Validation of hydrogeochemical databases for problems in deep geothermal energy

被引:0
|
作者
Thorsten Hörbrand
Thomas Baumann
Helge C. Moog
机构
[1] Erdwerk GmbH,Institute of Hydrochemistry
[2] Technical University of Munich,undefined
[3] GRS gGmbH,undefined
来源
关键词
Hydrogeochemical modelling; Thermodynamic database; Geothermal; PHREEQC; ChemApp; HKF;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Hydrogeochemical modelling has become an important tool for the exploration and optimisation of deep hydrogeothermal energy resources. However, well-established software and model concepts are often run outside of its temperature, pressure, and salinity ranges. The core of the model codes are thermodynamic databases which contain a more or less complete subset of mineral phases, dissolved species, and gases occurring in geothermal systems. Although very carefully compiled, they should not be taken for granted at extreme conditions but checked prior to application. This study compares the performance of four commonly used geochemical databases, phreeqc.dat, llnl.dat, pitzer.dat, and slop16.dat. The parameter files phreeqc.dat, pitzer.dat, and llnl.dat are distributed with PHREEQC and implement extended Debye–Hückel and Pitzer equations. Thermodynamic data in slop16.dat represent an implementation of the revised Helgeson–Kirkham–Flowers formalism and were converted to be used with the Gibbs Energy Minimizer ChemApp for this work. Test calculations focussed on the solubility for some of the most common scale-forming mineral phases (barite, celestite, calcite, siderite, and dolomite). The databases provided with PHREEQC performed comparatively well, as long as the range of validity was respected for which the corresponding database was developed. While it is obvious to use pitzer.dat at high salinities instead of phreeqc.dat, the range of validity for high temperature is usually not given in the database and has to be checked manually. The results also revealed outdated equilibrium constants for celestite in slop16.dat and llnl.dat and the lack of adequate temperature functions for the solubility constants of siderite and dolomite in all databases. For those two minerals, new thermodynamic data are available. There is, however, a lack of experimental thermodynamic data for scale-forming minerals in low-enthalpy geothermal settings, which has to be addressed for successful modelling.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Validation of hydrogeochemical databases for problems in deep geothermal energy
    Hoerbrand, Thorsten
    Baumann, Thomas
    Moog, Helge C.
    GEOTHERMAL ENERGY, 2018, 6 (01):
  • [2] Hydrogeochemical modeling of deep formation water applied to geothermal energy production
    Bozau, Elke
    van Berk, Wolfgang
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE FOURTEENTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON WATER-ROCK INTERACTION, WRI 14, 2013, 7 : 97 - 100
  • [3] The sun affects deep geothermal energy
    He, Jifu
    Li, Kewen
    Wen, Dongguang
    Chen, Yang
    Shi, Yanxin
    Wu, Haidong
    Hao, Wenjie
    Jin, Cong
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2025, 245
  • [4] Geothermal Energy's Promise and Problems
    Levitan, Dave
    IEEE SPECTRUM, 2011, 48 (12) : 16 - 16
  • [5] Deep geothermal energy as model for success
    Reinicke, Kurt M.
    Reichetseder, Peter
    Euroheat and Power/Fernwarme International, 2020, 2020 (10): : 14 - 17
  • [6] Deep Geothermal Energy Production in Germany
    Agemar, Thorsten
    Weber, Josef
    Schulz, Ruediger
    ENERGIES, 2014, 7 (07): : 4397 - 4416
  • [7] GEOTHERMAL-ENERGY - PROBLEMS PERSIST
    WALGATE, R
    NATURE, 1983, 301 (5896) : 103 - 103
  • [8] GEOTHERMAL-ENERGY CONCEPT AND PROBLEMS
    BATCHELOR, AS
    INTERDISCIPLINARY SCIENCE REVIEWS, 1978, 3 (01) : 4 - 6
  • [9] Geothermal Energy in China: Status and Problems
    Hu Ke and Yang Deming (Jilin University
    Journal of Geoscientific Research in Northeast Asia, 2000, (01) : 77 - 86
  • [10] Development of deep geothermal energy and its influence on geothermal water flow field: Taking the development of deep geothermal energy in Lankao County for an example
    Song Q.
    Wang G.
    Xu Y.
    Cheng L.
    Meitiandizhi Yu Kantan/Coal Geology and Exploration, 2021, 49 (02): : 184 - 193