SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “drilling cost”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

2025 Geothermal Drilling Cost Curves Update: Preprint

Drilling activities account for 30% to 57% of the cost to develop and install a geothermal plant. Therefore, an accurate representation of the cost to drill a well is paramount in techno-economic analysis to determine the feasibility of a geothermal power project. In 2022, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) endeavored to revise the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) GeoVision baseline drilling cost curves due to extensive improvement in drilling rates at the Utah Frontier Observatory Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) demonstration site. That effort did not culminate in the recommendation of new curves because the actual project costs did not match the reported performance improvements and were at or above the GeoVision baseline. The need for another iteration of this analysis has arisen from industry record drilling performance reported by recent commercial field-scale and demonstration projects, including Fervo Energy’s Cape Station, the Utah FORGE 16B(78)-32 demonstration and the Geysers Power Company’s GDC-36 demonstration. Therefore, in this work, we have estimated the resulting industry average rate of penetration (ROP) and bit life and applied these parameters as inputs to the Well Cost Simplified model used in the GeoVision analysis. The resulting revised cost curves show a significant decline from the GeoVision baseline. For vertical wells, the magnitude of cost decline ranges between 12% and 24% while for deviated wells, cost reductions between 18% and 26% are estimated. The revised cost curves are in good agreement with actual cost data and therefore, quantify the economic impact of the utilization of (and advances in) polycrystalline diamond compact (PDC) bit technology and the application of physics-based methodologies that optimize mechanical specific energy.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

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↗

DOE OSTI2022

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↗

DOE OSTI2022

Auto Indexer for Percussive Hammers Final Report

Geothermal energy has been underutilized in the U.S., primarily due to the high cost of drilling in the harsh environments encountered during the development of geothermal resources. Drilling depths can approach 5,000 m with temperatures reaching 170 C. In situ geothermal fluids are up to ten times more saline than seawater and highly corrosive, and hard rock formations often exceed 240 MPa compressive strength. This combination of extreme conditions pushes the limits of most conventional drilling equipment. Furthermore, enhanced geothermal systems are expected to reach depths of 10,000 m and temperatures more than 300 °C. To address these drilling challenges, Sandia developed a proof-of-concept tool called the auto indexer under an annual operating plan task funded by the Geothermal Technologies Program (GTP) of the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office. The auto indexer is a relatively simple, elastomer-free motor that was shown previously to be compatible with pneumatic hammers in bench-top testing. Pneumatic hammers can improve penetration rates and potentially reduce drilling costs when deployed in appropriate conditions. The current effort, also funded by DOE GTP, increased the technology readiness level of the auto indexer, producing a scaled prototype for drilling larger diameter boreholes using pneumatic hammers. The results presented herein include design details, modeling and simulation results, and testing results, as well as background on percussive hammers and downhole rotation.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Techno-Economic Performance of Eavor Loop 2.0

This project evaluated techno-economic performance for a sample Eavor-Loop 2.0 design for electricity production and direct-use heating. The Eavor-Loop 2.0 design investigated is a 7.5-km deep closed-loop geothermal system consisting of 12 laterals for a total of more than 90 km of downhole well and lateral length. Both a high geothermal gradient scenario of 60 degrees C/km and a low geothermal gradient scenario of 30 degrees C/km were considered. With pure water injected at 60 degrees C and 80 kg/s, reservoir simulations with the Slender-Body Theory simulator indicate average production temperatures over a 30-year lifetime of ~125 degrees C and ~210 degrees C for the low and high geothermal gradient scenario, respectively. These correspond to heat production of ~22 M Wth and ~51 M Wth, respectively. Using IPSEpro simulations, we find average power production of ~2.2 M We and ~8.6 M We, respectively, for a subcritical organic Rankine cycle power plant with air-cooled condensers. Cost estimates indicate the overall capital and levelized costs are dominated by the lateral drilling cost. Obtaining a levelized cost of electricity below $70/M Wh requires a geothermal gradient of 60 degrees C/km, a discount rate below 9%, and lateral drilling cost below $400/m. A well cost model indicates that ~$400/m for the Eavor-Loop 2.0 design investigated can be obtained for a drilling rate of penetration about 40 ft/hr (with bit life of 50 hours), and omitting casing and cement. Traditional (geothermal) well drilling has achieved these drilling rate conditions, including the Utah FORGE project where the rate of penetration has exceeded 50 ft/hr in granite. However, it is unclear if these conditions are still valid for drilling the Eavor-Loop 2.0 laterals (i.e., ~82 km of laterals at 4 to 7.5-km vertical depth with rock temperatures up to 460 degrees C), as such downhole completion has never been developed before. Competitive levelized cost of heat values ($1.2-$8.2/GJ) are calculated, even for the low geothermal gradient scenario (30 degrees C/km) and lateral drilling cost of $600/m.

advanced geothermal system↗

DOE OSTI2022

Context and mitigation of lost circulation during geothermal drilling in diverse geologic settings

Lost circulation is one of the most common and expensive problems facing geothermal energy development, representing up to 30% of drilling costs. We examined drilling records from four geothermal fields—McGinness Hills in central Nevada, Don A. Campbell and Steamboat Hills in western Nevada, and Puna Geothermal Venture on the Big Island of Hawai'i— to identify geologies most prone to lost circulation, as well as common mitigation strategies. Depths of lost circulation events varied, but their frequency often increased in the production interval. Lost circulation commonly occurred near fault intersections, and heavily faulted fields like McGinness Hills and Don A. Campbell showed secondary mineralization within approximately 100 m (328 ft) or less of where circulation was lost. Lost circulation mitigation strategies included using locally available materials (e.g., cotton seed hulls) as well as more expensive proprietary lost circulation materials, cement plugs above the reservoir, and drilling blind with aerated, polymer-based mud in the production zone. Addressing lost circulation using a well thought out decision-making approach and materials above the reservoir will save time and cost, and provide needed well integrity. Mitigation often requires a series of steps, typically applied from perceived least expensive to most, and are dependent on the severity and location in the well where circulation was lost and availability of materials. Placing cement plugs can cure lost circulation events, however these plugs are often expensive, time-consuming, and may not be successful.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

The role of air sealing while ground source heat pump system retrofits in the U.S. single-family houses

Widespread commercial adoption of ground source heat pumps (GSHP) is hindered by the relatively high initial cost associated with drilling boreholes in the ground to deploy ground heat exchangers. Reducing the energy demand of buildings has the potential to reduce the required borehole length and the associated drilling costs. In single-family residential buildings, air sealing can significantly lower heating energy usage, according to recent studies and reports. Thus, air sealing in conjunction with GSHP retrofits can lower the required GSHP system's capacity and borehole length to meet the thermal demands of the buildings. In order to understand the role of combining air sealing with GSHP retrofit quantitatively, the current study employs a whole building energy simulation tool integrated with an advanced design tool for the ground heat exchanger to determine changes in required GSHP capacity, total borehole length, and building energy consumption for with- and without-air sealing in single-family houses in 3 climate zones in the United States. The study considers one representative city for each climate zone, Phoenix, AZ for a hot climate, Seattle, WA for a moderate climate, and Minneapolis, MN for a cold climate. The results from this study show that reducing air infiltration from 0.8 ACH to the minimum ventilation requirement (0.35 ACH) can reduce borehole length requirement by up to 24% in Phoenix, 32% in Seattle, and 70% in Minneapolis. A similar magnitude of reduction can be seen for GSHP capacity and total building energy usage as well.

Prem Anand Jayaprabha, Jyothis Anand↗

DOE OSTI2025

Techno-Economic Viability of Flexible Dispatch of Unconventional Geothermal Systems

Flexible geothermal operations could boost project returns through the allocation of improved power purchase agreements and/or exploitation of power price arbitrage opportunities. In this study, we investigated the techno-economic feasibility of variable flow rate control and time-of-day pricing in closed-loop geothermal systems. We considered U-shaped multilateral system configurations and modeled a variety of technical system parameters. These designs were simulated using a slender-body theory (SBT) model for transient heat transfer and fluid flow. This subsurface model was integrated into the flexible geothermal economic model (FGEM) tool to evaluate the overall flexible geothermal system techno-economics. Future hourly ambient temperature conditions were based on the Sup3rCC dataset. Published datasets were used for future hourly wholesale electricity prices. We analyzed four operating strategies: 1) baseload operation, 2) seasonal dispatch (high flow rate during summer and nominal flow rate during the rest of the year), 3) net generation maximization by varying flow rate to maximize net power output, and 4) revenue maximization by varying flow rate to maximize revenue. We ran all four scenarios for a multiloop configuration with 12 lateral passes, 7-km vertical depth and 87-km total drilling length. Furthermore, we assumed a 60 degrees C/km geothermal gradient and ambient temperature and wholesale electricity prices for New Mexico as a typical state location. The nominal flow rate was set to 80 kg/s. When considering drilling costs of $1,000/m and a discount rate of 7%, the generation maximization scenario resulted in the lowest levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of ~$150/MWh. When considering project return on investment (ROI), defined as lifetime net income divided by upfront capital costs, all flexible operation scenarios performed better than the base case scenario. The highest ROI of 80% was obtained with the revenue maximization scenario. With drilling costs of $200/m and a discount rate of 5%, the generation maximization scenario resulted in LCOE of $49/MWh.

flexible geothermal↗

DOE OSTI2021

Thermal and Mechanical Energy Performance Analysis of Closed-loop Systems in Hot-Dry-Rock and Hot-Wet-Rock Reservoirs

To understand the potential and limitations for recovering thermal and mechanical energy from closed-loop geothermal systems a collaborative study is underway that will investigate an array of system configurations, working fluids, geothermal reservoir characteristics, operational periods, and heat transfer enhancements. Closed-loop geothermal systems are distinguished from hydrothermal or enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) in that the working fluid only circulates through drilled boreholes. Principal objectives of this study are to determine upper limits for thermal and mechanical energy recovery and optimal operational and configuration parameters for each scenario. Teams of scientists and engineers are applying a suite of numerical simulation and analytical tools to model the heat recovery from closed-loop geothermal systems, and then optimizing operational and configuration parameters to maximize the thermal and mechanical energy recovery. Results from the suite of numerical simulators and analytical tools, such as outlet and inlet states and temperature profiles in the geothermal reservoir over time are intercompared to increase confidence in the analysis. This paper documents the study findings for closed-loop systems in hot-dry-rock and hot-wet-rock reservoirs, where water is the working fluid. The characteristics of the hot-dry-rock reservoir were based on the U.S. Department of Energy's Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) site, near Milford Utah. Two objective functions are defined to optimize the operational and configuration parameters of the system, one each for the recovery of mechanical and thermal energy over the period of operation. For both objective functions, a surface plant thermal to mechanical energy conversion factor and an energy drilling cost is required. In keeping with the study objectives the surface plant conversion factor is determined from a second-law of thermodynamics analysis of a generic binary plant, and drilling costs are based on those from the Utah FORGE site and current national electrical costs.

closed-loop geothermal systems↗

DOE OSTI2021

Thermal and Mechanical Energy Performance Analysis of Closed-loop Systems in Hot-Dry-Rock and Hot-Wet-Rock Reservoirs

To understand the potential and limitations for recovering thermal and mechanical energy from closed-loop geothermal systems a collaborative study is underway that will investigate an array of system configurations, working fluids, geothermal reservoir characteristics, operational periods, and heat transfer enhancements. Closed-loop geothermal systems are distinguished from hydrothermal or enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) in that the working fluid only circulates through drilled boreholes. Principal objectives of this study are to determine upper limits for thermal and mechanical energy recovery and optimal operational and configuration parameters for each scenario. Teams of scientists and engineers are applying a suite of numerical simulation and analytical tools to model the heat recovery from closed-loop geothermal systems, and then optimizing operational and configuration parameters to maximize the thermal and mechanical energy recovery. Results from the suite of numerical simulators and analytical tools, such as outlet and inlet states and temperature profiles in the geothermal reservoir over time are intercompared to increase confidence in the analysis. This paper documents the study findings for closed-loop systems in hot-dry-rock and hot-wet-rock reservoirs, where water is the working fluid. The characteristics of the hot-dry-rock reservoir were based on the U.S. Department of Energy’s Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) site, near Milford Utah. Two objective functions are defined to optimize the operational and configuration parameters of the system, one each for the recovery of mechanical and thermal energy over the period of operation. For both objective functions, a surface plant thermal to mechanical energy conversion factor and an energy drilling cost is required. In keeping with the study objectives the surface plant conversion factor is determined from a second-law of thermodynamics analysis of a generic binary plant, and drilling costs are based on those from the Utah FORGE site and current national electrical costs.

Closed-loop geothermal systems, hot-dry-rock, hot-↗

DOE OSTI2026

Reservoir Characterization and Techno-Economic Analysis of Enhanced Geothermal and Closed-Loop Systems in the Wattenberg Field of the Denver-Julesburg Basin, Colorado

This report provides details of reservoir characterization and techno-economic analysis for enhanced geothermal systems and closed-loop geothermal systems in the Denver-Julesburg Basin Wattenberg area. The analysis contributes to the Geothermal Limitless Approach to Drilling Efficiencies (GLADE) project, a multi-institutional research initiative focused on advancing geothermal energy development by reducing drilling costs and improving the rate of penetration. The GLADE project brings together national laboratories, academic institutions, and industry partners, including the U.S. Department of Energy's Geothermal Technologies Office, Occidental Petroleum, the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR), Los Alamos National Laboratory, Colorado School of Mines, Louisiana State University, Texas A&M University, and several drilling technology companies. As part of this effort, NLR developed and applied slender-body theory modeling tools and the GEOPHIRES simulator to support techno-economic analysis. The slender-body theory wellbore simulator evaluated thermal performance in U-loop, Eavor-type multilateral, and enhanced geothermal system well configurations. Results indicated that an optimized single U-loop design delivers an outlet temperature of 168.8 degrees Celsius,stabilizing at a final outlet temperature of 135.3 degrees Celsius. Heat production also improved significantly, with an average thermal output of 16.9 MWth and a final thermal output of 11.0 MWth. These results provided critical baseline data for selecting optimized systems for techno-economic analysis. Building on these outputs, NLR applied the GEOPHIRES techno-economic simulator to estimate the levelized cost of electricity for both the Eavor multilateral and enhanced geothermal systems. The sensitivity analysis showed that drilling costs exert a particularly strong impact on the levelized cost of electricity of multilateral systems. Therefore, advances in drilling technology and improved drilling rates could yield significant gains in the economic performance of these systems. In this context, the GLADE project directly supports the U.S. Department of Energy's mission to reduce the cost of geothermal energy and accelerate the deployment of next-generation geothermal technologies.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS1974

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.↗

DOE OSTI2026

ResStock Measure Documentation: Residential Two-Stage Geothermal Heat Pump (4.0 COP, 20.5 EER) With Envelope Improvements and Advanced Air Sealing

The goal of this work is to develop energy efficiency, demand flexibility, and other retrofit end-use load shapes (electricity, gas, propane, or fuel oil) that cover a majority of the high-impact, market-ready (or nearly market-ready) measures. "Measures" refers to retrofits that can be applied to buildings during modeling. An "end-use savings shape" is the difference in energy consumption between a baseline building and a building with an energy efficiency, demand flexibility, or other retrofit measure applied. It results in a time-series profile that is broken down by end use and fuel (electricity or on-site gas, propane, or fuel oil use) at each time step. ResStock is a highly granular, physics-based, bottom-up model that uses multiple data sources, statistical sampling methods, and advanced building energy simulations to estimate the annual subhourly energy consumption of the residential building stock across the United States. The baseline model intends to represent the U.S. residential building stock as it existed in 2018. Technical documentation for the inputs and assumptions in the baseline building stock model is available in Reyna et al. (2025). Calibration and validation of the baseline model results are available in the final technical report of the End-Use Load Profiles project (Wilson, et al. 2022). This document focuses on a single end-use savings shape measure: Residential Two-Stage Geothermal Heat Pump (GHP) (4.0 COP, 20.5 EER) With Envelope Improvements. This measure combines a two-stage GHP with envelope improvements as a single package. As this package is a combination of two other measures, this document focused on documenting the results associated with this combination of technologies, with individual measure documents for two-stage GHPs and envelope improvements providing the information on the details of these measures. When the two technologies are combined, envelope improvements can modestly reduce energy consumption by a further 10%-15%, but also reduce the required size of the ground heat exchanger and heat pump by approximately 33% on average across all sites. The cost of installing envelope improvements in these homes is likely to be more than paid for by the reduction in equipment and drilling costs in these buildings for the majority of the stock.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Geothermal Power Systems Analysis: Outcome of Industry Stakeholders Workshop: Preprint

Geothermal cost and performance evaluation implemented via technoeconomic assessment (TEA) modeling is critical for the Department of Energy (DOE) and other geothermal industry stakeholders in assessing the current state of geothermal technologies and to identify existing hurdles to commercially viable geothermal development. The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is a major TEA tool used in estimating the economic feasibility and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of conventional hydrothermal systems and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). Since 2021, GETEM has been transitioning from an intricate spreadsheet model to a user-friendly tool within the System Advisor Model (SAM) developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Apart from enabling an expanded visibility of the geothermal model among other renewable resources, having GETEM in SAM has the advantage of simulation automation, better usability, updates tracking, active user inputs/feedback, and extended financial modeling. GETEM is used in developing supply curves for the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB). The ATB data are inputs to the Renewable Energy Potential (reV) and the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) models. The geothermal module in NREL’s reV model assesses the geothermal energy potential in the conterminous United States by defining the geospatial intersection of geothermal resources with existing grid infrastructure within the constraint of land use characteristics. The ReEDS model is a capacity expansion model used for simulating the long-term build-out and operation of the US generation and transmission system based on current energy costs and policies. To ensure enhanced representation of current industry trends in our model transitions and development, we organized a two-day virtual workshop to elicit geothermal industry stakeholder input and recommendations on our current approaches and assumptions on technoeconomic, resource assessment, and deployment scenarios modeling of geothermal technologies. Participants included developers, operators, investors, regulatory agencies, system modelers, national laboratory researchers, consultants, and other stakeholders. In this workshop, we gained stakeholder insights on current geothermal plant performance (i.e., capacity factors), updated drilling costs and learning curves, and next generation technologies such as closed loop and superhot rock geothermal. Other outcomes from this workshop and its impact on future geothermal development feasibility, resource availability, and capacity expansion studies are compiled and discussed.

Annual Technology Baseline↗

DOE OSTI2025

Geothermal Power Systems Analysis: Outcome of Industry Stakeholders Workshop

Geothermal cost and performance evaluation implemented via techno-economic assessment (TEA) modeling is critical for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and other geothermal industry stakeholders in assessing the current state of geothermal technologies and to identify existing hurdles to commercially viable geothermal development. The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is a major TEA tool used in estimating the economic feasibility and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of conventional hydrothermal systems and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). Since 2021, GETEM has been transitioning from an intricate spreadsheet model to a user-friendly tool within the System Advisor Model (SAM) developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Apart from enabling an expanded visibility of the geothermal model among other renewable resources, having GETEM in SAM has the advantage of simulation automation, better usability, updates tracking, active user inputs/feedback, and extended financial modeling. GETEM is used in developing supply curves for NREL's Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), which provides inputs to the Renewable Energy Potential (reV) and the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) models. The geothermal module in NREL's reV model assesses the geothermal energy potential in the conterminous United States by defining the geospatial intersection of geothermal resources with existing grid infrastructure within the constraint of land use characteristics. The ReEDS model is a capacity expansion model used for simulating the long-term build-out and operation of the U.S. generation and transmission system based on current energy costs and policies. To ensure enhanced representation of current industry trends in our model transitions and development, we organized a two-day virtual workshop to elicit geothermal industry stakeholder input and recommendations on our current approaches and assumptions on techno-economic, resource assessment, and deployment scenarios modeling of geothermal technologies. Participants included developers, operators, investors, regulatory agencies, system modelers, national laboratory researchers, consultants, and other stakeholders. In this workshop, we gained stakeholder insights on current geothermal plant performance (i.e., capacity factors), updated drilling costs and learning curves, and next-generation technologies such as closed-loop and superhot rock geothermal. Other outcomes from this workshop and its impact on future geothermal development feasibility, resource availability, and capacity expansion studies are compiled and discussed.

annual technology baseline↗

DOE OSTI2022

Deep learning-accelerated 3D carbon storage reservoir pressure forecasting based on data assimilation using surface displacement from InSAR

Fast forecasting of the reservoir pressure distribution during geologic carbon storage (GCS) by assimilating monitoring data is a challenging problem. Due to high drilling cost, GCS projects usually have spatially sparse measurements from few wells, leading to high uncertainties in reservoir pressure prediction. To address this challenge, we use low-cost Interferometric Synthetic-Aperture Radar (InSAR) data as monitoring data to infer reservoir pressure build up. We develop a deep learning-accelerated workflow to assimilate surface displacement maps interpreted from InSAR and to forecast dynamic reservoir pressure. Employing an Ensemble Smoother Multiple Data Assimilation (ES-MDA) framework, the workflow updates three-dimensional (3D) geologic properties and predicts reservoir pressure with quantified uncertainties. We use a synthetic commercial-scale GCS model with bimodally distributed permeability and porosity to demonstrate the efficacy of the workflow. A two-step CNN-PCA approach is employed to parameterize the bimodal fields. The computational efficiency of the workflow is boosted by two residual U-Net based surrogate models for surface displacement and reservoir pressure predictions, respectively. The workflow can complete data assimilation and reservoir pressure forecasting in half an hour on a personal computer.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

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 OSTI2025

Field Test and Thermal Performance Comparison of a Novel Underground Thermal Battery with a Single U-tube Borehole Heat Exchanger for Geothermal Heat Pump Application

Geothermal Heat Pumps (GHP) are a proven technology to electrify and decarbonize space heating and cooling by utilizing the thermally consistent underground as a heat sink or source. However, the high drilling costs of conventional borehole heat exchangers (BHEs) associated with GHP systems and subsurface heterogeneity have been two major challenges to their widespread adoption. In this paper, we present results from a field-scale pilot of an Underground Thermal Battery (UTB) as a potential alternative to a conventional BHE. To benchmark the UTB performance, a side-by-side field test was conducted to compare the UTB with a conventional BHE installed at the same site. The UTB was installed in a 7.01-meter-deep borehole having a diameter of 0.9 meter, whereas the conventional BHE (with single U-tube loop) is in a borehole with 36.6-meter depth and 0.15-meter diameter. Both are integrated into a GHP system to meet the thermal energy demands of office space at the Illinois Energy Farm on the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign campus. The system’s performance is compared in terms of heat transfer rate, outlet temperatures, and contributions to the overall thermal power of the GHP system under varying thermal demands and in different heat pump operation modes: heating only, cooling only, and hybrid (alternative, diurnal heating and cooling). Results to date indicate that the UTB delivers a more consistent response under during a time period of varying thermal demands. Its operational performance is better during short-term with higher thermal demands, while the conventional BHE performs better under continuous, long-term thermal demands.

Pokhrel, Sajjan [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000228523749)↗