Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Project seismic”

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 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Economic and operational investigation of CO 2 sequestration through enhanced oil recovery in unconventional reservoirs in Colorado, USA

The ongoing CCUS commercial projects are highly relied on the support of government incentives due to massive capital investment. Here, this study analyzes the economics of carbon capture utilization and sequestration (CCUS) projects, shows a state-wide CCUS deployment exercise, followed by simulation results of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) based CO 2 storage in unconventional reservoirs. The comprehensive economic analysis of capture, transportation, sequestration costs, enhanced 45Q tax credits, and EOR revenue implies the practicality of CO 2 -EOR to offset the high CCUS costs. With the economics understanding, we study the top CO 2 sources, existing CO 2 pipelines, and sequestration sinks in the state of Colorado, USA. This paper next presents results from EOR simulation in one section of the unconventional Denver-Julesburg (DJ) Basin Niobrara and Codell reservoirs. The simulation model is based on a geological static model, incorporated with hydraulic fracture stimulation, history matched to production, and calibrated to the microseismic and time-lapse surface seismic data. The CO 2 -EOR simulation results show that oil production can be increased and more CO 2 stored with: a longer primary production period; the presence of a shut-in period; higher injection rates; and multi-well injectors. The modeling results show that about 7–10 Mscf of CO 2 will be stored when recovering 1 stb of EOR oil. By adding the enhanced oil revenue and the carbon credits together, it is estimated that the most economic case can generate $\$13$ MM when oil price is assumed to be $\$80$/stb, and the EOR oil revenue is 3.4 times greater than that generated from 45Q incentives. It corresponds to the scenario that a five-year primary production is followed by CO 2 injection into four wells with the sequence of injection (4 MMscf/day for 6 months), shut-in (6 months) and production (12 months). The best practices in this study will provide valuable insights for similar CCUS projects in other unconventional fields. Furthermore, this study defines a term named “Carbon Neutrality Index (CNI)” by comparing the amount of CO 2 stored with that burned by EOR oil. The CNI value of 0 indicates the enhanced oil is carbon neutral; a negative CNI value implies there is a net reduction in carbon emission. The 4-year huff-n-puff (HnP) simulation leads to a positive CNI value, indicating that the EOR oil generated in this process is not carbon neutral yet.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Historic Submarine Landslides in the Northern Gulf of Mexico

This dataset provides a set of polygons representing the zone of depletion for historic submarine landslides (also referred to as mass transport deposits) within four regions of the US Exclusive Economic Zone in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Landslides were digitized by geologists and spatial scientists at the National Energy Technology Laboratory by visually interpreting landslide boundaries from a seismic-derived, high resolution bathymetric hillshade provided by the Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management (BOEM, 2017). A portion of the landslide features are derived from other spatial sources including the Seismic Water Anomalies dataset by BOEM (2016) as well as from McAdoo et al., 2000 and Twichell et al, 2005. The scale that landslides depletion areas can be interpreted at is limited by the spatial resolution of the gridded bathymetry, which is 12.192 meters (BOEM, 2017). For each landslide feature in the dataset, geometry metrics were calculated including geodesic area (km2) and geodesic perimeter (km) using the North America Albers Equal Area Conic projected coordinate system. The same geometry metrics were calculated for the four inventory regions.

DOE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Improving Subsurface Stress Characterization for Carbon Dioxide Storage Projects by Incorporating Machine Learning Techniques

The overall objective of this project is to develop a framework for reliable characterization and prediction of the state of stress in the overburden and underburden (including the basement) in CO 2 storage reservoirs using machine learning and integrated geomechanics and geophysical methods. Specifically, we propose to develop workflow encompassing of technologies and/or methods to predict stress and pressure changes due to CO 2 injection in an active tertiary recovery site and their impacts on subtle fault activation, fractures and occurrence of microseismic events and compare responses to field observations. In this project, we anticipate using dataset from the Farnsworth field Unit (FWU) which is operated by Purdure Petroleum. A novel elastic-waveform VSP inversion technique will be used to estimate high-resolution spatial and temporal changes of elastic moduli in CO 2 storage reservoirs, which will be combined with velocity-stress relationship derived from laboratory tests to obtain subsurface pressure and stress. Clustered microseismic data will be jointly inverted for improved focal mechanisms. Least-squares reverse-time migration of microseismic waveform data will be performed to directly image fracture/fault zones. Additionally, a deep neural network machine learning technique with convolutional and recurrent layers will be used for learning the spectro-temporal structures in microseismic waveforms. The results of this geotechnical data analysis will be integrated to develop a high-resolution 3D mechanical earth model extending from the overburden sealing formations to the underburden including the basement. Mechanical properties will be derived through integration of mechanical logs, tests, available results from chemo-mechanical laboratory tests, and elastic inversion of seismic data using a combination of Bayesian and stochastic methods as well as machine learning technique. Failure features (faults/fractures) will be represented and/or modeled based on seismic and core data analysis. A transient hydrodynamic-geomechanical model will be developed through coupling with the calibrated FWU reservoir simulation model. The full physics coupled model will be used to train a reduced order proxy model using machine learning algorithm for estimating stress which will then be used with appropriate constitutive relationships and forward seismological models to simulate pressure changes and induced microseismicity. An advanced optimization framework will be developed to perform a history match to minimize error between field observations and simulated. The history matched proxy model will be verified against the full-physics equivalent. The field observations that will be used in the coupled model calibration process include pressure/stress inverted from VSP, moment magnitude from microseismic analysis, real time downhole pressure measurements, production and injection data. Parameter sensitivity and uncertainty analysis will be performed to characterize the impact of model parameter uncertainty on stress estimates. The proposed project will have significant impact on future field implementation of the proposed technology. Because the project field site is an ongoing CO 2 EOR development, the value of the new technology will be demonstrated in an operational context and evaluated as a viable risk mitigation strategy. Cost/benefit will be evaluated together with the various commercial incentives for CO 2 sequestration available to oil and gas operators. The extensive available dataset and ongoing data acquisition under the SWP Phase III work plan provides flexibility for investigation of multiple approaches and reduces technical risk.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

GOOML - Finding Optimization Opportunities for Geothermal Operations: Preprint

Geothermal Operational Optimization with Machine Learning (GOOML) is a transferable and extensible component-based geothermal asset modeling framework that considers complex steamfield relationships and identifies optimization prospects using a data-driven approach. We have used this framework to develop digital twins that provide steamfield operators with an operational environment to analyze and understand historical and forecasted power production, explore new steamfield configuration possibilities, and seek optimal asset management for real world applications. The GOOML modeling software is built on a generic component-based systems framework that allows for both historical and forecast analysis. A GOOML model can perform historical data-assimilation using first-principal thermodynamics to create a meaningful data model. Historical production data can then be coupled with a forecast framework to train machine-learning models of steamfield components to predict future outputs. This modeling environment enables digital exploration of steamfield design configurations and operational scenarios. GOOML digital twins have been developed for steamfields in New Zealand and the United States representing differing power generation and field conditions. These digital twins have been validated by comparing hindcast predictions against historical production data. Reinforcement learning experiments were conducted to demonstrate the ability to programmatically explore the operations space using machine learning agents. Our initial results are compelling; two to five percent increases in annual energy production were demonstrated by the GOOML models with no additional infrastructure build required. GOOML offers a new approach to geothermal operations by applying state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms, comprehensive data analytics, and interaction with digital twins. Through application of these tools, operators will realize greater availability and higher net generation which will increase the cost effectiveness of geothermal energy projects.

access↗
DOE OSTI2024

Machine Learning and Data Science to Advance Laboratory Earthquake Prediction and Illuminate the Mechanics of Precursors to Failure

Earthquakes represent one of our greatest natural hazards and in recent years human induced seismicity is adding to the threat. Even a modest improvement in the ability to forecast devastating large earthquakes or smaller shallow events associated with fluid injection could save thousands of lives and billions of dollars. Current efforts to forecast earthquakes are limited by knowledge of earthquake physics and hampered by a lack of reliable lab or field observations. However, recent work has provided a critical opportunity for advancement. We have found: 1) clear and consistent precursors prior to earthquake-like failure in the laboratory and 2) that lab earthquakes can be predicted using machine learning (ML). These works show that stick-slip failure events –the lab equivalent of earthquakes– are preceded by a cascade of micro-failure events that radiate elastic energy in a manner that foretells catastrophic failure. Remarkably, ML predicts the fault zone stress state, the failure time and in some cases the magnitude of lab earthquakes. In addition, the observations include clear precursors to failure in the form of changes in fault zone properties prior to lab earthquakes. Precursors have been observed in previous laboratory studies but their origin is poorly understood and their possible connection to ML based earthquake prediction is unknown. The work conducted under our project has dramatically expanded these efforts. We have developed an integrated data science approach to illuminate the physics of earthquake precursors and lab earthquake prediction. Our work has accelerated the development of ML, artificial intelligence (AI), and related data science approaches by providing massive data sets that are tightly connected to critical scientific problems and by bringing together leading subject matter experts and data scientists. Earthquake physics involves phenomena that are far from equilibrium. Our work has leveraged data science methods to illuminate these phenomena and investigate how they relate to earthquake prediction. In addition to a large database with many types of labeled events that is available to everyone, our work has advanced the fundamental understanding of seismic forecasting, earthquake physics, and fault rheology

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗
DOE OSTI2023

DEEPEN 3D PFA Favorability Models and 2D Favorability Maps at Newberry Volcano

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. Part of the DEEPEN project involved developing and testing a methodology for a 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) for multiple play types (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical). This was tested using new and existing geoscientific exploration datasets at Newberry Volcano. This GDR submission includes images, data, and models related to the 3D favorability and uncertainty models and the 2D favorability and uncertainty maps. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology is based on the method proposed by Poux et al. (2020), which uses the Leapfrog Geothermal software with the Edge extension to conduct PFA in 3D. This method uses all available data to build a 3D geodata model which can be broken down into smaller blocks and analyzed with advanced geostatistical methods. Each data set is imported into a 3D model in Leapfrog and divided into smaller blocks. Conditional queries can then be used to assign each block an index value which conditionally ranks each block's favorability, from 0-5 with 5 being most favorable, for each model (e.g., lithologic, seismic, magnetic, structural). The values between 0-5 assigned to each block are referred to as index values. The final step of the process is to combine all the index models to create a favorability index. This involves multiplying each index model by a given weight and then summing the resulting values. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology follows this approach, but split up by the specific geologic components of each play type. These components are defined as follows for each magmatic play type: 1. Conventional hydrothermal plays in magmatic environments: Heat, fluid, and permeability 2. Superhot EGS plays: Heat, thermal insulation, and producibility (the ability to create and sustain fractures suitable for and EGS reservoir) 3. Supercritical plays: Heat, supercritical fluid, pressure seal, and producibility (the proper permeability and pressure conditions to allow production of supercritical fluid) More information on these components and their development can be found in Kolker et al., 2022. For the purposes of subsurface imaging, it is easier to detect a permeable fluid-filled reservoir than it is to detect separate fluid and permeability components. Therefore, in this analysis, we combine fluid and permeability for conventional hydrothermal plays, and supercritical fluid and producibility for supercritical plays. More information on this process is described in the following sections. We also project the 3D favorability volumes onto 2D surfaces for simplified joint interpretation, and we incorporate an uncertainty component. Uncertainty was modeled using the best approach for the dataset in question, for the datasets where we had enough information to do so. Identifying which subsurface parameters are the least resolved can help qualify current PFA results and focus future efforts in data collection. Where possible, the resulting uncertainty models/indices were weighted using the same weights applied to the respective datasets, and summed, following the PFA methodology above, but for uncertainty. There are two different versions of the Leapfrog model and associated favorability models: - v1.0: The first release in June 2023 - v2.1: The second release, with improvements made to the earthquake catalog (included additional identified events, removed duplicate events), to the temperature model (fixed a deep BHT), and to the index models (updated the seismicity-heat source index models for supercritical and EGS, and the resistivity-insulation index models for all three play types). Also uses the jet color map rather than the magma color map for improved interpretability. - v2.1.1: Updated to include v2.0 uncertainty results (see below for uncertainty model versions) There are two different versions of the associated uncertainty models: - v1.0: The first release in June 2023 - v2.0: The se...

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Seismoacoustic Monitoring of Pyroprocessing Equipment

With the projected increase in world nuclear capacity comes the hurdle of spent nuclear fuel. Pyroprocessing is one method to process irradiated fuel by using high temperatures and electrochemical steps to separate radioactive components. High temperatures, high radiation levels, and equipment confined to a heavily shielded hot cell are a few of the challenges introduced regarding safeguards for pyroprocessing. The first stage of the process utilizes an element chopper to cut irradiated fuel into smaller pieces, offering the potential to identify equipment operation through seismoacoustic monitoring. Eleven seismic and infrasound sensors were deployed at various locations and distances near a pyroprocessing hot cell to evaluate signals emitted from the chopper. Signals were processed using short-time Fourier transforms and manually scanned to locate chopping events. Operator logs were then collected for a ground truth comparison. Results indicate that both infrasound and seismic signals offer the ability to accurately measure this stage of pyroprocessing, though seismic signals are more prominent. Sensor locations are also evaluated to determine where the signal is detectable. This type of monitoring offers a method to aid in safeguards and proliferation detection by validating a pyroprocessing facility’s schedule and identifying activity that does not align with records.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

NETL Plastic Pipes Project - June 2022 Progress Report

Plastic or composite pipelines have been the bane of the utility locating industry because conduits are neither conductive nor magnetic, which are the properties traditionally used to locate buried utilities. Ground penetrating radar (GPR) is an effective geophysical tool for locating plastic/composite pipeline where the resistive cover allows for adequate penetration of radar energy. However, GPR cannot be used in areas where the soil cover is conductive due to significant clay and/or salt content. This study takes a comprehensive look at near-surface geophysical methods that potentially are useful for locating buried plastic/composite pipelines, either singly or in combination with other geophysical methods. Specifically, this modeling study uses computational numerical methods to forward model the response of GPR, resistivity, seismic, and gravity gradiometry methods to plastic/composite pipelines for various scenarios including: (1) pipe diameters ranging between 2 in. to 12 in.; (2) burial depths ranging between 3 ft to 4 ft; (3) various degrees in contrast in physical properties (i.e., permittivity, elasticity, electrical resistivity, density); and (4) various experimental acquisition choices (e.g., GPR radar frequencies, seismic source frequency, electrode spacing).

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Southwest Wind Power R&D Test Site Development at the National Wind Technology Center (CRADA CRD-12-00472 Final Report)

Southwest Windpower, Inc. (SWWP) has been designing and distributing small wind turbines for more than 22 years and is the recognized global leader in the design, manufacturing and distribution of small wind systems (400-3000 watts). The company has been a pioneer in the development of wind technology and has built and shipped more than 170,000 wind turbines to over 120 countries worldwide. Headquartered in Flagstaff AZ, SWWP has sales representatives in over 88 countries. Applications for SWWP systems include residential homes, commercial properties, micro grids, remote cabins, telecom transmitters, offshore platforms, water pumping and sailboats. In addition, U.S. Department of Defense uses SWWP’s products in Forward Operating Bases (FOB’s), USGS uses them for remote monitoring of glacier movements and the CIA uses them to provide power seismic monitoring. Today, SWWP plans development of new technologies to address distributed energy market needs and become even more aggressive in international markets. This strategy includes extensive Research, Development, Demonstration & Deployment (RDD&D) activities to improve existing production line into more simple, reliable, and cost-effective wind turbine systems. Important part of such activities is the field testing of the new systems, which should provide: (i) validation of the reliable operation of hardware and software; (ii) validation of numerical models of the system and its components; (iii) field comparison of various control and optimization strategies; (iv) customized reliability testing; (v) customized monitoring and analysis testing; and (vi) IEC certification testing (vii) filed demonstration of system performance and reliability. Such field testing facility should encompass multiple towers and appropriate data acquisition systems. SWWP is exploring to move part of the engineering department to Colorado, and execute its RDD&D strategies in this new location. Partnership with NREL will provide great insights into SWWP’s RDD&D processes and more efficient commercialization by utilizing NWTC as the field testing site, and working close with NREL personnel. NWTC is ideally suited to strain the design. NREL is very experienced with customized and IEC testing. During this project, Southwest Windpower aims to improve the value proposition of distributed renewable energy, and make it a competitive choice in the energy markets. As of today, more then 170,000 small wind turbines, manufactured in the U.S., are installed in more then 180 countries. With the improved value proposition, Southwest Windpower wants to create and address new market needs, substantially increase its sales domestically and internationally, which should have positive impact on the creation of American jobs, competitiveness of U.S. economy, export or U.S. products, and the use of renewable energy.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Area V: Waste Management and Subsurface Science (FY21-23 Final Report)

The objective of the Waste Management and Subsurface Science Topic Area V project is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of an intermediate-depth borehole for disposal of Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC) nuclear waste. The IAEC nuclear waste is currently stored in above ground and/or in near-surface facilities that provide short-term radiological worker safety but do not provide long-term, full security and safeguards protection for the nuclear material. Disposal of the IAEC nuclear waste several hundred meters below the surface in a sealed borehole would provide long-term security and safeguards due to its depth underground, as well as long-term radiological safety, due to its isolation in a stable geological formation. This project supports the nuclear security and safeguards initiatives of the Science and Technology Working Group of the NNSA/IAEC Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and addresses the Topic Area V objective and associated goals. The goals for Topic Area V are: (1) Assess the suitability of the vadose zone in the Yamin Plain of the northern Negev Desert, Israel as a host location for intermediate-depth borehole disposal of radioactive waste, (2) Define and refine the necessary characterization needs to better understand the regional climate, structure, and stratigraphy, geomechanics, geochemistry, hydrogeology, and seismicity of the stratigraphic sequence from the surface to the water table in the vicinity of the proposed host location for the disposal borehole(s), and (3) Develop a preliminary plan and schedule, including necessary resources and costs, for a borehole disposal concept and robust and transparent pre-closure and post-closure safety assessments. The safety assessments will require iteration with process level models at both site and regional scales. Upon completion, the information collected by this effort will allow the IAEC to make decisions regarding the viability and applicability of an intermediate depth (<500m) borehole for disposal in the vadose zone of the Yamin Plain. This FY21-23 final report is provided in lieu of a workshop report that was originally planned for delivery in January, 2024. Due to the conflict in Israel and associated delays, the workshop has been delayed to April 2024. The workshop will be held at LLNL but offsite and will switch to hybrid if travel restrictions remain in place. The associated workshop report will be provided as part of a new FY24-26 LCP.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Report for Department of State (DoS) V-Fund Project "Tying Moment Tensor Solutions to Explosive Yield"

The goal of this study was to use U.S. nuclear explosions with known source parameters (yield, depth, shot point material and/or parameters) to determine moment-derived yield estimates. This work has been accomplished by performing full moment tensor solutions using regional network data from the LLNL network, and other regional broadband stations. As part of this study, we have calculated solutions for 130 U.S. nuclear explosions and 12 additional chemical explosions. We then take several approaches to using moment tensors to estimate yield, considering both the full and isotropic moment tensors, doing straight regression analysis on the whole dataset, then successively refining the calibration with additional information about material and overburden. We have also tried a completely new approach of using the seismic moment to help estimate the radiated seismic energy and tying this to yield through a seismic efficiency. Results appear to be promising, but more work might be required to make this more useful in an operational sense.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

DEEPEN: Final 3D PFA Favorability Models and 2D Favorability Maps at Newberry Volcano

Part of the DEEPEN (DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments) project involved developing and testing a methodology for a 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) for multiple play types (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical). This was tested using new and existing geoscientific exploration datasets at Newberry Volcano. This GDR submission includes images, data, and models related to the 3D favorability and uncertainty models and the 2D favorability and uncertainty maps. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology, detailed in the journal article below, is based on the method proposed by Poux & O'brien (2020), which uses the Leapfrog Geothermal software with the Edge extension to conduct PFA in 3D. This method uses all available data to build a 3D geodata model which can be broken down into smaller blocks and analyzed with advanced geostatistical methods. Each data set is imported into a 3D model in Leapfrog and divided into smaller blocks. Conditional queries can then be used to assign each block an index value which conditionally ranks each block's favorability, from 0-5 with 5 being most favorable, for each model (e.g., lithologic, seismic, magnetic, structural). The values between 0-5 assigned to each block are referred to as index values. The final step of the process is to combine all the index models to create a favorability index. This involves multiplying each index model by a given weight and then summing the resulting values. The DEEPEN PFA Methodology follows this approach, but split up by the specific geologic components of each play type. These components are defined as follows for each magmatic play type: 1. Conventional hydrothermal plays in magmatic environments: Heat, fluid, and permeability 2. Superhot EGS plays: Heat, thermal insulation, and producibility (the ability to create and sustain fractures suitable for and EGS reservoir) 3. Supercritical plays: Heat, supercritical fluid, pressure seal, and producibility (the proper permeability and pressure conditions to allow production of supercritical fluid) More information on these components and their development can be found in Kolker et al., (2022). For the purposes of subsurface imaging, it is easier to detect a permeable fluid-filled reservoir than it is to detect separate fluid and permeability components. Therefore, in this analysis, we combine fluid and permeability for conventional hydrothermal plays, and supercritical fluid and producibility for supercritical plays. We also project the 3D favorability volumes onto 2D surfaces for simplified joint interpretation, and we incorporate an uncertainty component. Uncertainty was modeled using the best approach for the dataset in question, for the datasets where we had enough information to do so. Identifying which subsurface parameters are the least resolved can help qualify current PFA results and focus future efforts in data collection. Where possible, the resulting uncertainty models/indices were weighted using the same weights applied to the respective datasets, and summed, following the PFA methodology above, but for uncertainty.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Resolving glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) in response to modern and future ice loss at marine grounding lines in West Antarctica

Accurate glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) modelling in the cryosphere is required for interpreting satellite, geophysical and geological records and for assessing the feedbacks of Earth deformation and sea-level change on marine ice-sheet grounding lines. GIA modelling in areas of active ice loss in West Antarctica is particularly challenging because the ice is underlain by laterally varying mantle viscosities that are up to several orders of magnitude lower than the global average, leading to a faster and more localised response of the solid Earth to ongoing and future ice-sheet retreat and necessitating GIA models that incorporate 3-D viscoelastic Earth structure. Improvements to GIA models allow for computation of the viscoelastic response of the Earth to surface ice loading at sub-kilometre resolution, and ice-sheet models and observational products now provide the inputs to GIA models at comparably unprecedented detail. However, the resolution required to accurately capture GIA in models remains poorly understood, and high-resolution calculations come at heavy computational expense. We adopt a 3-D GIA model with a range of Earth structure models based on recent seismic tomography and geodetic data to perform a comprehensive analysis of the influence of grid resolution on predictions of GIA in the Amundsen Sea Embayment (ASE) in West Antarctica. Through idealised sensitivity testing down to sub-kilometre resolution with spatially isolated ice loading changes, we find that a grid resolution of ~$\frac{1}{3}$ of the radius of the load or higher is required to accurately capture the elastic response of the Earth. However, when we consider more realistic, spatially coherent ice loss scenarios based on modern observational records and future ice-sheet model projections and adopt a viscoelastic Earth, we find that predicted deformation and sea-level change along the grounding line converge to within 5 % with grid resolutions of 7.5 km or higher, and to within 2% for grid resolutions of 3.75 km and higher, even when the input ice model is on a 1 km grid. Furthermore, we show that low mantle viscosities beneath the ASE lead to viscous deformation that contributes to the instrumental record on decadal timescales and equals or dominates over elastic effects by the end of the 21st century. Our findings suggest that for the range of resolutions of 1.9–15 km that we considered, the error due to adopting a coarser grid in this region is negligible compared to the effect of neglecting viscous effects and the uncertainty in the adopted mantle viscosity structure.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Safety Analysis for the Versatile Test Reactor Conceptual Design

Safety analysis simulations have been carried out using the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 safety analysis code system to update the baseline set of results for the Versatile Test Reactor conceptual design. Results from a previous revision of this work provided input for the Conceptual Safety Design Report summarizing the overall safety basis for the VTR. This work will also support future analyses that will be required for Chapter 13, “Accident Analysis,” of a preliminary safety analysis report. A number of transients have been evaluated based on categories of postulated accident sequences suggested for consideration in NUREG-1537. Ultimately, the full spectrum of event initiators and subsequent accident sequences will be defined through a probabilistic risk assessment of the plant design following the implementation of the Licensing Modernization Project guidelines as described in the VTR Safety Design Strategy. Since that process is ongoing, the present analysis addresses several transients that are expected to be bounding accident scenarios that represent the three key ways to perturb a reactor: through changes to the core inlet temperature, mass flow rate, or reactivity. These correspond to a loss of heat sink (LOHS), loss of flow (LOF) or station blackout (SBO), and transient overpower (TOP), respectively. Both Protected and Unprotected versions of these transients have been evaluated, along with additional transients that include transient overpower with one stuck rod, pump coast-down failures, seismic events, and overcooling events. At the current stage of design, transient simulation results for the Versatile Test Reactor indicate that large safety margins exist for many event initiators. However, several “enabling” assumptions have been made, in terms of both design features and design limits, in order to perform the analyses; and these assumptions will need to be revised as the design matures. In addition, a larger spectrum of events needs to be evaluated as part of the on-going probabilistic risk assessment process.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Dynamic Rupture Simulations of the Mw7.2 1992 Landers,California, Earthquake

An important part of the simulation technique implemented in the Recipe is the earthquake rupture characterization based on established empirical scaling relationships between source parameters and seismic moment. The scaling relationships used in the rupture characterization are derived from recorded data and are tested against dynamic and kinematic rupture models of crustal earthquakes. Currently, a revised three-stage source scaling relationship between the source rupture area and seismic moment of inland crustal earthquakes, initially proposed by Irikura and Miyake, is being used. Recent analysis of results obtained with the Recipe for the 2016 M7.1 Kumamoto earthquake performed by several researchers, including the PI, Arben Pitarka, indicate that in order to reproduce the near-fault long-period ground motions and the permanent displacements, observed during surface-rupturing earthquakes, the recipe needs modifications to the kinematic rupture parametrization in the shallow crustal weak zone. In particular, improvements are required in characterizing the slip rate function at shallow depths, above the sesimogenic zone. The main objective of this research project was the development of a dynamic rupture model for the Mw7.2 1992 Landers, California earthquake. The dynamic rupture model was used to derive kinematic rupture parameters, such as slip, slip-rate, rupture time distributions, and slip rate functions in the weak (0-4km) and seismogenic crustal zones. In addition to the knowledge gained from the dynamic rupture modeling of Chi-chi, Ridgecrest, Kumamoto and other crustal earthquakes, studied by the PI, the rupture characterization of the Landers earthquake can be helpful in updating the conventional recipe for broadband ground motion simulations of crustal earthquakes with shallow rupture. The project emphasizes the need for performing physics-based earthquake rupture modeling which ultimately will inform further improvements of rupture characterization. In particular, the modeling of rupture dynamics for recorded earthquakes, and numerical simulations for different rupture scenarios, provides physical constrains on slip evolution in time and space, used in adjustments of empirical source scaling relationships for large crustal earthquakes.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Wellbore integrity assessment with casing-based advanced sensing

Wellbore integrity is of paramount importance to subsurface resource extraction, energy storage 1 and waste disposal. After installation, well casing and cement are subject to mechanical stress due to near-well pressure changes and fluid induced corrosion. This is exacerbated for geothermal wells where produced fluid is at high temperature and corrosive. The current state-of-the-art technologies for wellbore integrity assessments are an array of cased hole logging tools. Wireline deployed acoustic, electromagnetic and mechanical tools are all available to inspect steel casing corrosion and casing-cement bond and these tools can provide high-resolution assessment of borehole conditions. They are intrusive, however, in terms of borehole preparation and interruption to the normal operation of the wells, and not suitable for high temperature or highly deviated well deployments. In addition, these measurements are performed infrequently due to high cost, and are therefore incapable of providing frequent data to better predict borehole degradation trajectory, which can help provide early warning of potential borehole failures. For this project we are developing a suite of novel, non-invasive, casing based tools for wellbore integrity assessment, combining fast/low cost screening with higher-precision investigation. Our approach is based on monitoring the response of the casing when energized at the wellhead, thereby interrogating the casing without well intervention. Lab, field and numerical approaches are used in our study. During the early stage of the research, we focus on numerical simulations, which have shown the sensitivity of the low frequency electromagnetic (EM) signals to changes in borehole depths and have successfully tested the concept at a field site with different length well casings. Initial seismic modeling efforts have also demonstrated our capability to simulate seismic tube wave and seismic field alterations due to borehole breakage and associated fluid leakage. Further numerical, laboratory and field experiments are underway for additional technology sensitivity analysis, particularly the transient EM/Seismic reflectometry methods, data acquisition optimization, and numerical simulation improvements.

Wilt, Michael↗
DOE OSTI2025

CLEAP Project: OR-SAGE Analysis for MT, UT, and CO States

The OR-SAGE tool is designed to use industry-accepted practices in screening sites and then employ the proper array of data sources through the considerable computational capabilities of GIS technology available at ORNL. The tool was developed to screen the potential for NPP siting on a national and regional basis. However, because of the tool granularity, it is often focused specifically on the immediate area around user sites of interest. If data center siting parameters can be added to OR-SAGE, the ability to evaluate data center siting on a localized scale will be beneficial.1 More than 60 data sets have been collected and processed by ORNL to develop exclusionary, avoidance, and suitability criteria for screening sites for a variety of power generation types, including nuclear power plants. Available site evaluation parameters include population density, slope, seismic activity, proximity to cooling-water sources, proximity to hazard facilities, avoidance of protected lands and floodplains, susceptibility to landslide hazards, and many others. All siting parameters should be considered as flags to inform siting decisions and should not be used to rule in or rule out any NPP site. Once data center siting parameters are identified, appropriate data sets will be collected and processed. The OR-SAGE process is very versatile. Essentially, OR-SAGE is a visual, relational database. The database partitions the contiguous United States, a total of 720 million hectares (~1.8 billion acres), into 100-m by 100-m (1 hectare or ~2.5 acre) cells. The database is tracking just under 700 million individual land cells. Successive suitability criterion is applied to each cell in the database. User-specified thresholds can be applied to each siting parameter data layer. In this manner, a variety of scenarios can be quickly and thoroughly evaluated. Data can be added and/or revised within OR-SAGE to address user interests. Siting security assessment capability is currently being added to OR-SAGE. Security is expected to be of concern at data centers whether it is collocated with a nuclear power generating technology or not. If data center is collocated with a nuclear power generating source, the security threat attractiveness level of both will likely increase. It will be of additional benefit if a potential data center site is also assessed for security vulnerability.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗