Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “geothermal technologies program”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4

GTO Multi-Year Program Plan FY 2022-2026

The GTO Multi-Year Program Plan (MYPP), building on the findings of the GeoVision analysis, outlines a 5-year plan of activities GTO will pursue to support the growth and long-term contribution of geothermal energy to the U.S. electricity grid and American homes and buildings. The MYPP outlines GTO’s vision and mission and presents a high-level technology plan for key areas of GTO research starting in Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 and running through the end of FY 2026.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Measuring Impact of U.S. DOE Geothermal Technologies Office Funding: Considerations for Development of a Geothermal Resource Reporting Metric

This paper reviews existing methodologies and reporting codes used to describe extracted energy resources such as coal and oil and describes a comparable proposed methodology to describe geothermal resources. The goal is to provide the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) with a consistent and comprehensible means of assessing the impacts of its funding programs. This framework will allow for GTO to assess the effectiveness of research, development, and deployment (RD&D) funding, prioritize funding requests, and demonstrate the value of RD&D programs to the U.S. Congress. Standards and reporting codes used in other countries and energy sectors provide guidance to inform development of a geothermal methodology, but industry feedback and our analysis suggest that the existing models have drawbacks that should be addressed. In order to formulate a comprehensive metric for use by GTO, we analyzed existing resource assessments and reporting methodologies for the geothermal, mining, and oil and gas industries, and we sought input from industry, investors, academia, national labs, and other government agencies. Using this background research as a guide, we describe a methodology for assessing and reporting on GTO funding according to resource knowledge and resource grade (or quality). This methodology would allow GTO to target funding or measure impact by progression of projects or geological potential for development.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Geothermal Resource Reporting Metric (GRRM) Developed for the U.S. Department of Energy's Geothermal Technologies Office

This paper reviews a methodology being developed for reporting geothermal resources and project progress. The goal is to provide the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) with a consistent and comprehensible means of evaluating the impacts of its funding programs. This framework will allow the GTO to assess the effectiveness of research, development, and deployment (RD&D) funding, prioritize funding requests, and demonstrate the value of RD&D programs to the U.S. Congress and the public. Standards and reporting codes used in other countries and energy sectors provide guidance to develop the relevant geothermal methodology, but industry feedback and our analysis suggest that the existing models have drawbacks that should be addressed. In order to formulate a comprehensive metric for use by the GTO, we analyzed existing resource assessments and reporting methodologies for the geothermal, mining, and oil and gas industries, and sought input from industry, investors, academia, national labs, and other government agencies. Using this background research as a guide, we describe a methodology for evaluating and reporting on GTO funding according to resource grade (geological, technical and socio-economic) and project progress. This methodology would allow GTO to target funding, measure impact by monitoring the progression of projects, or assess geological potential of targeted areas for development.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

“Innervated” Pipelines: A New Technology Platform for In-Situ Repair and Embedded Intelligence

The overall vision pursued under the project would ultimately enable capability for real-time operational monitoring of natural gas (and other) pipeline infrastructures through the combination of in-situ repair and rehabilitation methods with embedded fiber optic sensing and associated data analytics methods and platform tools. Benefits to the public include more resilient and robust natural gas pipeline infrastructures with the potential to expand the applications of developed technologies under the program to other important areas of critical energy infrastructure in the future such as H2 pipelines and infrastructure, municipal and other civil infrastructure, as well as subsurface oil, gas, and geothermal infrastructure applications. The program has successfully demonstrated feasibility for all of the critical enabling elements and serves as a foundation for future technology maturation, deployment, and customization for other potential applications and high-priority needs into the future. Several underlying innovations have shown potential for commercial deployment and are the subject of continued development and technology transfer based upon patents submitted during the project duration.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Daemen Alternative Energy/Geothermal Technologies Demonstration Program, Erie County

The purpose of the Daemen Alternative Energy/Geothermal Technologies Demonstration Project is to demonstrate the use of geothermal technology as model for energy and environmental efficiency in heating and cooling older, highly inefficient buildings. The former Marian Library building at Daemen College is a 19,000 square foot building located in the center of campus. Through this project, the building was equipped with geothermal technology and results were disseminated. Gold LEED certification for the building was awarded. 1) How the research adds to the understanding of the area investigated. This project is primarily a demonstration project. Information about the installation is available to other companies, organizations, and higher education institutions that may be interested in using geothermal energy for heating and cooling older buildings. 2) The technical effectiveness and economic feasibility of the methods or techniques investigated or demonstrated. According to the modeling and estimates through Stantec, the energy-efficiency cost savings is estimated at 20%, or $24,000 per year. Over 20 years this represents $480,000 in unrestricted revenue available for College operations. See attached technical assistance report. 3) How the project is otherwise of benefit to the public. The Daemen College Geothermal Technologies Ground Source Heat Pumps project sets a standard for retrofitting older, highly inefficient, energy wasting and environmentally irresponsible buildings that are quite typical of many of the buildings on the campuses of regional colleges and universities. As a model, the project serves as an energy-efficient system with significant environmental advantages. Information about the energy-efficiency measures is available to other colleges and universities, organizations and companies, students, and other interested parties. The installation and renovation provided employment for 120 individuals during the award period. Through the new Center, Daemen will continue to host a range of events on campus for the general public. The College does not charge fees for speakers or most other events. This has been a long-standing tradition of the College.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

The National Geothermal Energy Research Program

The continuous demand for energy and the concern for shortages of conventional energy resources have spurred the nation to consider alternate energy resources, such as geothermal. Although significant growth in the one natural steam field located in the United States has occurred, a major effort is now needed if geothermal energy, in its several forms, is to contribute to the nation's energy supplies. From the early informal efforts of an Interagency Panel for Geothermal Energy Research, a 5-year Federal program has evolved whose objective is the rapid development of a commercial industry for the utilization of geothermal resources for electric power production and other products. The Federal program seeks to evaluate the realistic potential of geothermal energy, to support the necessary research and technology needed to demonstrate the economic and environmental feasibility of the several types of geothermal resources, and to address the legal and institutional problems concerned in the stimulation and regulation of this new industry.

Green, R. J.↗

Optimizing Geothermal Drilling: Oil and Gas Technology Transfer

There is a significant amount of financial risk associated with geothermal drilling. This study of drilling operations seeks opportunities to improve upon current practices and technologies. The scope of this study included analyzing 21 geothermal wells and 21 oil and gas wells. The goal was to determine a 'Perfect Well' using historical data to compare the best oil and gas well to the best geothermal well. Unfortunately, limitations encountered in the study included missing data (bit records, mud information, etc.) and poor data collection practices An online software database was used to format drilling data to IADC coded daily drilling reports and generate figures for analysis. Six major issues have been found in geothermal drilling operations. These problems include lost circulation, rig/ equipment selection, cementing, penetration rate, drilling program, and time management. As a result of these issues, geothermal drilling averaged 56.4 days longer than drilling comparable oil and gas wells in the wells in this study. Roughly $13.9 million was spent on non-productive time in the 21 geothermal wells, compared with only $1.3 million in the oil and gas wells, assuming a cost of $50,000 per day. Comparable events such as drilling the same sized hole, tripping in/out, cementing, and running the same size casing took substantially less time in the oil and gas wells. Geothermal wells were drilled using older and/or less advanced technology to depths less than 10,000 feet, while oil and gas wells reached 12,500 feet faster with purpose built rigs. A new approach is now underway that will optimize drilling programs throughout the drilling industry using Mechanical Specific Energy (MSE) as a tool to realize efficient drilling processes. Potential improvements for current geothermal operations are: the use of electronic records, real time services, and official glossary terms to describe rig operations, and advanced drilling rigs/technology.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Optimizing Geothermal Drilling: Oil and Gas Technology Transfer

There is a significant amount of financial risk associated with geothermal drilling; however, there are opportunities to improve upon current practices and technologies used. The scope of this drilling operational study included 21 geothermal wells and 21 oil and gas wells. The goal was to determine a 'perfect well' using historical data to compare the best oil and gas well to the best geothermal well. Unfortunately, limitations encountered in the study included missing data (bit records, mud information, etc.), poor data collection, and difficult to ascertain handwriting. An online software database was used to format drilling data to IADC coded daily drilling reports and generate analysis figures. Six major issues have been found in geothermal drilling operations. These problems include lost circulation, rig/equipment selection, cementing, penetration rate, drilling program, and time management. As a result of these issues, geothermal drilling averages 56.4 days longer than drilling comparable oil and gas wells in the wells in this study. Roughly $13.9 million would be lost due to non-productive time in the 21 geothermal wells and only $1.3 million in the oil and gas wells, assuming a cost of $50,000 per day. Comparable events such as drilling the same sized hole, tripping in/out, cementing, and running the same size casing took substantially less time in the oil and gas wells. Geothermal wells were drilled using older and/or less advanced technology to depths less than 10,000 feet, while oil and gas wells reached 12,500 feet faster with purpose built rigs. A new approach is now underway that will optimize drilling programs throughout the drilling industry. It is the use of Mechanical Specific Energy (MSE) as a tool to realize efficient drilling processes. However, a work-flow must also be established in order for there to be an efficient drilling program. Potential improvements for current geothermal operations are: the use of electronic records, real time services, and official glossary terms to describe rig operations, and advanced drilling rigs/technology.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Nevada Renewable Energy Training Project: Geothermal Power Plant Operators

The purpose of this project was to develop and institute a training program for certified geothermal power plant operators (GPO). An advisory board consisting of subject matter experts from the geothermal energy industry and academia identified the critical skill sets required for this profession. A 34-credit Certificate of Achievement (COA), Geothermal Power Plant Operator, was developed using eight existing courses and developing five new courses. Approval from the Nevada System of Higher Education Board of Regents was obtained. A 2,400 sq. ft. geothermal/fluid mechanics laboratory and a 3,000 sq. ft. outdoor demonstration laboratory were constructed for hands-on training. Students also participated in field trips to geothermal power plants in the region. The majority of students were able to complete the program in 2-3 semesters, depending on their level of math proficiency. Additionally the COA allowed students to continue to an Associate of Applied Science (AAS), Energy Technologies with an emphasis in Geothermal Energy (26 additional credits), if they desired. The COA and AAS are stackable degrees, which provide students with an ongoing career pathway. Articulation agreements with other NSHE institutions provide students with additional opportunities to pursue a Bachelor of Applied Science in Management or Instrumentation. Job placement for COA graduates has been excellent.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Demonstrating the Commercial Feasibility of Geopressured-Geothermal Power Development at Sweet Lake Field - Cameron Parish, Louisiana (Final Technical Report)

The goal of the project was to demonstrate the commercial feasibility of geopressured-geothermal power development by exploiting the extraordinarily high pressured hot brines know to exist at depth near the Sweet Lake oil and gas field in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. The existence of a geopressured-geothermal system at Sweet Lake was confirmed in the 1970's and 1980's as part of DOE's Geopressured-Geothermal Program. That program showed that the energy prices at the time could not support commercial production of the resource. Increased electricity prices and technological advancements over the last two decades, combined with the current national support for developing clean, renewable energy and the job creation it would entail, provided the justification necessary to reevaluate the commercial feasibility of power generation from this vast resource.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

2022 GETEM Geothermal Drilling Cost Curve Update: Preprint

The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is an essential tool for the Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technology Office (GTO) to understand the performance and cost of technologies it is seeking to improve. This detailed model is used for supply curve analyses, assessing the current economic feasibility and Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) of hydrothermal geothermal systems and EGS, and evaluating the potential impact of advanced geothermal technologies. GETEM can be used to estimate the performance and costs of currently available U.S. geothermal power systems. It is also used to estimate the costs of technologies 5 to 20 years in the future, given the direction of potential research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects. The model is intended to help GTO determine which proposed RD&D programs and projects might offer the most efficient improvement when using taxpayer funding. The model requires annual updates as well as revisions to reflect the current state of the art. Drilling costs are a significant portion of total geothermal development costs. The current GETEM drilling cost inputs rely on drilling data from 2009 and require an updated analysis of more recent data to ensure they remain representative of current technologies. An updated, more accurate understanding of costs could help the geothermal industry secure project development financing and investment funding and better allow the oil and gas (O&G) industry (both operators and service companies) weigh potential geothermal market participation and customization. This report details recent drilling improvements from the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) and O&G, comparing drilling performance and costs with values in GETEM, particularly the baseline drilling cost curves. Though drilling performance at FORGE has improved significantly, we did not find associated cost decreases that would justify lowering the GETEM baseline cost curves as of now.

API↗

2022 GETEM Geothermal Drilling Cost Curve Update

The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is an essential tool for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) to understand the performance and cost of technologies it is seeking to improve. This detailed model is used for supply curve analyses, assessing the current economic feasibility and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of hydrothermal geothermal systems and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), and evaluating the potential impact of advanced geothermal technologies. GETEM can be used to estimate the performance and costs of currently available U.S. geothermal power systems. It is also used to estimate the costs of technologies 5 to 20 years in the future, given the direction of potential research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects. The model is intended to help GTO determine which proposed RD&D programs and projects might offer the most efficient improvement when using taxpayer funding. The model requires annual updates as well as revisions to reflect the current state of the art. Drilling costs are a significant portion of total geothermal development costs. The current GETEM drilling cost inputs rely on drilling data from 2009 and require an updated analysis of more recent data to ensure they remain representative of current technologies. An updated, more accurate understanding of costs could help the geothermal industry secure project development financing and investment funding and better allow the oil and gas (O&G) industry (both operators and service companies) to weigh potential geothermal market participation and customization. This report details recent drilling improvements from the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) and the O&G sector, comparing drilling performance and costs with values in GETEM, particularly the baseline drilling cost curves. Although drilling performance at FORGE has improved significantly, we did not find associated cost decreases that would justify lowering the GETEM baseline cost curves at this time.

API↗

Assessment of Needs for Further Research to Understand the Role of Governments in Supporting Geothermal Exploration

This paper looks at financing barriers to geothermal resource exploration in the United States (U.S.) for electricity generation projects and analyzes why the market is not developing as quickly as foreign geothermal markets or as quickly as other renewable energy technologies in the U.S. Research opportunities and approaches to understanding these discrepancies are discussed, particularly whether government policies and programs are spurring development activities. Further analysis to understand policies, programmatic cost efficiencies, potential project revenues, and other economic impacts are recommended together with the preliminary conclusions.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Electric Power Generation from Low to Intermediate Temperature Resources

This project was designed to test the concept on the Eland-Lodgepole Field near Dickinson, North Dakota in the Williston Basin. The field is in secondary-recovery water-flood and consists of 12 producing oil wells, 5 water injection wells and one disposal well. Water production at the site averages approximately 320 gallons per minute (20.2 l s-1) and the temperature is 100 ⁰C. Engineers at Ormat estimated power production potential with the existing resource to be approximately 350 kWh. Unfortunately, ownership of the field was transferred from Encore, Inc., to Denbury, Inc., within the first week of the project. After two years of discussion and planning, Denbury decided not to pursue this project due to complications with the site location and its proximity to Patterson Lake. Attempts to find other partners operating in the Williston Basin were unsuccessful. Consequently, we were unable to pursue the primary objective of the project. However, during negations with Denbury and subsequent time spent contacting other potential partners, we focused on objectives 2 and 3 and developed a clear understanding of the potential for co-produced production in the Williston Basin and the best practices for developing similar projects. At least nine water bearing formations with temperatures greater than 90 ⁰C extend over areas of several 10s of km2. The total energy contained in the rock volume of those geothermal aquifers is 283.6 EJ (1 EJ = 1018 J). The total energy contained in the water volume, determined from porosities which range from 2 percent to 8 percent, is 6.8 EJ. The aquifers grouped by 10 ⁰C temperature bins (Table 1) include one or more formations due to the bowl-shape structure of the basin. Table 1. Summary of energy available in geothermal aquifers in the Williston Basin Analysis of overall fluid production from active wells, units, fields and formations in North Dakota showed that few sites co-produce sufficient fluid for significant power production with ORC technology. Average co-produced water for 10,480 wells is 3.2 gallons per minute (gpm). Even excluding the tight formations, Bakken and Three Forks, average co-produced water for the remaining 3,337 is only 5 gpm. The output of the highest producing well is 184 gpm and the average of the top 100 wells is 52 gpm. Due to the depth of the oil producing formations in the Williston Basin, typically 3 km or greater, pumps are operated slowly to prevent watering out thus total fluid production is purposefully maintained at low volumes. There remain potential possibilities for development of geothermal fluids in the Williston Basin. Unitized fields in which water production from several tens of wells is collected at a single site are good possibilities for development. Water production in the unitized fields is greater than 1000 gpm is several areas. A similar possibility occurs where infill-drilling between Bakken and Three Forks horizontal wells has created areas where large volumes of geothermal fluids are available on multi-well pads and in unitized fields. Although the Bakken produces small amounts of water, the water/oil ration is typically less than 1, the oil and water mix produced at the well head can be sent through the heat exchanger on an ORC. It is estimated that several tens of MWh of power could be generated by a distributed system of ORC engines in the areas of high-density drilling in the Bakken Formation. Finally, horizontal drilling in water bearing formations is the other possibility. Several secondary recovery water-flood projects in the basin are producing water above 100 ⁰C at rates of 300 gpm to 850 gpm. Those systems also could produce several tens of MWh of power with ORC technology. Objective 3 of the project was highly successful. The program has produced 5 PhDs, 7 MS, and 3 BS students with theses in geothermal energy. The team has involved 7 faculty in 4 different engineering and science disciplines, ChE, EE, GE, and Geol. The team has produced 26 peer-reviewed papers and 62 presentations at professional meetings. Faculty involved in the program developed five graduate level courses covering different elements in heat flow and geothermal energy that are now offered in the Harold Hamm School of Geology and Geological Engineering. Lessons learned – Keys to developing a successful project;1. Determine target formations; a. Data from oil and gas operators, state oil and gas regulatory agencies, and state geological surveys help to identify producing formations and their properties; 2. Determine the quantity of energy available in the target formations; a. A complete thermal analysis of the basin or region yields the most useful information; b. Critical data include: BHT, heat flow, stratigraphy, lithology, lithological properties, and thermal conductivity, subsurface structure; 3. Determine fluid production potential; a. State oil and gas regulatory agencies, and state geological surveys have data on oil, gas and water production. State Water Commission/Agencies have data on water quality, aquifers, and regulations; b. Consider single horizontal wells, multiple conventional wells, and unitized fields; 4. Calculate energy production capacity of each formation based on different well combination and power plant scenarios. This is a broad overview rather than a site specific analysis; 5. Research and understand the local electrical power industry. Obtain the PPA before committing to the project; 6. Work with the high-level personnel in the oil company partner. Obtain an MOU that addresses all issues in the project including what to expect if the company goes out of business, is bought out, changes management, etc; and 7. Be prepared for project delays.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

2015 Annual Report - Geothermal Technologies Office

Over the past year, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) supported a number of exciting initiatives and research and development (R&D)activities! The GTO budget was increased in Fiscal Years (FY) 2015-2016, providing the opportunity to invest in new technologies and initiatives, such as the DOE-wide Subsurface Crosscut Initiative, and the Small Business Vouchers (SBV)Program, which is focused on growing our small business and national laboratory partnerships. These efforts will continue to advance geothermal as an economically competitive renewable energy.

Geothermal, Annual, Report, Achievements, Review, ↗

Technology Development and Field Trials of EGS Drilling Systems at Chocolate Mountain

Polycrystalline diamond compact (PDC) bits are routinely used in the oil and gas industry for drilling medium to hard rock but have not been adopted for geothermal drilling, largely due to past reliability issues and higher purchase costs. The Sandia Geothermal Research Department has recently completed a field demonstration of the applicability of advanced synthetic diamond drill bits for production geothermal drilling. Two commercially-available PDC bits were tested in a geothermal drilling program in the Chocolate Mountains in Southern California. These bits drilled the granitic formations with significantly better Rate of Penetration (ROP) and bit life than the roller cone bit they are compared with. Drilling records and bit performance data along with associated drilling cost savings are presented herein. The drilling trials have demonstrated PDC bit drilling technology has matured for applicability and improvements to geothermal drilling. This will be especially beneficial for development of Enhanced Geothermal Systems whereby resources can be accessed anywhere within the continental US by drilling to deep, hot resources in hard, basement rock formations.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Rock melting technology and geothermal drilling

National awareness of the potential future shortages in energy resources has heightened interest in exploration and utilization of a variety of geothermal energy (GTE) reservoirs. The status of conventional drilling of GTE wells is reviewed briefly and problem areas which lead to higher drilling costs are identified and R and D directions toward solution are suggested. In the immediate future, an expanded program of drilling in GTE formations can benefit from improvements in drilling equipment and technology normally associated with oil or gas wells. Over a longer time period, the new rock-melting drill bits being developed as a part of the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory's Subterrene Program offer new solutions to a number of problems which frequently hamper GTE drilling, including the most basic problem - high temperature. Two of the most favorable characteristics of rock-melting penetrators are their ability to operate effectively in hot rock and produce glass linings around the hole as an integral part of the drilling process. The technical advantages to be gained by use of rock-melting penetrators are discussed in relation to the basic needs for GTE wells.

Rowley, J. C.↗