Enlighten Publications

In this section

Geothermal heat: status quo or deeper and down?

Banks, D. (2023) Geothermal heat: status quo or deeper and down? Geoscientist, 18 Apr.

Text
298274.pdf - Accepted Version
1MB

Publisher's URL: https://geoscientist.online/sections/features/geothermal-heat-status-quo-or-deeper-and-down/

Abstract

Dave Banks explores the economics of shallow versus deeply sourced geothermal heat, showing that the balance between drilling and electricity costs ultimately determines which type of project is favoured.

Item Type:	Articles
Status:	Published
Refereed:	No
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:	Banks, Mr David
Authors:	Banks, D.
Subjects:	Q Science > QE Geology T Technology > TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General)
College/School:	College of Science and Engineering > School of Engineering > Systems Power and Energy
Journal Name:	Geoscientist
Publisher:	Geological Society
ISSN:	0961-5628
ISSN (Online):	2045-1784
Copyright Holders:	Copyright © 2023 The Author
First Published:	First published in Geoscientist 18 April 2023
Publisher Policy:	Reproduced in accordance with the publisher copyright policy

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record

References

Banks, D. (2022) The value of heat and geothermal waters. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology 56, qjegh2022-064; https://doi.org/10.1144/qjegh2022-064 Brook, M. et al. (2003) GESTCO case study 2a-1: storage potential of the Bunter Sandstone in the UK sector of the Southern North Sea and the adjacent onshore area of eastern England. Nottingham, UK, British Geological Survey report CR/03/154N, 44 pp; https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/10704/ Burley, S.D. (1984) Patterns of diagenesis in the Sherwood Sandstone Group (Triassic), United Kingdom. Clay Minerals 19(3), 403 – 440; https://doi.org/10.1180/claymin.1984.019.3.11 Kolo, I. et al. (2023) Repurposing a geothermal exploration well as a deep borehole heat exchanger: understanding long-term effects of lithological layering, flow direction, and circulation flow rate. Sustainability 15, 4140; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054140 Lukawski, M.Z. et al. (2014) Cost analysis of oil, gas, and geothermal well drilling. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 118, 1–14; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2014.03.012. Ogden, J. & Johnson, N. (2010) Techno-economic analysis and modeling of carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS) technologies. Chapter 2 in Maroto-Valer, M.M. (ed.), “Developments and Innovation in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Capture and Storage Technology”, 27-63. Woodhead Publishing; https://doi.org/10.1533/9781845699574.1.27. Raine, R. & Reay, D.M. (2019) A review of the geothermal reservoir properties of Triassic, Permian and Carboniferous sandstones in Northern Ireland. Geological Survey of Northern Ireland, Belfast, Internal report 19/01. 59 pp; https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/527287/ Ramm, M. (1992) Porosity-depth trends in reservoir sandstones: theoretical models related to Jurassic Sandstones offshore Norway. Marine and Petroleum Geology 9(5), 553–567; https://doi.org/10.1016/0264-8172(92)90066-N. Van Wees, J.D. (2021) Eavor loop audit report. TNO report TNO 2019 R11549, updated 21-05-2021. Utrecht, Netherlands; https://www.eavor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2021.05.21_updated_eavor_audit_report.pdf

Deposit and Record Details

ID Code:	298274
Depositing User:	Mr David Banks
Datestamp:	12 May 2023 09:01
Last Modified:	13 May 2023 01:31
Date of acceptance:	6 March 2023
Date of first online publication:	18 April 2023
Date Deposited:	12 May 2023
Data Availability Statement:	No