Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Utah geothermal”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2017

Mineralogy of Drill Cuttings Beowawe, Dixie Valley and Roosevelt Hot Springs

Mineralogical, lithological, and geospatial data of drill cuttings from exploration production wells in Beowawe, Dixie Valley and Roosvelt Hot Springs. These data support whole rock analyses for major, minor and critical elements to assess critical metals in produced fluids from Nevada and Utah geothermal fields. The samples were analyzed by x-ray diffraction (legacy data) and then checked by thin section analysis.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS1997

Remote Sensing Applications for Antrim Shale Fracture Characterization, Michigan Basin

Advanced Research International (ARI) sent seven staff members to the 1997 International Coalbed Methane Symposium, held in Tuscaloosa, Alabama from May 12-17. ARI gave a short course on risk reduction strategies, including remote fracture detection, for coalbed methane exploration and development that was attended by about 25 coalbed methane industry professionals; and presented a paper entitled 'Optimizing coalbed methane cavity completion operations with the application of a new discrete element model.' We met with many potential clients and discussed our fracture detection services. China has vast coalbed methane resources, but is still highly dependent on coal-and wood-burning. This workshop, sponsored by the United Nations, was intended to help China develop its less-polluting energy reserves. ARI is successfully finding new applications for its fracture detection services. Coalbed methane exploration became an important market in this quarter, with the inception of a joint industry/government collaboration between ARI, Texaco and DOE to use remote fracture detection to identify areas with good potential for coalbed methane production in the Ferron Coal Trend of central Utah. Geothermal energy exploration is another emerging market for ARI, where fracture detection is applied to identify pathways for groundwater recharge, movement, and the locations of potential geothermal reservoirs. Ari continued work on two industry/government collaborations to demonstrate fracture detection to potential clients. Also completed the technical content layout for multimedia CD-ROM that describes our remote fracture detection services.

Kuuskraa, Vello↗
DOE OSTI2021

Utah FORGE 2020-2021 Geothermal Energy/EGS Survey and Results

The Utah FORGE project collaborated with the University of Utahs Department of Communication on a Capstone course during Fall Semester 2020. The course created a survey to gauge the general populations knowledge of geothermal energy and Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS). The survey was distributed through Qualtrics, an experience management company, in late 2020 and early 2021 to respondents in 11 western states (AZ, CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY). Approximately 1,000 responses were received. The Code Book (the consent form and the questions themselves) and the raw data results in a spreadsheet are included in the data resources.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Economic Impact of Permitting Timelines on Geothermal Power in California, Nevada, and Utah

The United States has great geothermal power potential; however, only a small fraction of this resource has been utilized for power generation. Various barriers, including technical, financial, and regulatory permit delays, are attributed to the lower penetration of geothermal energy into the national grid. Unpredictable environmental reviews and permitting timelines are some of the non-technical barriers that can cause delays in geothermal exploration and utilization plans. This document provides an assessment of the potential economic impact of permitting costs and timelines on geothermal power in California, Nevada, and Utah. Development of geothermal resources requires multi-layered regulatory permitting by local, state, and federal agencies. In this study, we collected and reviewed permit timelines and associated cost data for several existing geothermal power plants as well as for geothermal projects currently undergoing permitting processes for exploration and development activities in California, Nevada, and Utah. We interviewed several geothermal developers and staff from multiple permitting agencies to obtain insight from both sides (i.e., people applying for permits and people processing those applications for California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] and National Environmental Policy Act [NEPA] reviews and other regulatory compliance). The intent of this project was also to identify informative pathways for the geothermal stakeholder community by which the permitting process could be streamlined.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sedimentary Geothermal Resources in Nevada, Utah, Colorado, and Texas

The objectives of this project were to (1) perform a literature review of sedimentary geothermal resources, (2) identify data sources and develop data-collection methodologies that characterize selected resources, (3) screen sedimentary basins and formations for sedimentary geothermal potential, and (4) evaluate the technical feasibility of one or more selected locations. Numerous publications have characterized geothermal resources within sedimentary basins. A literature search reviewed publications describing resources located in Colorado, Louisiana, Nevada, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. The most attractive resources have high temperature gradients, low drilling costs, and reservoir permeabilities greater than 10 millidarcies (mD). Prospects in Colorado, Nevada, Texas, and Utah exhibit attractive characteristics and were chosen for further analysis. Sedimentary resources in Nevada and Utah are most attractive, followed by tested resources in Texas and untested resources in Colorado. The identified resources in Wyoming and Louisiana had lower geothermal gradients and were not evaluated. Reservoir modeling and techno-economic analysis were performed at Marys River Basin–North in Nevada. Geothermal energy production at this location is expected to have a levelized cost of energy (LCOE) ranging between 10 and 20 cents/kWh. Additional work may result in lower LCOE estimates at this location and at other attractive prospects in these three regions. The Great Basin carbonate and alluvial aquifer system of eastern Nevada and western Utah includes a lower carbonate aquifer unit, which has the potential for hosting both conduction- and convection-dominated geothermal systems. Mapping has identified lateral thickness variability expressed as a roughly 120–150-km-wide central corridor, which hosts the thickest and most continuous formations and extends from near Las Vegas north to the Idaho border. Purchase and analysis of privately held legacy seismic data could potentially compensate for the lack of sufficient data documenting measured depth to the lower carbonate aquifer unit. Multiple orogenies, extension episodes, and intrusive events have deformed and displaced the target formations of the lower carbonate aquifer unit. This structural complexity and potential for dipping reservoirs emphasizes the need for detailed geological, geophysical, and reservoir modeling. Heat flow within three Colorado sedimentary basins reviewed as part of this study was calculated in targeted studies by the Colorado Geologic Survey and Colorado School of Mines. These calculations are based on bottom-hole temperature data sets with significant limitations and some variability but produce values consistently higher than the global continental average of 65 mW/m2 for all three basins. Heat flow in the Raton Basin is the highest; however, permeability measurements from specific sedimentary formations with high heat flow have not been obtained. Promising formations for sedimentary geothermal systems were found in all three regions studied—Nevada-Utah, Colorado, and Texas. The next steps for developing sedimentary geothermal resources vary due to differences in available data and resource uncertainties. Additional scopes of work are recommended for identified basins in these three regions.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2018

Utah FORGE: TEM and Gravity Data

This submission includes a gravity data in text format and as a GIS point shapefile and transient electromagnetic (TEM) raw data. Each text file additionally contains location data (UTM Zone 12, NAD83) and elevation (meters) data for that station. The gravity data shapefile was in part downloaded from PACES, University of Texas at El Paso, http://gis.utep.edu/subpages/GMData.html, and in part collected by the Utah Geological Survey (UGS) as part of the DOE GTO supported Utah FORGE geothermal energy project near Milford, Utah. The PACES data were examined and scrubbed to eliminate any questionable data. A 2.67 g/cm^3 reduction density was used for the Bouguer correction. The attribute table column headers for the gravity data shapefile are explained below. There is also metadata attached to the GIS shapefile. name: the individual gravity station name. HAE: height above ellipsoid [meter] NGVD29: vertical datum for geoid [meter] obs: observed gravity ERRG: gravity measurement error [mGal] IZTC: inner zone terrain correction [mGal] OZTC: outer zone terrain correction [mGal] Gfa: free air gravity gSBGA: Bouguer horizontal slab sCBGA: Complete Bouguer anomaly

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Utah FORGE 10-3726: Geothermal Multiset Straddle for High Temperature Applications - 2024 Annual Workshop Presentation

This is a presentation on the Geothermal Multiset Straddle (GMS) for High Temperature Applications by Welltec, presented by Ricardo Vasques. This video slide presentation discusses the development of (1) an annular multiset isolation system; (2) a stimulation straddle isolation system; and (3) a multi open-close flow system, for geothermal environments. This is to enable effective zonal isolation and stimulation with multiset capabilities, to implement downhole controlled EGS in any location, and to extend the productive life of the well. This presentation was featured in the Utah FORGE R&D Annual Workshop on August 15, 2024.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Flowback Test Analyses at the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) Site

Abstract In 2017 and 2019, injection testing was carried out in three zones in a vertical well in granite at the Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy site near Milford, Utah, USA. In several injection cycles, flowback was implemented rather than shut-in. The goal was to explore an alternative to prolonged shut-in periods for inferring closure stress, formation compressibility, and formation permeability (permeability thickness product). The flowback procedures involved a cyclic flowback/shut-in, while pressure decreased. The flowback data are presented, and analyses are shown. The inferred closure stress(es) from flowback analyses are lower than for equivalent injection cycles that were strictly shut-in. Relatively high formation compressibility obtained from the flowback analyses indicates an extensive, fractured system. This study also includes numerical simulation of the flowback events. The numerical model shows that the rebound pressure is not necessarily the lower bound of the minimum principal stress. The signature of stiffness change can be identified as the process when the depletion mainly transitions from hydraulic fracture to natural fractures from numerical analysis. Overall, flowback potentially has advantages over shut-in because of the reduced time to closure.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Cape EGS: Frisco 2-P Well Stimulation Microseismic Data

This dataset contains microseismic data acquired during the Frisco 2-P well stimulation project led by Fervo Energy, conducted between June 1 and June 11, 2024, near the Utah FORGE geothermal site. The microseismic data was collected from various Utah FORGE wells: via Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) fiber in 16B, and three 3-component geophones located in wells 56-32, 78B, and 32. The dataset is structured in SEGY format, where the first nine traces represent data from the geophones, and the remaining traces capture DAS data from well 16B. Each SEGY file in this dataset contains triggered microseismic events, with event initiation based on Short-Time Average over Long-Time Average (STA/LTA) detection criteria during the stimulation process. Files are grouped by time intervals and named following the structure "[WellPad][WellName][Month]_[Year]Divine_Trigger[EventNumber].sgy," indicating well pad, well name, date, and event number. Sampling parameters include a spatial sampling of approximately 2 meters for DAS channels and a temporal sampling rate of 2000 Hz, with each data record spanning 1.2 seconds. The files' coordinates are referenced to the location of the FORGE 16A-32 wellhead, positioned at UTM coordinates: Easting 334641.1891 m and Northing 4263443.693 m. The geographic coordinates for this origin are 38.50402147 latitude and -112.8963897 longitude, with an elevation of 1650.0249 meters above sea level.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Cape EGS: Frisco Pad Wells Flow Test Microseismic Data

This dataset contains microseismic data acquired during the Frisco pad flow test project led by Fervo Energy, conducted between July 17th - Aug 12th 2024, near the Utah FORGE geothermal site. The microseismic data was collected from various Utah FORGE wells: via Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) fiber in 16B, and two 3-component geophones located in wells 56-32 and 78B. The dataset is structured in SEGY format, where the first six traces represent data from the geophones, and the remaining traces capture DAS data from well 16B. Each SEGY file in this dataset contains triggered microseismic events, with event initiation based on Short-Time Average over Long-Time Average (STA/LTA) detection criteria during the stimulation process. Files are grouped by time intervals and named following the structure "[WellPad][WellName][Month]_[Year]Divine_Trigger[EventNumber].sgy," indicating well pad, well name, date, and event number. Sampling parameters include a spatial sampling of approximately 2 meters for DAS channels and a temporal sampling rate of 2000 Hz, with each data record spanning 1.2 seconds. The files' coordinates are referenced to the location of the FORGE 16A-32 wellhead, positioned at UTM coordinates: Easting 334641.1891 m and Northing 4263443.693 m. The geographic coordinates for this origin are 38.50402147 latitude and -112.8963897 longitude, with an elevation of 1650.0249 meters above sea level.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Utah FORGE: Geochemical Data for Cold Groundwaters and Produced Geothermal Fluids

Geochemical data for cold groundwaters and produced geothermal fluids around the Utah FORGE site. The data is compiled into four tables in the attached Excel File. Table 1 is a compilation of compositions (anions, cations, weak acids, oxygen, hydrogen, and carbon isotopes) for cold groundwaters and produced geothermal waters in the Milford valley, Utah. Table 2 is a compilation of noble gas (He, Ne, Ar) and He and Ne isotopic compositions for cold groundwaters and produced geothermal waters in the Milford valley, Utah. Table 3 provides values for calculated advective and diffusive fluxes of helium. Table 4 provides values of calculated subsurface stored heat between the Opal Mound fault and the Utah FORGE site, which are related to volumes of recently solidified magmatic heat sources.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

In-Situ Stress Measurements at the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) Site

A scientific injection campaign was conducted at the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) site in 2017 and 2019. The testing included pump-in/shut-in, pump-in/flowback, and step rate tests. Various methods have been employed to interpret the in-situ stress from the test dataset. This study focuses on methods to interpret the minimum in-situ stress from step rate, pump-in/extended shut-in tests data obtained during the stimulation of two zones in Well 58-32. This well was drilled in low-permeability granitoid. A temperature of 199 °C was recorded at the well’s total depth of 2297 m relative to the rotary Kelly bushing (RKB). The lower zone (Zone 1) consisted of 46 m of the openhole at the toe of the well. Fractures in the upper zone (Zone 2) were stimulated between 2123–2126 m measured depths (MD) behind the casing. The closure stress gradient variation depended on the depth and the injection chronology. The closure stress was found to increase with the pumping rate/volume. This stress variation could indicate that poroelastic effects (“back stress”) and the presence of adjacent natural fractures may play an important role in the interpretation of fracture closure stress. Further, progressively increasing local total stresses may, consequently, have practical applications when moderate volumes of fluid are injected in a naturally fractured or high-temperature reservoir. The alternative techniques that use pump-in/flowback tests and temperature signatures provide a valuable perspective view of the in-situ stress measurements.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗