Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Well Locations”

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

Utah FORGE: Updated Phase 2C Well Location Coordinates

Utah FORGE has been established to develop, test, and improve the technologies and techniques required to develop EGS-type geothermal resources. Drilling of the first of two deep deviated wells, 16A(78)-32, will begin in the second half of 2020. This well will serve as the injection well for the injection-production well pair that will form the heart of the laboratory. This submission contains an archive of well location data within the Roosevelt Hot Springs geothermal area. An Excel spreadsheet is included containing updated GPS data for Utah FORGE wells drilled during Phase 2C (56-32, 68-32, 78-32). This data was collected over time by the Utah Geological Survey and contains all coordinates collected and the final averaged XY coordinates in both Longitude and Latitude and UTM Zone 12, NAD83. Elevation is also included. GIS shapefiles with well points are provided in the archive.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Geologic Assessment and Recommended New Well Locations to Improve the Area 25 Potable Water System, Nevada National Security Site

The Mission Support and Test Services, LLC (MSTS) Geoscience Operations Group performed a hydrogeologic study of an area of interest in Area 25 at the request of the MSTS Enterprise Infrastructure Program to identify potential locations for a new water well to replace J-14 Water Well (J-14 WW). Based on limited subsurface hydrogeologic data for the area, geologists developed two options for construction of a new well. Option 1 is to construct the well within approximately 250 feet (ft) of J-14 WW, and Option 2 is to construct the well approximately 1,550 ft north of J-11 Water Well (J-11 WW). Option 1 may be preferred, as the hydrogeology is better understood adjacent to an existing well. A well drilled at the Option 2 location would not have to be as deep as that at the Option 1 location, but the hydrogeologic setting is more uncertain at this greater distance from a verified subsurface geologic data point.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

Selection of Well Locations for Saturated Zone Monitoring at the E-Area Low Level Waste Facility

Savannah River Site (SRS) has adopted a revised approach to performance monitoring of the E- Area Low Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) that adds a saturated zone component to the existing vadose zone monitoring program (Kubilius, 2019). The revised monitoring approach specifies that eight additional water table wells be installed near Slit Trench 1 (ST1) and Engineered Trench 2 (ET2). Six wells will be installed at locations characterized in 2017 and 2018. These include four wells near ET2 (ELF001D, ELF002D, ELF003D, and ELF004D) at locations identified by Kubilius (2019) and two wells north of ST1 (ELF005D and ELF006D) at locations finalized in this report. Additionally, two wells (ELF007D and ELF008D) are to be installed at locations south of ST1 based on characterization work completed in 2020 and documented in this report. This area is near well cluster BGX-2 between the Mixed Waste Management Facility (MWMF) and the ELLWF. The area is upgradient of ELLWF and, contamination in the water table aquifer is sourced from MWMF.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Extended Application of State LiDAR Datasets in Locating Orphaned Wells in Appalachian Region

Location inaccuracies in historical and state oil and gas well databases present a major challenge in locating these orphaned wells. To address this, modern scientific methods such as Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR), aerial magnetic remote sensing, and digital GIS products have been employed. LiDAR technology uses light to detect surface area changes, providing detailed surface views. This is a workflow to process LiDAR data for use in locating orphaned wells.

Gorantla, Vijaya [NETL Site Support Contractor, Na↗

Locating Undocumented Wells Using Historical Oil and Gas Exploration Maps: A Case Study in Osage County, Oklahoma

Undocumented oil and gas wells lack reliable information about their locations and characteristics, making them difficult to identify. These wells can result in unanticipated delays and costs in the development of nearby surface and subsurface resources, and, if improperly plugged, can cause contamination. This study leverages historical petroleum exploration maps to locate such wells, focusing on Osage County, Oklahoma. Two sets of early 20th century oil and gas exploration maps by the United States Geological Survey were georeferenced and analyzed using a computer vision model to detect well symbols. The locations of detected wells were compared to the location of known wells in the database from the Bureau of Indian Affairs Osage Agency to identify potential undocumented wells. The analysis yielded over 500 potential undocumented wells, with dry holes constituting the largest fraction. Field verification confirmed the presence of some undocumented wells. Comparison with prior work revealed limited overlap, underscoring the complementary value of historical oil and gas maps for locating undocumented wells. This approach demonstrates the utility of integrating historical cartographic resources with modern geospatial and machine learning techniques to improve the identification and management of undocumented wells.

Energy - Petroleum↗

Lineaments on Skylab photographs: Detection, mapping, and hydrologic significance in central Tennessee

An investigation was carried out to determine the feasibility of mapping lineaments on SKYLAB photographs of central Tennessee and to determine the hydrologic significance of these lineaments, particularly as concerns the occurrence and productivity of ground water. Sixty-nine percent more lineaments were found on SKYLAB photographs by stereo viewing than by projection viewing, but longer lineaments were detected by projection viewing. Most SKYLAB lineaments consisted of topographic depressions and they followed or paralleled the streams. The remainder were found by vegetation alinements and the straight sides of ridges. Test drilling showed that the median yield of wells located on SKYLAB lineaments were about six times the median yield of wells located by random drilling. The best single detection method, in terms of potential savings, was stereo viewing. Larger savings might be achieved by locating wells on lineaments detected by both stereo viewing and projection.

Moore, G. K.↗

Groundwater elevation data for monitoring wells within the East and Taylor River basins, Colorado (USA)

This dataset is comprised of temporal variations in groundwater elevation data for the 24 monitoring wells located throughout the East River watershed. Seasonal to annual variations in groundwater elevations are a critical property of mountainous watersheds needed to understand both hydrological and below ground biogeochemical processes. Such data serve as a critical constraint for numerical models describing coupled groundwater-surface water behavior within the watershed. Additionally, the offset between the maximum and minimum groundwater elevations defines the extent of the bedrock weathering zone, with annual excursions in the groundwater hydrographic (i.e., the rising and falling hydrographic limbs) imposing primary controls on bedrock saturation state and redox conditions that govern biogeochemical reactions impacting nitrogen, carbon, and metals cycling. Manufacturer-specific software is used to download pressure data from each transducer, with broadly available spreadsheet software (e.g. Microsoft Excel) used to convert temporal variations in water pressure to elevations in units of meters above mean sea level. As additional monitoring wells are installed within the East River watershed and new groundwater monitoring wells are installed in the Taylor River watershed, temporal groundwater elevation data will be included as a part of this master dataset. Details regarding the metadata associated with each monitoring well location, including well depths, screened intervals, well location coordinates, and bedrock type, are included, as is a standard operating procedure for generating groundwater elevation data from water pressure values recorded by the pressure transducers. This dataset includes: (1) a zip file (East_River_Watershed_Compiled_Groundwater_Elevation_Data_Plots.zip), containing (a) PNG of groundwater hydrographs, (b) a CSV file with groundwater elevation data, and (c) CSV file containing metadata organized by location; (2) an Excel file (East_River_Watershed_Compiled_Groundwater_Elevation_Data_Plots.xlsx) with the groundwater elevation data, groundwater hydrographs, and metadata organized by location; (3) a Word file (Groundwater_elevation_data_protocols.docx) and a PDF file version (Groundwater_elevation_data_protocols.pdf) containing field protocols and methods; (4) a location metadata (locations.csv) file; (5) a file level metadata (flmd.csv); and (6) data dictionary (dd.csv) file.This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Results from an Aeromagnetic Survey to Detect Steel-Cased Wells at a Marcellus Shale Well Site in Washington County, Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania has a 150-year history of oil and gas production—the longest of any state—and this enduring activity has resulted in the drilling of more than 300,000 recorded wells. However, unknown wells likely exist because innumerable wells were drilled during Pennsylvania’s intense early oil and gas history when incomplete records were kept of well locations. There is concern that early wells are likely to be ineffectively sealed because there were no laws that required plugging when the wells were abandoned. Today, many undocumented and unplugged wells are thought to be in areas of emerging shale gas and shale oil development where open wellbores can provide a pathway for undesired upward migration of fluids and gas from hydraulically fractured reservoirs. Due to this concern, Pennsylvania regulators have asked operators to locate orphaned and abandoned wells within a 1,000-ft buffer of proposed new wells. The objective of this report is to demonstrate that high-resolution aeromagnetic surveys, historic air photos, and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) imagery can be rapid and effective methods to reconnoiter large, forested areas of moderate terrain for the presence of abandoned wells. These well-finding methods were evaluated at a proposed Marcellus Shale gas drilling site in Washington County, Pennsylvania, where the methods collectively located 18 confirmed wells: 15 wells were identified from aeromagnetic surveys, two wells were identified from inspection of historical air photos, and one well was identified by evaluation of state-wide LiDAR imagery. Only six wells were previously known, and their locations, as recorded in Pennsylvania’s statewide oil and gas wells database (PA/IRIS/WIS), were often too inaccurate for the wells to be found in the dense underbrush. Twelve wells identified in this study were abandoned, unmarked, and undocumented. Aeromagnetic surveys locate wells by detecting the unique magnetic signature of vertical, steel well casing, which is depicted on magnetic maps as a “bull’s eye” type anomaly that is centered directly over the well. However, when wells were drilled and found to be sub-economic, their casing was sometimes pulled and salvaged for reuse. Such wellbores provide no magnetic response and go undetected if all casing was removed. Oftentimes attempts to retrieve well casing were not 100% successful. For example, historical records for one well in the study area indicate that the well was completed in 1902 as a dry hole and that, to the extent possible, the casing was pulled for reuse. However, a section of 10-in. diameter steel casing was not recovered and remains at an unknown depth in the wellbore. This well was easily detected by the aeromagnetic survey although only deep casing remained in the well. To mitigate for the likelihood that wellbores exist where most or all casing has been removed, this study augmented aeromagnetic data with historic air photos and digital terrain models generated from LiDAR datasets—both databases are publicly available at no cost for areas within Pennsylvania. These complementary methods located three wells where the aeromagnetic anomaly, although present, was subtle and overlooked. Together, these methods determined accurate locations for six known wells within the study area and located 12 previously unknown wells. Although it is not certain that these methods successfully located all wells in the study area, the application of these methods does represent a significant improvement over relying on existing databases for well locations. For the Appendix to the report, see: https://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=b46c417a-7c9e-4d25-b810-e6248b0217f4</p>

04 OIL SHALES AND TAR SANDS↗

WHOLESCALE: Coordinates of wells at San Emidio, Nevada

This dataset includes position coordinates and elevation information for wells at the WHOLESCALE San Emidio project location. Well positions in the attached file are characterized by UTM coordinates (Easting, Northing) in meters, and WHOLESCALE coordinates (Easting, Northing) relative in meters from a chosen reference point. The elevation of the top and bottom of open intervals within each well (representing locations of perforated or open-hole sections) are measured in meters (positive) above WGS84 geoid (mean sea level). The WHOLESCALE acronym stands for Water & Hole Observations Leverage Effective Stress Calculations and Lessen Expenses. The goal of the WHOLESCALE project is to simulate the spatial distribution and temporal evolution of stress in the geothermal system at San Emidio in Nevada, United States.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Factors controlling injection-induced rupture of intersecting faults during geological sequestration of CO 2

This study addresses coupled multiphase fluid flow and geomechanics effects on potential fault activation associated with subsurface CO 2 injection around intersecting faults. An enhanced fault-representation model is used to capture geomechanical responses of two intersecting faults with finite length during CO 2 injection. The faults are embedded in a strike-slip stress regime of a caprock-reservoir-basement system with the faults represented by zero-thickness interfaces with adjacent finite-thickness damage zones. A sensitivity analysis is conducted to study the effect of fault permeability, slip-weakening behavior, well location relative to the orientation of faults, and well placement (the number and location of injection wells). Five metrics (pressure, CO 2 plume, shear state on the fault, as well as shear displacement and stress path at selected fault monitoring points) are selected to assess CO 2 migration and reactivation of intersecting faults. The results show that induced ruptures are favored by low permeability faults due to high pressure buildup and by slip-weakening behavior resulting from fault strength reduction. The location of one injection well relative to fault orientation determines the magnitude of changes in effective normal stress and shear stress, affecting the location of induced ruptures. Well placement (two injection wells used in the paper) dominates pressure diffusion around the intersection and tips of faults. This redistributes changes in effective normal stress caused by each injection well, influencing the spatial distribution of ruptures along faults. A larger injection volume induces far-field ruptures that are controlled by stress transfer within the injection layer. The findings presented here can provide valuable insights into engineering operations for a long-term, safe, and reliable geologic CO 2 storage.

Fault permeability↗

Temperature Uncertainty Modeling with Proxy Structural Data as Geostatistical Constraints for Well Siting: An Example Applied to Granite Springs Valley, NV, USA

Utilizing existing temperature and structural information around Granite Springs Valley, Nevada, we build 3D stochastic temperature models with the aim of evaluating the 3D uncertainty of temperature and choosing between candidate exploration well locations . The data used to support the modeling are measured temperatures and structural proxies from 3D geologic modeling, the latter considered "secondary" data. Two stochastic geostatistical techniques are explored for incorporating the structural proxies: cosimulation and local varying mean. With both the cosimulation and local varying mean methods, many equally likely temperature models (i.e., realizations) are produced, from which temperature probability profiles are calculated at candidate well locations. To aid in choosing between the candidate locations, two quantities summarize the temperature probabilities: Vprior and entropy. Vprior quantifies the likelihood for economic temperatures at each candidate location, whereas entropy identifies where new information has the most potential to reduce uncertainty. In general, the cosimulation realizations have smoother spatial structure, and extrapolate high temperatures at candidate locations that are located along the direction of the longest spatial correlation, which are down dip from existing temperature logs. The smooth realizations result in tight temperature probability profiles that are easier to interpret, but they have unrealistic temperature reversals in some locations because the cosimulation technique does not enforce a conductive geothermal gradient as a baseline (i.e., linearly increasing temperature with depth). The local varying mean results produce realizations with more realistic geothermal gradients, with temperatures increasing downward since a depth-temperature relationship is included. However, because they have much noisier spatial nature compared to cosimulation, it is harder to interpret the temperature probability profiles. The different local varying mean results allow the geologist to determine which proxy (e.g., dilation versus distance to fault termination) should be used given the specific geothermal system. In general, Vprior from local varying mean results identify locations that are close to high values for the structural proxies: areas with highe r probabilities for higher temperatures. The entropy results identify where uncertainty is greatest and therefore new drilling information could be most useful. Though these techniques provide useful information, even when applied to areas of sparse data, our comp arison of these two techniques demonstrates the need for new geothermal geostatistics techniques that combine the advantages of these two methods and that are tailored to the spatial uncertainty issues inherent in geothermal exploration.

3D temperature modeling↗

Basin Management of Geologic CO2 Storage: Effect of Well Spacing on CO2 Plume and Pressure Interference

This is the conference paper accompanying an oral presentation made at the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Western Regional Meeting (WRM) held in Bakersfield, California, April 26–28, 2022. The paper provides the results of a basin-scale CO2 storage modeling project investigating subsurface pressure interference among CO2 injection wells located in proximity to each other.

Wijaya, Nur↗

Temperature uncertainty modelling with proxy structural data as geostatistical constraints for well siting: an example applied to Granite Springs Valley, NV, USA

Utilizing existing temperature and structural geology information around Granite Springs Valley, Nevada, we build 3D stochastic temperature models with the aims of evaluating the 3D uncertainty of temperature and choosing between candidate exploration well locations. The data used to support the modelling are measured temperatures and structural proxies from 3D geologic modelling (distance to fault, distance to fault intersections and terminations, Coulomb stress change and dilation tendency), the latter considered ‘secondary’ data. Two stochastic geostatistical techniques are explored for incorporating the structural proxies: cosimulation and local varying mean. With both the cosimulation and local varying mean methods, many equally-likely temperature models (i.e. realizations) are produced, from which temperature probability profiles are calculated at candidate well locations. To aid in choosing between the candidate locations, two quantities summarize the temperature probabilities: V prior and entropy. V prior quantifies the likelihood for economic temperatures at each candidate location, whereas entropy identifies where new information has the most potential to reduce uncertainty. In general, the cosimulation realizations have smoother spatial structure, and extrapolate high temperatures at candidate locations that are located along the direction of the longest spatial correlation, which are down dip from existing temperature logs. The smooth realizations result in tight temperature probability profiles that are easier to interpret, but they have unrealistic temperature reversals in some locations because of the dipping ellipsoid shape created and that the cosimulation technique does not enforce a conductive geothermal gradient as a baseline (i.e. linearly increasing temperature with depth). The local varying mean results produce realizations with more realistic geothermal gradients, with temperatures increasing downward since a depth-temperature relationship is included. However, because they have much noisier spatial nature compared to cosimulation, it is harder to interpret the temperature probability profiles. The different local varying mean results allow the geologist to determine which proxy (e.g. dilation v. distance to fault termination) should be used given the specific geothermal system. In general, V prior from local varying mean results identify locations that are close to high values for the structural proxies: areas with higher probabilities for higher temperatures. The entropy results identify where uncertainty is greatest and therefore new drilling information could be most useful. Though these techniques provide useful information, even when applied to areas of sparse data, our comparison of these two techniques demonstrates the need for new geothermal geostatistics techniques that combine the advantages of these two methods and that are tailored to the spatial uncertainty issues inherent in geothermal exploration.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Database and Explorer

Overview The Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Toolkit is an online exploratory visualization tool developed by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM) with support from other federal agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). It provides a single point of access to authoritative information on federal agency investment in a portfolio of research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects that have been publicly announced to advance technologies for point source carbon capture, carbon dioxide removal, transport, storage, and conversion, collectively referred to as carbon management. The RD&D programs covered in this tool are authorized by annual congressional appropriations ("Base Program") and the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The tool also incorporates public information on other federal initiatives, such as the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs, and public information released by other government agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) and Primacy States’ Underground Injection Control Class VI permits and EPA’s facility level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Developed in a geographic information system, the tool organizes carbon management projects into five groups based on the primary technology that a project aims to advance, each visually represented as a digital layer ("carbon management project layer"). Only federally funded projects are included, which can be awarded projects that are completed or ongoing, or projects that have been selected but are currently under negotiation. Project information can be viewed in the map or in the attribute table below it when turned on. In the map view, each project is displayed at either its host site (for field work), where available, or its performer site (project lead's location, further explained in the table below). Host sites and performer sites are represented in distinct icons. Several reference layers offer additional public information on infrastructural and natural resource environment for carbon management. These reference layers, combined with multiple geographical basemaps, enable users to visualize the carbon management project layers in context. Carbon management project information will be updated monthly based on feedback and information availability. Carbon management project layers Point Source Carbon Capture (PSC) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from power plants or industrial facilities. Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing CO2 from the atmosphere, including direct air capture (DAC) and DAC hubs, direct ocean capture, enhanced mineralization, and biomass carbon removal and storage. For projects with multiple host sites, each of the sites are displayed individually with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the total for the entire project. Carbon Transport This layer contains DOE- and DOT-funded projects focused on CO2 transport. The Transport Research and Development sublayer contains projects that do not involve physical infrastructure; the Proposed Transport Corridor sublayer contains projects for which either a route for the transport infrastructure has been proposed or a general area for the transport infrastructure has been identified. Carbon Storage This layer contains DOE-funded key projects focused on CO2 storage. For projects with multiple field-work sites, each of the sites are displayed individually on the map with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the overall total for the entire project. Carbon Conversion This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on converting CO2 into economically valuable products. Reference layers The following layers provide additional information in the geographic proximity of carbon management projects. Users should reference the original sources for more details (weblinks provided below and in pop-up windows on the map). Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub and Facility These layers illustrate the approximate areas of the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs announced by DOE's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED) and the approximate locations of individual facilities that constitute the hubs (see "Where are the H2Hubs located?" on the webpage linked above). EPA Facility Level GHG Emissions (direct emitter) This layer shows direct CO2 emissions from stationary sources in 2022, using data extracted from EPA's Facility Level Information on GreenHouse gases Tool (FLIGHT). Captured and injected CO2 are not deducted from direct emitters’ total emissions. Contact EPA for additional details. Underground Injection Control Class VI permit/permit application This layer shows the locations of CO2 injection wells that are granted or in the process of applying for an Underground Injection Control Class VI permit by EPA or a Primacy State (currently Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming). The URLs for the permits or permit applications are provided in the pop-up windows associated with the well locations. Contact EPA for additional details. Carbon Storage Resource This layer contains information on prospective CO2 storage resources in saline formations and oil and gas reservoirs provided by the National Carbon Sequestration Database and Geographic Information System (NATCARB) spatial database. Contact NETL for additional details. Existing CO2 pipeline This layer shows active CO2 pipelines based on information digitized from the map issued by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Contact PHMSA for additional details.

Carbon Conversion↗

Water at the Research and Education Complex [Poster]

Purpose: To identify the management methods for stormwater, sanitary sewer, and potable water throughout the facilities at the Research and Education Complex (REC) using drawings and written documents. To confirm the locations and status of wells located throughout the REC. To compile appropriate documentation that relates to water for each facility at the REC, verify that documentation is accurate, and create any new documentation that is necessary through field verification.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗