T308 Geothermal Energy
Wednesday, 25 October 2017
8:00 AM - 12:00 PM
Room 602/603
GEOTHERMAL PLAY FAIRWAY ANALYSIS OF THE SNAKE RIVER PLAIN, IDAHO
Paper number: T308-4
Program: Technical Sessions
Time: 8:45 AM – 9:00 AM
Authors
-
Drew SilerU.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA
-
Ghanashyam NeupaneIdaho Falls, ID
-
Jacob DeAngeloGeology, Minerals, Energy, and Geophysics Science Center, Moffett Field, CA
-
James EvansUtah State University, Logan, UT
-
Neil SnyderGolden, CO
-
Jonathan GlenU.S. Geological Survey, Moffett Field, CA
-
Dennis NielsonSalt Lake City, UT
-
Sabodh K. GargLeidos Inc, San Diego, CA
-
Lee LibertyBoise State University, Boise, ID
-
Patrick DobsonLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
-
Erika GasperikovaLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
-
Eric L. SonnenthalLawrence Berkeley National Lab, Berkeley, CA
-
Dennis NewellUtah State University, Logan, UT
Abstract
During Phase 1 we compiled existing data at a regional scale and created a methodology in GIS for analyzing the three components needed for a geothermal energy system: heat, permeability, and seal. Each of these was modeled by combining a range of evidence and uncertainty layers to create Common Risk Segment (CRS) maps. These CRS maps were then combined to create a Composite CRS (CCRS) map that allowed us to select a variety of potential focus sites for further study. We use standard Arc GIS functions to process the data (e.g., empirical Bayesian Kriging, kernel density functions) and employ Python scripts to systematize data handling across layers. The resulting tools are both reproducible and portable to other regions and settings.
During Phase 2 we selected two representative focus sites, the Western Snake River Plain (WSRP) near Mountain Home, Idaho, and Camas Prairie in central Idaho. The Mountain Home region represents a blind geothermal resource in an area of high heat flow and young volcanism; Camas Prairie is a structurally controlled basin with indicators of magmatic heat. Phase 2 had three primary goals: (1) to fill data gaps in critical areas in order to better define potential prospects, (2) to integrate these data into new thermal and structural models, and (3) to infer the location of potential resources and drilling targets that could be validated during Phase 3.
New data acquired during Phase 2 included mapping and structural analysis of faults and subsurface lineaments; seismic, magnetotelluric, gravity and magnetic surveys; trace element and isotope geochemistry springs and well water; whole rock analysis of volcanic rocks, and new Ar-Ar ages of young basalt vents. We also produced new thermal models. Integration of these data into new higher resolution CRS and CCRS maps have identified two prospects for potential verification during Phase 3, which begins Fall 2017 and will include drilling a new test well in Camas Prairie.
Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 49, No. 6
doi: 10.1130/abs/2017AM-305209
© Copyright 2017 The Geological Society of America (GSA), all rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted to the author(s) of this abstract to reproduce and distribute it freely, for noncommercial purposes. Permission is hereby granted to any individual scientist to download a single copy of this electronic file and reproduce up to 20 paper copies for noncommercial purposes advancing science and education, including classroom use, providing all reproductions include the complete content shown here, including the author information. All other forms of reproduction and/or transmittal are prohibited without written permission from GSA Copyright Permissions.