Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Geothermal drilling”

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 145 records · Page 8

EGS Collab Experiment 2: Core Photographs and Descriptions

This submission contains photographs of rock core collected from EGS Collab Experiment 2 (and 3) boreholes. Cores were generally photographed in about 1-foot sections using Nikon D3300 DSLR cameras from two angles about 90 degrees apart, wet and dry. Core photos are provided here in .zip files for each well, organized in subfolders by depth interval. Panoramic photographs of the rock cores as well as description and anomaly logs are also available here.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment for Evaluating the Global Warming Potential of Geothermal Energy Production Using Inactive Oil and Gas Wells for District Heating in Tuttle, Oklahoma

Repurposing abandoned oil and gas infrastructure for geothermal energy production has great potential to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This study quantified the life cycle global warming potential of geothermal energy production using four inactive oil and gas wells repurposed for district heating in Tuttle, Oklahoma. A cradle-to-grave prospective life cycle assessment was performed to compare GHG emissions between the geothermal district heating system and conventional natural gas-fired heating system from 2020 to 2050. For initial implementation of the geothermal system, we investigated two approaches: 1) repurposing abandoned infrastructure from a nearby oil and gas well site, and 2) production and injection well drillings including new construction of a central heat exchange station. Environmental impacts from the geothermal system were estimated for five scenarios where a natural gas peaking boiler is incorporated to supply peak heat demand. The prospective results indicated that cumulative reduction in GHG emissions from transitioning to the geothermal district heating system increase over time as a function of future renewable resource penetration and technological advancements within electricity, fuel, and steel production. Over 30 years, the global warming potential associated with the district heating demand will have been reduced by up to 24 % with the repurposed system. These results imply that repurposing existing oil and gas infrastructure for geothermal energy systems of district heating will bring future climate benefits.

abandoned oil and gas wells↗

GEOPHIRES Simulations for Deep Direct Use (DDU) Projects

This folder contains the GEOPHIRES codes and input files for running the base case scenarios for the six deep direct-use (DDU) projects. The six DDU projects took place during 2017-2020 and were funded by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office. They investigated the potential of geothermal deep direct-use at six locations across the country. The projects were conducted by Cornell University, West Virginia University (WVU), University of Illinois (U of IL), Sandia National Laboratory (SNL), Portland State University (PSU), and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Four projects (Cornell, WVU, U of IL, SNL) investigated geothermal for direct heating of a local campus or community, the project by PSU considered seasonal subsurface storage of solar heating, and the NREL project investigated geothermal heating for turbine inlet cooling using absorption chillers. To allow comparison of techno-economic results across the six DDU projects, GEOPHIRES simulations were set up and conducted for each project. The GEOPHIRES code was modified for each project to simulate the local application and incorporate project-specific assumptions and results such as reservoir production temperature or financing conditions. The base case input file is included which simulates the base case conditions assumed by each project team. The levelized cost of heat (LCOH) is calculated and matches the base case LCOH reported by the project teams.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Geothermal Play-Fairway Analysis of Washington State Prospects: Final Report

The Washington State Geothermal Play-Fairway Analysis overcomes the exploration challenges posed by dense vegetation, glacial deposits, and extreme precipitation. The geothermal play-fairways we target are locations where heat, permeability, and saturated porosity are present in sufficient volume to provide adequate heat exchange at depths accessible by modern drilling technology. The three study areas lie along the Cascade Range magmatic arc and are near Mount Baker, Mount St. Helens, and the Wind River Valley. The seven-year project is divided into three phases. In Phase 1 we build on a previous statewide assessment of geothermal resources and develop an initial modeling approach. The results are a series of favorability, uncertainty, and risk maps for three targeted study areas. Based on these initial results, we collect new geologic and geophysical data to further refine our modeling and reduce exploration uncertainty in Phase 2. We improve the modeling method to handle the new data and update the favorability, uncertainty, and risk maps. We also update the conceptual geothermal resource models. In Phase 3 we validate our modeling approach by drilling two temperature-gradient holes and collecting and analyzing core, image logs, and new geochemistry. Our modeling approach improves on an earlier statewide method through a more-rigorous and detailed assessment of heat and permeability. Permeability potential is assessed through geomechanical modeling of the deformation that can generate and maintain reservoir porosity and permeability. Metrics to inform heat potential include temperature-gradient wells, which are sparse in Washington; proximity of Quaternary volcanic vents and young intrusive rock; spring temperature; and reservoir temperature inferred from geothermometry. We weight the individual components using an expert-guided approach known as the Analytical Hierarchy Process. During Phase 2 we also develop a fluid-filled fracture model, and an infrastructure model that helps to delineate areas which are more favorable for geothermal development based on proximity to transmission lines, elevation, land ownership and use restrictions, and availability of process water. New geologic and geophysical data is collected during Phase 2 in each of our three main study areas. At Mount Baker and north of Mount St. Helens we conduct 1:24,000-scale geologic mapping and lidar analysis to better constrain the location and character of surface faults; detailed mapping in the Wind River Valley was completed just prior to the start of this project. Ages of intrusive rocks are determined with 40 Ar/ 39 Ar geochronology, though all of our samples are Miocene or older. We collect ground based gravity observations (a total of 1,580 new stations) in all of our study areas and ground-based magnetic lines (a total of 93 km) at Mount Baker. These data are combined with existing gravity and aeromagnetic data and used to constrain fault locations and geometry. Two to three cross sections are constructed at each study area using the mapped surface geology and forward-modeling of the gravity and magnetic data; these cross sections form the basis for our updated conceptual models. We collect magnetotelluric surveys at Mount Baker and Mount St. Helens and these data are inverted to form a resistivity model from the surface to about 10 km depth; each model shows conductive zones that can be interpreted as upwelling geothermal fluids. At Mount St. Helens we deploy a passive seismic array and use the newly detected events to refine the location of the Saint Helens seismic zone. We also employ ambient-noise tomography to develop a detailed seismic-velocity model for the study area and use this model to help constrain our cross sections and conceptual model. Based on the new data collected during Phase 2—and our updated models—we develop a campaign of temperature-gradient holes and core analysis to validate our modeling in Phase 3. Drill hole MB76-31 is located near Little Park Creek, 11 km west-southwest of the summit of Mount Baker, and is 1,471 ft deep. About 410 ft of core from the lower portion of the hole—and image logs from ~175 ft below ground surface to the bottom—are collected and analyzed. Water samples are collected and processed for geothermometry. Drill hole MSH17-24 is located along upper Schultz Creek, 16 km north-northeast of Mount St. Helens and has core from 470 ft to the bottom at 1,053 ft. We did not collect image logs due to borehole stability concerns, but water samples are collected and analyzed for geothermometry. Repeat temperature-gradient measurements are made at both sites and thermal conductivity is measured from core samples. At MB76-31, the equilibrated temperature gradient of 64°C/km and calculated heat flow of 141–159 mW/m 2 is more than twice the regional average. Detailed mapping and analysis of the core, coupled with correlation to the image logs, indicates a history of permeability generation consistent with our predictions of high permeability. Because the site has high favorability in the Phase 2 model, we consider the results a positive validation of the modeling. At site MSH17-24, the equilibrated temperature gradient of ~15°C/km and calculated heat flow of 41–43 mW/m 2 are similar to regional. Geochemical analysis of the water samples indicates a meteoric source without any geothermal component. Detailed outcrop-based mapping of fault exposures near the drill site and analysis of image logs from nearby boreholes indicates a history of permeability generation consistent with our predictions. Because the site has low favorability in the Phase 2 model, we consider the results a positive validation of the modeling. Together, the two sites provide a reasonably positive validation of the Phase 2 modeling and should encourage future use of this modeling approach.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

A Technology Roadmap for Advanced Geothermal Well Construction

Recent analysis has shown that by 2050, geothermal energy can supply up to 90 GW of power to the U.S. electrical grid. Reducing the lifecycle cost of geothermal wells is critical to achieving this level of adoption. While time-related costs of drilling remain an important issue, there is also a need to focus on the costs associated with casing and cementing of geothermal wells. This report provides a roadmap of R&D activities needed to reduce the life cycle cost of casing and cementing while improving life-of-well performance. The purpose of the roadmap is to develop priorities for R&D in the areas of (1) high-performance and cost-effective materials for target geothermal well conditions, (2) well construction methods and techniques to reduce construction costs, and (3) methods and techniques to decrease to decrease long-term operating costs. The roadmap sets targets for the next 10-year period and purposely excludes R&D efforts into improved rock reduction. The roadmap was developed by a joint working group of experts from Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Brookhaven National Laboratory, and Sandia National Laboratories as well as 35 experts from industry and academia. Input from a series of information gathering sessions was used to inform and guide the development of the roadmap.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Geo Thermal Cloud: Cloud Fusion of Big Data and Multi-Physics Models using Machine Learning for Discovery, Exploration, and Development of Hidden Geothermal Resources

The project is motivated by the challenges, risks, and costs associated with geothermal exploration and production. Many processes and parameters impacting geothermal conditions are poorly understood. Diverse datasets are available to help characterize subsurface geothermal conditions (public and proprietary; satellite, airborne surveys, vegetation/water sampling, geological, geophysical, etc.). Yet, it is not clear how to properly leverage these datasets for geothermal exploration due to an incomplete understanding of how physical processes impacting subsurface geothermal conditions are represented in these observations. Recent advancements in machine learning (ML) provide great promise to resolve these issues. The tremendous challenges and risks of geothermal exploration and production bring the demand for novel ML methods and tools that can (1) analyze large field datasets, (2) assimilate model simulations (large inputs and outputs), (3) process sparse datasets, (4) perform transfer learning (between sites with different exploratory levels), (5) extract hidden geothermal signatures in the field and simulation data, (6) label geothermal resources and processes, (7) identify high-value data acquisition targets, and (8) guide geothermal exploration and production by selecting optimal exploration, production, and drilling strategies. Our goals and work under Phases 1 and 2 (as proposed) of this project address all these needs.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utah FORGE: Well 56-32 Drilling Data and Logs

This dataset consists of drilling data (Pason data spreadsheets, daily reports, days v. depth, mud logs), Schlumberger logs (FMI, shear anisotropy analysis, memory, sonic, array induction/spectral density/dual spaced neutron/gamma ray/caliper, spectral GR/temperature, and Gardner density correlation), and an end of well report (EOWR) for Utah FORGE well 56-32. This is a vertical well that will be used for seismic monitoring. It was drilled between February 7th and February 21st 2021 to a depth of 9,145 feet. More information about this well can be found at: https://utahforge.com/2021/02/09/drilling-progress-of-well-56-32/ (linked below)

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utah FORGE: Well 16A(78)-32 Core Analysis Results

This dataset features petrographic, X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), and Scanning Electron Microscopy Analyses of core samples from well 16A(78)-32, which serves as the injection well for the Utah FORGE Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) project. In addition to an overview of the analysis, the following items have been included here: images of 21 entire thin sections in plane-polarized and cross-polarized light from 16 depths, scanning electron microscope back scatter electron photomosaic maps of 21 thin sections from 16 depths, bulk XRD data from 16 depths, clay-sized XRD patterns from 16 depths, an optical petrography report, and scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy analyses of eight selected samples.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utah FORGE: Discrete Fracture Network (DFN) Data

The FORGE team is making these fracture models available to researchers wanting a set of natural fractures in the FORGE reservoir for use in their own modeling work. They have been used to predict stimulation distances during hydraulic stimulation at the open toe section of well 16A(78)-32. These fracture sets are fully stochastic and do not contain the deterministic set that matches the pilot well 58-32 FMI data. Well 58-32 has been completed and 16A(78)-32 is to be drilled as part of Phase 3. The original .fab files are not included due to redundancy. The *.fabgz data for the 800m and 1200m depth areas are in the native FracMan format and have been compressed using Gzip. Filtered data for the 800m depth area includes .csv spreadsheets, native FracMan (.fab), and GOCAD (.ts) files that are in a compressed zip format. The file titled "SGW 2020 Finnila and Podgorney DFN fracture files on GDR.pdf" is a description of the data and should be reviewed prior to data use.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Ground-Truthing: Exploratory Borehole Characterization and Modeling to Verify and Expand Techno-Economic Evaluation of Earth Source Heat at Cornell U

This report documents the successful completion of DOE award DE-EE0009255: Ground- Truthing: Exploratory Borehole Characterization and Modeling to Verify and Expand Techno- Economic Evaluation of Earth Source Heat at Cornell University . Cornell University is evaluating the technical and economic feasibility of using deep direct-use (DDU) geothermal energy, referred to locally as Earth Source Heat (ESH), to serve as a renewable energy source for campus heating. To meet this objective, Cornell drilled an approximately 3-kilometer-deep exploratory borehole: the Cornell University Borehole Observatory (CUBO), or ESH-1. The team conducted an extensive suite of geophysical, hydrologic, thermal, mechanical, and geochemical measurements to evaluate subsurface conditions and geothermal development potential. This report summarizes the well drilling and testing tasks, findings, and conclusions.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Analysis of Rig Parameter Data Using Drilling Process Modeling Constraints, Volume 5: Utah FORGE Well 16B(78)-32

Drill rig parameter measurements are routinely used during deep well construction to monitor and guide drilling conditions for improved performance and reduced costs. While insightful into the drilling process, these measurements are of reduced value without a standard to aid in data evaluation and decision making. In the main body of this work (Volume 1), a method is demonstrated whereby rock reduction model constraints are used to interpret drilling response parameters; the method could be applied in real-time to improve decision-making in the field and to further discern technology performance during post-drilling evaluations. Drilling parameters are evaluated using laboratory-validated rock reduction models for predicting the phenomenological response of drag bits (Detournay and Defourny, 1992) in computational algorithms. The method presented has applicability to development of advanced analytics on future geothermal wells using real-time electronic data recording for improved performance and reduced drilling costs. A drilling cost model is also used to show the tradeoff between rate of penetration and bit life and the influence on interval drilling costs. Details of the bit specifications and performance are cataloged in an independent volume, documented under separate cover, for each of the four wells, and include Volume 2: Utah FORGE 16A(78)-32; Volume 3: Utah FORGE 56-32; Volume 4: Utah FORGE 78B-32 and Volume 5: Utah FORGE 16B(78)-32.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Analysis of Rig Parameter Data Using Drilling Process Modeling Constraints, Volume 4: Utah FORGE Well 78B-32

Drill rig parameter measurements are routinely used during deep well construction to monitor and guide drilling conditions for improved performance and reduced costs. While insightful into the drilling process, these measurements are of reduced value without a standard to aid in data evaluation and decision making. In the main body of this work (Volume 1), a method is demonstrated whereby rock reduction model constraints are used to interpret drilling response parameters; the method could be applied in real-time to improve decision-making in the field and to further discern technology performance during post-drilling evaluations. Drilling parameters are evaluated using laboratory-validated rock reduction models for predicting the phenomenological response of drag bits (Detournay and Defourny, 1992) in computational algorithms. The method presented has applicability to development of advanced analytics on future geothermal wells using real-time electronic data recording for improved performance and reduced drilling costs. A drilling cost model is also used to show the tradeoff between rate of penetration and bit life and the influence on interval drilling costs. Details of the bit specifications and performance are cataloged in an independent volume, documented under separate cover, for each of the four wells, and include Volume 2: Utah FORGE 16A(78)-32; Volume 3: Utah FORGE 56-32; Volume 4: Utah FORGE 78B-32 and Volume 5: Utah FORGE 16B(78)-32.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Analysis of Rig Parameter Data Using Drilling Process Modeling Constraints, Volume 3: Utah FORGE Well 56-32

Drill rig parameter measurements are routinely used during deep well construction to monitor and guide drilling conditions for improved performance and reduced costs. While insightful into the drilling process, these measurements are of reduced value without a standard to aid in data evaluation and decision making. In the main body of this work (Volume 1), a method is demonstrated whereby rock reduction model constraints are used to interpret drilling response parameters; the method could be applied in real-time to improve decision-making in the field and to further discern technology performance during post-drilling evaluations. Drilling parameters are evaluated using laboratory-validated rock reduction models for predicting the phenomenological response of drag bits (Detournay and Defourny, 1992) in computational algorithms. The method presented has applicability to development of advanced analytics on future geothermal wells using real-time electronic data recording for improved performance and reduced drilling costs. A drilling cost model is also used to show the tradeoff between rate of penetration and bit life and the influence on interval drilling costs. Details of the bit specifications and performance are cataloged in an independent volume, documented under separate cover, for each of the four wells, and include Volume 2: Utah FORGE 16A(78)-32; Volume 3: Utah FORGE 56-32; Volume 4: Utah FORGE 78B-32 and Volume 5: Utah FORGE 16B(78)-32.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Analysis of Rig Parameter Data Using Drilling Process Modeling Constraints, Volume 1: Summary of Utah FORGE Wells 16A(78)-32, 56-32, 78B-32 and 16B(78)-32

Drill rig parameter measurements are routinely used during deep well construction to monitor and guide drilling conditions for improved performance and reduced costs. While insightful into the drilling process, these measurements are of reduced value without a standard to aid in data evaluation and decision making. In the main body of this work (Volume 1), a method is demonstrated whereby rock reduction model constraints are used to interpret drilling response parameters; the method could be applied in real-time to improve decision-making in the field and to further discern technology performance during post-drilling evaluations. Drilling parameters are evaluated using laboratory-validated rock reduction models for predicting the phenomenological response of drag bits (Detournay and Defourny, 1992) in computational algorithms. The method presented has applicability to development of advanced analytics on future geothermal wells using real-time electronic data recording for improved performance and reduced drilling costs. A drilling cost model is also used to show the tradeoff between rate of penetration and bit life and the influence on interval drilling costs. Details of the bit specifications and performance are cataloged in an independent volume, documented under separate cover, for each of the four wells, and include Volume 2: Utah FORGE 16A(78)-32; Volume 3: Utah FORGE 56-32; Volume 4: Utah FORGE 78B-32 and Volume 5: Utah FORGE 16B(78)-32.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utah FORGE: Optimization of a Plug-and-Perf Stimulation (Fervo Energy)

Information around the plug-and-perf treatment design at Utah FORGE by Fervo Energy. Objective and Purpose: - Develop a multistage hydraulic stimulation approach designed specifically to target the top three factors that control the technical and commercial viability of an EGS system: i) Achieving sufficient injectivity to support high cross-well flow rates ii) Distributing flow evenly across the wellbore and reservoir to maximize heat mining efficiency, ensure sustained heat transfer, and mitigate thermal breakthrough iii) Overcoming the effects of stress heterogeneity, stress shadowing, and variations in natural fracture properties during the stimulation treatment, leading to a more predictable stimulated reservoir volume and offset well placement - The following activities will be performed: i) Design, plan, and execute a multistage plug-and-perf stimulation treatment at a Fervo site with data acquisition and well testing activities aimed at addressing key technical aspects of the issues above ii) Perform data processing and interpretation of field results to translate the results form the Fervo site to a site-specific design at the Utah FORGE site iii) Design, plan, and execute a multistage plug-and-perf stimulation treatment design at the Utah FORGE site Methods and Approach: - Design a detailed data acquisition plan to maximize learning around: i) DFIT testing ii) Petrophysical logging, image logging iii) Permanent DAS/DTS fiber optic monitoring iv) Deep borehole microseismic monitoring v) Shallow borehole induced seismicity monitoring vi) Injection/production testing (RTA analysis, tracer testing) vii) Integrated numerical modeling and production forecasting

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

GeoThermalCloud: Cloud Fusion of Big Data and Multi-Physics Models using Machine Learning for Discovery, Exploration, and Development of Hidden Geothermal Resources

The primary goals of this project are identifying hidden geothermal resources in the USA and designing profitable enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). Many non-obvious processes and parameters could characterize geothermal resources and could control the ultimate energy potential of geothermal fields. Diverse datasets (e.g., geology, geochemistry, geophysics, satellite, airborne geophysics) are available to help characterize geothermal resources, but this data is sparse and multi-scale that has hindered attempts to leverage the datasets for geothermal exploration and profitable EGS design. Recent advancements in machine learning (ML) give promise to overcome these issues. Modern ML methods and tools can (1) analyze large datasets, (2) assimilate model ensembles that include a multitude of inputs and outputs, (3) process sparse datasets, (4) perform transfer learning between sites with different data quality, (5) extract hidden geothermal signatures from field and simulation data, (6) label geothermal resources and processes, (7) identify highvalue data acquisition targets, and (8) guide geothermal exploration and production by selecting optimal exploration, production, and drilling strategies.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

Utah FORGE: Well 16A(78)-32 Drilling Data

This dataset includes survey data, drilling data, daily reports, summaries of daily operations, and rig photos from the drilling of Utah FORGE well 16A(78)-32, which is a highly deviated deep well. It was completed 60 days ahead of schedule. Rig move in began 10/22/2020 and drilling commenced on 10/30/2020, and total depth was reached on 12/18/2020. Drilling was followed by a diagnostic fracture injection test (DFIT), logging, and circulating casing. The rig was released on 1/12/2021. The upper part of the well was drilled vertically through approximately 4,700 feet of sediments before penetrating into high strength, crystalline granite. The well was deviated at a 65 degree angle from vertical after reaching a depth of 6,000 ft. This angle was maintained for the remainder of the well's trajectory. The well ultimately reached a true vertical depth of 8,559 feet, and a total measured depth of 10,987 feet. Preliminary measurements indicate temperatures at the "toe" of the well will exceed 442 degrees F (228 degrees C). Approximately 74 ft of core of the granitic and metamorphic rocks that will form the FORGE reservoir was also recovered.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

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↗