We have to quantify available and extractable geothermal energy in thermal spring associated geothermal systems without any down hall data. Geophysical and hydro-geochemical techniques used to find out extent and subsurface temperature of the geothermal system. Do you have an idea for assessing geothermal potential of thermal spring associated geothermal reservoir?
Please look in our booklet, page 23-32:
http://www.geotis.de/homepage/Ergebnisse/TIEFE_GEOTHERMIE_Nutzungsmoeglichkeiten_in_Deutschland_3_Auflage_2011.pdf
Sorry, at the moment in German only, but the English version will appear in two weaks at the sam homepage.
With kind regards
Ruediger Schulz
http://www.geotis.de/homepage/Ergebnisse/TIEFE_GEOTHERMIE_Nutzungsmoeglichkeiten_in_Deutschland_3_Auflage_2011.pdf
Thank you Dr. Rüdiger Schulz
Please upload link to English version. i cant understand German.
Start by geting the best estimates for the parameters in the equition used, reservoir temperature, porosity, heat capacity, rock density. Pick this from reports from the area or for similar reservoirs. Give the parameters some error range and run Monte Carlo simulation with the equation. This should give you some estimate and an indication of the error.
English-language promoters of geothermal investment typically use the Australian or Canadian geothermal resource reporting codes (e.g. http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/geothermal/ageg/geothermal_reporting_code ), which are based on the USGS heat-in-place method . Because of complaints that this approach was too often used to grossly exaggerate resource potential, the initial version of this code has been updated in 2010. However, criticisms persist ( e.g. Garg and Combs, 2011, Stanford, https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/db/IGAstandard/record_detail.php?id=7240 ).
Because German municipalities that wished to become involved in geothermal development could not put their assets at risk, explicit exploration assessment and targeting criteria have been developed to support insurance of geothermal exploration drilling in Germany (and potentially elsewhere). Detailed data acquisition and analysis standards have been specified for assessing German geothermal systems hosted in deep sediments, particularly in the Malm carbonates of the Molasse Basin in Bavaria. However, these standards are relevant to only a subset of worldwide geothermal prospects and recent drilling in Bavaria suggests that the German standards may be optimistic regarding the reliability with which uncertainty can be mitigated when few case histories are available.
The geothermal resource assessment approaches currently used by the companies that have been the most successful in developing conventional geothermal resource capacity require a more detailed understanding of conventional geothermal reservoirs. Resource capacity assessments prior to drilling are typically based on a range of resource conceptual models representative of uncertainty, supported by worldwide case history experience with analogous systems (e.g. Grant and West, 2011, Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Academic Press; or, for a synthetic illustration of the construction of one geothermal resource conceptual model, see Cumming, 2009, Stanford, https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/db/IGAstandard/record_detail.php?id=5548).
However, if your application is an academically-oriented assessment of geothermal potential, the USGS heat-in-place approach as embodied in the 2010 Australian geothermal resource reporting code is more or less the standard and, as Grant and West (2011) point out, PNOC (now EDC) in the Philippines used an approach similar to the Australian code in its 1980s-era assessments that proved to be realistic - most likely because numerous prospects and analogous outcomes from drilling provided a realistic context.
In my previous answer I must apologize for making a serious typo in an author's name in the reference:
Grant, M. and Bixley, P., 2011, Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Academic Press.
