kea, which serves as confirmation of the integrated approach.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

DEEPEN 3D PFA Weights for Exploration Datasets in Magmatic Environments

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. As part of the development of the DEEPEN 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) methodology for magmatic plays (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical), weights needed to be developed for use in the weighted sum of the different favorability index models produced from geoscientific exploration datasets. This GDR submission includes those weights. The weighting was done using two different approaches: one based on expert opinions, and one based on statistical learning. The weights are intended to describe how useful a particular exploration method is for imaging each component of each play type. They may be adjusted based on the characteristics of the resource under investigation, knowledge of the quality of the dataset, or simply to reduce the impact a single dataset has on the resulting outputs. Within the DEEPEN PFA, separate sets of weights are produced for each component of each play type, since exploration methods hold different levels of importance for detecting each play component, within each play type. The weights for conventional hydrothermal systems were based on the average of the normalized weights used in the DOE-funded PFA projects that were focused on magmatic plays. This decision was made because conventional hydrothermal plays are already well-studied and understood, and therefore it is logical to use existing weights where possible. In contrast, a true PFA has never been applied to superhot EGS or supercritical plays, meaning that exploration methods have never been weighted in terms of their utility in imaging the components of these plays. To produce weights for superhot EGS and supercritical plays, two different approaches were used: one based on expert opinion and the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), and another using a statistical approach based on principal component analysis (PCA). The weights are intended to provide standardized sets of weights for each play type in all magmatic geothermal systems. Two different approaches were used to investigate whether a more data-centric approach might allow new insights into the datasets, and also to analyze how different weighting approaches impact the outcomes. The expert/AHP approach involved using an online tool (https://bpmsg.com/ahp/) with built-in forms to make pairwise comparisons which are used to rank exploration methods against one-another. The inputs are then combined in a quantitative way, ultimately producing a set of consensus-based weights. To minimize the burden on each individual participant, the forms were completed in group discussions. While the group setting means that there is potential for some opinions to outweigh others, it also provides a venue for conversation to take place, in theory leading the group to a more robust consensus then what can be achieved on an individual basis. This exercise was done with two separate groups: one consisting of U.S.-based experts, and one consisting of Iceland-based experts in magmatic geothermal systems. The two sets of weights were then averaged to produce what we will from here on refer to as the "expert opinion-based weights," or "expert weights" for short. While expert opinions allow us to include more nuanced information in the weights, expert opinions are subject to human bias. Data-centric or statistical approaches help to overcome these potential human biases by focusing on and drawing conclusions from the data alone. More information on this approach along with the dataset used to produce the statistical weights may be found in the linked dataset below.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

DEEPEN 3D PFA Index Models for Exploration Datasets at Newberry Volcano

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. As part of the development of the DEEPEN 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) methodology for magmatic plays (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical), index models needed to be developed to map values in geoscientific exploration datasets to favorability index values. This GDR submission includes those index models. Index models were created by binning values in exploration datasets into chunks based on their favorability, and then applying a number between 0 and 5 to each chunk, where 0 represents very unfavorable data values and 5 represents very favorable data values. To account for differences in how exploration methods are used to detect each play component, separate index models are produced for each exploration method for each component of each play type. Index models were created using histograms of the distributions of each exploration dataset in combination with literature and input from experts about what combinations of geophysical, geological, and geochemical signatures are considered favorable at Newberry. This is in attempt to create similar sized bins based on the current understanding of how different anomalies map to favorable areas for the different types of geothermal plays (i.e., conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical). For example, an area of partial melt would likely appear as an area of low density, high conductivity, low vp, and high vp/vs. This means that these target anomalies would be given high (4 or 5) index values for the purpose of imaging the heat source. To account for differences in how exploration methods are used to detect each play component, separate index models are produced for each exploration method for each component of each play type. Index models were produced for the following datasets: - Geologic model - Alteration model - vp/vs - vp - vs - Temperature model - Seismicity (density*magnitude) - Density - Resistivity - Fault distance - Earthquake cutoff depth model

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

DEEPEN Leapfrog Geodata Model Cleaned and Reformatted Exploration Datasets from Newberry Volcano

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. As part of the DEEPEN 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) conducted at Newberry Volcano for multiple play types (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical), existing geoscientific exploration datasets needed to be acquired, cleaned, reformatted, and assembled in Leapfrog Geothermal. This GDR submission includes all of the cleaned and reformatted (X (m), Y (m), elevation (m), processed data values) datasets used to build the Leapfrog Geodata model. Existing datasets were acquired from the GDR, from AltaRock, and from other sources. This yielded the following datasets: - Digital elevation model produced from LiDAR data by Ramsey and Bard, 2016 - MT surveys from 2006, 2011, 2014, and 2017 (including single inversions) - Gravity surveys from 2006, 2007, and 2011 (including single) - Earthquake catalogs from PNSN, LLNL, and the Newberry EGS Demonstration project - Seismic velocity model from Templeton et al., 2014 - The Frone, 2015 temperature model and a new one produced through extrapolating downhole temperature measurements and the SMU temperature at depth maps. Two versions of the new model are provided: 250 m spacing and 500 m spacing - EarthVision geologic model with alteration from Moser et al., 2016 - Well data from EGS well 55-29, deep geothermal wells, coreholes (GEO N-2 through 5) and several thermal gradient holes - "Newberry Well Data:" Location, simple lithology, directional survey data, and temperature data for the 34 wells and coreholes used in the Newberry PFA Although there are additional 2D datasets available in the area, such as aeromagnetic surveys, these were not included in the analysis. While it may be possible to project these datasets into three dimensions by assuming the surface measurements do not vary with depth, this method is associated with high uncertainty. Preexisting inversions of these data were unavailable, and inverting additional geophysical datasets is outside the scope of this project.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

DEEPEN 3D PFA Favorability Models and 2D Favorability Maps at Newberry Volcano

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. Part of the DEEPEN project involved developing and testing a methodology for a 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) for multiple play types (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical). This was tested using new and existing geoscientific exploration datasets at Newberry Volcano. This GDR submission includes images, data, and models related to the 3D favorability and uncertainty models and the 2D favorability and uncertainty maps. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology is based on the method proposed by Poux et al. (2020), which uses the Leapfrog Geothermal software with the Edge extension to conduct PFA in 3D. This method uses all available data to build a 3D geodata model which can be broken down into smaller blocks and analyzed with advanced geostatistical methods. Each data set is imported into a 3D model in Leapfrog and divided into smaller blocks. Conditional queries can then be used to assign each block an index value which conditionally ranks each block's favorability, from 0-5 with 5 being most favorable, for each model (e.g., lithologic, seismic, magnetic, structural). The values between 0-5 assigned to each block are referred to as index values. The final step of the process is to combine all the index models to create a favorability index. This involves multiplying each index model by a given weight and then summing the resulting values. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology follows this approach, but split up by the specific geologic components of each play type. These components are defined as follows for each magmatic play type: 1. Conventional hydrothermal plays in magmatic environments: Heat, fluid, and permeability 2. Superhot EGS plays: Heat, thermal insulation, and producibility (the ability to create and sustain fractures suitable for and EGS reservoir) 3. Supercritical plays: Heat, supercritical fluid, pressure seal, and producibility (the proper permeability and pressure conditions to allow production of supercritical fluid) More information on these components and their development can be found in Kolker et al., 2022. For the purposes of subsurface imaging, it is easier to detect a permeable fluid-filled reservoir than it is to detect separate fluid and permeability components. Therefore, in this analysis, we combine fluid and permeability for conventional hydrothermal plays, and supercritical fluid and producibility for supercritical plays. More information on this process is described in the following sections. We also project the 3D favorability volumes onto 2D surfaces for simplified joint interpretation, and we incorporate an uncertainty component. Uncertainty was modeled using the best approach for the dataset in question, for the datasets where we had enough information to do so. Identifying which subsurface parameters are the least resolved can help qualify current PFA results and focus future efforts in data collection. Where possible, the resulting uncertainty models/indices were weighted using the same weights applied to the respective datasets, and summed, following the PFA methodology above, but for uncertainty. There are two different versions of the Leapfrog model and associated favorability models: - v1.0: The first release in June 2023 - v2.1: The second release, with improvements made to the earthquake catalog (included additional identified events, removed duplicate events), to the temperature model (fixed a deep BHT), and to the index models (updated the seismicity-heat source index models for supercritical and EGS, and the resistivity-insulation index models for all three play types). Also uses the jet color map rather than the magma color map for improved interpretability. - v2.1.1: Updated to include v2.0 uncertainty results (see below for uncertainty model versions) There are two different versions of the associated uncertainty models: - v1.0: The first release in June 2023 - v2.0: The se...

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Exploring for Superhot Geothermal Targets in Magmatic Settings: Developing a Methodology

This paper presents preliminary results from a subset of work carried out as part of a multinational research project entitled DErisking Exploration for multiple geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments (DEEPEN). One objective of DEEPEN is to develop a customized approach to exploration for superhot geothermal plays in magmatic systems. This paper summarizes key geologic components, risk factors, and exploration methods for geothermal plays in magmatic settings based on a review and comparative analysis of international training sites. As part of a Play Fairway Analysis (PFA) approach to exploring for multiple play types in a single magmatic system, training data were compiled and weights assigned to various evidence layers. Two different approaches for weighting exploration datasets are described in this paper - one based on expert opinions and the other using statistical learning. Weights produced by both approaches will be input into a 3D PFA workflow that combines multiple exploration datasets to generate 3D geothermal favorability models, which will be applied to two international demonstration sites.

GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Geothermal Energy and Resilience in Arctic Countries

The eight Arctic countries - Iceland, Canada, Denmark (Greenland and the Faroe Islands) Norway, Sweden, Finland, Russia, and the United States (Alaska) - have diverse energy systems, but can be split into two distinct groups based on energy characteristics. The first group includes systems in Europe (Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Iceland), which are heavily grid-connected. The second group includes the United States (Alaska), Canada, Russia, and Greenland, which have grid-connected energy systems in their more densely populated southern regions, but are also defined by the prevalence of remote microgrids. Energy sources for heat and power vary across grid-connected communities in the Arctic nations. The primary energy source for remote communities, on the other hand, is almost exclusively diesel. This is true for both heat and power. Despite these and other key distinctions, Arctic countries share many commonalities with regard to their energy systems. One is a fundamental need for heat. Heat and electric energy are linked in most communities - remote, rural, and urban - and those linked systems are increasingly vulnerable to disruptions. Several of the Arctic countries use baseload renewable energy resources for heat and power. Iceland uses geothermal and hydroelectric; Canada, the United States, Sweden, Norway, and Finland use hydroelectric. Utilization of baseload renewable energy resources on-site for combined heat and power appears to enhance the resilience of communities in Arctic countries with high penetration of those resources. On the other hand, reliance on diesel by remote communities in other Arctic countries may be amplifying vulnerabilities. Although geothermal energy is currently used in all eight Arctic countries, resources are poorly mapped, and details can be difficult to come by. Despite this, geothermal energy provides heat and sometimes electricity at both utility scales and at the microgrid scale. Geothermal electricity is produced in Iceland, Russia, and the United States (Alaska). Direct use of geothermal heat is used in Iceland, Russia, United States, Canada, and Norway. Geo-exchange is used in Sweden, Finland, Norway, Canada, and the United States. In this paper, we reframe geothermal heat and power systems as integrated energy systems, asking the question: are integrated geothermal energy systems - where available and economic - resilient solutions for communities in Arctic countries? We identify resilience attributes of integrated geothermal energy systems, with a focus on microgrids and small-scale applications. Based on the high-level, qualitative analysis presented in this paper, the answer appears to be yes. Further work should prioritize refining our understanding of geothermal resources in Arctic countries, because development of the most economic geothermal resources in Arctic countries has the potential to enhance the energy resilience of its residents, whether in a grid-connected or remote off-grid context.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Analysis of Selected Publicly Available Geothermal Exploration Data Gaps

As part of a United States Department of Energy (DOE) supported retrospective analysis of DOE's Play Fairway Analysis (PFA) projects, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) compiled and analyzed publicly available geothermal exploration datasets to identify and highlight data gaps in areas prospective for hosting geothermal resources. The analysis was intended to understand the existing geographic coverage of selected datasets commonly utilized both by the PFA projects and geothermal developers during resource assessments including geologic mapping, temperature gradient drilling, and aeromagnetic, gravimetric, and lidar surveys. Results indicate that broad areas of the western United States estimated to have geothermal potential lack sufficient geologic and geophysical coverage necessary for even regional resource exploration. The study directly informed the recent Geoscience Data Acquisition for Western Nevada, or GeoDAWN - which united DOE's Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) of the U.S. Department of the Interior to assist U.S. needs for energy and critical minerals. The study also has the potential to inform public investment in further data acquisition for characterization of the Earth both for geothermal and other natural resource assessments.

data↗
DOE OSTI2021

Geothermal Energy and Resilience in Arctic Countries

The eight Arctic countries have diverse energy systems but can be split into two distinct groups based on energy characteristics. The first group includes countries which are heavily gridconnected (Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Finland); the second group includes countries with some grids as well as an abundance of remote microgrids, particularly in their more northern regions (Canada, Russia, the United States [Alaska], and Greenland). The primary energy source for both heat and power in remote communities is almost exclusively diesel. Geothermal energy is currently used in all eight Arctic countries, providing heat and sometimes electricity at utility scales and at the microgrid scale. However, the availability of geothermal resources is poorly defined in Arctic countries. We reframe geothermal heat and power as integrated energy systems, asking the question: are integrated geothermal energy systems - where available and economic - resilient solutions for communities in Arctic countries? Resilience attributes of integrated geothermal energy systems are identified, with a focus on microgrids and small-scale applications.

arctic energy↗
DOE OSTI2021

Geothermal District Heating in the United States: 2021 Update

As of 2021, there are 23 geothermal district heating (GDH) systems in the United States. Most are over 30 years old. This paper presents an overview of GDH development in the United States and the performance of GDH systems over time. Calculations of the estimated levelized cost of heat (LCOH) for existing U.S. GDH systems were made using NREL's GEOPHIRES tool. Estimated LCOH for existing U.S. GDH systems ranges from $15 to $105/MWhth. This paper explores other factors in GDH development such as resource and system size, capacity factor, and the role of policy. U.S. GDH utilization and deployment are compared to worldwide trends. Results show that the market for GDH in the United States has been weak over the past 40 years due to the combination of inexpensive fossil fuel alternatives (mostly natural gas), lack of incentives focused on heating/cooling, and other factors. Future opportunities for increased GDH deployment in the United States related to increased demand for low-carbon heating and cooling solutions (driven by decarbonization goals in the residential, commercial and industrial heating/cooling sectors, and particularly aggressive ones on college campuses) are outlined. Lastly, this paper identifies policy mechanisms that have been implemented in other countries to incentivize GDH (such as financial incentives targeting GDH, geothermal risk reduction mechanisms, carbon prices benefiting low-carbon heat production, and others).

geothermal district heating↗
DOE OSTI2021

DEEPEN Data Catalog for Magmatic Geothermal Systems in the United States

This data catalog contains information related to the Training Site Analysis for the Geothermica project "DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments (DEEPEN)." The DEEPEN project aims to reduce exploration risk for geothermal fluids in magmatic systems by developing improved an improved framework for interpretation of exploration data using the Play Fairway Analysis (PFA) methodology. The Training Site Analysis performed for DEEPEN leverages existing datasets to develop a customized PFA approach to exploration for multiple geothermal resource types in magmatic systems (conventional hydrothermal resources, supercritical fluid and superheated steam resources, and superhot EGS resources). This data catalog contains links to publicly available data files related to 8 training sites in the United States. US training sites are: the Cascades/Aleutians PFA project; the Hawaii PFA project, the Oregon Cascades PFA project, the Snake River Plain, Idaho PFA project, the Washington State PFA project, Newberry Volcano, Coso Geothermal Field, and the Geysers Geothermal field. This database contains an overview of these training sites, data sources, and links to publicly available exploration datasets. For the five PFA projects, details on exploration data related to PFA components (heat, fluid, permeability, sometimes seal) are provided, including a summary of data weighting methodologies.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗