Engineering topics

Trainor-Guitton, Whitney (ORCID:0000000257263886)

Publications and source records attributed to Trainor-Guitton, Whitney (ORCID:0000000257263886).

9 records

DOE OSTI2025

Comparative Study of Enhanced Geothermal System Supply Curves Across CONUS from Two Temperature Models Using the Renewable Energy Potential Model (reV)

Enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) have had recent breakthroughs within the geothermal sector. These breakthroughs are reflected in the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 2024 Annual Technology Baseline and will result in updated EGS supply curves (i.e., the available resource capacity relative to cost). Our research uses NREL's Renewable Energy Potential (reV) model to compare EGS supply curves across the conterminous United States (CONUS) for two different temperature models: the Stanford temperature model (STM) and the Southern Methodist University temperature model (SMU). The reV model provides the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) at a consistent resolution across CONUS, taking into consideration transmission costs and constraints as well as technical exclusions pertaining to sensitive cultural, ecological, or infrastructure locations. In addition to a countrywide analysis of both models, we also conducted a regional analysis of Texas. We observed the STM had, on average, lower temperatures across different depths, resulting in slightly higher mean and median LCOEs as compared to the SMU temperature model at the same depths. In the regional analysis for Texas, however, when we compared only the common points between the two temperature models, the STM had lower median and mean LCOEs compared to SMU due to higher temperatures at depths greater than 5 km.

enhanced geothermal systems↗

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 OSTI2025

Exploring Geothermal Potential of Great Basin Sub-Regions

The INnovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations Of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project aims to discover new, economically viable hidden geothermal systems in the Great Basin region by building on previous work in play fairway analysis and machine learning. A key objective of this project is to develop an exploration workflow to reduce geothermal exploration risks for hidden geothermal systems. A single preliminary play fairway workflow was developed from the assessment of the regional INGENIOUS geological, geophysical, and geochemical datasets. This workflow provided new preliminary predictive geothermal fairway maps for the INGENIOUS study area, which encompasses most of Nevada, western Utah, southern Idaho, southeastern Oregon, and easternmost California. However, a recent study (incorporating machine learning techniques) of a portion of Nevada identified four geologic domains and determined that the relative importance of individual datasets or features as indicators of geothermal potential may differ across these domains. The INGENIOUS study area includes a much larger and more geologically diverse region; therefore, additional geologic domains or sub-regions are expected. To assess the sub-regions in the INGENIOUS study area, principal component analysis and k-means clustering were applied. Preliminary results indicate that the INGENIOUS regional data cluster into groups that relate to different geologic domains in the Great Basin region. These include domains such as the Walker Lane, extensional western Great Basin region, broad lower strain region in the eastern Great Basin of western Utah and eastern Nevada, Quaternary volcanic fields, and the area adjacent to the Snake River Plain. These clusters are assessed to determine the key geologic drivers of the identified clusters. Understanding this variability can provide key insights for the exploration and characterization of hidden geothermal systems in the Great Basin region and could indicate the need to develop multiple geothermal conceptual models and play fairway workflows for the INGENIOUS study area.

exploration↗

DOE OSTI2024

Derisking Superhot Geothermal Plays with Value of Information: Utilizing Play Fairway Analysis, Geophysics and Technoeconomics

This paper describes a methodology for evaluating how the play fairways analysis (e.g., favorability) can improve our chances of making geothermal development decisions. We make statistical resource assessments and couple them with technoeconomic analysis utilizing previous favorability work performed for the Newberry Volcano. We demonstrate how the favorability can be used in a decision analysis framework because the Newberry favorability also estimated an associated uncertainty. The specific decision considered is how large of a power plant to build, which is difficult given the uncertainty about the resource size. Our results focus on two resource types, hydrothermal and enhanced geothermal systems, and they demonstrate how estimates of the minimum, most likely, and maximum estimates of the geothermal resource (denoted as the P10, P50, and P90, respectively) can be used in a decision analysis framework. Lastly, the value of information results explore using favorability with and without the magnetotelluric and gravity data from the Newberry Volcano. As expected, the favorability is more reliable, according to our methodology, at indicating the resource size when it includes the two geophysical models.

enhanced geothermal system↗

DOE OSTI2024

Geothermal Uncertainty Representation in reV: the Renewable Energy Potential Model

We present a preliminary methodology for including geothermal resource uncertainty into the Renewable Energy Potential model, which estimates potential capacity and costs on a gridded surface at the national scale. The uncertainty outputs characterize the 10th, 50th and 90th percentile for geothermal resources using two energy capacity estimation equations. We then present a method and results that demonstrate how other geologic data layers, which may be indicative of permeability, can be used to inform the mean and standard deviation of the geothermal capacity. We demonstrate how the mean and standard deviation can be defined or partially informed by using collocated regression estimates and estimate errors, respectively . These regression results are from 36 observed geothermal power plants in the Great Basin region and are also used to benchmark the P10-P90 calculations.

exclusions↗

DOE OSTI2023

Development of a Geothermal Module in reV: Quantifying the Geothermal Potential while Accounting for the Geospatial Intersection of the Grid Infrastructure and Land Use Characteristics

The Renewable Energy Potential (reV) model is a geospatial platform for estimating technical potential and developing renewable energy supply curves, initially developed for wind and solar technologies. The model evaluates deployment constraints, considering land use, environmental, and cultural factors, and estimates the distance to existing grid features to connect future plants (Maclaurin et al., 2021). A pressing deficiency in the reV model, however, is representation of geothermal electricity generation technologies. To address this gap, we developed a novel geothermal generation module for reV that allows for representation and analysis at the same level of detail as other renewable technologies. This paper describes our process for evaluating data sources for the modeling, and presents five preliminary reV geothermal results. More specifically, we present two sets of resource data that represent upper and lower bounds for geothermal potential. We then present several sensitivity runs using the upper bound resource data; the results are encouraging that levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) can be reduced by optimizing the location and estimated capacity of the spatially diverse geothermal resource while considering the distance to existing grid infrastructure. Our preliminary supply curves and levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) results should be considered with care due to the highly uncertainty in geothermal resource potential data. We present median LCOE values for the conterminous U.S. for five scenarios: four hydrothermal (3.5km depth) and one EGS (4.5km depth). The capital and operating costs for each respective technology are modeled. We also compare results using two different resource data sources.

exclusions↗

DOE OSTI2023

A VOI Web Application for Distinct Geothermal Domains: Statistical Evaluation of Different Data Types within the Great Basin

The Great Basin region contains different domains that have different structural and hydrothermal flow patterns. Depending on the characteristics of these patterns, certain data types may be more successful at detecting hidden geothermal resources. In this paper, we quantitatively evaluate if certain data types are more successful in certain domains. Given different aquifer, strain and structural conditions, we explore which data types statistically reveal positively labeled geothermal sites. We utilize value of information (VOI) metrics to help quantify the reliability of data types to discriminate against "positive" and "negative" labeled geothermal sites. We also evaluate how kernel density estimation can help generalize the statistics that inform VOI, which is necessary given the limited data in geothermal exploration. Except for the Carbonate Aquifer, the highest ranking of the Vimperfect is the Local Structural Setting. Next, the slip and dilation tendency is first for Carbonate Aquifer and second for Central Nevada Seismic Belt and Western Great Basin. For the Carbonate Aquifer, heat flow is has the lowest Vimperfect value compared to the other three domains, which is consistent with the understanding of how heat flow measurements are masked by regional groundwater flow.

Bayesian analysis↗

DOE OSTI2023

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↗

DOE OSTI2023

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↗