International Examples ofDeep Geothermal Test Sites

David Bruhn

GFZ - German Research Centrefor Geosciences Potsdam

TU DelftDept. for Geoscience & Engineering

Groß Schönebeck

Hamburg

Hannover

ThüringischesBecken

Ober-rhein

graben

Dresden

Leipzig

Urach

SoultzStuttgart

Frankfurt

Köln

Erding

Straubing

BayerischesMolassebecken

NorddeutschesBecken

Neustadt-Glewe

BerlinGenesys Horstberg

Basel

Speyer

Offenbach

Pullach

Unterhaching

Aachen

Landau

1) North German Basin2) Molasse basin3) Upper Rhine Valley

Geothermal Sites in Germany

source: Bonté, 2014

Geothermal Licenses in NL

Geology of the Central European Basement

Paris

Bruxelles

London

Munich

Praha

Warszawa

Berlin

Hamburg

Kobenhavn

NEGB PTNWGBNEB

DB

North Sea

Baltic

SeaRotliegend

Tornquist zone

VariszicanbeltVariszican Deformation front

Caledonian Deformation front

Caledonides &older massifs

Precambriancrystallinebasement

Alps

Rhenohercynian

Saxothuringian

Moldanubian

Alpi

ne

front

0 100 200 km

EGrSk3/90GtGrSk4/05

(modified after Ziegler 1990, Bertelsen 1992, Brecht 1999)

Structure: North German Basin as part of the South Permian BasinTarget HorizonLower Permian Red Beds(Rotliegend)Depth3700 to 4400 m(Main) exploration period1960-1990 (1970-1985)

Well Path

500 m³ gel(YF140/145) + 4% KCl100 t proppant(HSP 20/40coated/uncoated)Pmax= 380 barQmax = 58 liter/sec.

500 m³ gel(YF140/145) + 4% KCl113 t proppant(HSP 20/40coated/uncoated)Pmax= 495 barQmax = 66 liter/sec

13000 m³ water(pH5)24 t sand

Pmax = 586 barQmax = 150 liter/sec.

Stimulation Details

Microseismicity during Hydraulic Stimulation

Reservoir Stimulation

Distance (m)

Depth (m)

Site Assessment:• 2D Seismic• Two Wells• Lithology• Rock Properties• Fluid Chemistry• Stimulations• Well Tests

Expected:30 a Operation

(numerical models)

(Blöcher et al. 2010)

Productivity Decline with Time

(Blöcher et al., 2016)

0 4000 8000 12000 16000 20000cumulative produced volume [m³]

0

2

4

6

8

10

dyna

mic

pro

duct

ivity

inde

x [m

³/(hM

Pa)

] productivity indexfit

10000100010010

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5Time (a)

produced fluid volume [m³]

2 ½ years

Theory vs. Reality

• Sedimentation/Precipitation in Wellbore• (Electrochemical) Precipitation in Vicinity of Well• Sustainability of Induced Fractures• 2-Phase Flow in Reservoir• Reservoir Compartmentalization

Constraining the Root Cause

Process Identification and Control

(Regenspurg et al., 2015; Blöcher et al., 2016; Reinsch et al. 2015, 2017 )

From Field Scale to Lab Scale

Completing the Picture in 3DSeismic Investigation

8 km

8 km

• Sedimentation/Precipitation in Wellbore• (Electrochemical) Precipitation • Sustainability of Induced Fractures• 2-Phase Flow in Reservoir• Reservoir Compartmentalization

(Stiller et al., 2018)

Innovative Science and TechnologiesReliable Geothermal Energy Provision

Learning from Groß Schönebeck: • Exploration, Drilling, Stimulation and Monitoring Technologies Improved – Work Ongoing• Increased Process Understanding by Extensive Laboratory and Numerical Investigations

Aim: Provide Technological Solutions for Major Bottlenecks Outlook: Third Well as Potential Breakthrough for Geothermal Energy Provision from Deep

Sedimentary BasinsNucleus for Geothermal Research and Technology Transfer

Ongoing Geothermal ProjectsINCO EU-Mexico:

• GEMexNovel Concepts:

• CHPM2030• GeoWell• SURE

EGS:• DeepEGS• DESTRESS

Shallow Geothermal:• GEOTeCH• Cheap-GSHPs• MATChING

FP7:• IMAGE (finished)• Geothermal ERA NET

o GEOTHERMICA

Groß Schönebeck Test Site in 2015

Delft Aardwarmte Project

A Production wellB Heat exchangerC Heating circuitD Injection well

Sub programmes1. Assessment of Geothermal Resources 2. Exploration of Geothermal Reservoirs3. Drilling Geothermal Wells4. Reservoir Engineering5. Plant Process Engineering 6. Operation of Geothermal Systems7. Sustainability, Environment and Regulatory

Framework

Overall goal:

Development of new cost–effective technologies suitable for a sustainable growth of geothermal energy in Europe and worldwide

1 BERGEN Uni Norway2 British Geological Survey UK3 BRGM France4 CNR-IGG Italy5 CRES Greece6 ENEA Italy7 EOST – Uni Strasbourg France8 ETH Zürich Switzerland9 GFZ Potsdam Germany10 Geothermiezentrum Bochum Germany11 IFE Norway12 INGV Italy13 IRIS Norway14 ÍSOR Iceland15 Karlsruhe Institute of Technology Germany16 LIAG Germany17 LNEG Portugal18 LTTT/ZET Germany19 Polish Geological Institute Poland20 Politecnico di Milano Italy21 Politecnico di Torino Italy22 RWTH Aachen Germany23 SINTEF Norway24 Scuola Superiore Sant Anna, Pisa Italy25 TNO Netherlands26 TU Darmstadt Germany27 TU Delft Netherlands28 UFZ Leipzig Germany29 University of Bari Italy30 University of Torino Italy31 University of Trieste/OGS Italy32 University of Utrecht Netherlands33 VITO Belgium

The European EGS test site Soultz-sous-Forêts, France

Objective 2 x 1.5 MW electrical power (1.5 MW capacity currently installed)

Wells 3

Vertical Depth 5.000 m

Temperature > 180°C

Flow Rate 2 x 35 l/s

Reservoir EGS/HDR/petrothermal

Power Plant ORC

Research 1987 to 2005

Construction 2005 to 2008

Status feed-in of up to 1.5 MWe

Soultz: some facts

• 22 years of research, from first site investigation to opeartion and electricityproduction in 2008

• 80 MEuros spent on RTD and installations: 30 M€ EU, 25 M€ France, 25 M€ Germany.

• The initial French-German cooperation was enlarged by adding the UK experience (Camborne School of Mines)

• 15 research institutions and numerous subcontractors involved• More than 40 PhD theses, 1000+ scientific publications• Regional spin-offs in Landau, Insheim, Bruchsal, Rittershoffen, Strasbourg

(currently drilling) …• Now owned and operated by ES Géothermie

What does this mean for UKGEOS?

• Test sites are absolutely vital for energy technology development• For international visibility, connect with networks• Data availability and management

=> Stay European!

Thank you for your attention