IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i3p967-d736816.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling Subsurface Performance of a Geothermal Reservoir Using Machine Learning

Author

Listed:
  • Dmitry Duplyakin

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO 80401, USA)

  • Koenraad F. Beckers

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO 80401, USA)

  • Drew L. Siler

    (U.S. Geological Survey, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA)

  • Michael J. Martin

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO 80401, USA)

  • Henry E. Johnston

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO 80401, USA)

Abstract

Geothermal power plants typically show decreasing heat and power production rates over time. Mitigation strategies include optimizing the management of existing wells—increasing or decreasing the fluid flow rates across the wells—and drilling new wells at appropriate locations. The latter is expensive, time-consuming, and subject to many engineering constraints, but the former is a viable mechanism for periodic adjustment of the available fluid allocations. In this study, we describe a new approach combining reservoir modeling and machine learning to produce models that enable such a strategy. Our computational approach allows us, first, to translate sets of potential flow rates for the active wells into reservoir-wide estimates of produced energy, and second, to find optimal flow allocations among the studied sets. In our computational experiments, we utilize collections of simulations for a specific reservoir (which capture subsurface characterization and realize history matching) along with machine learning models that predict temperature and pressure timeseries for production wells. We evaluate this approach using an “open-source” reservoir we have constructed that captures many of the characteristics of Brady Hot Springs, a commercially operational geothermal field in Nevada, USA. Selected results from a reservoir model of Brady Hot Springs itself are presented to show successful application to an existing system. In both cases, energy predictions prove to be highly accurate: all observed prediction errors do not exceed 3.68% for temperatures and 4.75% for pressures. In a cumulative energy estimation, we observe prediction errors that are less than 4.04%. A typical reservoir simulation for Brady Hot Springs completes in approximately 4 h, whereas our machine learning models yield accurate 20-year predictions for temperatures, pressures, and produced energy in 0.9 s. This paper aims to demonstrate how the models and techniques from our study can be applied to achieve rapid exploration of controlled parameters and optimization of other geothermal reservoirs.

Suggested Citation

  • Dmitry Duplyakin & Koenraad F. Beckers & Drew L. Siler & Michael J. Martin & Henry E. Johnston, 2022. "Modeling Subsurface Performance of a Geothermal Reservoir Using Machine Learning," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:3:p:967-:d:736816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/3/967/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/3/967/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pan, Shu-Yuan & Gao, Mengyao & Shah, Kinjal J. & Zheng, Jianming & Pei, Si-Lu & Chiang, Pen-Chi, 2019. "Establishment of enhanced geothermal energy utilization plans: Barriers and strategies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 19-32.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seyed Poorya Mirfallah Lialestani & David Parcerisa & Mahjoub Himi & Abbas Abbaszadeh Shahri, 2022. "Generating 3D Geothermal Maps in Catalonia, Spain Using a Hybrid Adaptive Multitask Deep Learning Procedure," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-16, June.
    2. Hubert Szczepaniuk & Edyta Karolina Szczepaniuk, 2022. "Applications of Artificial Intelligence Algorithms in the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-24, December.
    3. Chen, Kecheng & Sun, Xiang & Soga, Kenichi & Nico, Peter S. & Dobson, Patrick F., 2024. "Machine-learning-assisted long-term G functions for bidirectional aquifer thermal energy storage system operation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    4. Moraga, J. & Duzgun, H.S. & Cavur, M. & Soydan, H., 2022. "The Geothermal Artificial Intelligence for geothermal exploration," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 134-149.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kwon, Dohee & Kim, Youngju & Choi, Dongho & Jung, Sungyup & Tsang, Yiu Fai & Kwon, Eilhann E., 2024. "Enhanced thermochemical valorization of coconut husk through carbon dioxide integration: A sustainable approach to agricultural residue utilization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 369(C).
    2. Esteves, Ana Filipa & Santos, Francisca Maria & Magalhães Pires, José Carlos, 2019. "Carbon dioxide as geothermal working fluid: An overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Xia, Z.H. & Jia, G.S. & Ma, Z.D. & Wang, J.W. & Zhang, Y.P. & Jin, L.W., 2021. "Analysis of economy, thermal efficiency and environmental impact of geothermal heating system based on life cycle assessments," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    4. Pokhrel, Sajjan & Sasmito, Agus P. & Sainoki, Atsushi & Tosha, Toshiyuki & Tanaka, Tatsuya & Nagai, Chiaki & Ghoreishi-Madiseh, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Field-scale experimental and numerical analysis of a downhole coaxial heat exchanger for geothermal energy production," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 521-535.
    5. Anderson, Austin & Rezaie, Behnaz, 2019. "Geothermal technology: Trends and potential role in a sustainable future," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 18-34.
    6. Soltani, M. & Moradi Kashkooli, Farshad & Souri, Mohammad & Rafiei, Behnam & Jabarifar, Mohammad & Gharali, Kobra & Nathwani, Jatin S., 2021. "Environmental, economic, and social impacts of geothermal energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    7. Rui Cui & Bo Feng & Xiaofei Duan & Jichu Zhao & Yabin Yang & Shoutao Feng & Yilong Yuan, 2024. "Analytical Study of Permeability Properties of Loose Sandstone Based on Thermal-Hydraulic-Mechanical (THM) Coupling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-19, January.
    8. Ma, Yuanyuan & Li, Shibin & Zhang, Ligang & Liu, Songze & Liu, Zhaoyi & Li, Hao & Shi, Erxiu, 2020. "Study on the effect of well layout schemes and fracture parameters on the heat extraction performance of enhanced geothermal system in fractured reservoir," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    9. Ma, Weiwu & Wang, Yadan & Wu, Xiaotian & Liu, Gang, 2020. "Hot dry rock (HDR) hydraulic fracturing propagation and impact factors assessment via sensitivity indicator," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 2716-2723.
    10. R.V., Rohit & R., Vipin Raj & Kiplangat, Dennis C. & R., Veena & Jose, Rajan & Pradeepkumar, A.P. & Kumar, K. Satheesh, 2023. "Tracing the evolution and charting the future of geothermal energy research and development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Qiao, Mingzheng & Jing, Zefeng & Feng, Chenchen & Li, Minghui & Chen, Cheng & Zou, Xupeng & Zhou, Yujuan, 2024. "Review on heat extraction systems of hot dry rock: Classifications, benefits, limitations, research status and future prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    12. Schifflechner, Christopher & Dawo, Fabian & Eyerer, Sebastian & Wieland, Christoph & Spliethoff, Hartmut, 2020. "Thermodynamic comparison of direct supercritical CO2 and indirect brine-ORC concepts for geothermal combined heat and power generation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 1292-1302.
    13. Chen, Heng & Wang, Yihan & Li, Jiarui & Xu, Gang & Lei, Jing & Liu, Tong, 2022. "Thermodynamic analysis and economic assessment of an improved geothermal power system integrated with a biomass-fired cogeneration plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    14. Shu, Biao & Zhu, Runjun & Elsworth, Derek & Dick, Jeffrey & Liu, Shun & Tan, Jingqiang & Zhang, Shaohe, 2020. "Effect of temperature and confining pressure on the evolution of hydraulic and heat transfer properties of geothermal fracture in granite," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    15. Mott, A. & Baba, A. & Hadi Mosleh, M. & Ökten, H.E. & Babaei, M. & Gören, A.Y. & Feng, C. & Recepoğlu, Y.K. & Uzelli, T. & Uytun, H. & Morata, D. & Yüksel, A. & Sedighi, M., 2022. "Boron in geothermal energy: Sources, environmental impacts, and management in geothermal fluid," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    16. Ma, Yuanyuan & Li, Shibin & Zhang, Ligang & Liu, Songze & Liu, Zhaoyi & Li, Hao & Shi, Erxiu & Zhang, Haijun, 2020. "Numerical simulation study on the heat extraction performance of multi-well injection enhanced geothermal system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 782-795.
    17. Sigurjónsson, Hafþór Ægir & Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Bogason, Sigurður G., 2021. "A life-cycle analysis of deep enhanced geothermal systems – The case studies of Reykjanes, Iceland and Vendenheim, France," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1076-1086.
    18. Shu, Biao & Chen, Junjie & Xue, Hui, 2024. "Experimental study of the change of pore structure and strength of granite after fluid-rock interaction in CO2-EGS," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    19. Wang, Yijiang & Jiang, Jinyi & Darkwa, Jo & Xu, Zeyuan & Zheng, Xiaofeng & Zhou, Guoqing, 2020. "Experimental study of thermal fracturing of Hot Dry Rock irradiated by moving laser beam: Temperature, efficiency and porosity," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 803-816.
    20. Mahmoud G. Hemeida & Ashraf M. Hemeida & Tomonobu Senjyu & Dina Osheba, 2022. "Renewable Energy Resources Technologies and Life Cycle Assessment: Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-36, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:3:p:967-:d:736816. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.