Post on 02-Jun-2018
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 1/164
SAND87
-
0 18
Un l im ited Re leas e
UC-66
Impact of R & D on Cost
of
Geothermal Power
Documentation of Model Version
2.09
Susan Petty
The Mesquite Group
PO Box 1283
136 W. Whiting Ave
Fullerton, CA 92632
Dan Entingh
Meridian Corporation
4300 King St, Suite 400
Falls Church,
VA
22302
B.
J. Livesay
Livesay Consultants
2616 Angel1 Ave
San Diego, CA 92122
Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87 185
and Livermore, California 94550 for the United States Department
of
Energy
under Contract DE-AC04-76DP00789
Pr in ted Feb rua ry 1988
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 2/164
I
+
Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States
Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation.
NOTICE Thi s report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an
agency of the United Sta tes Government. Neither the United Sta tes Govern-
ment nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any
of
their
contractors, subcontractors,
or
their employees, makes any warranty, express
or implied, or assumes any legal liability
or
responsibility for the accuracy,
completeness, or usefulness of any information, ap paratus , product, or pro-
cess disclosed, or represents t hat
its
use would not infringe privately owned
rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or
service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer,
or
otherwise, does not
necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring
by the United States Government, any agency thereof or any of their
contractors
or
subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do
not necessarily state
or
reflect those
of
the United States Government, any
agency thereof
or
any of their contractors
or
subcontractors.
Printed in the United States of America
Available from
National Technical Information Service
U.S. Departm ent of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
NTIS price codes
Printed copy: A03
Microfiche copy : A01
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 3/164
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by anagency of the United States Government. Neither the United StatesGovernment nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees,makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legalliability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, orusefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or processdisclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privatelyowned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, orotherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or anyagency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed hereindo not necessarily state or reflect those of the United StatesGovernment or any agency thereof.
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 4/164
DISCLAIMER
Portions of this document may be illegible inelectronic image products. Images are producedfrom the best available original document.
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 5/164
D
S
C
M
E
t
L
o
\
T
s
e
w
a
p
e
e
a
a
a
o
w
o
k
s
p
o
e
b
a
a
o
h
U
n
e
S
a
e
G
o
n
m
e
N
e
h
h
U
n
e
S
a
e
G
o
n
m
e
n
a
a
h
e
n
a
o
h
e
m
p
o
m
a
a
w
a
a
y
e
e
r
m
p
e
r
a
u
m
e
a
e
a
y
o
e
p
b
y
o
h
a
a
c
m
p
e
e
o
u
u
n
o
a
n
o
m
a
o
a
a
u
p
o
r
p
o
d
s
o
o
e
e
s
h
s
u
w
o
d
n
n
n
p
v
e
y
o
w
n
g
s
R
e
e
e
h
e
n
o
a
s
p
c
c
m
m
e
c
a
p
o
p
o
o
s
v
c
b
a
n
m
e
a
m
a
k
m
a
a
u
e
r
o
h
w
i
s
d
n
n
y
c
u
e
o
m
p
y
s
e
m
e
e
m
-
m
e
o
o
a
n
b
h
U
n
e
S
a
e
G
o
n
m
e
r
a
a
h
e
T
v
e
w
s
a
o
n
o
o
a
h
e
e
h
e
n
d
n
n
y
s
a
e
r
r
e
e
h
o
h
U
n
e
S
a
e
G
o
n
m
e
r
a
a
h
e
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 6/164
ABSTRACT
IM-GEO is an analysis used t o estimate th e impact of techno-
logy improvements on the relative cost of hydrothermal power.
Th e analysis is available in a tutorial program for use on
personal computers. It is designed for use by R & D program
managers to evaluate R & D options. Only th e potential impact of
technologie s is considered with all economic factors being held
constant. This analysis has one unique feature. The economic
impact of reducing risk by improving reservoir characteri zation
is included using a strategy currently employed by financial
institutions.
This report describes th e basis of the calculations,
documents the code, and describes t h e operational procedures.
Application of the
code
to
s t u d y
potential cost reductions due to
R &
D
success will be don e by R
& D
managers to evalu ate and
direct their own programs.
ii
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 7/164
I MPACT
OF R
&
D
ON GEOTHERMAL POWER
OUTLI NE
Page
1
. 0
EXECUTI VE SUMMARY
1. 1 Pur pose and Scope
1 2
Gener al Capabi l i t i es
of
Model
1 3 Power
Pl ant Per f ormance and Cost s
1
2
3
2 0 PURPOSE, BACKGROUND, AND SCOPE
3
2. 1 Pur pose
2 2
Scope
-,
8
. 0
THE GEOTHERMAL TECHNCl LOGY BASELI NE
3 1
Maj or
Cost I t ems and t hei r I nt er act i ons
3 2 Reservoi r Basel i ne Dat a
10
3 2 1
Regi ons Sel ected
3 2 2
Ener gy
3 2 3 Temperat ure
3 2 4
Chem st r y
3 2 5
Dept h
3 2 6
Fl ow r at e
10
11
1 1
12
13
13
3 . 3 Reser voi r I dent i f i cat i on
14
3.3.1 I ndust r y Pr act i ce vs.
3 3 2
Expl or at i on St r at egy
3 3 3
Cost i ng Al gor i t hm
Cur r ent Technol ogy
Assumed fo r t hi s Model
14
15
16
3 4
Reser voi r Conf i r mat i on
17
3 4 1 I ndust r y pr acti ce vs .
3 4 2 Conf i r mat i on St r at egy
Cur r ent Technol ogy
Assumed f or t hi s Model
17
17
19
. 5
Reser voi r Management
3 5 1
Reser voi r Pressur e Decl i ne
3 5 2
Wel l Wor kover
3 5 3
Pumps and Pumpi ng Cost
19
2
2
21
6 Dr i l l i ng and Compl et i on
3.6.1
Cur r ent pract i ce v s .
3 6 2 Wel l Base Cost
Cur r ent Technol ogy
-
Geother mal
v s .
Oi l
&
Gas
21
23
i i i
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 8/164
3 6 2 1
I ni t i at i on
3 6 2 2
I nt erval
1
t hr ough
N
3 6 2 3
Compl et i on
Page
25
25
27
3 6 3
Add- on Cost s
27
3 6 3 1
Lost Ci r cul at i on
3 6 3 2 Dept h Ri sk
3 6 3 3 Cement i ng Probl emE
3 6 3 4
Ot her Probl ems
27
27
21
28
3 7 Power Pl ant Sel ect i on and Desi gn Pract i ce
29
3 7 1 Power Pl ant Excl usi ve of Br i ne
St abi l i zat i on and Envi r onment al Cont r ol s
29
3 7 2
Fi el d Pi pi ng Cost
29
3 7 3 Br i ne St abi l i zat i on and
Envi r onment al Cont r ol s
30
3 8
Econom c Anal ysi s
30
4. 0 HOW THE MODEL WORKS 31
4 1
Dat a el ement s
31
4. 2 General Fl ow
of
Comput at i on, One Proj ect
32
4 3 A
Few General Mat t ers
35
4 3 1 Power - On- Li ne ( POL) Temporal
4 3 2
Wei ght s f or Cost
of
Power Tot al s
4 3 3 Non- Li near i t i es i n Resul t s
4 3 4
Mer gi ng Mul t i pl e Set s
of R
&
D
4 3 5
Er r or Messages
Rel a t i onshi ps
Achi evement s
35
35
36
37
37
5 0
EXAMPLES
OF
ANALYSES
38
5. 1 I mprovement s i n
Wel l s
5. 2
I mprovement s i n Down Hol e Pumps
5 3 I mpr ovement s i n Reservoi r
Identification/Engineering
5 4
I mpr ovement s i n Power Pl ant s
5 5 Above Four Achi evements Combi ned
5 6
Combi ned Achi evement s, at Lower Level s
39
40
41
42
43
44
6.0
RECOMMENDATI ONS
45
6. 1
Resour ce Avai l abi l i t y
6. 2
Ext end Level
of
Det ai l
6 3
Ext end Model
t o
I ncl ude
6 4 Case St udi es
Non- Hydr ot her mal Resour ces
45
45
46 .'
47
i v
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 9/164
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
APPENDICES
TECHNOLOGY BASELINES
MODEL GENERAL OPTIONS AND MENUS
DETAILS OF MODEL REPORTING OPTIONS
IM-GEO DATA FILES
MODEL INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURE
LISTING OF MODEL CODE
PROGRAMMER NOTES
PREVIOUS STUDIES
V
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 10/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 11/164
I MPACT OF R &
D
COST OF GEOTHERMAL
POWER
1. 0
Execut i ve Summar y
A menu dr i ven pr ogr am f or
IBM- P C
compat i bl e mcr ocomput ers
has been devel oped f or use by progr am managers as one t ool t C J
- eval uat e t he i mpact of var i ous t echnol ogy devel opment s on t he
I
cost of hydr ot her mal power . Thi s pr ogr am consi der s t he i mpact
of
gener al ar eas
of
t echnol ogy i mpr ovement . Al l economc var i abl es
ar e f i xed si nce onl y t echnol ogy i ssues ar e consi der ed.
Hydr ot her mal r esour ces ar e di vi ded i nt o geol ogi c r egi ons
because t he geol ogy det erm nes t he cost s i n many
of
t he ar eas of
possi bl e t echnol ogy i mpr ovement . These r egi ons ar e consi st ent
wi t h t he USGS def i ned r esour ce ar eas. I ndi vi dual hydr ot her mal
r esour ces wer e t hen consi der ed wi t hi n t hese r egi ons on t he basi s
of t he possi bi l i t y of near
term
( wi t hi n t en year s) econom c
devel opment . Thus onl y moderate t o hi gh t emperature r esour ces
wer e i ncl uded i n t hi s st udy.
Possi bl e ar eas
of
t echnol ogy i mprovement wer e r el ated t o GTD
pr ogr ams. The i mpact of t he f ol l owi ng pr ogr am ar eas was
consi der ed:
Reser voi r Engi neer i ng ( Reser voi r I dent i f i cat i on,
Reser voi r Conf i r mat i on, Reser voi r Management
i n model . )
Har d Rock Penet r at i on ( Dr i l l i ng i n model )
Conver si on Technol ogy ( P o w e r Pl ant i n model )
Each GTD progr amel ement
or
pr oj ect can be eval uat ed usi ng
t hi s pr ogr am f or pot ent i al i mpact on t he rel at i ve cost of
geot her mal power.
A uni que f eat ur e of t hi s model i s t he i ncl usi on of r eser voi r
r i sk i n t he anal ysi s as a quant i f i abl e
c o s t
el ement . Previ ous
st udi es have had di f f i cul t y eval uat i ng t he i mpact of t echnol ogy
i mpr ovement s i n t he ar ea of r esour ce def i ni t i on, descr i pt i on and
l ong t er m behavi or pr edi ct i on. I t i s cl ear that such acti vi t i es
as wel l t est i ng, numer i cal si mul at i on and geochem cal model i ng
shoul d have an i mpact on t he rel at i ve
cost
of power . I mpr ovi ng
our under st andi ng of geother mal syst ems shoul d i n t he l ong r un
l ower devel opment cost s. However , t hi s has been di f f i cul t t o
quant i f y i n
a
si mpl e, easy t o eval uat e way. Thi s pr ogr am cal cu-
l at es t he cost of
a
devel opment usi ng best and worst case
est i mat es
for
r el evant physi cal f act or s. The di f f er ence bet ween
t hese cost s i s consi der ed t he cost of t he r i sk associ at ed
w i t h
t he pr oj ect . Technol ogy i mpr ovement s whi ch r educe t he di f f erence
bet ween t he best and wor st cases r educe t he r i sk and thus r educe
t he r el at i ve cost of power .
-
v
1. 1
Scope of Wor k
Thi s r epor t and t he model i ncl ude t he f ol l owi ng:
1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 12/164
a) Descri pt i on
of
t he model and document at i on
of
i t s gen-
er al st r at egy and al gor i t hms.
b) Document at i on of t he basel i ne cost est i mat es used on t he
model . These ar e f or el ect r i ci t y pr oduct i on
syst ems.
at a number
of pr om si ng hydr ot her mal r egi ons i n the
U. S.
c)
Descri pt i ons
of
many aspect s of cur r ent
U. S.
geot hermal
devel opment pr act i ce, and expl anat i ons of how t hese ar e account ed
f or i n t he model .
d) Exampl es of how a f eu hypot het i cal R & D achi evement s
coul d be ent ered
as
dat a t o t he model t o est i mat e t he i mpact s
of
t hose achi evement s on t he cost of geot hermal power .
The model and r epor t do not pr ovi de est i mates of :
a) The degree t o whi ch t he model ed geot her mal energy
pr oduct i on and conver si on subsyst ems appear t o be suscept i bl e t o
i mprovement t hrough cont i nued
R
& D.
b) The si ze
of
ant i ci pated r esear ch achi evement s ( magni t ude
of
t echnol ogy i mpr ovement ) expect ed f r omt he geot hermal R & D
pr ogr am of t he
U. S.
Depar t ment of Energy.
c)
H o w cost r educt i ons f ost er ed t hr ough R
&
D woul d af f ect
r esour ce avai l abi l i t y
or
mar ket penet r at i on.
d) Any aspect s of power pr oduct i on t echnol ogy cost s
f rom
geopr essured, hot dr y r ock, or magma energy r esour ces.
I t i s possi bl e t o use t he model t o accompl i sh a. and
b .
usi ng i nput f r omt he geot her mal communi t y, R &
I>
manager s and
f ur t her ef f or t by t he pr esent t eam Addi t i onal wor k on t he
model woul d be necessary t o accompl i sh c. and d .
1. 2
Gener al Capabi l i t i es
of
Model
The model est i mat es t he cost of geot her mal el ect r i c ener gy
by est i mat i ng t he cost s of maj or subsyst ems. Subsyst em cost s ar e
based on and ar e sensi t i ve t o: a) t he physi cal char act er i st i cs of
speci f i c geot her mal r eser voi r s and b ) t he per f ormance and cost s
of
t he engi neer i ng and t echnol ogy needed t o conver t geot hermal
f l ui d t o el ect r i ci t y.
The model al l ows R & D manager s t o ent er al t er nat i ve numer i -
cal est i mates f or component cost s
or f o r
r eser voi r par amet er s.
Such al t ernat i ve est i mat es ar e assumed t o r ef l ect i mpr ovement s i n
t he t echnol ogy t hat coul d r esul t f r om
R
&
D
on t he technol ogy.
The model t hen cal cul at es t he r el at i ve
c o s t
of geot her mal power
f or i mpr ovement s. The est i mat i on of t he ant i ci pat ed si ze of
such
R &
D Achi evement s i s expect ed t o be done by
R &
D managers,
who ar e f am l i ar wi t h t he t echnol ogy and wi t h t he t echni cal
di r ect i ons and i nt ensi t y of
DOE
and ot her
R &
D pr ogr ams f or
geot hermal energy t echnol ogy i mprovement .
An i mpor t ant and
novel f eat ur e of t he model i s t hat i t
est i mat es cost s r el at ed t o f i nanci al r i sks due t o
maj or uncer -
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 13/164
t ai nt i es of pr edi ct ed r eser voi r per f or mance. Thi s
r i s k
anal ysi s f eat ur e m m cs t he way t hat a commer ci al banker eval -
uat es such r i sks.
The i mpor t ance of t he r i sk anal ysi s f eat ur e i s t hat i t
provi des a means by whi ch R & D managers can est i mat e t he i mpact s
of i mpr ovement i n r eser voi r t est i ng, anal ysi s and pr edi ct i on
t echni ques upon t he cost of geother mal power. Thi s f eat ur e
appear s not t o have been i ncor por at ed i nt o ear l i er ef f or t s t o
est i mate t he i mpact s of
R & I)
on t he cost of U. S. geot her mal
el ect r i ci t y.
1. 3 Power Pl ant Per f or mance and Cost s
The est i mates of geot her mal power pl ant per f ormance and c o s t
used i n t hi s model ar e r el at i vel y cr ude appr oxi mat i ons.
Lat e i n t he pr oj ect , i t was det er m ned that power pl ant dat a
t hat had been i ni t i al l y sel ect ed f or use i n t he model wer e based
on a r ange of pl ant i nl et condi t i ons t oo nar r ow t o accomodat e t he
r ange of condi t i ons encount er ed i n some
of
t he hi gh r i sk s i t e
char act er i st i cs. Accor di ngl y a br i ef sur vey was made of a number
of
ear l i er r epor t s of pl ant per f or mance and cost . The cost s t hen
used i n t he model wer e dr awn f r omwhat appeared t o be some
dom nant t r ends i n t hose dat a, as descr i bed i n Sect i ons 13 and
14
of Appendi x
A .
However , t her e was a consi derabl e degr ee of scat t er i n t he
dat a t hat wer e avai l abl e. Thus we bel i eve t hat t he est i mat es of
power
pl ant per f or mance and c o s t ar e l i kel y t o i ncl ude
uncer t ai nt i es on t he or der
of
225%. The est i mates of pl ant
per f ormance and cost and t he way i n whi ch t hose ar e opt i m zed
r el at i ve t o t he cost of t he geot her mal f l ui d suppl y shoul d
be r evi ewed and i mpr oved i n f ut ur e updates of t hi s model .
2. 0
BACKGROUND, PURPOSE AND SCOPE
I n eval uat i ng t he i mpact of
R &
D on t he cost of power
produced by convent i onal met hods and on newer r enewabl e
t echnol ogi es such as sol ar or w nd power gener at i on t here i s an
obvi ous cause and ef f ect r el at i onshi p bet ween i mpr ovement i n
t echnol ogy and r educt i on
of
cost . I f a l ess expensi ve process
f or pr oduci ng phot ovol t ai c cel l s, f or i nst ance, i s devel oped, t he
cost of pr oduci ng power wi t h t hose cel l s i s r educed. I f a mor e
r el i abl e bear i ng
f o r a
w nd gener at or i s desi gned, el ec. t r i ci t y
pr oduced by w nd wi l l be l ess expensi ve. I n geother mal ener gy
product i on, however , much
of
t he cost
of
power pr oduct i on i s
r el at ed t o t he behavi or of a nat ur al r esour ce over t i me.
I t i s r el at i vel y easy t o cal cul at e t he r educti on i n cost of
geot hermal power f r om t he devel opment of
a
mor e ef f i ci ent bi nar y
power pl ant , or i mpr oved dr i l l i ng t echnol ogi es. I mpact s of
t echnol ogi cal i mpr ovement s i n t hese ar eas
are
i ncl uded i n
t h i s
anal ysi s under R & D achi evement s f or wel l s and f or pl ant s.
However i t i s not so obvi ous how t he cost of power i s r educed
when an i mprovement i n pr essure or f l owr at e measurement equi pment
i s made
or
a bet t er met hod f or model i ng t he l ong t er m behavi or
of
3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 14/164
a reservoir is found. Th e cost of well testing or reservoir
modeling may in fact
go
up if the se new methods are used, making
th e apparent cost of power higher.
Reservoir engin eerin g is aimed at using information about
th e geothermal reservoir collected prior to production to
descri be the field for plant design and predict the
long
term
behavior of the field. It is clear that improved reservoir
engineering techniques should provide a more accurate estimate
of
th e conditions to
be
expected at th e time of initial start up
of
th e power plant and predict better th e conditions for operation
of th e plant at
10
t o
30
years. This should in turn affect the
calculation of the price per kilowatt needed to make development
of
th e resource economic and th e investors and lenders estimates
of t he financial risks involved i n development
of
the resource.
Since reservoir engineering 1s not an exact scienc e, the
reservoir engineer usually develops a most reas onable case
scenar io to describe th e reservoir and looks at what th e worst
cas e for the reservoir would be. In predicting th e long term
behavior of th e field th e sa me principal is used. Th e engineers
designing th e wellfield and the power plant generally design
for
the worst
case
conditions.
If
th e first six wells have
temperatures ranging from 450 degrees
F
to
475
degrees
F ,
the
engineers may estimate th e fluid requirements for
t h e
power plant
based on the lower temper ature even though it is most probable
that the fluid temper ature from all wells in th e field may
average out to
465
degrees
F.
Technology improvements in reservoir engineering should
result in less discrepancy between th e most reasonable case and
th e worst case estimates for the field. These technology
improvements reduce th e risk associated with production of geo-
thermal power. Risk must have a cost , but how that cost should
be
calculated is not obvious.
Bankers and insurers of geothermal projects have had to
grappl e with this issue. On e major bank solved the problem
by
requiring geothermal operat ors to borrow th e difference between
th e cost of a geothermal power project based on the most likely
estima te of reservoir parameters and long term behavior and th e
worst case estimate. Using this approach allows assignment of a
cost to reservoir risk. Improvements in reservoir technology
reduce the difference between the most likely case and the worst
case estimates and thus reduce the cost
of
risk associated with
geothermal power projects. Potential impacts of improved
reservoir engineering are included under
R
&
D
Achievements,
Reservoir and Ris ks, Reservoir.
2.1
Purpose
Other
DOE
efforts have been directed toward analyzing the
relative improvement in the cost of geothermal power due to
research efforts.
A
list of thes e previous studies is included
in Appendix
H.
This effort draws from these previous studies. Since
technology
has
improved since th e completion of these previous
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 15/164
studies , costs and practices have needed to be updated to make
this effort current.
Th e Meridian Corporation models GEO.BAS and BUSBAR, which
give th e engineering costs and busbar costs for flash or binary
systems, seemed th e best starting point for th e calculation of
th e improvement in geothermal power cost. The models were
updated using current exploration, testing and drilling practice
B
and recent power plant cost.
A
team of individuals familiar with
the day
to
day workings of th e geothermal business collected
costs and reviewed basic procedures used for geothermal develop-
ment.
z
Th e study relied thoroughly o n interviews of industry
experts. There are too few operating geothermal plants outside
th e Geysers for statistics collected on geothermal projects to be
meaning ful. Determining industry practic e must ther efor e be and
was do ne by consulting with thos e practicing in the geothermal
industry. For t his r eason th e numbers used to represent a
generic well cost or th e description of a representative reser-
voir in a region may not be th e average reservoir or well in that
region, but should be close to what experienced geothermal field
develope rs would view
as typical and economic.
The purpose
of
this report is to describe the function
of
th e model and give examples of its use to estimate the impact
of
R
&
D technology on th e cost of geothermal power. The model is
menu driv en and allows input of baseline and improved costs and
best estimate and worst ca se reservoir parameters by th e user.
These inputs correspond to improvements in reservoir and power
plant technology resulting from research and development. The
resulting output sh ows the percentage change in th e cost of power
resulting from either reducing th e reservoir risk or reducing the
cost
of
some aspect of th e power production cycle.
R
&
D
in geothermal
is
aimed at improv ing techno logy by
reducing th e cost, increasing the efficiency, or reducing the
risk of a contributing factor in th e cost of power production.
For instance , research could develop a new drill bit which would
increase the rate of penetration during drilling
of geothermal
wells thus reducing t he cost of well completion. Using an
algorithm which calculates t he cost of geothermal wells from so me
key input factors such as depth, penetration rate and amount of
lost circulation and t he tim e it takes to deal with lost circula-
tion , the improvement in cost expected from the new drill bit can
be used t o calculate th e expected reduction in well cost. The
model then proceeds to calculat e a change in cost of power
associated with thi s technology enhancement.
Th e model is intended for us e by R &
D
managers who define
th e goals of their research projects and understand the areas of
impact of improvements in technology.
. 2.2
Scope
The model targets five areas with present day potential for
hydrothermal power production. Only areas where economic power
from hydrothermal sources can be expected in the near future were
5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 16/164
used
magma
using
U.S.G
for this study. Hot dry roc k, geopressured geothermal and
energy were not addressed. The five areas were determined
data from th e U.S. Geological Survey and correspond to the
.S. geothermal reg ions a s follows:
Basin and Range Basin and Range
Cascades Cascades
Geysers
Young Volcanics
Pacific Border (Not included
Alaska, Hawaii, Valles Caldera
in this study.)
Sierra Nevada ( C o s o , Long
Valley
The regions were chosen for their similarity in overall
geology and resource characteristics. One of t he areas of
variability which determines th e cost of a geothermal project is
difference in geology between different reservoirs. Dividing the
possible areas of geothermal development i n the U.S. into regions
with roughly the same geology allows for variation in exploration
and resource development strategy of basic drilling cost without
increasing t he complexity
of
the program input data.
For each of thes e regions two generic projects were defined,
a binary and a flash plant project. Data from existing
development and selected potential developments in each region
were used to determine t he characteristics of the generic
project. Criteria for the inclusion of a project in this study
were: 1) th e potential for economic geothermal electric
development over th e next ten years and
2)
the likelihood of
reduct ion of project cost by new technologies which are probable
within th e next ten years. The Geysers was removed from this
study since this dry steam resource is unique and has been
commercially exploited f or many years.
Baseline data for the se generic projects were determined
from an actual project deemed "typical" for th e region. Other
U.S.G.S. regions were reserved for a later phase of study as
being unlikely to yield economic quantities of electric power in
th e near future. The Young Volcanics category is a hold-all for
resources in various U.S.G.S. regions other than th e Cascades
which ar e associated with recent volcanic features and can
be
expected t o produce at very high temperatures.
Major cost accounts were then identified which contribute to
th e end cost of geothermal power. Current costs for actual
projects were investigated to update earlier work on the cost of
geothermal power. The major cost accounts were then broken down
into sub-accounts for th e purpose of determining present costs.
Thes e sub-accounts also reflect potential areas of possible R
&
D.
Zn existing model for calculating th e cost of geothermal
6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 17/164
power was t hen sel ect ed. Thi s model i ncl uded al gor i t hms for
cal cul at i ng t he
cost of power
pl ant s and pr oduct i on Syst ems gi ven
i nf or mat i on
on
t he nat ur e of t he r esour ce. The model was updated
t o
t ake i nt o account t he changes i n t he dr i l l i ng i ndust r y and i n
ot her areas whi ch have occur r ed. An al gor i t hm
f o r
cal cul at i ng
t he cost
of
geot her mal wel l s gi ven cer t ai n char act er i st i cs of t h e
r eservoi r was t hen devel oped and used t o cal cul ate t he basel i ne
wel l cost s. Add- on cost s f or t he possi bi l i t y
of
t r oubl e dur i ng
dr i l l i ng i n t he area
of
l ost ci r cul at i on, cement i ng and
o t h e r
t r oubl es r el at ed t o t he nat ur e
of
t he geot hermal r esour ce were
i ncl uded. A met hod
f o r
t aki ng i nt o account l ong t erm f i el d
behavi or wi t h r espect t o pr oduct i on decl i ne was added. The
cur r ent ver si on
of
t he model does not , however , t ake heat depl e-
t i on of t he r eser voi r i nt o account . Compl ex model i ng of pr oduc-
t i on and i nj ect i on pr act i ces woul d be necessar y t o det er m ne heat
sweep accur at el y. A si mpl e t emper at ur e decl i ne model f r om act ual
and pr oj ected dat a woul d be possi bl e al t hough of dubi ous
accur acy, but t i me was not avai l abl e t o add t hi s t o t he model f or
t hi s ver si on.
Model updat es t ake i nt o account cur r ent expl or at i on, r eser -
voi r t est i ng, dr i l l i ng and power pl ant desi gn cost s and pr act i ce
as of J anuar y,
1986.
Cost s used i n t hi s anal ysi s t hus r ef l ect
t he cur r ent s t at us of t he dr i l l i ng and servi ce compani es due t c ~
t he downt ur n i n t he oi l and gas i ndust r i es.
Thr oughout t he t ask of val i dat i ng t he model by assessi ng
cur r ent cost s and i n devel opi ng t he cost i ng st r at egi es t he st udy
r el i ed t hor oughl y on i nt er vi ew
of
i ndust r y exper t s. Ther e ar e
not enough geothermal power generat i on pr oj ect s operat i onal ot her
t han t hose i n t he Geyser s t o use a st at i st i cal appr oach
t o d e t e r
m ni ng cost s and devel opment s t r at egi es. Ther ef or e, peopl e
f am l i ar wi t h geot hermal devel opment were chosen t o eval uat e and
updat e t he model and benchmark t he cost s. These expert s
used
t hei r
own
knowl edge of geot her mal ' devel opment and r el i ed on t hei r
cont act s i n t he busi ness f or backup and fo r i nf or mat i on not
avai l abl e t o t hem
The model
i s
demonst r at ed usi ng
some
hypot het i cal
R & D
achi evement s i ncl udi ng: 1 ) i mpr ovement i n wel l s,
2 )
i mpr ovement
i n down hol e pumps,
3
i mpr ovement i n r eser voi r i dent i f i cat i on/ -
engi neer i ng,
4 )
mprovement s i n power pl ant s,
5)
t he above f our
achi evement s combi ned, and 6) combi ned achi evement s at l ower
l evel s
of
achi evement
( see
Sect i on 5 . 0 ) .
Usi ng t he model t he i mpact of cur r ent DOE
R & D
programs
on
t he cost
of
power produced usi ng geother mal ener gy can
be
est i mat ed. Such est i mat es ar e not i ncl uded i n t hi s r epor t . I n
or der t o make t hese est i mat es, i nput f r om
R &
D
manager s
of
ongoi ng
DOE
r esear ch pr oj ect s i s needed. Usi ng t hi s i nput ,
t h e
pr oj ect t eam can det er m ne t he possi bl e i mpr ovement i n r i sk or
cost . The model can t hen be used t o cal cul at e r el at i ve
i mprovement i n
cost
of power .
Reduci ng t he cost
of
geot hermal power pr oduct i on i s onl y
one
goal of
R
& I). Maki ng cur r ent l y uneconom c r esour ces avai l abl e
f o r devel opment i s equal l y i mport ant . Al t hough t hi s model can be
modi f i ed t o det er m ne how much power can
be
made avai l abl e by
7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 18/164
cost reductions resulting from R & D, this study does not
undertake that task.
In addition, large quantities of energy are now untapped
from hot dry rock, geopressured geothermal and magma energy
sources. The reservoir assessment, drilling and power conver-
sio n technologies for these sources are sufficiently different
from that used for hydrothermal sources that considerable progra-
mming would be needed to change the model to accomodate these
resources. However, this could be accomplished using the basic
strategies of the model.
3.0 GEOTHERMAL
TECHNOLOGY BASELINE
This section describes th e major cost items included in the
model. Also defined here ar e the reservoir baseline data used to
define th e five regions used for the study.
It
is
important to understand how current industry practice
relates to current technology. A problem important to the
indu stry may have been solved by rese arch , but indu stry may not
be using th e latest technology in actual practice. This study
uses current industry practice th e as basis for cost estimates
and costing algorithms. Current practice used to defin e costs
will therefore be described in this section. However, current
technology which could improve practice will be mentioned where
it exists and th e method used to estimate the risk reduction
resulting from it s us e will be described if possible.
The cost of power production in a typical geoth ermal
electrical development project can be divided into
5
sub-system:
1 )
2 )
3)
4)
5 )
3.1
T h e
Reservoir Identification
-
Project selection activities
including geophysics, geochem istry, geologic mapping and
analysis, gradient well drill ing, stratigraphic. test
well drilling and drilling of wildcat wells.
Reservoir Confirmation - Drilling of confirmation wells,
well testi ng, geophysical logging, production logging,
reservoir analysis and prediction of reservoir behavior
through modeling.
Reservoir management - Strategies for management of th e
resource including pumping, injection, well workovers,
redrilling of wells, adding supplemental wells and well
spacing.
Well Drilling
-
Drilling and completion
of
production
and injectio n wells.
Power plant and gathering system - Piping, separators,
fluid treatment, environmental
protection equipment,
turbine generators, pumps, binary c ycle equipment.
Major Cost Items and Their Interact ions
costs of each of these subsystems are interrelated in
8
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 19/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 20/164
true
at
once is extremely unlikely. However, the power plant and
well field designer must plan and design for the contingency that
they may. The financial planner for the project must raise
enough money to cover all of these contingencies along with the
usual construction contingency included as part of standard
engineering practice.
The other side of th e premium added to the project for th e
effect
of
reservoir risk is the possibility that the field will
be
better than th e most reasonable estimate. Fewer wells may be
needed; the average temperature of th e fluid may
be
hotter. Yet
th e field developer can not count on this possibility. He must
still borrow or in so me other way com e up with enough money to
finance the worst cas e scenario. He may end up with a power
plant that is overdesigned and more costly than he actually
needs. Thus if technology could be improved and th e spread
between th e worst c ase and the most reasonable estimate improved,
the cost of the projects would go down.
It is assumed for this model that no project can have
100%
certainty 0 5 success. The worst case estimate therefore only
gets us to a 95% confidence. The remaining 5% chance of failure
is insured against by th e purchase
of
reservoir insurance. The
cost of this insurance is included in th e total power price.
There is a possibility t hat th e interaction of the various
cost parameters and their associated risks can multiply costs
beyond what would be reasonable due to multiple interactions.
Where possible this has been avoided in the coding
of
the model.
However, th e interactions
of
th e elements are not always obvious.
For this reason, actual plant, well and field costs were
estimated using rea l project data and information from
developers. These estimates were used as a basis for comparison
to prevent the model from producing unrealistic answers.
3.2
Reservoir Baselin e Data
Reservoir baseline data provides a description of t he reser-
voir at the time of plant start up. The values are th e most
probable estimates of such characteristics as flow rate from each
well, reservoir fluid temperature, wellhead pressure, fluid
chemistry and
so
forth.
3.2.1 Regions Selected
For each region a typical project was determined with what
is assumed to be average characteristics. For instance, in the
Imperial Valley region the project is assumed to be somewhere
near the Salton Sea , but the wells are deeper than the average
well in current Salton Sea projects and the brine
is
more
concentrated to account for th e characteristics of the resources
at
Brawley and Westmorland. Thus it should not be assumed that
th e reservoir parameters used for thi s study represent any actual
project. They are thos e which might represent th e average
project in th e region.
For
the young volcanic region, many of the projects in this
region may be in remot e areas such as Alaska or Hawaii where
10
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 21/164
ser vi ces and equi pment can onl y be obt ai ned at pr em um Ot her
proj ect s wi l l be I n t he mai nl and
U. S.
To accomodat e t he
l ar ge
di f f er ence i n cost bet ween t hese i sol at ed pr oj ect s and t hei r
count er par t s i n mor e accessi bl e ar eas, t wo t ypi cal hi gh
t emperatur e young vol cani c pr oj ect s wer e used, one i n
a
r emot e
l ocat i on such as Hawai i and t he ot her i n t he mor e accessi bl e
Coso, Cal i f or ni a ar ea.
The basel i ne dat a assumed f or each r egi on i s l i st ed i n
Appendi x D. Thi s dat a was obt ai ned f r om USGS Ci rcul ar
790,
t he
BPA s t udy of geot her mal pot ent i al i n t he Cascades, mat er i al
publ i shed i n t he
GRC
Bul l et i n and i n t he t r ansact i ons
of
t he
GRC
and by per sonal communi cat i on wi t h devel opers. Wher e dat a was
r ecei ved by personal communi cat i on, i t has been averaged i n w i t h
publ i cl y avai l abl e dat a t o pr eser ve t he conf i dent i al i t y of t h e
sour ces.
3.2.2 Energy
The t ot al ent hal py i n t he r egi on i s used
by
t he model t o
wei ght t he average power pr i ce. Thus a r egi on cont ai ni ng a
l arger amount
of
potent i al energy woul d wei gh more heavi l y i n t he
average power pr i ce. The val ues were t aken f r omUSGS Ci r cul ar
790 except f or t he Cascades val ues. At t he t i me t hat dat a f or
Ci rcul ar 790 was compl i ed. l i t t l e expl or at i on had been done i n
t he Cascades. Tot al ent hal py i n a r eser voi r f or Ci r cul ar 790 was
l ar gel y based on sur f ace mani f est at i ons.
Peep
col d gr ound wat er
ci r cul at i on caused by hi gh r ai nf al l i n t he Cascades obscur es most
pot ent i al sur f ace mani f est at i ons. Cascades val ues wer e t her ef or e
t aken f r om t he BPA st udy whi ch used ot her cr i t er i a f or est i mat i ng
t ot al ener gy i n a r eser voi r .
Onl y r eser voi r s wi t h possi bl e t emper at ur es above
125
degr ees
C were consi der ed si nce l ower t emperat ur e r esour ces ar e not
st udy of power avai l abi l i t y shoul d be done t o t ake t hese and
ot her r esour ces not used f or t hi s st udy i nt o account ) . Si nce
Ci r cul ar
790
does not br eak down
t he
r esour ces i t l i st s by
physi ogr aphi c pr ovi nce, geot her mal
areas
l i sted
wer e
assi gned
t o
one of t he r egi ons used f or t hi s st udy on t he basi s of geol ogy.
Some r esour ces di d not f i t i nt o any
of
t he r egi ons and have been
l ef t out of t hi s st udy. Most of t hese, however , wer e of ver y
l ow
t emper at ur e and woul d not have f i t t he st udy cr i t er i a.
l i kel y t o be econom c
f or
power generat i on
f or
some
t i me.
( A
The expl orat i on st r at egy assumes that an area of some si ze
char act er i st i c of each r egi on i s expl or ed as
a
uni t . Thi s
st r at egy wi l l be descr i bed i n mor e det ai l i n sect i on 3. 4.
Th e
var i abl e t i t l ed Ener gy i n SubAr ea i n Appendi x
D,
page
D - 3 ,
al l ows al t er at i on of t hi s modul ar expl or at i on area. I ncreasi ng
t he ener gy i n t he expl orat i on uni t woul d mean t hat expl or at i on
costs
a r e
shared by
a
l arger number
of
power pl ant s
so
t hat t he
t ot al cost of expl or at i on al l ocat ed t o a i ndi vi dual pl ant woul d
be smal l er .
3.2.3 Temper at ure
Reser voi r t emper at ur es f or t hi s st udy ar e t aken f r om t ypi cal
pr oj ect s al r eady devel oped i n t he r egi ons used. Thus t he
11
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 22/164
temperature
not
meant to be the average or mean temperature for all possible high
temperature resources in th e Imperial Valley, but a "typical"
temperature representative of projects either currently under
development or abandoned. A typical tempera ture was selected
because in many ca ses a rang e of temperatures may be present in a
given resource area , but some high tem perature f luids may be too
high in dissolved solids or may present other problems for
exploitation. For exam ple, it is highly likely that 700 degrees
F fluids exist in th e Kilauea East Rift Zone in Hawaii. However,
it
is
not likely that thes e will b e exploited without mixing with
cooler fluids from reservoirs above due to the difficulty in
controlling such high temper ature, high pressure fluids.
of 47S°F used f or th e Imperi al Valley region is
Although the reservoir temperature is important to the
design of th e power plant, it is th e enthalpy of the fluid
delivered at the wellhead that determines th e amount
of
power the
plant will produce. Very litt le data on produced enthalpy is
currently available. A s a resul t, som e other way of determining
the fluid requirement
for
th e power plant was needed. In
addition, the drawdown associated with flow of th e fluid in the
reservoir determines th e wellhead pressure. Even a very high
temperature fluid with a high enthalpy may have to
be
produced at
a
low
wellhead pressure due to low permeability
of
the reservoir.
Lou
wellhead pressure will requ ire a lower pressur e, larger
turbine. This is the case in Hawaii. For this reason t he fluid
requirement
for
flash power plants was tied to the wellhead
temperature. Future versions
of
th e model may use both reservoir
requirements.
The values for reservoi r temperat ure were taken from both
reservoirs with operating power plants and those which are still
in the exploration
or
confirmation phase. Proprietary data was
provide s by seve ral oper ator s for both reservoir and wellhead
temperature. Where no test data was available, such as for the
large number of resources in th e Cascades, data from the USGS and
from estimates made by those exploring t he Cascades were used.
3.2.4 Chemistry
Fluid chemistry is a important factor in determining the
cost of geotherm al power conversi on. Proprietary data from
operating plants and
from
resource s being tested was used to
determine a representative range of values for several important
aspects of fluid chemistry including: total dissolved solids,
total non-condensible g ases, hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide.
:.-, All of this data is currently estimated and available as
input for each region. However, only total dissolved solids and
hydrogen sulfide are currently tied to power conversion costs.
Total dissolved solids ar e used to determine th e need for brine
stabilization equipment, in th e drilling cost estimates and for
th e cost of testing. Hydrogen sulfide is used to determine the
need
for H2S
abatement.
There are other aspects of the cost of power conversion
which are tied to chemical factors. Th e cost of plant and field
maintenance is linked to th e corrosive effects of the fluid. In
12
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 23/164
a general way, corrosiveness can be determined from th e levels of
dissolved solids, H S, and
CO
. Well workovers a re more costly
if high levels of ca?cium carbosa te are present as is t he case in
much of th e Basin and Range.
H S
corrosion requires th e use of
more expensive metals for well casing and production piping.
Pumps may need special maintenance if the fluid is corrosive. At
present thes e factor s ar e accounted for by inputing higher
workover cost values where corrosi on or scale are expected.
2
3.2.5
Depth
The average depth of wells drilled in an area clearly
impacts th e cost of wells drilled in th e area and th e cost of
maintenance of those wells. Well depths are a factor of geology
and can vary greatly from reservoir to reservoir in a region.
Depths were therefore selected for each region based largely on
data from existing field developments unless thes e developments
did not seem to represent th e majority of future developments
anticipated in th e region. Such is th e case in the Cascades
where exploration for binary resources has been to fairly shallow
depths although it is not anticipated that future resources will
occur at less that
3000
feet.
The depth to the resource
is
used t o calculate the well cost
and th e pump set depth for calculation of pumping cost. Howe ver,
well base costs ar e calculated outside this program using a
detailed algorithm described in Section
3.6.2
and used as inputs
to the model. Pump set depth is calculated as a step function
with wells deeper that
1000
which ar e pumped using a pump
set
depth of
1000
feet. This is due to the current use
of
line shaft
pumps exclusively in th e industry. Changing the resource depth
without changing th e well cost and pumping cost will not effect
th e total power cost.
3.2.6 Flow Rate
Flow rate is
one
of the factors difficult to estimate;
particularly for reservoirs which have not yet been developed.
Yet flow ra te is tied to many
cost
factors including: production
piping diameter, number
of
wells, pumping costs and power plant
sizing. It was therefo re necessary to project data from fields
already produced or tested onto future developments. Th e highest
values for flow rate for
a
region were not used. Very high rate
wells have been drilled in the Imperial Valley for instance, but
many reservoirs have been tested with more moderate rates.
It was decided that for this modeling effort average rate
wells would
be
assumed to dominate future developments to make
estimates more conservative, even though high rate wells are
likely to be drilled at many prospects. In fact, at on e resource
in the Salton Sea, th e developer estimated th e average flow rate
for th e wells conservatively, but t he bank experts made even mor e
conservative estimates. Th e Wells produced at much higher rates
than either estimate requiring fewer wells and an overall lower
plant cost. Unfortunately, without more knowledge it
is
not
possible to project flow rate accurately. This must of necessity
increase the cost of geothermal development. Th e cost of this
lack
of
information is reflected in th e model in t he size of the
13
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 24/164
risk value associated with flow rate estimates.
Flow rate changes with time represent a large uncertainty
for both th e developer and th e financing agency. Reservoirs are
generally operated at a constant pressure and flow rate is
allowed t o decrease duri ng th e drawdown, both around th e well and
in th e reservoir as a whole. In order to represent the decrease
in flow rat e in a producing reservoir, a simple exponential
declin e was assumed. Although data does not exist (except at
Lardarello and the Geysers), to determine the shape of long term
declin e curves, an exponential decli ne is logical. This type of
declin e represents the drainage of a reservoir of limited extent.
It is clearly a conservative approach to estimating flow rate
behavior with time. A very limited resource can be represented
by
a
rapid decline rate while resource with some or a large
amount of recharge can be represented by a smaller rate
of
decline. This does not account for th e possibility of catastro-
phic reservoir failure. Such a possibility is assumed to
be
small for the purpose of this model, no greater than 5%, and is
insured against by requiring th e cost of reservoir insurance to
be
added to t he field cost.
The shape of the curve determines the points during
exploitation that replacement wells will be needed and therefore
has an effect on the cost of power. It is possible in the future
to link this model with numerical models which predict more
complex long-term behavior of flow rate with time in the reser-
voir. However, this is a more complex programming effort and
was
not justified for this version of the model.
3.3 Reservoir Identification
The exploration of resources varies widely from on e geologic
setting to another and from one developer to another. Geothermal
resources can sometimes be easily identified by surfac e
manifestations such as hot springs and fumeroles. If no surface
expression is obvious, exploration methods such as geologic
mappin g, geophysics, remote sensi ng, fluid and soil chemistry and
temper ature gradient measurement have been used with varying
degree s of success to locate resources at depth.
An "expert interview" appro ach was used to develop the
strategy for identifying an economic reservoir. Geologists and
reservoir engineers working in the regions defined for this model
were consulted to determ ine how they would explor e an area and
what probability of succes s their strategy would have. The
numbers used for calculating exploration costs may not be the
numerical average of all exploration costs, but com e close to
actual amounts spent.
3.3.1 Industry practice vs. current technology
Geothermal energy exploration is in the same state that
petroleum exploration was when developers started to explor e
beyond areas with oil seeps and obvious domes. The Cascades are
a
good examp le of this situat ion. Heat is clearly present in the
Cascad es, an area of active volcanism. However, the high rain
fall and igneous roc ks mak e many commonly used methods of
14
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 25/164
geot her mal expl or at i on i nappr opr i at e. I n t hi s ar ea, i t may be
necessary
t o
dr i l l many st r at i gr aphi c, deep t est hal es t o f i nd
r eser voi r s whi ch wi l l be econom c t o pr oduce.
Because geot her mal expl or at i on i s i n i t s ear l y st ages,
devel opers use t hei r own st yl e of expl orat i on whi ch may or may
not t ake advant age of t he most cur r ent t echnol ogy. Cur r ent
pr acti ce
w a s
used f or t he pur pose of est i mat i ng t he cost
of
expl orat i on' . I t can be ar gued t hat t her e ar e bet t er expl or at i on
st r at egi es or t hat more expl or at i on woul d yi el d bet t er dat a and
ensure more
successes. However , r eal expl or at i on success r at i os
are
l i nked wi t h t hese expl or at i on cost s,
so
i t
seems
r easonabl e
t o
use
act ual expl orat i on met hods.
I n or der t o det er m ne t he cost of expl or at i on, devel oper s
act i vel y expl or i ng i n each ar ea wer e asked about t hei r
expl orat i on pr ogr ams. Thi s i nf or mat i on was gener al i zed i nt o
t hr ee cat egor i es of expendi t ur e: geol ogy and geophysi cal survey
wor k, t emper at ur e gr adi ent hol e dr i l l i ng, and dr i l l i ng of one
expl or at i on wel l of pr oduct i on si ze. I n each cat egor y, wher e
t here was a conf l i ct bet ween st r at egi es devel oped as par t
of DOE
st udi es and i ndust r y pr act i ce, t he cost f or expl or at i on usi ng
st andar d i ndust r y methods was used. For exampl e, al t hough
l ar ger number s of expl or at i on wel l s are needed t o def i ne
a
moderate t emper at ur e r esour ce, l ower pr of i t mar gi ns on such
r esour ces have dr i ven devel oper s t o cut cost s on expl or at i on.
Thi s i s r ef l ect ed i n an i ncr eased spread bet ween best and worst
case val ues f or t hese r esour ces due t o t he i ncr eased r i sk and
shows up i n t he cal cul at i on on r i sk.
An exampl e of t he net ef f ect of t hi s model i ng deci si on i s
t hat i t show t he Cascades pl ant s as: a) pr oduci ng r el at i vel y
expensi ve power at hi gh r i sk, but b ) bei ng most amenabl e t o
r educt i on of r i sk t hr ough i mpr ovement s
of
reservoi r i dent i f i c. a-
t i on and conf i r mat i on t echnol ogy.
3. 3. 2
Expl orat i on st r at egy assumed f or t hi s model
Previ ous st udi es have shown var i ous success r at es f o r t he
dr i l l i ng of geot her mal wi l dcat wel l s, def i ned as wel l s dr i l l ed
f ar f r om ot her successf ul geot her mal wel l s. One such study
showed t hat between
1
and 2 geother mal wel l s out of 10 dr i l l ed as
a t ot al wi l dcat i s successf ul . W l dcat success shoul d be
af f ect ed by t he ef f i cacy of t he expl or at i on st r at egy empl oyed.
Thus r esear ch coul d change t he success of wi l dcat dr i l l i ng.
For t hi s r eason t he wi l dcat success r at i o i s an i nput var i abl e.
The basel i ne and r i sk val ues f or wi l dcat success ar e shown i n
Appendi x
D.
The over al l r egi ons wer e di vi ded i nt o expl or at i on uni t s of
a
si ze r el at ed t o t he geol ogy
of
t he r egi on and used as an i nput
var i abl e. Thus i f 10.000 MWe of power coul d be devel oped f r oma
r egi on and an aver age expl or at i on uni t woul d i dent i f y 500 MWe of
power
t hen 20 uni t s coul d
be
devel oped i n t h a t r egi on wi t h
pot ent i al l y t en
50
MWe power pl ant s on each uni t . Each
expl orat i on uni t i n a regi on woul d have the same amount of money
spent t o i dent i f y i t as econom c. Thus t he expl or at i on budget
f or each uni t woul d be shar ed by t he t otal number of power pl ant s
15
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 26/164
const r ucted i n t he uni t .
The code al l ows t he expl orat i on budget
t o be
expended
f o r
each uni t up t o t he compl et i on of a deep pr oduct i on di ameter t est
wel l , a wi l dcat wel l . Of t hese wi l dcat s onl y a f r act i on w l l
be
successf ul
so
t he cost of expl or i ng t he unsuccessf ul uni t i s al so
spread out among t he power pl ant s const r uct ed on t he successf ul l y
expl or ed uni t . I t was assumed t hat geol ogy f or each l arge r egi on
was si m l ar enough f or expl or at i on st r at egi es t o be t he same
t hr oughout t he r egi on, keepi ng t he aver age cost t o expl or e
e a c h
uni t const ant over t he r egi on. Cost of expl or at i on var i ed onl y
f r om r egi on t o r egi on. The model appl i es t he ent i r e cost of
expl or at i on
for
each f ai l ed expl or at i on at t empt .
No
possi bi l i t y
of par t i al expendi t ur e f or expl or at i on was i ncl uded. The t i me
al l owance f or t he expl or at i on of each uni t was 6 mont hs.
A successf ul wi l dcat wel l does not guar ant ee a successf ul
power pl ant . Some areas w l l have t he expl orat i on budget
expended on t hem and t hen
go
on t hr ough t he conf i r mat i on phase
onl y t o f ai l .
The
model adds i n t he cost of expl or i ng t hese
ar eas wi t h successf ul wi l dcat s whi ch do not have a conf i r med
r eser voi r t o t he t ot al expl or at i on cost .
3. 3. 3. Cost i ng al gor i t hm
Expl orat i on cost s i ncl ude over head usi ng an average
mul t i pl i er of
2. 25
on manpower. Cost s f or expl or i ng i n t he
var i ous r egi ons wer e est i mat ed usi ng dat a f r om devel oper s
act i vel y wor ki ng i n each r egi on. However , t her e was a l ar ge
di f f er ence i n t he st r ategi es empl oyed even i n t he same r egi on by
di f f er ent devel oper s. For i nst ance one devel oper i n t he Basi n
and Range r egi on f el t t hat dri l l i ng of t emperatur e gr adi ent hol es
yi el ded t he most i nf or mat i on whi l e anot her r el i ed heavi l y on
geochem st r y f r om hot spr i ngs. However , t he average budget f or
expl or at i on di d not di f f er gr eat l y f r om devel oper t o devel oper
f or r esour ces of si m l ar t emper at ur e. Ther e was a cut - of f f or
moderate t emperat ur e r esour ces at shal l ower dept hs. For t hi s
t ype
of
r esour ce t he devel opers expended f ar l ess on gr adi ent
hol es and r el i ed more on exi st i ng dat a, expendi ng
much
l ess
over al l on t hese pr oj ect s t han was spent on deeper , hot t er
r esour ces. For t hi s r eason dept h was made a var i abl e f or
expl or at i on cost . For deep r esour ces, i . e. t hose gr eat er t han
3000
f eet a deep geol ogy sur charge was added. Thi s coul d i ncl ude
t he cost of doi ng geophysi cal surveys
or
dr i l l i ng a st r at i graphi c
cor e hol e.
I n or der t o cal cul at e an aver age expl or at i on cost f or each
r egi on, data on st r at egi es and budget s
was
exam ned and broken
down i nt o t he t hr ee cat egor i es ment i oned above:
1.
Geol ogy,
geophysi cal and geochem cal survey wor k, 2. Temper at ure gr adi ent
hol es, and 3. Expl or at i on wel l s. I ncl uded i n t he
f i r s t
cat egory
ar e al l act i vi t i es not rel at ed t o wel l dr i l l i ng i ncl udi ng
l i t er at ur e sear ches, chem cal sampl i ng of spr i ngs and wel l s,
mappi ng, st udy of aer i al phot os, i nt er pr et at i on of exi st i ng dat a,
geophysi cal dat a col l ect i on and i nt er pr et at i on and soi l
chem st r y. Appendi x D gi ves a l i s t i ng
of
t he i nput dat a f i nal l y
assumed by r egi on. Det ai l ed expl or at i on st r at egi es ar e not
i ncl uded here si nce budget s
seemed
more const ant t han st r at egy.
16
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 27/164
3.4 RESERVOIR CONFIRMATION
After th e drilling of a successful wildcat well it is
assumed that steps ar e take n to confirm whether an economic
reservoir is present. This confirmation phase includes th e
drilling of further production diameter wells
of
which some
fraction will be succes sful, testing of the wells during drilling
and production testin g and interpretation of the data collected
during tests including geolog y, geochem istry, geophysics and
reservoir engineering.
3.4.1
Industry practice vs. current technology
During the confirmation phase, as during exploration,
industry practice may differ from what current research has shown
to be most effect ive in confirming
a
reservoir. Although
l o n g
term testing of wells with careful sampling of fluid and non-
condensible gases is recommended
by
many DOE studies, not all
developers test wells for longer than a feu days and few make
rigorous measurements of fluid chemistry. Where a conflict arose
between industry practice and current technology, again th e cost
of actual practice was used.
Th e largest area of variability in practice seems to b e in
us e of numerical simula tion for data interpretation. Although
it
seems
reasonable to use numerical simulation techniques
to
predict th e long term behavior of a resource, many developers do
not do
so,
particularly for smaller projects and moderate
temper ature resources. In many cases numerical simulation is
under taken not by th e dev elop er, but as resea rch by a university
or
national laboratory funded by
D O E .
Although som e developers
routinely use numerical simulation others never do. In this
case , unlike all other ca ses of conflict between industry
practice and current technol ogy, it was decided to include some
cost for numerical simula tion in th e confirmation phase even
though this may not be standard practice. The model uses a
system of multipliers for determining th e change in cost
for
various aspects of power production. If a zero cost for simula-
tion is used then no multiplier can increase this cost to
s h o w
improvement in technology.
3.4.2
Confirm ation strategy assumed for this model
Included in th e cost of confirming a reservoir are not only
th e cost of drilling wells and testing them , but the cost
of
those wells which fail t o produce economic amounts
of
energy.
To
account for this cost a fraction of the wells drilled during the
confirmation phase were assumed to be dry holes.
Of
these dry
holes
a
certain number can be used as injection wells, while some
are totally useless. For thi s model an "expert interview"
approac h was again used
to
determine th e confirmation strategy.
By examining both succes sful and failed projects and talking
to
reservoir engineers practicing in geothermal now, it was decided
that during confirmation four good producers are drilled with
1.5
injectors and
. 5
dry holes. After th e drilling and testing of
these six wells t he developer is ready to go to th e bank
or
other
financial source for further financing for the construction of
a
17
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 28/164
power plant. This is not stat istic ally accura te dat a, but
probably comes clos e t o actual statistical probabilities of
success and failure.
No
amount of testing and well drilling can guarantee that
the resource will be economic to operate for the
30
year life of
most power plants. Thi s model assumes that the best that can be
done is a 95% certainty. Th e cost of reservoir insurance is
included in th e field cost. This in part insures against
a
catastrophic reservoir failure that could not
be
foreseen using
testing methods. Th e remaining risks are accounted for in th e
add-on cost
of
additional well s, testing
and so
forth whic h would
be required to bring the confidence up to this
95%
level as seen
by a typical lending institution.
In addition to dry holes and injection wells an allowance
for redrilling
a
fraction
of
th e production wells was made.
Since most geothermal reservoirs are drilled into fractured roc k,
redrilling non-productive wells by sid e tracking can often yield
results. The redrill fractio n is input as a variable. A simple
equation also calculates the number of spare producers as a
fraction of th e total number of production wells. Th e number of
spares is always one
or
more.
Some sites
will
be identified and o
t h r o u g h t h e
confirmation process only to turn out to be uneconomic at t he end
of this phase. Th e probability
of
successful confirmation is
input as a variable and can
be
changed to reflect improvements
in
exploration technology. Th e baseline success ratio was set at
sites in
all
of th e regions and was determined by discussion with
developers and from personal knowledge. Actual statistics were
not used since early demonstration projects and projects started
and stopped for reasons oth er than th e economics
of
that
particular project bias th e small sample available. The Geysers
would tend t o dominate any overview
of
the success
of
identified
geothermal resources.
Another aspect
of
reservoir confirmation is the success r ate
of drilling after
a
reservo ir has been identified. The success
of drilling is not only higher after initial identification of
the resource, but differs from area to area depending on th e
geology. For this reason, the success rate for confirmation
drilling was input as
a
variabl e for each region. Appendix
D
shows th e values used. Thes e were again determined using expert
knowledge from thos e involved in drilling in each region.
In
areas where little exploration has so far been done such
as
the
Cascades , opinion can only be conjecture and will need updating
as
more
information is available.
Geothermal
wells
can be dry holes by virtue of either low
tempera ture or flow rate. Neither problem precludes their use as
injectors. For this reason
a
fraction of the dry holes are
passed on as injectors and are not totally written off. If there
ar e insufficient injectors from the dry holes, separate injectors
are then costed. Geother mal injectors must generally be drilled
to the sa me depth
as
producers or sometimes deeper and a re there-
fore at least as costly as producers. The retaining
of
som e dry
holes as injectors is current practice and reflects a realistic
18
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 29/164
econom c appr oach.
Some producer s may show prom se, but be j ust under t he f l ow
or t emper at ur e needed f or econom c pr oduct i on. Ot her pr oducer s
exper i ence downhol e probl ems. I n each case t he devel oper may
need t o r edr i l l a f r act i on of t he pr oducer s compl et ed. A r edr i l l
f r act i on was est i mat ed f or al l r egi ons and an add on r edr i l l cost
devel oped. Thi s i s di scussed i n mor e det ai l i n t he dr i l l i ng
sect i on.
3. 5 Reser voi r Management
Fol l owi ng conf i r mat i on of t he r eser voi r i t i s assumed t hat
f i nanci ng i s obt ai ned and t he r emai ni ng necessary pr oduct i on
wel l s dr i l l ed. As soon as t hi s phase i s ent er ed i t i s necessar y
t o begi n managi ng t he use
of
t he r esource. Reservoi r management
i nvol ves det er m ni ng t he spaci ng of wel l s and whet her t hey wi l l
be pumped or al l owed t o f r eef l ow. Some est i mat es of t he r at e
t hat new wel l s wi l l need t o be dr i l l ed i s made and t he cost of
mai nt ai ni ng t he wel l s and t he wel l f i el d i s est i mat ed. Fl ui d
i nj ect i on may present speci al pr obl ems such as t he need
fo r
wel l
cl eanout or chem cal f l ui d t r eat ment . These ar e al l r eser voi r
management deci si ons and t hey have a l ar ge i mpact on t he cost and
oper at i on of t he power pl ant .
3. 5. 1 Reser voi r pr essur e decl i ne
One of t he gr eat est areas of uncer t ai nt y i s t he r at e of
pr essur e decl i ne of t he wel l f i el d. As f l ui d i s pr oduced f or
power gener at i on t he pr essur e i n t he f i el d wi l l decl i ne. The
r at e at whi ch t hi s occur s depends on whet her t here i s a sour ce of
hot f l ui d t o r echar ge t he r eser voi r , on how f ast t hi s r echar ge
f l ui d can r each t he produced zone and on how much f l ui d was
stored i n t he reservoi r i ni t i al l y.
The pet r ol eum i ndustr y uses dat a f r om f i el ds si m l ar t o
a
new f i el d t o det er m ne t he decl i ne r at e, of t en by t he use
of
decl i ne cur ves or by numer i cal si mul at i on of t he f i el d. Decl i ne
c u r v e s and
mat er i al
bal ances
ar e
si mpl e met hods w h i c h r e l y
on
knowl edge of t he l ong t er m behavi or of exi st i ng pr oduced f i el ds
t o pr ove t hei r val i di t y. Ther e ar e t oo f ew geot her mal f i el ds
whi ch have been produced f or a l ong peri od of t i me and none whi ch
have been depl eted. We don' t know how geot her mal r eservoi r s
wi l l behave i n t he
l o n g
r un. Numer i cal si mul at i on of exi st i ng
f i el ds can be mat ched agai nst what l i t t l e pr oduct i on dat a i s
avai l abl e, but t here can be no way t o pr ove whet her t he si mul a-
t i on i s a val i d model
of
t he f i el d unt i l t he f i el d appr oaches
depl et i on.
Because of t hi s enormous uncer t ai nty, any appr oach used t o
pr oj ect f i el d pr essur e behavi or i s i n t he r eal m of conj ect ur e.
Decl i ne cur ves al l ow f or a gr eat deal of f l exi bi l i t y wi t h a
r el at i vel y si mpl e comput at i onal scheme. For t hi s model an
exponent i al decl i ne was assumed because t hi s i s a conser vat i ve
shape of cur ve and f i t s t he assumpt i on t hat t her e i s a l i m t t o
t he r esour ce. Ot her cur ves may f i t some r esour ces bet t er , but at
t hi s t i me t he dat a i s not avai l abl e t o t el l
one
way or another
whi ch t ype of decl i ne cur ve f i t s whi ch r eser voi r . Dat a f r om t he
19
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 30/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 31/164
by t he pl ant i t sel f and t her ef ore r educes t he net power out put
of
t he pl ant .
Cur r ent l y, onl y l i neshaf t pumps ar e consi der ed r el i abl e
enough
f or
geot her mal use. The l i m t on set dept h f or l i neshaf t
pumps i s ei t her 1200
or
1000 f eet accor di ng t o who you t al k t o.
For t hi s st udy an ar bi t r ar y set dept h of 1000 f eet was used f or
al l wel l s deeper t han
1000
f eet .
For
shal l ow wel l s a set dept h
of 2/ 3 of t he wel l dept h was used. Cal cul at i on of a set dept h
woul d al l ow det er m nat i on of t he benef i t s of downhol e submer si bl e
pumps. A si mpl e modi f i cat i on woul d al l ow t hi s cal cul at i on and
shoul d be i ncl uded i n t he next ver si on of t he model .
3. 6 DRI LLI NG AND COMPLETI ON
The cost of dr i l l i ng geot her mal wel l s has l ong been
r ecogni zed t o be hi gher t han t hat f or oi l and gas. Separ at i ng
out t he r easons f or t hi s i ncr ease i n cost shoul d enabl e
us
t o
est i mat e t he cost of dr i l l i ng geot her mal wel l s i n a gi ven
geol ogi c set t i ng.
3.6.1 Cur r ent Pr act i ce v. Cur r ent Technol ogy
A
number of di f f er ences i n t he t ool s and oper at i ons i n
geother mal dr i l l i ng and compl et i on make i t more expensi ve t han
i t s oi l and
gas
cousi n. The f our maj or i t ems or t r oubl es t hat
cont r i but e t o t he i ncr eased cost of geot her mal dr i l l i ng over oi l
and gas ar e 1 ) hi gh t emper at ur e,
2 )
l ost ci r cul at i on,
3)
cor r osi on and
4 )
hard f ormat i on. Ther e ar e many t hi ngs done i n
geot her mal t o cope wi t h t hese di f f er ences whi ch i ncr ease t h e
c o s t .
Temperat ure
-
Temperatur e has both a di r ect and i ndi r ect
i nf l uence on t he cost of dr i l l i ng, and compl et i on. Mud, casi ng
desi gn, cement pl acement and st r engt h, t he cement i ng pr ocedur e
used and i nst r ument at i on al l ar e mor e cost l y due
t o
hi gh t empera-
t ur e. Not onl y do t hese i t ems cost more i n or der t o wi t hst and
t he hi gher t emper at ur es, but t he f ai l ur e r at e i ncr eases
i n
t he
oper at i ons i nvol vi ng t hese i t ems due
t o
t he t emperat ur e. The
cost t o f i x f ai l ur es i s al ways hi gher t han t he cost t o pr event
t hem maki ng geot her mal even mor e expensi ve.
Lost Ci r cul at i on - I n a geot her mal r eser voi r l ost ci r cul a-
t i on i s al most essent i al . The hi gh per meabi l i t i es needed to gi ve
t he l ar ge pr oduct i on r at es necessary f or econom c geother mal
ener gy mean that geot her mal r eservoi r s ar e i n hi ghl y f r act ur ed or
ver y por ous r ocks. I n t hese r ocks dr i l l i ng f l ui d can be l ost at
a t r emendous r ate.
I f t he t emper at ur es i n t he wel l ar e not yet hi gh enough f or
a pr oducti ve wel l , t hen l ost ci r cul at i on means di f f i cul t i es. I n
t h e oi l and gas busi ness i t
i s
al ways necessar y t o st op l ost
ci r cul at i on because of t he possi bi l i t y of a hi gh pr essur e
bl owout . Hydr ot her mal r eser voi r s ar e usual l y at hydr ost at i c
o r
sub- hydr ost at i c pr essur e. Bl owout s r esul t f r om a l oss of t he
pr essur e that keeps t he hi gh t emper at ur e f l ui d f r om boi l i ng.
A s
a r esul t ,
i f
t emper at ur es ar e not yet hot enough f or t he f l ui d t o
21
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 32/164
f l ash i nt o st eam a bl owout i s l ess l i kel y. Cont r ol equi pment
can be used t hat wi l l r educe t he l i kel i hood i f a danger ous
bl owout . Ther ef or e i f l ost ci r cul at i on can not be st opped
by
or di nar y met hods t he wel l can be dr i l l ed ahead bl i nd unt i l a
casi ng poi nt can be r eached and t he l oss zone permanent l y shut
of f . However , l ost ci r cul at i on cont r ol al ways t akes t i me, and
t i me t akes money.
Lost ci r cul at i on combi ned wi t h cor r osi ve f l ui ds and hi gh
t emper at ur es can r esul t i n mor e di f f i cul t compl et i ons and i n
casi ng f ai l ur es. Lost ci r cul at i on pl ays a ver y i mpor t ant r ol e i n
pr event i ng compl et e cement j obs. Of t en t he l oss zone must b e
pl ugged bef ore cement i ng t o pr event unsuppor t ed casi ng or f l ui d
get t i ng t r apped behi nd t he casi ng. Cor r osi ve f l ui ds t r apped
behi nd t he casi ng can r educe t he casi ng l i f e. Expansi on of
t r apped f l ui ds as t hey ar e heat ed dur i ng wel l f l ow can cause
casi ng col l apse.
Cor r osi on
-
Cor r osi ve f l ui ds cause anot her set of pr obl ems
whi ch can i ncr ease t he cost of geot her mal wel l s. Cor r osi on i n
oi l and gas wel l s can be a pr obl em but t he hi gh t emper at ur es and
compl ex chem st r y of geot her mal f l ui ds vast l y i ncr ease t he cost
of
t he sol ut i on t o t he cor r osi on pr obl em i n geot her mal wel l s.
Four el ement s al l pr esent i n geot her mal cont r i but e t o t he degr ee
of
cor r osi on pr obl ems: cor r osi ve mat er i al s, oxygen, moi st ur e and
hi gh t emper at ur e. More expensi ve casi ng and dr i l l st r i ng
mat er i al s, oxygen scavengers, H S abatement equi pment and f l ui d
di sposal pr obl ems dur i ng dr i l l i ng ar e al l r el at ed t o cor r os i on.
Al l cont r i but e t o t he i ncreased cost of geot her mal wel l s.
2
Har d r ock penet r at i on - A si zabl e por t i on of geot her mal
wel l s ar e dr i l l ed i n met amor phi c and i gneous r ocks. These r ocks
t end t o be harder and mor e abr asi ve t han t he sedi ment ary r ocks
encount er ed i n oi l and gas dr i l l i ng. Rat e of penet r at i on i s
l ower and bi t l i f e i s shor t er , l eadi ng t o i ncr eased dr i l l i ng
t i me. Because l i t t l e oi l and
gas
dr i l l i ng i s done i n ver y har d
r ock, t her e i s l i t t l e equi pment avai l abl e f r om i ndustr y t o
i mpr ove t he si t uat i on and l i t t l e i ncent i ve f or i ndust r y
t o
devel op equi pment whi ch woul d sol ve t he pr obl em
I n addi t i on t o sl owi ng dr i l l i ng t i me har d rocks make
di r ecti onal dr i l l i ng mor e di f f i cul t . Tur ni ng t he hol e and
cont r ol l i ng di r ect i on i n hi ghl y f r act ur ed har d r ock t ake mor e
t i me and t her ef or e mor e money.
The r egi ons sel ect ed f or t hi s st udy wer e gr ouped t o have
common geol ogi c pr oper t i es. Thi s f aci l i t at es desi gn of a
gener i c geother mal wel l
for
each r egi on f or t he bi nar y and
f l ash syst ems whi ch wi l l have si m l ar pr oper t i es wi t h r espect t o
t he t r oubl e ar eas di scussed above.
A pr evi ous unpubl i shed st udy by Sandi a anal yzed i n some
det ai l t he oper at i ons, t i me and cost s f or dr i l l i ng of such
gener i c geot her mal wel l s. The wel l s anal yzed wer e t r oubl e f r ee.
The cost of var i ous t r oubl es was added separ at el y t o t hi s base
wel l cost . The desi gn of t he wel l coul d t hen be opt i m zed
t o
r educe cost by changi ng t he r ate of penet r at i on or other t i me
f actor s i n t he cost of t he wel l .
22
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 33/164
For
t he pr esent st udy t he wel l cost s ar e handl ed i n t he same
way. The wel l s ar e meant t o be r epr esent at i ve wel l s f or t he
power pl ant i n a gi ven r egi on. But t he cost may not appl y t o any
par t i cul ar wel l actual l y dr i l l ed i n t hat r egi on. The wel l cost
can be changed t o r ef l ect i mprovement s i n t echnol ogy by changes
i n t he cost t abl e and per f or mance t abl es used t o cal cul at e t he
base and add on cost s. The new wel l cost can t hen be ent ered
i nt o t he pr ogr am as a var i abl e.
3. 6. 2
Base wel l cost
The wel l cost s wer e cal cul at ed i n t wo st eps i ndependent l y
of
t he model code. The f i r st st ep was t o det er m ne what a t ypi cal
wel l m ght cost i n each of t he r egi ons wi t hout t he cost
of
t r oubl es such as l ost ci r cul at i on, cement i ng pr obl ems, et c. Ti me
consumed i n dr i l l i ng t hr ough har d r ock i s account ed
for
usi ng
r at es of penet r at i on est i mat ed f or di f f er ent rock t ypes. Rapi d
bi t wear due
t o
har d, abr asi ve f or mat i ons i s i ncl uded t hr ough use
of expect ed bi t l i f e f or t he envi r onment ant i ci pat ed f or t he
r egi on.
For t he pur pose of t hi s st udy dr i l l i ng was consi der ed
f i ni shed when t he t ot al dept h had been reached, t he l ast l i ner or
casi ng st r i ng cement ed and t he wel l head i n pl ace. Tubi ng needed
f or pumpi ng was consi der ed t o be r un wi t h a workover r i g and was
i ncl uded i n t he pump cost .
The appr oach t o cal cul at i ng t he wel l cost i nvol ver i nput
f r om t he geol ogi st , t he pr oducti on pl an and t he dr i l l i ng
engi neer . The st eps i n t he cal cul at i on ar e:
1) Det er m ne t he t emper at ur e pr of i l e.
From t he geol ogi c i nf or mat i on a gener al i zed t emper at ur e
pr of i l e i s est i mat ed whi ch i s r epr esent at i ve of t he r egi on.
Hi gher t emper at ur e resul t s i n i ncr eases i n t he mud cost , pr obl ems
i n cement i ng, l oggi ng cost and ot her i ncr eases. The pr of i l e
i s
t hen r ef er r ed
t o
f or est i mat i ng cost s whi ch ar e af f ect ed
by
t emper at ur e.
2 )
Make a t abl e of t he ROP/ bi t l i f e.
The cl assi f i cat i on of r at e of penet r at i on and bi t l i f e r ange
f rom
1
t o
10
wi t h 1 bei ng t he easi est t o dr i l l and 10 bei ng t he
har dest . The val ues ar e an i nt egr at i on of di scussi ons wi t h
geot her mal oper at ors, geol ogi st s, bi t user s and r evi ew of wel l
r ecor ds. Al t hough har dness i s not al ways cor r el at ed di r ect l y
wi t h bi t l i f e, har dness i s a good appr oxi mat i on of abr asi veness
whi ch det er m nes bi t l i f e.
3 Det er m ne t he ROP map f or t he wel l .
The geol ogi st and t he dr i l l i ng engi neer make a dr i l l i ng
cl assi f i cat i on pr of i l e f or each wel l usi ng t he t abl e of
ROP
and
bi t l i f e. Thi s map i s assumed t o be consi st ent wi t h t he geol ogy
and dr i l l i ng condi t i ons ant i ci pat ed on aver age over t he ent i r e
r egi on. The bi t l i f e i s si mpl i f i ed and i s consi der ed t o onl y
23
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 34/164
depend o n hardness, not temperature or abrasiveness.
4 ) Select t he standard and oversize casing program.
Past casing design used the size series 20 - 13
3/8
-
9
5/8 - 7 . current practice has in a number of cases gone to use
of
22 - 16"
-
11 3/4
-
8
5/8 and 6 . In a four element casing
string th e larger program can handle a
30%
increase in flow. For
this model both designs were used. If the production expected
from a typical well is 500,000 lb/hr or below the 20 program is
used. If the flow rate is above 500,000 lb/hr the 22 design is
used.
Casing set points and th e us e of liner strings are decided
from th e temperature profile, lost circulation map, a borehole
stability map and information on possible water inflow as well as
by consulting standard practice for existing wells.
5)
Determine th e cost of casing and transportation.
The cost for th e casing is determined from price sheet s from
commonly used suppliers of new casing. Transportation is
calculated from the mill t o the west coast. No attempt was made
to
optimize transportation cost by assuming delivery directly
from Japan to a place like Hawaii, for instance.
The cost
of
downhole casing equipment such as the casing
shoe , is costed as 200 extra feet
of
casing of that size. Where
a liner hanger or polished bore is used, th e cost is estimated a=
300 extra feet
of
that si ze casing.
This step results in a ta ble of casing costs for each well.
6 ) ake a table of t he running times
for
casing.
A table of running times for the common casing sizes was
determined
from
interviews
of
drilling engineers. The estimate
is in hours per 1000 feet of casing to be run.
7 ) Make a table of running times for
logs.
Using the estimates from th e Sandia generic wells stud y,
times for running l o g s were calculated from the casing program.
The estimate included time to condition mud, rig up f o r logging,
log and rig down th e equipment. The cost f o r logging paid t o th e
service company is included in t he well confirmation cost.
A t the end of each interval that logs will be run , th e time
estimate and day rate are used to determine the cost to set up
and run the
log.
This cost i s included in the well cost.
8 ) Make a table
of
th e cost of cementing.
Again from th e Sandia generic well work and current prac-
tice, an estimate of th e time to cement the casing and liner is
made. Added to this are the cost of the cement and t he cementing
service charge. The cement cost is calculated for th e different
siz e casings which need cementing, for the type of cement needed
24
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 35/164
f or t he appr opr i ate t emperat ur e and f or t he dept h
The t i me est i mat e
for
cement i ng i ncl udes r i g up and r i g
down, t he cement i ng t i me and t i me wai t i ng f or cement t o set .
The wel l cost s are est i mat ed over t hr ee phases: i ni t i at i on,
i nt er val s
1
t hr ough
N
and compl et i on. Tot al cost f or each phase
i s cal cul at ed usi ng i nf or mat i on f r om t he above tabl es wher e
appl i cabl e and t hen t he t ot al cost i s added up.
3.6.2.1
I ni t i at i on
Si t e cost - The si t e cost i s det er m ned f r om past exper i ence
i n si t e const r uct i on. The si t e expenses at t empt t o t ake i nt o
account t he possi bl e wel l l ocat i on and t ype of t er r ai n t hat can
be expect ed.
Geot her mal l ocat i ons are of t en i n r emot e ar eas or
di f f i cul t t er r ai n. The s i ze of t he l ocat i on may depend on t he
avai l abi l i t y of l and, t he wel l spaci ng and t he f l ui d pr oduct i on
r at e expected f r om each wel l . I f a ver y l ar ge f l ui d f l ow
i s
expect ed, a l ar ger si t e may be needed t o const r uct pi t s f or f l ui d
st or age dur i ng t est i ng. Concer n f or l ost ci r cul at i on al one
j ust i f i es t he use
of
l ar ger r eser ve pi t s. I n many f i el ds t he
desi r e t o r educe pi pi ng cost has r esul t ed i n dr i l l i ng of
cl ust er ed wel l s f r om pads. Thi s l evel of det ai l was not i ncl uded
i n t hi s ver si on of t he model .
Cel l ar
-
The cel l ar i s est i mat ed t o cost $10, 000 f or al l
si t es.
Conduct or - A t abl e was const r uct ed t o est i mat e t he cor r ect
cost f or t he conduct or pi pe. The cost depends on dept h, di ameter
of t he conduct or and t he har dness of t he s o i l . The cost var i es
f rom
$20, 000
t o
$55, 000.
Mobilization/Demobilization
- The mobi l i zat i on cost i s t he
move on/ move of f expense t hat i s a part
of
t he cont r act wi t h
t h e
dr i l l i ng r i g . Thi s amount var i es wi t h t he di st ance of t he l oca-
t i on f rom avai l abl e r i gs , t he avai l abi l i t y of r i gs and s i ze of
t he r i g. For t hi s st udy t he mobi l i zat i on cost was set at 10
t i mes t he r i g day r at e. Thi s i s i n gener al a f ai r appr oxi mat i on
of t he mobi l i zat i on char ge over var i abl e condi t i ons.
3.6.2.2
I nt er val
1
t hr ough
N
I nt er val cost s wer e cal cul at ed f or each casi ng i nt er val .
The cost s ar e comput ed f r om t he t i me of dr i l l i ng out
of
t he
s h o e
t o t he next st r i ng
of
casi ng
or
l i ner has been r un and f i xed i nt o
pl ace. The f ol l owi ng gr i d shows t he number s t o be cal cul at ed f or
each i nt er val t hat
i s
dr i l l ed. I t ems i ncl uded i n t he i nt er val
cost ar e 1 ) bi t s and t ool s, 2 ) l oggi ng t i me, 3) casi ng, 4
cement i ng and
5 )
mud cost . The f ol l owi ng char t shows t he cost s
t o be cal cul at ed f or each i nt er val dr i l l ed.
25
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 36/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 37/164
11
1
12
and
The cement i ng var i abl e cost i s comput ed f r om
t i me and t he hour l y r i g expense.
The di r ect cost f or cement i ng i s t aken f r om
t abl e.
3. 6. 2. 3
Compl et i on
t he cement i ng
t he cement i ng
Compl et i on cost s ar e est i mat ed
f r om t he cost
of
t he wel l head
t he t i me
f o r
t he oper at i ons.
The compl et i on t i me f or t he
dr i l l i ng r i g i s est i mat ed at
3
days.
Compl et i on acti vi t i es i ncl ude wel l c l eanout , i nst al l at i on
of
t he wel l head, t est acti vi t i es wi t h t he r i g
on
t he hol e and ot her
act i vi t i es r el at ed t o pr epar at i on of t he wel l f or pr oduct i on
whi ch r equi r e t he r i g.
Af t er each component cost i s cal cul at ed t he t ot al wel l cost
i s det erm ned by summ ng t he el ement s.
3.6.3 Ad d
on cost s
Thr ee maj or cost cent er s f or di f f i cul t i es whi ch add cost t o
geot hermal wel l s wer e est abl i shed by t he Sandi a gener i c wel l
st udy:
1)
l ost ci r c ul at i on,
2)
dept h r i sk; and
3 i
cement i ng
pr obl ems. Al l ot her possi bl e di f f i cul t i es wer e gr ouped t oget her
as ot her pr obl ems.
3.6.3.1
Lost Ci r cul at i on
Lost ci r cul at i on expense
was
cal cul at ed i n t wo st eps:
1) Make a t abl e of t he l ost c i r cul at i on sever i t y.
Lost ci r cul at i on cl asses ar e est i mat ed r angi ng f r om
1
t e
7
based on both t he t i me l ost and t he amount of money spent t o
Sol ve t he pr obl em The cl asses were def i ned wi t h smal l enough
di f f erences bet ween cl asses t o pr event enor mous changes i n wel l
cost
when appl i ed
over
t he ent i r e l engt h
of an i nt er val .
2)
Det er m ne t he l ost ci r cul at i on map f or t he wel l .
A l os t ci r cul at i on cl assi f i cat i on
f or
each
1000
f eet was
t hen assi gned. On aver age one such cl ass event wi l l occur f or
t hat
1000
f eet
of
hol e. Wher e l e55 t han a f ul l
1000
f oot secti on
is
dr i l l ed a f r act i onal por t i on of expense and t i me
w a s
cal cul at ed.
The r easonabl eness of t hi s r esul t was t hen t est ed agai nst
some known exper i ences. The
t i me
and money spent
on
l ost
ci r cul at i on f or act ual wel l s was f ound t o agr ee wel l wi t h t he
r egi onal wel l s used f or t hi s st udy.
3.6.3.2 Dept h
Ri sk
I n t he dr i l l i ng of any wel l f or t he pr oducti on of oi l , gas
or
geot hermal t her e i s an uncer t ai nt y about t he dept h at whi ch
t he pr oduct i on i s t o be f ound. Fai l ur e t o f i nd pr oduct i on at t he
27
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 38/164
expect ed dept h wi l l r esul t i n one
of
t hr ee deci si ons: 1 ) abandon
t he wel l and move on t o anot her l ocat i on,
2)
deepen t he wel l , and
3 pl ug back and si de t r ack.
The possi bi l i t y of abandonment i s cover ed by t he dr y hol e
f ract i on.
A
cer t ai n per cent age of wel l s ar e not econom c f or any
pur pose. Some can be t ur ned i nt o i nj ecti on wel l s i f t hey wi l l
r ecei ve suf f i c i ent f l ui d and t hat f l ui d wi l l not i nt er f er e wi t h
pr oduci ng wel l s.
The cost t o deepen t he wel l i s est i mat ed f r om t he dai l y cost
and t i me t o dr i l l f or deepeni ng
a
f i xed amount . A n aver age
deepeni ng of 500 f eet was sel ect ed f or t hi s st udy. Usi ng t he
knowl edge of general geol ogy f or a r egi on and i nt er vi ews wi t h
oper at or s t he f r act i on of wel l s r equi r i ng deepeni ng
was
chosen.
For t hi s ver si on
of
t he model t hese val ues ar e f i xed, but easi l y
coul d be i nput as var i abl es. Because t hese val ues ar e f i xed, t h e
onl y way t o show t he i mpact of i mpr oved near wel l bor e f r act ur e
det ect i on, f or i nst ance, woul d be t o r educe t he base wel l cost or
t he dry hol e or r edr i l l f r act i on.
The t hi r d possi bl e act i on t o be t aken when pr oduct i on i s
i nadequat e at t he dept h expect ed i s
t o
pl ug back and s i de t r ack
a
new l eg. The cost t o si de t r ack was cal cul at ed for sever al
di f f er ent wel l si t uat i ons and f ound
t o
aver age 22%of t he
b a s e
wel l cost wi t hout t r oubl e. The f r acti on of
wel l s
t o be r edr i l l ed
i s a var i abl e subj ect t o r i sk. Best and wor st case est i mat es f or
t he redr i l l f r act i on ar e i nput . I mpr ovement s i n expl or at i on
t echni ques, downhol e l oggi ng, dr i l l i ng t echnol ogy and compl et i on
t echnol ogy can be r ef l ect ed by reduci ng t he wor st case val ue f or
t he redr i l l f ract i on.
3. 6. 3. 3
Cement i ng Pr obl ems
The cost
of
cement i ng pr obl ems was est i mat ed si m l ar l y t o
t he cost of l ost c i rcul at i on.
1)
Make a t abl e of cement i ng t r oubl e sever i t y.
Thi s t abl e i s s i m l ar t o t he t abl e of l ost ci rcul at i on
sever i t y descri bed above. Fi ve cl assi f i cat i ons of cement i ng
di f f i cul t y wer e made r angi ng f r om a smal l amount
of
t i me and
money t o f i x t he pr obl em t o t he most sever e of f i ve days and
250, 000.
2) Make a map of t he cement i ng t r oubl es.
Usi ng t he wel l casi ng pr ogr am a map of t he wel l showi ng
number
of
i nci dent s of cement i ng t r oubl e
of
a chosen degr ee
of
sever i t y was made. The t i me f or f i xi ng t he pr obl em was t hen
mul t i pl i ed by t he dai l y r i g expense and t he cost t o f i x t he
pr obl em added f or each i nt er val . The t ot al f or t he wel l was t hen
added up.
3.6.3.4
Ot her Pr obl ems
Al l ot her pr obl ems such as t ool s l ost i n t he hol e, dr i l l
pi pe wear , devi at i on cont r ol pr obl ems and mud syst em di f f i cul t i es
20
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 39/164
were l umped t ogether . An over al l est i mat e was made t hat t hese
pr obl ems t ot al 3% of t he wel l cost .
3. 7 POWER PLANT SELECTI ON AND DESI GN
The
I M- GEO
model
uses
a power pl ant cost i ng appr oach
devel oped by EG&G I daho f or a previ ous cost of power st udy. I n
or der t o det er m ne i f t hi s appr oach mat ched cur r ent pl ant cost s,
cost s f or r epr esent at i ve pl ant s i n each of t he r egi ons wer e
exam ned. Wher e avai l abl e act ual pl ant cost s were used.
I n
ot her areas a set of i nput s such as t hose used by t he model were
gi ven t o a power pl ant engi neer and a f i r st cut cost est i mate was
made of t he cost of t he pl ant .
3.7.1 Power Pl ant Excl usi ve of Br i ne St abi l i zat i on and
Envi r onment al Cont r ol s
The l ar gest ar ea of var i abi l i t y i n t he cost of t he pl ant
i t sel f i s t he br i ne ef f ect i veness. Thi s i s dependent on t he
f l ui d ent hal py f or whi ch l i t t l e dat a i s avai l abl e. However ,
t emper at ur e r el at es i n a r el at i ve way t o f l ui d ent hal py and was
t her ef or e used as t he i nput f actor f or pl ant f l ui d r equi r ement .
Pl ant f l ui d r equi r ement s t hen det er m ne t he si ze of t he t ur bi ne
and condenser and dr i ve t he cost .
Ot her var i abl es such as t he avai l abi l i t y of cool i ng wat er ,
t he ambi ent t emper ature and t he degree of pl ant aut omat i on have
l ess ef f ect on t he t ot al cost of t he pl ant t han does t he br i ne
ef f ect i veness. However , t he choi ce of mat er i al s f or t he t ur bi ne
and pi pi ng may have a l ar ge i mpact on cost and ar e st r ongl y
i nf l uenced by t he f l ui d chem st r y. For t hi s ver si on
of
t he model
f l ui d chem st r y onl y af f ects t he need f or br i ne st abi l i zat i on
equi pment and f or envi r onment al cont r ol s. Ot her ar eas af f ect ed
by f l ui d chem st r y wer e negl ect ed f or t hi s phase.
For each r egi on a bi nary t echnol ogy power pl ant and a dual
f l ash power pl ant wer e cost ed. The power pl ant ef f i ci ency i s a
var i abl e and can be i nput t o show t he i mpact of power conver si on
t echnol ogy. For bi nar y pl ant s t he cost
of
t he heat exchanger was
i ncl uded as a separ at e i t em t o al l ow f or ease i n t yi ng t he f l ui d
chem st r y t o t he cost of t he bi nar y power pl ant .
3. 7. 2 Fi el d Pi pi ng Cost
For t hi s st udy t he cost of t he f i el d pi pi ng syst em was
est i mat ed as a separ at e cost . To det er m ne pi pi ng cost s, t h e
assumpt i on
was
made t hat phase separat i on woul d occur at t he
pl ant and a si ngl e pi pe woul d car r y two phase f l ui d
t o
t he pl ant .
I n some cases wel l head separat i on may be f easi bl e, but i n most
ar eas t he n@ed f or water t r eat ment and envi r onment al cont r ol s
pr ecl udes t hi s opt i on. The l engt h of pi pi ng was t hen determ ned
usi ng an i nput wel l spaci ng whi ch was agai n det er m ned usi ng
act ual dat a and exper t opi ni on. A pi pi ng l ayout based on uni f or m
br anchi ng pi pes f r om a cent r al pl ant wi t h i nj ect or s on t he o u t e r -
most r i ng was used to cal cul at e pi pe l engt h. The pi pi ng si ze was
based on t he f l ow r at e f r act i on i n each pi pe sect i on.
29
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 40/164
3.7.3 Brine Stabili zatio n and Environmental Controls
A large cost area for any power plant using geothermal
fluids is th e need to contend with corrosive or scaling water.
The cost
of
stabilizing brine and removing
or
neutralizing scale
and corros ion problems was c alculated a s an add o n cost based on
th e total dissolved solids content.
A
step function was used.
If
TDS
was higher than 10,000 ppm then stabilizati on was needed
and th e cost added on. It was assumed that a flash crystalizer
would be used and th e cost calculated on that basis.
The cost of environment al controls is determined in general
by th e amount of
H 2 S
in the noncondensible gases. This again was
calculated as
a
cost add on using a Stretford type abatement
system for th e base cost. Clearly other types of environmental
controls and costs may be necessary for different geothermal
fluids. Future versions of th e model could tie aspects of fluid
chemistry into th e cost o f environmental controls.
3.8
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
It would be unrealistic t o pretend that inflation , taxes and
the cost of money a re not factors in t he cost of geothermal power
plants. However, it is alway s a problem what assumptions t o make
when including thes e factors in calculating th e cost
of
geothermal power. Putting power on line takes time and that time
costs money.
A
power generation method which can get power or
line quickly has an advantage over one that is
slow.
These factors ar e included in this study using input values
show n in Appendix
A ,
on page 1-14. They can be varied t o reflect
currently accepted ide as for futu re values.
30
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 41/164
4.0 HOW
THE MODEL WORKS
presented in th e appendixes.
4.1
Data Elements
This section presents a brief overview of how
I M G E O
works.
Details are
The major data elements o f
IM-GEO
are as follows.
A. Data Base of Site Characteristics
Th e data file "SJTEDATO.DAT" contains data on physical and CG3t
characteristics of about 35 aspects o f eight
U S .
liquid-dominated
hydrothermal electric regions.
the computations.
associated with them. Thos e characteristics can be used in the costing
calculations as either a "Best Case" or "Worst Case" value.
About
20
of those characteristics are used
i n
About a dozen of thos e characteristics have "estimation errors"
B. Sensitivity Factors
These are entered by the user.
They are inferred to be "achievements
o f
R&D that alter technology performance or cost".
factors, "RISK factors" alter th e current values of the "estimation errors"
described imme diately above. Others, "R&D Achievements", impa ct upon selected
cost or performance te rm s in th e costing code that are are not covered by
"RISK factors".
Some o f the sensitivity
To avoid a possible confusion,
you
should note that "RISK factors" are
just as much achievemen ts of R&D as are "RLD Achievements" factors. The two
names are used in 1 M - G E O to distinguish between tw o sets of R&D achievements
that are calculated somewhat differently.
C. Parameters Embedded in Costing Code
Many technology performance and cost parameters and their values are
embedded directly in the costing code.
These cannot be changed without
rewriting and compiling the code.
D.
Financial Factors
Microecon omic factors that support translation of capital and
O&M values
to
Mills/KWh are contained in the data file "BUSFNFCT.GE0".
31
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 42/164
4.2 General Flow of Computation
The general flow computation i s shown i n Figure
4 - 1 .
There a re four s teps .
1. User e d i t s / a l t e r s s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o rs .
2. Computations occur.
a. A f i r s t p a s s t h r o u g h the cos t ing code es t ima tes
t h e
"Best Case"
cos t o f power.
b. The second pass estimates the "Worst Case" cost of power.
c.
The
difference between the two cases i s ass igned to " F i n a n c i a l
3. User views one or more Reports ava ila ble a f t e r computations are done.
Risk" sub-account.
B o t h
Multi-Region and Single-Region/Site reports are
a v a i l a b l e .
4 . User decides
t o
p r i n t one or more Reports.
The "Base Case",
which assumes R&D Achievements are zero, can be a l t e r e d
The control
s t r u c t u r e
o f IM -GE O,
represented
i n
Figure 4-2 ensures
t h a t
a t any t ime
t o
reflect accomplished improvements i n th e base1 ine technolo gies.
every resu l t s sc reen o r R e por t ge ne r a t e d w i l l r e f l e c t t he e f f e c t s of a l l
s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s t h a t a r e a c t i v e a t the time the repo r t i s genera ted.
The pre sen tat ions avai
1ab1
e are descr ibed
n
d e t a i l i n Appendix
C.
32
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 43/164
FIGURE 4 - 1
OVERVIEW OF IM-GEO CALCULATIONS
EDITED SENSITIVITY
FACTORS
1.
R&D
Achievements
2. RI'KS re Physical
characteristics o f
power project (a)
3. Regional Weights
for Multi-Site
Totals
Note (a):
Physical RISK factors
are mostly related to
uncertainties o f reservoir
characteristics.
COST NG "ENGINE '
A. Find Plant Gross Size
B.
Find Floh Eequirement
C. Find per-Well Cost
D.
Find Accounts Costs:
1.
Identify Reservoir
2.Confirm Reservoir
3.Well
s
4.
athering Equip
.
5.Downhole Pumps
6.
ower P1 ant
7.Heat Exchangers
8.Brine Stabilizing
9.
Environmental
10. nsurance
(On A.3 - A.9)
E.
Find TOTAL Cost
F .
F i n d
Financial RISK
( b )
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
( O f A.1.- A . l O )
Note ( b ) :
Financial
RISK
is the difference
in cost
between
t w o cost estimates for th e project, one bas ed< on
"Best Case" and the other based on "Worst Case"
estimates of the si te and technology physical or
cost characteristics.
3 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 44/164
F IGURE
4 -
2
OVERVIEW OF CONTROL STRUCTURE OF IM-GEO
I
STARTUP :
Data f a c t o r s lo ad ed
Base case ca l cul ated
I
M E N U [Z]
I
*
Help
Change the
Base Case
* Go t o Menu [ V I
* [ Q l u i t t o DOS
I
v
M E N U
[ V I
I
* 'Single-Si te runs
and Reports.
*
Mu l t i -S i t e
runs
and Reports.
*
Go
t o Menu
[Z]
I
' PROGRAM CONTROL LO G IC
* Runs calculat ion rout ines
au tomat ica l ly t o ensure
t h a t
every Repor t s re f l ec t s
*
E d i t
s e n s i t i v i t y
f a c t o r s .
/--------,--,-,,,-,--------,-,-
I
< - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
\,,-;,,--,--,,,,,,,,-----------
the cur ren t va lues
o f
I s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s .
* Stamps same Time on a l l
r e p o r t s
t h a t
emanate from
same set
of
s e n s i t i v i t i e s .
v
I
REPORTS
(Major
repor t s inc lude a l i s t o f a l l
s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s i n operat ion a t
time
o f
cal cul a t o n . )
3 4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 45/164
4 . 3 A Few General Matters
4.3.1
Power-On-Line (POL) Temporal Relationships
t ime i s 3 years .
value, and depends on the Probabil i ty of Success of Identification; w i t h
a
typical value of 6 t o
7
years .
(Account 3) i s s e t a t 3
y e a r s .
The costs for Accounts
1
and 2 a re e s t i n a t ed a t e a r l y
1986
l ev e l s ,
a n d
e s c a la t e d t o t h e POL da te a t a fixe d Discount Rate. T h i s accounts
for
the
r e t e r r rsturn E=fe cts due
t o
l a g s between ex?wditures i n those phases
a n d
t - 2
F d z t e ,
b,-
a l s o r e s u l t s
i n
a
s l i g h t
o v t - ? s t i ma t i o n
o f
t h e i r e f f e c t s
on
t h e c o s t
o f
power because al l costs are es t imated at 1986 levels .
reservoir pressure and wel l
f l o w
ra te dec l ines appears i n appropriate O& M
accounts fo r Wells, G athering equipment, etc .
A l l c o s t s a r e r e f l e c t e d t o a POL date of
J a n u a r y
1,
1986.
Construction
P l a n t l i f e i s s e t a t 30 years.
The durat ion of the ident i f icat ion s tage (Account 2) i s a calculated
The
d u r a t i o n
of the confi rmat ion s tage
The costs of the supplemental field equipment needed
t o
deal w i t h
4.3.2
WEIGHTS f o r Cost
o f
Power
T o t a l s
Weights
[ I ]
"Regional Potential"
and [ L ]
"Program Relevance"
b o t h depend
on the S i t e Data var ia b le
l . ,
"Energy
i n
Region, M W * 3 0 Y " . This variable h a s
risk assoc ia ted w i t h i t , whose
i m p a c t
i s changeable a t Screen [ Y , E ] , l i n e A.
These weights, and th e general weighted sums, ar e re ca lcu lat ed a f t e r the value
of i tem [Y ,E ] , l i n e
A i s
changed.
Weight [L], "Program Relevance" depends
u p o n
the Base Case cost
o f
power
as
well
as upon the "Energy
i n
Region, MW*30Y". The dependence i s as
f 01 1ows
:
a) The weight i s the product of the "Energy
i n
Region" and a Utility
b )
i h e U t i l i t y f u n ct io n is:
fun ctio n de rive d from th e Region's Base Case co st of power.
1.
I f the cos t o f power
i s
l e s s t h a n o r equal t o
80
Mills/KWh, then
U = (Cost
o f
Power)/BO.
T h u s ,
U would be
1.0
a t
80
Mills/KWh, and
0.5
a t
40 Mills/KWh.
2. I f t h e c o s t o f power
i s
g r e a t e r
t h a n 80 Mills/KWh,
then
U
= 80/(Cost of Power). T h u s , U
would be 0.5 a t 160 Mills/KWh,
0.25
a t
160 Mills/KWh,
e t c .
T h i s
U t i l i t y f u n c t i o n
i s
intended t o re f l e c t the Program's in te res t i n
conducting RLD t h a t
will most
b en e f i t p o t e n t i a l power plants
t h a t
a r e
a t or
near the competit ive economic
margin.
35
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 46/164
4.3 .3 Non-Linearit ies i n Results
of R&D achievements upon t h e co s t of power are, i n general , no t l i n ea r .
impac t on the cost of power
will
be l ess
t h a n
the s u m of the impacts
o f
each
set of achievements acting alone.
e a r l i e r v e r si on
of
IM-GEO.
R&D managers w h o use t h i s model should note, above a l l , t h a t the impacts
I n general, when
t w o
s e t s of R&D achievements are combined, the result ing
For example, consider these resul ts from a s ingle p l a n t case, using an
S e n s i t i v i t y Fac tors
Cost per P l a n t
S a v i n g
i n Cost of
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Case We1 1 Ef fi ci en cy Power, Percen t
-
1.
0.7
1 .o 10.0
2 .
1
.o
1 .2 8.5
3 .
0 .7
1 .2 17 .4
1.
2 .
3 .
0.7
1 .o
1 .o 1 .2
0 .7
1 .2
10.0
8.5
17.4
I n th i s case , the combined sav ings a re l ess t h a n the sum
of
t h e "p a r t s "
because a more ef f i c ien t p l a n t requ i res fewer wel l s
t o
serve i t .
Thus t h e
savings due t o well cos t reduct ion are appl ied
t o
fewer wel ls
i n
Case 3 t h a n
i n
Case 1.
This
is
n o t
a "problem"
i n
a technical sense,
a l t h o u g h i t
can
o f t e n
seem
like a problem
i n
the "psychological" sense.
cost ing codes take
i n t o
account many o f t h e
major
ways i n which di fferent
phys ica l fac to rs and t echnology per formance co ef f i c ie n t s in te rac t t o re su l t i n
a f i n a l co s t o f power from a s p ec i f i c p ro j ec t .
I t s i m p l y means
t h e
IMGE O
T h i s effect does mean
t h a t
the bes t represen ta t ion of t h e i m p ac t s u p o n
the co st -o f power expected
t o
r e s u l t f r o m t h e e f f o r t s of the R D Program as a
- hole shou ld be entered by merging a l l an t i c i p a t ed
R&D
Achievements i n t o a
s m e e t of Ac hie vem en ts, and th en runn ing the program. See the section on
"Merging Mu1 t i p l e Se ts of R&D Achievements".
achfevement
will
be represented best against a "background"
of
the in tegra ted
set of achievements.
T h i s
means, for example t h a t t h e
impact
of the
30 %
reduct ion i n the cos t o f wel l s
i n
the example above
would
be best represented
by the va lue
17.4 - 8.5 -
8.9
percent ,
r a t h e r
t h a n
t h e
10
percent found by
ente ring the wel l co st achievement alone. Thus, f in al claims regarding the
overal l impact of s ingle
R D
programs s h o u l d be estimated by s u b t r a c t i n g those
achievements from the more global set of achievements of
t he
R D Program as a
who1 e.
I t
means t h a t t h e e s t i ma t e of the f i n a l impac t of any s i n q l e
-
3 6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 47/164
4 . 3 . 4 Merging Multiple Sets of
R&D
Achievements
be merged into a common set of R&D Program Achievements, then some o f t h e i r
an t i c ipa ted
R D
Achievements are l ikely
t o
overlap,
i n
t e rms
of
IM-GEO
s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s .
i n
ma ter ia l s fo r cas ings could reduce the o ve ra l l - co s t o f th e cas ing
p o r t i o n
of the wel l costs .
f a m i l i a r w i t h th e techno logy 8,s a whole. Id ea ll y t h a t resolution should be
done by the
R D
Program managers.
technical inwts
and
assessments
from
re se a. :hers - .
; I ther analysts wi i l be
When two or more independent se t s of an ti ci pa te d R&D Achievements are t o
For example, both changes
i n
well
d r i l l i n g
procedure
a n d
Such overlaps mustAbe resolved i n reasonable ways
by
an a l y s t s who are
I t i s
t r
5e an? pioa ted however, t h a
rea.
open t o possible charges of "double counting" the impacts of selected
achievements.
- d to complete such a process .
I f such a process
i s n o t
done, then the R D Program as a whole rema
ns
4 .3 .5
Error Messages
i n
d a t a
inputs .
ci rcumstances .
m u l t i p l i e r t o
0,,
then a "Division by Zero" message will occur, and the program
wi ll ter m ina te. Your work w il t be l o s t , and yo u'l l have t u s tar t over.
The IM-GEO code i s protected from many b u t n o t a l l poss b le user e r ro rs
Divis ion
by
zero can be attempted under certain
For example i f the user se t s
a
power plant eff iciency
3 7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 48/164
5.0 EXAMPLES
OF
ANALYSES
I n
t h i s s e c t i o n we p r e s e n t a fe w p r e l i m i n a r y e x am pl es o f how ch an ges i n
s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o rs a f f e c t t he c os t o f p o w e r r e s u l t s .
The examples shown i n
t h i s s e c t i o n a r e d ra wn f r o m V e r si o n 2.08 o f t h e m od el , a nd a r e n o t a c c u r a t e
f o r R8D im pa c t ana l y s i s pu rposes .
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c u r r e n t G e o th e r ma l R8D p ro gr am , a nd t h e r e f o r e s h o u l d n o t
be
c o n s t r u e d
as
r e f l e c t i n g a n y th i ng r e al .
p r e s e n t d e t a i l e d i n p u t s a nd o u t p u t s f o r e ac h c as e.
The 'RaD Ac hievem ents" we re s el e ct e d
by
an a n a l y s t w i t h n o d ee p
The cases and r e s u l t s summ ar i zed i n t h e t a b l e b e lo w.
The
f o l l o w i n g
pages
P r e l i m i n a r y R e s u l t s f r o m D r a f t
I M - G E O
Code
N ot f o r C i t a t i o n
or
P u b l i c a t i o n
Impact on Cost o f
Power , Percent
spe ct o f RLD Program
1.
IMPROVEMENTS I N WELLS -
7.1
2.
IMPROVEMENTS
I N DOWN
HOLE
PUMPS
-
1.5
3 . IMPROVEMENTS I N RESERVOIR
IDENT I f I CAT
I N/ ENGINEERING
- 20.2
4. IMPROVEMENTS I N
POWER
PLANTS -
7.3
5. ABOVE FOUR ACHIEVEMENTS
COMBINED
- 29.1
6.
COMBINED ACHIEVEMENTS, AT LOWER
LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT - 17.0
3 8
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 49/164
5.1
IMPROVEtlENTS IN WELLS
G E O T H E R M A L - C O S T OF P O W E R E S T I M A T E R U N : 02-24-1987 - 00:50:23
Mu1
ti-Region Weighted Averaged Data WEIGHTS
=
Regional Capacity
[From IMGEO Model]
TECHNOI.
% OF 1986 % COST %
OF
N E W
ACCOUNT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1986 *****
N E W
TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM
******
&***** TECHNOLOGY CHANGE
TECH.
TOTAL
OF C OS T ELECT. COST FROM
1986 E L E C T . C OS T
- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TOTAL
:
100.0
92.9 - 7.1
100.0
RISK FRACTION
: 27.3
25.2
-
7.8
27.1
1.
Identify Reservoir 7.1 5.7 - 19.6
6.1
2. Confirm Reservoir
7.1
6.2 -
13 . 3
6.6
3. Wells
31.3 26.7
-
14.5
28.8
5.
Gathering Equip. 8.5 8.5
-
0.0
9.2
6. Power
Plant
30.8
30.8
- 0.0 33.2
7.
Heat Exchangers
5.4 5.4
- 0.0
5 . 8
8. Brine Stabilizing
1.4 1.4
-
0 . 0
1.6
9. Environmental
2 . 0
2 . 0 - 0.0
2.1
10.
Insurance
2.9
2.7
- 6.7 2 . 9
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - . - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4. Downhole Pumps 3.5 3.5 - 0.0 3.7
+**************e*** RESULTS NOT VALID FOR CITATION t*****************t*t*
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IM-GEO: SENSITIVITY FACTORS I N EFFECT 02-24-1987 - 00:50:23
R&D Achvmt:
TOTAL Cost, Avg. Well [Nom.=l.O]: 0.90
R&D Achvmt: Well Prblms, Lost Circul [Nom.=l.O]: 0.50
RLD
A c h v m t :
Well Prblms, Cementing [Nom.=l.O]: 0.40
R&D Achvmt:
Well Prblms, Other [Nom.=l .O]: 0.80
39
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 50/164
5.2 IMPROVEMENTS I N DOWN HOLE PUMPS
GEOTHERMAL COST
OF
POWER ESTIMATE RUN:
02-24-1987
-
00:52:26
M u l t i - R e g i o n W e ig h te d A v er a ge d D a t a WEIGHTS
-
R e g i o n a l C a p a c i t y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[From
IMGEO
Model)
ACCOUNT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TOTAL
:
R I S K
FRACTION :
1. Jdent
i
y R e s e r v o i r
2 . C o n f i rm R e s e r v o i r
3 .
W e l l s
4 .
Downhole Pumps
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1986
TECHNOL.
% OF COST
*********
----..----
100.0
27.3
7.1
7.1
3 1 . 3
3.5
- - - - - - - - -
***** NEW TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM
******
% OF 1986 X COST X OF NEW
TECHNOLOGY CHANGE TECH. TOTAL
ELECT. COST FROM 1986 ELECT.
COST
5. Gat he r i ng E qu ip .
8.5
8.5 - 0.0 8.6
6.
Power P lan t 30.8 30.8
- 0.0
31.3
7.
Heat Exchangers
5.4 5.4
- 0 .0
5.5
8. B r i ne S t a b i l t i n g
1.4
1.4
- 0.0 1.5
9. E nv i ronm en t a l
2.0 2.0
-
0 .0
2 .0
10. I n s u r a n c e 2 .9
2.9
-
0.3
2 . 9
*******e*********** RESULTS NOT VALID FOR CITATION +++*******+****+******
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I M - G E O :
SENSIT IVI TY FACTORS I N EFFECT
02-24-1987
-
00:52:26
R&D Achvmt: Cap.Cost, Deep Wel l
Pump [Nom.=l.O]: 0 .80
R&D Achvmt:
O&M
Cost, Deep Wel l
Pump
[Nom.=l.OJ: 0.50
4 0
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 51/164
5.3 IMPROVEMENTS I N RESERVOIR
IDENTIFICATION/
E N G I N E E R I N G
GEOTHERMAL
COST OF POWER ESTIMATE RUN: 02-24-1987 01:10:58
Multi-Region
Weighted
Averaged
Data
WEIGHTS
=
Regional
Capacity
1986 ***** N E W
TECHNOLOGY
SYSTEM
******
[From IMGEO Model J TECHNOL. X OF 1986
%
COST X OF NEW
*********
.TECHNOLOGY CHANGE TECH. TOTAL
ACCOUNT X
OF
COST ELECT.
COST
FROM
1986
E L E C T . COST
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TOTAL : 100.0 79.8
- 20.2 100.0
RISK FRACTION :
27.3 15.6
- 42.8 19.6
I . Identify Reservoir
7.1
3.3
- 53.5 4.1
2. Confirm
Reservoir
7.1 7.1
-
0.0
8.9
3. Wells 31.3
22.5 -
22.2
2 E . 2
4. Downhole
Pumps 3.5
2.4
- 32.2 3.0
5.
Gathering
Equip.
8.5 5.9
-
30.7 7.4
6. Power Plant
30.8 28.0
- 9.0 35.1
7.
Heat Exchangers
5.4
4.9 - 10.1
6.1
8.
Brine
Stabilizing 1.4 1.4
-
0.0
1.8
9 .
Environmental
2.0 2.0
- 0.0 2.5
10. Insurance 2.9
2.3 - 19.1
2.9
- - - - - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*******************
RESULTS
NOT
VALID FOR CITATION
t***+*******t*t+tt+*+*
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IM-GEO: SENSITIVITY FACTORS I N
EFFECT
02-24-1987 01:10:58
R8D
Achvmt:
Wildcat
Success Ratio [Nom.=l.O]:
1.50
R&D Achvmt:
Dry Holes / Producer
[Nom.=l.O]:
0.60
R&D
Achvmt: F l o w Rate, Producer [Nom.=l.O]: 1.20
RISK: Well
head Temperature, F
[Nom:=l
.O]
:. 0.60
RISK:
Prod.
Well Flow,
Klb/hr
[Nom.=l.O]
:
0.60
RISK:
Flow
for
Decline, Klb/hr [Nom.=l.O]
:
0.60
RISK:
Decline Coeff., l/Years
[Nom.-1.01
: 0.60
4 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 52/164
5.4 IMPROVEMENTS I N POWER PLANTS
GEOTHERMAL COST OF POWER ESTIMATE
RUN:
02-24-1987
-
01:13:16
M u1 i -Reg ion We igh t ed A ve raged Da t a
WEIGHTS
=
R e g i o n a l C a p a c i t y
1986 ***** NEh' TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM ******
[From
IMGEO
Model
J
TECHNOL.
SC
OF 1986
X
COST
X OF
NEW
********* TECHNOLOGY CHANGE TECH. TOTAL
ACCOUNT
X
OF COST ELECT. COST FROM 1986 ELECT. COST
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - - e . - -
- - - - - - - . - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - _
TOTAL :
100.0
92.7
- 7.3
100.0
RISK FRACTION
:
27.3 23.1
- 15.3 24.9
1.
1der.t
i y R e s e r v o i r 7 . 1
6.9
5 7.5
2.
C o n f i r m R e s e r v o i r
7 . 1
7 .1
- b.0
7 .7
3 . W e l l s 31.3
26.6
-
15 .1 28 .6
4 . Downhole Pumps
3.5
2.7
-
21 .3 2 .9
5 .
G a t h e r i n g E q u i p .
a .
5 6 . 6
-
22 .0 7 .2
6. P ower P lan t
3 0 . 8 30.6
- 0.6
33 .0
7. Heat Exchangers 5.4
6.0
11 .o 6.5
8.
B r i n e S t a b i l i z i n g 1.4 1 .4
-
0.0
1 . 6
9 .
E nv i ronm en t a l
2 . 0
2 . 0
- 0 . 0 2 . 1
10.
I n s u r a n c e
2 . 9
2 . 7
-
7 .5 2 .9
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c - - - - - - - - - -
- - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*+***************** RESULTS NOT VALID FOR CITATION
*****++*******t*******
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - _ c _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ c _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - e - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I M - G E O : SENSITIVITY FACTORS I N EFFECT
02-24-1987
-
01: 13: 16
RLD Achvmt: E f f i c i e n c y , FLASH P l a n t [Nom.=l .O
R&D Achvmt: E f f i c i e n c y , BINARY P l a n t (Nom.-1.0
RLD Achvmt: Cap. Co st , BINARY P l a n t (Nom.=l.O]:
1.05
R&D Achvmt: Cap. Co st , H e a t Exch ange (Nom.=l.O]:
1.30
RLD Achvmt:
OLM
Cost , He at tx ch an ge (Nom.=l.O]:
0 . 9 0
4 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 53/164
5.5 ABOVE FOUR
ACHIEVEMENTS
COMBINED
GEOTHERMAL
COST
OF POWER
E S T I M A T E
RUN:
02-24-1987 01:16:16
Mu1t i Region Weighted Averaged Data WEIGHTS
-
Re g io n a l Ca p a c i t y
[From I M G E O Model] TECHNOL. X OF 1986 % COST X OF N E W
ACCOUNT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1986
*****
NEW
TECHNOLOGY
SYSTEM ******
********* TECHNOLOGY CHANGE TECH. T O T A L
X
OF
COST ELECT.
COST
FROM
1986
ELECT. COST
- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TOTAL
:
100.0 70.9 - 29.1 100.0
R I S K F R A C T I O N :
27.3 13.1
- 52.0 18.5
1. I d e n t i f y R es er v oi r
7.1
2.6 - 62.5
3.7
- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
2. C o n f i r m R e s e r v o i r
7.1 6.2
-
12.7
8.8
3. W e l l s
31.3 17.0
- 45.8 23.9
4.
Downhole Pumps 3.5
1.1
-
67.9 1.6
5. Ga th e r i n g Eq u ip .
8.5
4.8
-
43.6
6.8
6. Power P lan t
30.8 28.1 - 8.7
39.7
7. H e a t Exchangers 5.4 5.5
1.2
7.8
8. B r i n e S t a b i l i z i n g 1.4 1.4 - 0.0
2.0
9.
En v i ro n me n ta l
2.0 2.0 - 0.0
2.8
10.
I n s u r a n c e
2.9
2.1
-
26.8
3.0
******************* RESULTS
NOT V A L I D
FOR C I T A T I O N
tt+t***t****tt*****i**
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I M - G E O : S E N S I T I V I T Y F A C T O R S I N
EFFECT
02-24-1987 01:16:16
R&D
Ach vmt: W i l d ca t Su ccess Ra t i o
[Nom.=l.O]:
R&D
Achvmt: TOTAL Cost, Avg. Well
[Nom.=l.O]:
R&D
Achvmt: Dry Ho le s
/
Pro d u ce r [Nom.-1.01
:
R&D Achvmt: F low Rate, Pr oduce r [Nom.=l
.O ] :
R&D Achvmt : E f f i c i en c y , FLASH Pl an t [Nom.=l .O]:
R8D
A c h v m t :
E f f i c i e n c y , BINARY P l a n t [Nom.-1
. O ] :
RbD Achvm t: Cap. Cos t, BINARY P l a n t [Nom.=l.O]:
R&D
Achvm t: Cap.Cost, Deep We ll Pump
[Nom.-1.01:
R&D Achvmt: O&M Co st , Deep We ll Pump [Nom.=l.O]:
R&D Achvmt: Cap. Cost, Hea t Exchange [Nom.=l.O]:
R&D
Achvmt: ObM
Cost,
Heat Exchange
[Nom.-1.01:
R&D Ach vmt: We l l P rb lms , L o s t C i rc u l [Nom.-1.01:
R&D
Achvmt
:
We1
1
P r b l
ms
, Cementing
[Nom. -1.01 :
R&D
Achvmt : We l l Prb lms, Other
[Nom.-1
.O] :
1.50
0.90
0.60
1.20
1.05
1.20
1.05
0.80
0.50
1.30
0.90
0.50
0.50
0.80
R I S K : Wel lhead Tempera tu re , F [Non.=l .O]
: 0.60
R I S K :
Prod . We l l
F l o w ,
K l b / h r [Nom.-1.01
: 0.60
R I S K :
Flow
f o r D e c l i n e , K1 b / h r
[Nom.-1
.O] :
0.60
R I S K : D e c l i n e C o e f f . , l / V e a r s (Nom.=l .O]
:
0.60
4 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 54/164
5.6
the i mpac ts that might occur from an overall-lower set o f achievements.
COMBINED ACHIEVEMENTS, AT LOWER LEVELS
The achievements used in section 5.5 we re each reduced slightly, to
show
IM-GEO: SENSITIVITY FACTORS I N EFFECT 02-24-1987
-
01:20:47
R&D Achvmt: Wildcat Success Ratio
R&D
Achvmt: TOTAL Cost, Avg. Well
R&D
Achvmt: Dry Holes
/
Producer
R&D
Achvmt: Flow Rate, Producer
R&D
Achvmt: Efficiency, FLASH Plant
R&D Achvmt: Efficiency, B l N A R Y Plant
R&D Achvmt: Cap. Cost, BINARY Plant
R&D Achvmt: Cap.Cost, Deep Well Pump
R&D
Achvmt: O&M Cost, Deep Well Pump
R&D
Achvmt: Cap. Cost, Heat Exchange
R&D
Achvmt:
O&M
Cost, Heat Exchange
R&D Achvmt: Well Prblms, Lost Circul
R&D
Achvmt: Well Prblms, Cementing
R&D Achvmt: Well Prblms, Other
Nom.=l .O]:
Nom.=l.O]:
Nom.=l.O]:
Nom.-1 .O] :
Nom. ~ 1 . 0:
Nom.=l.O]:
Nom.=l.O]:
Nom.-1.01:
Nom.=l.O]:
Nom.=l .O]
:
Nom.=l .O] :
Nom.=l.O]:
Nom.=l.O]:
Nom.=l.O]:
1.20
0.95
0.80
1.10
1.02
1.10
1.05
0.90
0.80
1.20
0.95
0.80
0.80
0.90
RISK:
Wellhead Temperature,
F
[Nom.=l.O] :
0.80
RISK:
Prod. Well Flow, Klb/hr [Nom.=l .O] : 0.80
RISK: Flow fo r Decline, Klb/hr [Nom.=l.O]
:
0.80
RISK: Decline Coeff., l/Years [Nom.=l .O] : 0.80
4 4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 55/164
6. 0
RECOMMENDATI ONS
These areas f or cont i nuat i on and i mpr ovement
of
t hi s wor k
r emai n: 1) ext end t hi s model t o al l ow cal cul at i on of i ncrease i n
r esour ce avai l abi l i t y due t o t echnol ogy i mpr ovement ,
2 )
extend
t he l evel of det ai l of t hi s model , and
3)
pr oduce si m l ar model s
f or hot dry r ock, geopr essured and magma energy sys t ems.
6. 1
Resour ce Avai l abi l i t y
The pr esent model shows t he percent age r educt i on i n cost of
power due t o t echnol ogy achi evement s f or 6 r egi ons wi t h t he
potent i al f or near t erm geot hermal power devel opment . Usi ng
updat ed i nf or mat i on f r om t he
USGS
on r esour ce si ze and t empera-
t ur e, t he model coul d be pr ogr ammed t o al so show how t hi s cost
r educt i on br i ngs more
resources
i nt o econom c avai l abi l i t y.
T h i s
woul d l ar gel y i nvol ve car ef ul i nput on r esour ce si ze and char ac-
t er i st i cs and
a
cut of f f or an econom c pr i ce
of
power , perhaps
on a r egi onal basi s.
6. 2
Ext end Level of Det ai l
At sever al poi nt s i n t he di scussi on of t he model st at ement s
are i ncl uded whi ch i ndi cat e where i nt er act i ons bet ween var i abl es
wer e negl ect ed or f i xed i nput s were used where var i abl es waul d be
more appr opr i at e. I n any pr ogr amm ng ef f or t deci si ons ar e made
about t he l evel of det ai l t o be i ncl uded whi ch are cont r ol l ed by
t he avai l abi l i t y of t i me and money. The mor e var i abl es al l owed
as i nput t he more compl ex t he t ask of oper at i ng t he model .
Fut ur e ver si ons of t he model coul d i ncr ease t he compl exi t y
of t he model and i ncr ease t he number of i nt eract i ons pr ogr ammed
i nt o t he code. The areas where t hi s woul d be of most benef i t
i ncl ude:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Extend power pl ant i nt er act i ons bet ween pl ant cost and f l ui d
chem st r y i ncl udi ng t ot al di ssol ved sol i ds, non- condensi bl e
gases and per haps speci f i c di ssol ved chem cal speci es.
I ncr ease t he detai l i n t he code deal i ng wi t h pumpi ng power
t o
i ncl ude cal cul at i on of i ncreased wel l pr oduct i vi t y f r om
i ncr eased set dept h. Thi s woul d i nvol ve pr ogr amm ng i n
pr oduct i vi t y cur ves f or t he r epr esent at i ve wel l s f or each
r egi on and woul d be f ai r l y compl ex. However , t he cur r ent
ver si on
woul d r equi r e t he user t o cal cul at e t he i ncr eased
wel l f l ow f r om i ncr easi ng t he pump set dept h and i nput a new
wel l f l ow.
The cur r ent model ver si on does not consi der r eservoi r heat
depl et i on. Thi s i s a compl ex i ssue and woul d not be easy t o
pr ogr am i n accur at el y. A si mpl i st i c model of heat depl et i on
usi ng a decl i ne cur ve appr oach coul d be used unt i l t he model
coul d be combi ned wi t h
a
r eservoi r model such as t hat devel -
oped by Paul Kr uger of St anf ord.
Li nki ng t he code wi t h
a
r eser voi r model woul d al l ow f or mare
accur at e est i mat i on
of
t he ef f ect of f l ui d depl et i on and
pr essure dr awdown i n t he r eservoi r .
45
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 56/164
5. At pr esent t he model uses a si mpl e al gor i t hm t o cal cul at e
t est i ng cost s f or each wel l dur i ng each phase of
devel opment . I t woul d be f ai r l y easy t o make some of t he
i nput s t o t hi s t est i ng al gor i t hm i nput var i abl es so t hat
t he
ef f ect of l onger t est i ng or mor e cost l y t est i ng on t he cost
of power coul d be cal cul at ed. Si nce wel l t est i ng i s an ar ea
whi ch i s l i kel y t o r educe r eser voi r r i sk, t hi s woul d make
t he model r ef l ect cost i ncreases associ at ed w t h t hat r i sk
r educt i on mor e easi l y. Thi s i s al so t r ue of t he cost
of
wel l l oggi ng whi ch i s pr ogr ammed i n as a f unct i on dependent
on dept h and t emper ature. The onl y way t o change t he cost
i n t he cur r ent ver si on of t he model i s t o change t hi s
f unct i on. Thi s i mpr ovement woul d al l ow t he cal cul at i on of
t he i mpact of speci f i c t echnol ogy i mpr ovement s i n t he ar ea
of r eservoi r t est i ng and i nst r ument at i on. Because we know
t he amount of measur ement er r or r esul t i ng f r om use
of
i naccur at e t est procedur es and i nst r ument at i on, i t i s easy
t o det er m ne t he r i sk r educt i on f r om i mpr ovement s of t hi s
t ype
6.
The model does not account
for
l ong t er m changes i n
r eser voi r chem st r y. Thi s i s a compl ex pr obl em f or whi ch no
si mpl e sol ut i on seems adequate. However , r ecent
work
i n
thi s area h a s i ndi cat ed t hat CO, i n t he r eser voi r may
decr ease wi t h t i me. Wel l s i n Haeai i have i ncr eased i n
sal i ni t y wi t h cont i nued pr oduct i on. Consi der at i on of t hese
r esul t s may l ead t o t he possi bi l i t y
of
model i ng t hese
ef f ect s . ~
I
7. I ncl ude t he wel l cost i ng al gor i t hm as par t
of
t he model .
Thi s woul d al l ow cal cul at i on of changes i n t he wel l cost
wi t hi n t he model and woul d enabl e t he
R
& D manager t o see
t he i mpact of ver y det ai l ed t echnol ogy i mpr ovement s i n t he
area
of
Har d Rock Penet r at i on.
6. 3
Extend Model t o I ncl ude Non- Hydr ot her mal Resour ces
I n or der t o ext end t hi s wor k t o i ncl ude t hese r esour ces,
subst ant i al modi f i cat i on woul d need t o be made t o t he code.
Each
of t hese ener gy sour ces uses some modi f i cat i on of a st andard
power conver si on cycl e t o expl oi t t he heat of a f l ui d. However ,
t he wel l cost , expl orat i on cost and r eservoi r management
t echni ques woul d be ver y di f f erent . Each energy t ype woul d have
t o be consi der ed separatel y usi ng a syst ems anal ysi s appr oach t o
det er m ne t he cost of devel opment .
There have been ef f or t s t o model t he cost of Hot Dr y Rock
geother mal ener gy. Cer t ai nl y f or t he power conver si on t echnol ogy
t hese w l l f or m a good basi s. For ot her aspect s of t he Hot Dr y
Rock conver si on pr ocess , such as wel l cost and r eser voi r
management , new approaches t o t hese sect i ons woul d have t o
be
made. Pr ogr ess on t he Hot
Dry
Rock Pr oj ect i ndi cat es t hat t he
f r act ur es pr oduced at dept h f or heat exchange w t h t he r eservoi r
ar e di f f er ent f r om t hose ant i ci pat ed. New i deas f or wel l
compl et i on st r at egi es are bei ng gener at ed.
A
user sel ect ed
mul t i pl e scenar i o appr oach t o wel l const r uct i on m ght be usef ul .
46
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 57/164
Wel l cost and power gener at i on f r om f l ui d heat
for
geopr essur ed geothermal coul d pr obabl y be cal cul at ed usi ng t he
exi st i ng code. However , ot her aspect s of ener gy conver si on. such
as
use of f l ui d mechani cal energy and separ at i on and sal e of
pet r ol eum f l ui ds woul d have t o be added. Agai n a mul t i pl e
scenar i o appr oach coul d be used here.
For magma energy ext r act i on use of mul t i pl e scenar i os
f o r
t he wel l compl et i on m ght be essent i al . Si nce a syst em anal ysi s
has been done at l east i n par t by Sandi a, t hi s i nf or mat i on coul d
be i ncor por at ed i nt o t he model reduci ng t he t i me and ef f or t
needed f or codi ng. Expl or at i on and r eser voi r conf i r mat i on
st r at egi es woul d need t o be determ ned and new sect i ons coded f or
t he model .
The l ar ge pot ent i al
of
t hese three energy conver si on t eChnG-
l ogi es more t han mer i t s t he ef f or t t hat woul d be r equi r ed t o
i ncl ude t hen i n t he cost of power model S O t hat t he i mpact of R
1c
D coul d be cal cul at ed.
6. 4 Case St udi es
Two case st udi es woul d make t he use of t hi s model cl ear er
t o
t he R&D manager s f o r whom i t i s i nt ended. The f i r st wcl ul d s h ow
t he i mpact of usi ng cur r ent l y avai l abl e t echnol ogy i n al l ar eas
of geot hermal devel opment t hat pr esent l y do not t ake advant age of
t hese t echnol ogi es. The second woul d show t he maxi mum possi bl e
i mpr ovement i n t echnol ogy and reduct i on i n r i sk.
Thi s ver si on of t he model has been benchmarked usi ng cost s
det er m ned f r om st andar d i ndust r y pr act i ce. Some t echnol ogy
i mprovement s ar e not t aken advant age of by i ndust r y
f o r
may
r easons. A s an exampl e of how t he ml del can be used and t o
s h o w
t he benef i t of t echnol ogy t r ansf er , a case st udy of t he c o s t
i mpr ovement possi bl e by usi ng cur r ent l y avai l abl e t echnol ogi es
coul d be done.
Because t hi s model does not have al l t he possi bl e
i nt er act i ons bet ween r eser voi r f act or s and thei r associ at ed c o s t s
di r ect l y pr ogr ammed i nt o t he code,
a
case st udy showi ng t he
maxi mum r easonabl e i mpr ovement i n t echnol ogy and i t s associ ated
r i sk r educt i on woul d pr event unr easonabl e expect at i ons
for
cost
dr i l l i ng, expl or at i on, power conver si on t echnol ogy and ot her
aspect s
of
geot hermal devel opment coul d be consul t ed t o pr ovi de
i nput f or t hi s case st udy. A cost r educt i on f or best possi bl e
achi evabl e r esear ch goal s woul d al so show up any di f f i cul t i es i n
t he model and poi nt out areas of i mpr ovement .
47
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 58/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 59/164
A P P E N D I X A
T E C H N O L O G Y B A S E LI N E S
A -
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 60/164
TECHNOLOGY BASELINES
A . 1 General Note on Technical Factors
This appendix is a guide to many of the major technical and
costing relationships that are built into the computer code of
th is model. We intend these comments to be instructive rather
than definitive.
Th e definitive description of any and all of thes e factors i
th e listing of the IM-GEO code. The code includes lengthy
documentation to ensur e that interested technical reviewers will
have little difficulty in determining what was done where.
The project team had t o make many decisions about which
facto rs were most important for depicting current practice in
U . S .
geothermal development projects. These decisions are not
sacred. We hope that as review occurs a body o f suggestions and
contributions will allow for further improvement of the model.
As guidelines for th ese suggestions two comments follow:
* The baseli ne technologies represented should reflect
U.S.
industry practice as
of
January, 1986.
The anticipated improvements in technology should
represent those that seem achievable by modest
investments in R & D (shar ed by D.O.E. and indu stry )
within th e next
5
to
10
years.
A . 2
Costing Basis
All cost estimates reflect our best understandings of
industry practices and costs as of January
1 ,
1986. All
elementary costs ar e loaded with relevant supervisory and
overhead costs.
A . 3 Power Plant and Field Desi gn
This
is
th e critical relationship in every design
for
a .
geothermal power development project. The brine flow requirement
of th e plant, divided by th e anticipated flow from the average
production well, determines how many wells are required at plant
start up.
Ideally, th e plant brine flow requirement s hould be a
continuous function of th e brine flow required by th e plant,
sensitive to th e work available from th e brine (at estimated
temperature, pressure, dissolved solids, and non-condensible
gases), and th e average flow per production well. We have not
achieved much clarity here and ther e is room for impr ovement.
The data available to us within the schedule and budget for
th e project allowed us to get up t he following relationships:
Flash Plants:
11 The flow into and
from th e plant is taken from point
estimates i n the si te data base.
These flows are
A - 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 61/164
subj ect t o some smal l adj ust ment s i n t he code.
2)
The power pl ant cost i s a si mpl e f unct i on of t he t emp-
er at ur e of t he br i ne at t he wel l head.
Bi nar y Pl ant s:
1 )
Fl ow r equi r ement s ar e est i mated f r om
a
si mpl e model of
t he net br i ne ef f ect i veness at t he wel l head t emper at ur e.
The pl ant f l ow r equi r ement s i n t he si t e dat a base are
not used.
2 The power pl ant cost i s model ed as r el at ed most di r ect l y
t o t he r at e of br i ne f l ow t hr ough t he pl ant . Br i ne
t emperat ur e has a modest ef f ect on t hi s cost rel at i on-
shi p.
A 4
Br i ne stabi l i zat i on
The need f or br i ne st abi l i zat i on equi pment depends on
t he t ot al di ssol ved sol i ds cont ai ned i n t he f l ui d. Thi s i s
pr ogr ammed i nt o t he code as a st ep f unct i on. Fl ui ds wi t h
gr eat er t han 10, 000ppm ar e assumed t o r equi r e st abi l i zat i on
whi l e t hose wi t h l ess do not . The cost assumed i s t hat of a
f l ash crystal i zer system
A . 5 Envi r onment al Cont r ol
The onl y envi r onment al cont r ol pr ogr ammed i nt o t hi s
ver si on of t he model i s
H 2 S
abat ement . The cost of
a
St r et f or d t ype abat ement i s added t o t he base pl ant cost
when t he H 2 s cont ent of t he f l ui d i s above 50 ppm f or f l ash
t ype pl ant s. For bi nar y pl ant s t he
H 2 s
l evel i s not
consi der ed. I n addi t i on t o addi ng t o t he pl ant capi t al
cost , hi gh
H 2 s
al so adds t o t he 0 &
M
cost . Bot h cost add-
on6
ar e scal ed t o t he amount
of H 2 s
i n t he f l ui d as
a
mul t i pl i er of t he pl ant capi t al cost f or t he base
0
& M
cost .
A . 6 Wel l C o s t s
Wel l cost s ar e cal cul at ed ear l y i n t he model because wel l s
ar e an essent i al par t of I dent i f i cat i on, Conf i r mat i on, and
Reser voi r Management oper at i ons. Wel l cost s are di vi ded i nt o
base cost s and add- on cost s as descr i bed i n sect i on 3. 7.
The act ual cost of t he wel l s i s cal cul at ed usi ng a ser i es oft abl es and maps di scussed i n sect i on
3. 7.
Thi s i s done
exter nal l y t o t he model . Thus i mpact s of t echnol ogy on t he cost
of t he wel l ar e shown by t he cost mul t i pl i er . Thi s mul t i pl i er
af f ects t he ent i r e wel l cost i ncl udi ng add- ons.
A - 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 62/164
A . 7
Extension, Redrill, and Dry Hole Relationships
Th e relationships among these cost add-ons to th e base well
cost are roughly as follows:
Extension i s
done and
f a i l s .
Redrill must
be done.
Well - ???
Redr
done
succ
We1 1
-----
A
I
I
E
V
11
i s
and
eds.
= Producer
Redrill
i s
done
an d
f a i l s .
Well
-
DRY
. - - - - - - - - - - - _ -
A ,
B,
D,
and
E
are entered or coded values.
C
is calculated.
A = 0.25 X Dry Hole Fraction B = 0.20, fixed value
C - 1 - A - B - D D = Redrill Fraction
E
=
0.75 X
Dry Hole Fraction
A.8 Well
Flow
Testing Costs
Testing Co sts ar e estimated based o n 3-day, 10-day or 21-day
flow tests. Testing costs are then added to well costs to
form
a
final cost for each of four categories of wells:
- Wildcat Wells
-
Wells drilled during th e reservoir confirmation phase
-
Production wells drilled during field development phase
-
Injection and Dry Holes
T h e cost of logging is included here and is calculated from
an equation using depth and temperature a8 variables.
A . 9
Identification Operations
Geological, geophysical and geochemical aspects of explora-
tion are calculated for the region as a whole. Th e cost
of
exploration
is
dependent on t he anticipated depth
of
the
A - 4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 63/164
resource. A premium cost is added for wells deeper than 3000
feet. This could include th e cost of geophysical exploration
suc h as seismology or a cored small diameter test hole. It was
found from the cost estimates that the cost of whatever was done
to explore for deeper resources was about
$100,000.
Th e cost of gradient wells was emphasized by several
developers as one of the most important cost aspects of
exploration. This cost was apportioned for every wildcat well
drilled and is there fore affected by th e sensitivity parameter
"Wildcat Su ccess Ratio" s inc e this will increase or decrease the
number of wildcat wells drilled.
Wildcat wells are assumed to cost the same a5 any other
production well. Successful wells are included in th e pool of
available producers.
The amount of developable electrical power in each region is
an input variable and can be found in the table of input data.
Each region i s divided into areas of a s ize which can be affected
by an input variable. These areas are further divided into
50
MW
units.
Th e sensitivity parameter "Probability of Success of
Confirmation" affects the costs accumulated here in th e following
manner"
A
fraction of th e reservoirs that appear to be "iden-
tified" will fail to support power production after a "confirma-
tion" attempt has ensued. Therefore, th e "Identification" cost
for each reservoir that successfully supports power production is
calculated to include additional identification costs in
proportion to th e probability of failure of the unit "Confirma-
tion" effort.
A . 1 0
Confirmation Operations
Confirmation activity is assumed to take three years to
drill and test six wells. Of these it is assumed that four will
be good p r o d u c e r s , 1.5 will make good injectors and . 5 will be
dry holes not useful for anything. At conclusion
of
the
confirmation phase t he developer is assumed ready to seek project
financing. For a field developer who anticipates someone else,
perhaps a utility, will build th e power plant, he is ready
to
seek t he builder of t he plant.
It is assumed that th e developer has a .9S certainty of
achieving 30 years of power production if the full cost of
developing th e si te is available. The additional
-05
of
uncertainty
is
covered by th e cost of reservoir insurance. The
risk of failure does not change from on e site to another, only
th e cost of the development. Thus a site with a very high risk
at th e end of drilling and testing six wells will cost a great
deal, perhaps a prohibitively large amount. This should be
remembered when risk reduction factors are chosen.
Testing cost for wells drilled during confirmation and
identification phases are more expensive than those for infill
drilling.
A - 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 64/164
The probability of success of confirmation affects costs
that show up in both th e confirmation and identification phases.
Th e reason is that any failed confirmation effort implies that
so me amount of exploration had been incurred to achieve a "go"
status on the attempt to confirm. Both of these efforts move
into th e "sunk cost" column when th e confirmation effort fails ,
yet are reflected i n the relevant accounts for the cost of power
at a successful project. In IM-CEO th e "identification" c o s t s
occasioned by th e confirmation failure are added to the
Identification accou nt, while th e direct costs of th e failed
confirmation effort are added into th e Confirmation account.
A . 1 1 Field Decline Factors
The effect of pressure decline in the reservoir is modeled
explicitly to find th e number and temporal pattern of
supplemental production wells needed. Annual payments to cover
th e capital and 0 & M costs of th e supplemental wells and their
piping are added to th e Well and Gathering
0
& M accounts.
The estimated decline coefficient for each site includes
provision for th e drawdown effect s of production from multiple
plants on each reservoir. However, it should be remembered that
th e decline coefficients are estimated using t h e m o s t elementary
of methods and may
not
apply to any actual reservoi r. An
exponential decline is used although other equations might model
an individual reservoir better.
Because of the curve fitting technique used t o estimate the
decline coefficient and define the exponential curve, there are
two initial flow rates used as input data. One is the average
initial flow rate per well used for purposes of estimating the
number of wells in th e field. The other is the initial flow for
th e purpose of the decline curve. If the risk for one of these
values adjusted to show a technology improvement than the other
must be adjusted by a n equal percentage.
A . 1 2 Well Life Due t o Plugging
or
Corrosion
Many geothermal R
&
D impact models have set a singl e value
for th e life of a production well that incorporated both drawdown
and other well loss effects. Th e current model breaks these two
effect s apart. Th e drawdown effect is modeled explicitly by the
decline curve, while th e other problems which limit well life are
handled by estimating th e tim e between mechanical workovers on
th e well and th e average amount of a typical workover. These
factors ar e both influenced by th e fluid chemistry
so
that
changes in th e risk values for fluid chemistry factors should
effect the well life and cost of workovers. These interactions
are not programmed into th e model.
There is no simple well life parameter in this program. The
need for added wells as th e pressure in th e field decreases and
the need for replacing wells du e to mechanical failure
is
handled
separately.
A - 6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 65/164
A . 1 3
Fie ld
P i p i n g
r e c t i l i n e a r a r r a y w i t h t h e plan t i n the cen ter .
There i s a f u l l r u n of pipe
from each production well t o th e plant.
number,
[ n ] ,
i n
each square showing the number of "separation" units between
the wel l and the plant :
The gath erin g system f o r producer wel ls
i s
modeled as a diamond-shaped
The
p a t t e rn
i s a fol lows,
w i t h
the
(31
I
[31--[21 I31
I I
[31--[21--[11 121 131
I l l
131 PI [11--[21--[31
131 [21--[31
131
[3] - [2] -
[
1 1
- P ) - -
[
1 1 -
[2]
-
[3]
I l l
I I
I
This
p a t t e r n
i s
a reasonable compromise between the case where the field
i s
narrower
i n
one dimension than the other, and a case where pads and
mul t iwell mani fo lds a re used t o reduce ce r ta in
d r i l l i n g
and
p i p i n g
co s t s .
This pa t te rn moreover has th e qu i te useful computat ional property o f
requ i r ing a to ta l p ipe
length
t h a t s c a l e s i n a fractal manner
w i t h
t h e
t o t a l
number of producer wells required.
The fractal dimension
i s
roughly 1.5.
This i s espec ia l ly usefu l
i n comput ing the addi t ional pipe required for
supplemental production wells.
In j ec t i o n p i p i n g costs assume
t h a t
i n j ec t i o n w e l l s a r e l o ca t ed o u t s i d e
o f
t h e p ro d u c t i o n f i e l d ,
a t 6 separa t ion u n i t s from the
p l a n t .
The
p i p i n g
c o s t s
assume t h a t groups of
4
i n j ec t i o n w e l l s
are
fed from t h e same pipe.
T h u s
in jec t ion wel l s a re modeled as l y i n g t o one or t w o sides o f t h e f i e l d ,
r a t h e r
than being arrayed
i n
a c i r c u l a r r a d i a l p a t t e r n .
A .14 Supplemental Production Wells
t h e e s t i m a t e o f t h e pressure d ec l i n e
i n
t h e r e s e rv o i r . This i s modeled
ex p l i c i t l y a s an exp on en ti al f l o w - ra t e d ec l i n e c o e f f i c i en t ap p li ed t o t h e
i n i t i a l p ro d u c t i o n
wells
and any required supplemental wells.
The requirement f o r supplemental product ion w el l s
i s
d r iv e n e n t i r e l y by
There
i s no provis ion ( i n Version 3.00 an d ea r l i e r ) fo r t emp era t u re
d ec l i n e i n
the
r e s e r v o i r d u r i n g t h e r e s e r v o i r l i f e . T h u s ,
the
model
is
s i m i l a r t o a t e a k e t t l e w hose b ottom
i s k e p t
at a constant temperature and
t o
w h i c h no f l u i d i s added as t he i n i t i a l f l u i d co nv ec ts out o f t h e . s p o u t .
There i s no prov i sion f o r supplemental in j ec t io n wel l s .
T h e
costs f o r d r i l l i n g
a n d O&M
o f supplemental production w ell s a re added
t o t h e O&M accounts f o r product ion and in je ct io n wel ls . Costs assoc iated w i t h
A - 7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 66/164
the g ather ing pipes f o r supplemental production w ells a re added to
t h e
O &M
accounts f o r the gathe r ing system. These accumulat ion ar e per previous
p r a c t i c e i n similar models .
i l l u m i n a t i n g i f such costs were s h o w n i n a separate account . )
( future modellers take note :
I t would be more
A .
15 Down
Hole
Pumps
objec t ive i s
t o
prevent f la sh ing i n t h e wellbore. A secondary objec t ive i s t o
inc rease the f lowra te f rom low- tempera ture we l ls . Ne i ther of these requi re -
ments / re la t ionships i s
modeled
e x p l i c i t l y .
Down hole pumps are assumed only for
b i n a r y
power pl an ts . The pr imary
The power required per pump va r i e s
w i t h
t he we l l de p th ( se t t i ng d e p t h ) .
The model could be enhanced
i f
the relationshiin between
pumping
power
and
resaurce tempL -ture shown i n Figure 8.1& o f tne "Sourcebook" were
u p d a t e d a n d
incorporated in to the code.
The cos ts for
pumps
a r e
for
contemporary l ine
s h a f t
pumps. Comparable
cos ts fo r e l e c t r i c downhole pumps, should these ensue from R&D,
can be entered
qu ite di rec t ly . However, advantages t h a t m i g h t accrue f rom electr ic downhole
pumps
w i t h
respec t t o be ing able
t o
se t those deeper
t h a n
line shaft pumps
( c u r r e n t ly l im i t e d to a bou t
1000
f e e t ) would have t o be analyzed
q u i t e
c a r e f u l l y
for
r e l e v a n t s e n s i t i v i t y e n t r y p o i n t s i n t o IMGEO, es p ec ia ll y w i t h
respect t o average flow per production well , and
t h e
re la t io nsh ip between
reservoir and well head f luid enthalpy.
A . 1 6 Flash Plant flow and Costs
Flash plant br ine f l o w requi rement ra tes
vary
g r e a t l y w i t h t he s a t u r a t i o n
The
q u a l i t y
f a c t o r
fo r
Flow ra tes for f la sh p lan ts
condit ions ("steam q u a l i t y " ) of the well head brine.
e a c h s i t e
i s
i m p l i c i t
i n
t he S i t e da t a base,
by
comparison of factors
"Required Flow into Plant" and
"Flow
from Plant" .
are based expl ic i t ly on those va lues i n t he S i t e da t a base.
were 1 nked m or e e xp l i c i t l y t o measurable charac te r i s t ic s of the rese rvoi r .
t h a t break
a t
390 degrees F. The equations were derived from a review o f
previous s tud ie s and the costs provided by
S. U n i t t
i n December
1986.
r e s u l t s
o f
t he e qua t ions a r e qu i t e c ons i s t e n t a c r oss the f o l lowing s tud ie s ,
when stated
costs were
esca la ted to January
1986 u s i n g
t h e GNP
I m p l i c i t
Price
Deflator: T h e
GELCOM model
from
t h e MITRE Corp,
1976;
The
BPA
P a c i f i c
Northwest
Geothermal
Study,
1984;
and
S.
Unit t ' s cos ts ,
1986.
Flash
p l a n t
cost values from
the INEL/Technecon studies, estimated
i n 1979
-
1980
were
signif icantly higher than those aforementioned.
T h e overa l l pa t te rn sugges ts
t h a t f l a s h p l a n t c o s t s
h a v e
not changed much i n a decade.
Future ve r s ions o f
this
model would b e n e f i t g r e a t l y i f this r e l a t i o n s h i p
The capi ta l cos t of f la sh p lan ts i s estimated from two l inea r equa t ions
The
A . 17 Binary Plant Flow and Costs
.
T h e estimated br ine f l o w requirement f o r binary pl an ts was found t o vary
considerably across the
small
number of st u d ie s av ai la bl e. The problem
A- 8
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 67/164
a pp ea rs t o a r i s e from the very ac t ive R&D in to the p roper t i es o f w ork ing
f l u i d s
d u r i n g
t h e l a s t d ecade ,
w i t h
r e l a t i v e l y f ew s t u d i e s o f f e r i n g ex p l i c i t l y
de ta il ed assumptions. The problem
i s
compounded i n
t h a t
some s tudies report
ne t o r g ross b r ine e f fec t iveness va lues t h a t only somet imes include expl ici t
provision
for
powering deep well
pumps t h a t f eed t h e p l a n t .
S undry
d a t a p o i n t s from the BPA Pacific Northwest Geothermal S t u d y ,
S.
Unitt's d a t a ,
t h e I N E L / Technecon studies,
and
the
E P R I
well -head generator
s t u d i e s (1984-86) were compare graphically.
brine effect iveness across a wide temperature range were apparent ,
and
adopted. Various adju stm ents , as documented i n the code,
t o
account for the
net
power requirement
i n
t h e f i e l d f o r
down
hole
p u mp s .
for flow requirements.
because two of the s i t e s use re la t iv e ly coo l b r ines , espe c ia l ly i n the
"risked" condi t ions .
well
w i t h
the brine f low requirement , provided
t h a t a
minor secondary
adjustment i s made for temperature beyond
t h a t
i m p l i c i t i n the f low
requirement dependence on temperature.
a s
t/- 30
percen t , espec ia l ly
a t
th e lower temperatures . Addi tional
u n ce r t a i n t y p rev a i l s w i t h r e s p e c t t o
p l a n t
co st est im ate s. The sponsors o f
th is s tudy have been not i f ied oral ly of t h i s s t a t e o f u n ce r t a in t y .
Crude funct ions for net and g r o s s
Binary power p l a n t co s t - e s t i ma t e d a t a were even more
sparse t h a n
those
This problem i s exacerbated i n the cur ren t
s t u d y
I t was noted t h a t av a i l ab l e co s t s t e n d t o s c a le f a i r l y
Thus user s of t h i s model a re cautioned
t h a t
f low ra tes may be off as
m u c h
A - 9
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 68/164
A . 18 Microeconomics and Financial Assumpt ions
B us ba r c o s t s a re c a l c u l a t e d o n a r ev en ue re q u i r e m e n t s b a s i s , f o l l o w i n g
t h e re co mm en da ti on s o f t h e
E P R I
Tec hnic al Assessment Guides o f 1978
( a l g o r i t h m s ) a nd 198 2 ( c e r t a i n c o s t i n g f a ct o rs ) . Tax r e q u i re m e n t s r e f l e c t t h e
F e d e ral Ta x a c t o f 1 98 6 p ro v i s i o n s f o r ge o th e rm a l e n erg y p ro j e c t s , w i t h a 10
p e r c e n t s p e c i a l i nves tmen t t a x c r e d i t assumed; t hese assumpt ions shou ld be
a d e q u a t e f o r p l a n t s t h a t go o n l i n e i n l a t e 1987 t h r o u g h 1 989.
b e t h e same, t o k ee p m a t t e r s r e l a t i v e l y s i rrDl e.
d o l l a r s , w i t h v a lu e s g i v e n as m i l l s p e r k i l o w a t t hour. T ha t v a lu e i s c l o s e t o
t h ? f i r s t y e a r c o s t a t t h a t da te , and shoul:’ be m u l t i p l i e d by t h e e f f e c t
o f
g e: .c ra l i n f l a t i o n (assumed t o be 4 p e rc e nt p e r y e a r) t o f i n d t h e c o st v a lu e i n
f o l l o w i n g y e a r s .
embodied
i n
t h e t he f i l e
BUSFNFCTAEO,
used by
I M - G E O .
The assumpt ions behind
t h o s e f a c t o r s a r e a s f o l l o w s :
F i e l d and p l a n t c o s t
o f
c a p i t a l ( r e q u ir e d r a t e s o f r e t u r n ) a r e assumed
t o
The f i n a l r e s u l t s a r e ex pr es se d as l e k i l i z e d i n J an ua ry 1986 co n s ta n t
V a r io u s f a c t o r s f ro m t h e E P R I - T A G methodology f o r b u s b a r c o s t i n g a re
SOURCE: MERIDIAN C o rp o ra t i o n , F a i r f a x ,
VA
V E R S I O N : BUSIMGEO.BAS Program
RUN DATE: 03- 12- 19 87 11:20 a.m.
POL DATE: 1986 A l l V al ue s i n C u r re n t D o l l a r s : 1986
ASSUMPTIONS :
AFDC: No t i nc l u de d i n c a p i t a l cos t es t ima tes .
C a p i t a l a n d O&M Cost Ba si s Year: 1986.0
Y ea rs t o C o n s t ru c t : 3
G en eral I n f l a t i o n R at e: 0 .0 4 F u el I n f l a t i o n R at e: 0 .0 4
Book L i f e : 30 Tax L i f e : 5
D e b t F ra c t i o n :
0.50
Debt Rate : 0.11
Common Fraction:
0.50
Common Rate: 0.15
Der i ved D i scoun t Ra te : 0.13
CASE: SET
I M - G E O
FACTORS, AS-BUILT, NO AFDC
- - - -
Income ?ax (0.34 + 0.02): 0.36
I nves tmen t Tax Cred i t: 0.10 ‘Geothermal P ro pe rt y
Proper ty Tax
il
Insurance: 0 .02
Account i g Met hod:
Acce le ra ted Depre c ia t i on : Doub le De c l i n i ng Ba lance
Capaci ty ,
N e t
MWe: 50
Average Capaci ty Factor :
.85
Av era ge Ann ual Ene rgy, kWh: 372,300,000.
(Report i s con t i nued on t he nex t page . )
F1ow Through
A-1
0
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 69/164
- - - - - - - LEVELIZED A N N U A L FIXED CHARGE R AT E S , P e r c e n t - - - - - - - -
Weighted Cos t of Capi ta l
13 .00
* Si nk i ng Fund Depr ec i a t i on 0.34
* Ret i r em en t Di s pe r s i on Al l owance 0 .56
* Income Tax (Federa l and Sta te ) 3.43
* Accelerated D e p r e c i a t i o n - 3 . 4 0
*
I n v e s t m e n t l a x
Credit
- 1 .84
* P r o p e r t y l a x an d I n s u r a n c e
2.00
Tot a1 14.09
- - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LEVELIZED
BUSBAR
COSTS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Char ge and Un i t s Va l ue Level i t i n g
BUSBAR
C OS T
F ac to r mi 11
s/kWh
C a p i t a l C o s t ,
SlOOOs
106150.8 0.14087 40.2
V a r i a b l e O&M, mills /kWh 10 1.413805
14 1
Fixed OLM,
S/kW
p e r y e a r
10 1 .413805 1 .9
Fuel, mi 11
s/kWh
10 1 .413805 14 . 1
- - - - -
Tot a l
:
7 0 . 3
A t c e r t a i n p l a c e s
i n
t h e c o s t i n g c o de t h e term " u n a c o s t " o c c u r s . T h i s
i s
a t e c h n i c a l t e r m t o d e s c r i b e a n an n u al p ay me nt r e q u i r e d t o a m o r t i z e a l u m p sum
p r e s e n t v a l u e o v e r
N
y e a r s , where N i s u s u a l l y ( b u t n o t a l w a y s ) t h e book l i f e
o f t h e power p l a n t . T h i s term
i s
used i n c o de l i n e s wh e re u nu s ua l s t r e a m s o f
p a ym e n ts , e .g . f o r s u p p l e m e n t a l p r o d u c t i o n w e l l s , n ee d t o b e c o n v e r t e d t o a n
e q u i v a l e n t l e v e l O&M c h a rg e d u r i n g ea ch y e a r of t h e p l a n t l i f e .
A - 1 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 70/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 71/164
APPENDIX
B
MODEL G E N E R A L OPTIONS AND MENUS
B -
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 72/164
MODEL GENERAL OPTIONS AND MENUS
This section describes the maj or messages and menus that you will see on
the screen.
screen, are described elsewhere.
Reports (results of calculations), which also appear on the
1.0 Start Up Messages
IM- GEO loads so me dat a files and calculates the Base Case results for the
eight regions wh en it begins operation. Messa ges about the progress of t h o s e
operations appear s on th e screen:
WELCOME
TO
IM-GEO.
(
Setting up Base Case )
WAIT: LOADING PHYSICAL DATA FOR REGIONS
WAIT: ADJUSTING WOR ST CASE DATA
WAIT: LOADI NG BASE CASE VALUES
WAIT: CALCULATING 8 REGIONS:
W A I T :
FILLING B A S E C A S E V A L U E S
( A
count message appears as Region is calculated
Once th e Base Case i s initialized, the IM -G EO identification sc reen
appears, showin g the source, Version number, and date of the program:
IM-GEO
VERSION
3.00
[
IMGE03001
16
Mar.
1987
IMPACTS OF R&D ON COST OF GEOTHERMAL POWER
Prepared By Meridian Corporation
Falls Church, Virginia
- - Under Contract t o Sandia Corporation
A1
buquerque, New Mexico
Contract N o . 02-1947
Project Team:
Dan Entingh,
Bill
Livesay, Susan Petty,
Richard Traeger, Stanley Unitt
PRESS
A N Y K E Y
TO START OPERATION
-=====>
A beep sounds after this display appears on the screen.
Press any key,
and you will
see the "Start-up and Quit" Menu.
B - 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 73/164
2.0
Menu [Z], "START-UP and
Q U I T "
f . SET: BASE CASE t o C u r re n t D ata
G. RESET: BASE CASE
t o O r i g i n a l D ef au lt s
A t a l l menus t h a t l o o k l i k e t h i s , boxed w i t h a n ENTER S E L E C T I O N ==>
p ro mp t, j u s t p r es s t h e l e t t e r y ou w ant , and t h e i n d i c a t e d a c t i o n
w i l l
occu r .
You c an u se e i t h e r u pp er o r l o w e r c as e e n t r i e s .
I f
y o u g e t y o u r w o r k i n g p a r a m e t e r s a l l fo u l ed up, come back t o t h i s
menu
and press
[GI.
Tha t w i l l s e t e v e r y th i n g back t o t h e o r i g i n a l s t a r t u p
v a l u e s .
O p t i o n [ F ] h e r e l e t s y ou s e t u p an a l t e r n a t i v e B ase Case.
To
do tha t ,
y o u w o u l d e d i t
R&D
Achievements from Menu
[ Y ]
t o e s t ab l i sh d i f f e r e n t
geo the rma l
techno logy pa rame te rs than those i n the D e f au l t Base Case. Then
come back t o t h i s menu and se le c t [F].' That
w i l l
e s t a b l i s h t h e c o s t s of power
r e s u l t i n g f r o m y o u r t e c h n o l o g y s e l e c t i o n s a s t h e B ase Case
f o r
a l l f u r t h e r
r e p o r ts , u n t i l you s e l e c t [Z,G] here .
Opt.ion [ R ] l e t s y ou d i v e r t " p r i n t ed " R ep or ts t o a d i s k f i l e .
You
can
i n t eg r a te r e s u l t s i n t h a t f i l e i n t o p ub l i sh ab le re po r t s.
o u t p u t c ha nn el i s a c t i v e ,
t h e menu s e ct i o n l o ok s l i k e t h i s :
When t h e f i l e
_ c
R.
CHANGE:
Where REPORTS a r e s e n t :
NOW -
F i l e :
fMGEOUT.TXT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The conten ts o f t h e f i l e 1HGEOUT.TXT ar e empt ied each t i m e th e p rogram
is
r e s ta r t ed o r i f O p t i o n [GI i s s el ec te d.
You c a n e x i t I M - G E O o n l y f r o m o p t i o n [QJ a t t h i s menu.
P r e s s i n g [ V I a t t h e [Z] menu sends you t o t h e OPERATIONS Menu. I t i s
f r o m t h e OPERATIONS menu t h a t you w i l l do a lm os t a l l
o f
y o u r w o r k w i t h I M G E O .
B - 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 74/164
3.0 Menu [ Y ] , OPERATIONS
IM-GEO- Y ] OPERATIONS MENU
A. HELP: Editing Options
B. EDIT: R&D Achvmnts, RESERVOIR L. SHOW: R&D Achievements
C. EDIT: R&D Achvmnts, WELLS M. SHOW: I-S ite Current Costs
D. EDIT: R&D Achvmnts, PLANTS N. SHOW: 1-Site Base Case Costs
0. PRINT 1-S ite Technical Details
p. ****
.
EDIT:
RISKs, RESERVOIR
F .
EDIT:
RISKs, WELLS
&
FLOW
G. EDIT:
RISKs, UNIT COSTS Q. SHOW: Multi-Reg., Costs
X
Region
R.
PRINT Multi-Reg., F I N E GRAIN Rpt
s. ****
. EDIT: Regional WEIGHTS
I * ****
J .
EDIT: Financial Factors
T .
EJECT Page (After cPrt.Scr>)
. - _ _ - - - - - - - - _- - _ __ - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -
K . HELP: Report Options
. - _ - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
U. SELECT: Single Analysis Site, NOW
=
1
V . RUN:
W . R U N : Mu1 ti-Region Analysis, (ACCOUNTS X PERCENT Report)
Single-Si te Cost of Power Analysis
. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2. GO TO: START-UP
/
QUIT MENU
This is the menu where you will spend most of your time.
0
Edit Sensitivity Data, via Options [B] through
[J].
It allows you
to:
0
Vie w and print a list of all of those factors whose current value
differs from
1.0,
via Option
[L].
0 Alter the weights that each Region carries in the Multi-Region
result weighted -average totals; Option
[ H I .
Option [HI contains
an option to print the resulting weights.
0 View (SHOW to console screen) and print reports from the various
calculations;
[ M I
- [R]
0
Eject page from printer
[ T I .
This is for when you m ay have performed
a DOS <Shift-Prt Scr> to print the console results. For example,
you might want to do that when one or more of the editing screens
[ e ]
through
[GI,
or
[I]
is active.
o
Perform multi-site or single site calculations; [VI
[wj.
The m ost important thing for you t o note here is that the results that
IM-GEO shows to screen or paper always reflect accurately the current
8-4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 75/164
settings of th e Base Case cost
of
power, the R&D Achievements, Risk Impacts,
and Regional Weights. The computer program contains logical interlocks
which ensure that
no
results are presented to you until t he appropriate
recalculations, based on the current settings of R&D achievements, occur.
by the presentation
of
tho se results on th e screen.
usually given an option [P] to send t he results to your printer.
In general, eac h request for a calculation or a report will be followed
At that point, you are
Details o f
R&D
Achievem ent Editing Options are given in section
3.6.
Details
of
the Regional Weight Option are described in section
3.5.
Details of th e Reports a re described in Appendix
C.
4.0 [ Y , U ] ,
Select S ite f or Singl e-Sit e Reports
which calculations are mad e in Single-Site modes:
Option
[U]
at t he Y-OPERATIONS menu lets you change the "Single Site" f o r
SELECT SINGLE SITE FROM ONE
OF
TH E FOLLOWING:
1. Imperial Valley - Flash
2.
Imperial Valley
-
Binary
3.
Basin & Range - Flash
4.
Basin & Range
-
Binary
5. Cascades
-
Flash
6.
Cascades
-
Binary
7.
Young Volcanics
-
Flash
1
8. Young Volcanics - Flash 2
CURRENT SITE # IS:
1
SELECT SITE NUMBER [ l
-
81, <Enter>
:
1
Here you will have
to
press the <Enter> key after you type the number o f
the site you wish to have active as the "Single Site".
8 - 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 76/164
5.0 [Y,H] E D I T Regiona l Weigh ts
A l l
Mu l t i -R eg i on co s t o f power es t ima tes a re based on we igh ted ave rages
F o u r d i f f e r e n t w e i g h t i n gf c o st s e s t i m a te d f o r e i g h t
(8)
separa te reg ions .
methods have been programmed.
i f you p ress [ H I a t Menu [ V I :
The W e i g ht s i n f o r c e a r e s e l e c t e d f r o m t h e f o l l o w i n g menu, w h i c h ap pe ar s
I M - G E O - [ Y , H ]
R e- we ig ht ed r e s u l t s a pp ea r q u i c k l y , s i n c e i n d i v i d u a l
reg ion a l power co s t s do no t have t o be recompu ted.
S e l e c t R e g i on a l W ei gh ts f o r T o t a l s
-_------------------____c_______________--------------
A. HELP: What You Can / Should Do Here
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CURRENT SELECTION: Regional Capacity
_ c - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1.
Weight - Reg iona l Capac i t y [ - D E F A U L T
]
3.
Weight
=
E qua l f o r a l l R egio ns
K. Weight - User ’s Numer ica l
Values
L.
Weight
=
R el ev an ce t o R&D Program
S. SHOW/PRINT
Z. CONTINUE
Va lue o f Cu r ren t We igh ts
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[ K ] b r i n g s u p
a
s c r e e n t h a t h e l p s you
you
en te r any we igh ts you wish .
See t h e t e c h n i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s e c t i o n s o f t h i s m anual f o r e x pl a n t io n s o f
t h e m ea njng s o f o p t i o n s
[I]
nd [L] here.
8 - 6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 77/164
6.0
th e anticipated Achi evements of the Research and Development Program.
describe the actions of th e following subset
o f
the OPERATIONS menu:
[Y,B-J], Edit R&D Achievements and Risks
Options [B] - [GI and [I] - [J] of the [Y]-OPERATIONS M enu let you enter
H er e we
So me R&D Achievements are in the form of improvem ents in equipment
cost
Other R&D Achievements are in the form of reduction of reservoir and
[J] allo ws access to a few mino r financial factors.
Each of these options brings up an "Editing Screen". The specific
Each editing screen presents a list of factors, each keyed to a letter.
or efficiency, [B], [C], [D].
drilling uncertainties, [E],
[F],
[GI.
screens are sho wn below.
You
are prompted to
press
t h e letter for
the
factor you
w a n t
to
edit.
you are further prompted to enter the new value for the factor.
Then
Y o u can continue t o select and c hange factors in this m anner, until
you
press [Z]. Pressing [Z] returns you to Menu [Y].
Th e follow ing subsections present the editing screens, cu rrent as o f
IMG EO Version 2.08 of
20
February 1987.
These screens may be somew hat
different i n later versions.
B - 7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 78/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 79/164
6.3
[Y,D],
E d i t
R&D
Achievements f o r PLANTS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EDITING: R&D Achieveme nts f o r PLANTS:
A.
R&D
Achvmt: Years Between P la nt s
[Nom.=l.O]
/
NOW
=
1
B .
R&D
Achvmt: Ef f i c i en cy , FLASH Pl an t
[ N o m . = l . O ]
/ NOW = 1
C.
R&D Achvmt: Cap. Cos t, FLASH P l a n t [Nom.=l.O] / NOW =
1
0.
R&D Achvmt:
O&M
Cost, FLASH P la nt
[ N o m . = l . O ]
/ NOW =
1
E. R&D Achvmt: Ef f ic iency , BINARY Plan t [Nom.=l.O] /
NOW
=
1
F. R&D Achvmt: Cap. Co st, BINARY P l a n t [Nom.=l.O] / NOW
=
1
G. R&D Achvmt: O&M Cost, BINARY P la nt [Nom.= .O ] / NOW
=
1
H. R K I Achvmt: Cap. C ost , H eat Exchange [ N o m . = ] -21 / I:3W = 1
I . R8D Achvmt: O&M C os t , l ' = a t Exchange [ N O R . = ' ':I / ~. i 1
2. R8D Achvmt: Cap. C o s t , I ? n e S t a b i l .
NO:^.:.
.,I / 1:
=
1
K.
R&D
Achvmt: OSb Cost , E . -ne S ta b i l .
f t : ~ ~ . = : . O ]
/ L n 1
L.
R6D Achvmt : Cap. Cos t,
h2S
l r e a t m e n t itiorn.=l.O]
/
NOW
=
1
M.
R&D
Achvmt: O&M Cost, H2S Treatment [ N o m . = l . O ]
/ NOW
=
1
ENTER x
o f D a t a
I t e m
t o Change, or Z t o C O N T I N U € :
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Note,
f o r e d i t i n g s cr ee n "[Y,D], E d i t
R&D
Achievements for PLANTS" ,that
t h e B i n a r y P l a n t f a c t o r s [ E ] and
[ F ] :
F . R&D Achvmt:
Cap. Cost,
B I N A R Y
P l a n t
G.
R&D Achvmt:
O&M
Cost, B I N A R Y P l a n t .
o p e r a t e c om p l e t e ly i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f f a c t o r s :
H. R&D Achvmt: Cap. Cost, Heat Exchange
1.
R&D Achvmt:
O&M
Cost, Heat Exchange
Th is independence was se t in to
I M G E O
so t h a t e f f e c t s e x p e c t e d f r o m r a d i c a l l y
d i f f e r e n t heat e xc ha ng er c o n ce pt s c o u l d be e n te r ed f a i r l y e x p l i c i t l y .
I f you w ant t o a l t e r B i n ar y p l a n t c o s ts
i n
s i m l e ways, you shou ld en te r
th e same-Cap i ta l co s t Achievement le v e l f o r fact=%] and [ H I .
S i m i l a r l y ,
if ou change the Binary O&M cos t fac to rs , en te r the same cos t Ach ievement
l e v e l f o r f a c t o r s [GI and [ I ] .
The ca se f o r F l a s h p l a n t s i s s i m i l a r . F o r s i m p l e changes, e n t e r t h e same
C.
RbD
Achvmt: Cap. Co st , FLASH P l a n t
3. RLD Achvmt: Cap. Cost,
B r i n e S t a b i l .
1. R&D Achvmt:
Cap. Cost,
H2S Treatment
D.
R&D Achvmt: OaM Cost, FLASH P la n t
K. RLD Achvmt:
ObM
C os t, B r i n e S t a b i l .
M. RLD Achvmt:
ObM
Cost, H2S Treatment
a ch ie ve me nt l e v e l s f o r e ach f a c t o r
i n
t h e f o l l o w i ng t r i p l e t s :
B - 9
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 80/164
6.4
[ Y , E ] , E d i t
RISK Factors for
R E S E R V O I R
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * - - -
EDITING: Est im at io n Erro r s f o r RESERVOIR:
A .
RISK: Energy i n Region, MW*30Y [Nom.=l.O]
/ NOW =
1
B . 0
c .
0
D. 0
E.
RISK: Reservior Satur. Temp,
F [ N o m . = l . O ] / NOW = 1
F . 0
G.
RISK: Wellhead Temperature, F
[Nom.=l.O] / NOW = 1
H.
0
I .
0
3.
0
K . RISK: HZS,
PPM
[ N o m . = l . O ]
/
N O W = 1
L.
RISK: Tot.
Dis.
So l i d s , PPK (Nom.=l.O]
/
NOW
= 1
E d i t i n
"RISKS":
T h e comments
here a p p l y t o t h i s e d i t i n g
screen
as well
a s t o+ose
f m F ] ,
E d i t
RISK
Factors
for WELLS & FLOW",
and
" [ Y , G ] ,
E d i t
RISK
Factors for UNIT
COSTS".
Some of the Si te
Data
factors have "Bad Case" offset values associated
w i t h them.
have an o f fse t o f -30 degrees F.
The
450
degree value
is
t h e e s t i m a t e
o f t h e
most l ike ly wel l
head
temperature for the modeled prospect
i n
the Region.
T h e
value 450
-
30 = 420
degrees
F. represen ts a typical worst case value
for
the
temperature.
T h a t is,
the reservo i r eng ineer has
s a i d , " I t h i n k i t
will be
450
degrees , b u t
I
don't want
t o
promise you
t h a t i t
will rea l ly be any b e t t e r
t h a n
420 degrees."
For example,
a
Well Head Temperature of
450
degrees
F.,
m i g h t
Wi t h
f a c t o r
[GI.
"RISK: Wellhead Temperature, f " set equal
t o
t h e d e fau l t
value
o f
1.0, the "RISKY" cost of the current
p l a n t
will be costed assuming a
well-head temperature o f 450
-
(1.0
X
30) -
420
F.
0.4 ,
then the "RISKY" cost will assume a temperature of
450 - (0.4 X
30)
-
438
F.
The RISK
values
i n
the "Si te Data" da ta-base thus a re g en e ra l l y
t o
be
viewed
a s errors of estimation t h a t r e s e rv o i r an a l y s t s t y p i ca l l y m ak e
i n
1986.
The RISK fa c to rs t h a t you es t ab l i sh
here
are in terpreted as accomplishments o f
R&D t h a t
will h e l p
reservoir analysts reduce the magnitude
o f
erro rs o f
es t imat ion .
I f f a c t o r
[GI i s
s e t t o
These menus
have a "spotty" l o o k because not al l o f t he S i t e D a t a f a c t o r s
have
risk
values s e t aga in s t them. The p resen ta t ion se lec ted
here is
intended
t o h e lp you c ro s s -co r r e l a t e t h e s e t h ree s c reen s t o t h e i n fo rm at io n
i n
the S i t e
D a t a f i l e .
The
values
o f
t h e o f f s e t s a r e R eg i o n - s p ec i f i c .
8 - 1 0
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 81/164
6.5
[Y,F], Edit RISK Factors fo r WELLS & FLOW
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EDITING: Estimation Errors for WELLS
8
FLOW:
A .
0
B.
0
C.
RISK: Producer Redrill Fraction [Nom.-1.01
/
NOW
= 1
D.
RISK: Dry Holes per Producer [Nom.=l.O]
/
NOW
= 1
E.
RISK:
Y r s
Btwn. Workover, PRODU [Nom.-1.01 / NOW
= 1
F. RISK: Yrs Btwn. Workover, INJCT [Nom.=l.O]
/
NOW
= 1
G.
0
H.
0
1.
RISK: Prod. Well Flow, Klb/br [NorO.=l.O]/ NOW
= 1
J .
RISK:
Inject. Well Flou KiIjhr [Nonx.:l.O]
/
NOW
=
1
'
i
. R I S K :
Flow for Decline, Klk, 'k: [Noz.=:.O]
/
N3W
=
1
L. RISK: Declin e Coeff., l/Years [Nom.-1.01
/
NOW
=
1
M.
0
N.
0
ENTER
x
of Data Item to Change, or
Z
to CONTINUE:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
See th e note in section
3.6.4
for the desrcription
of
the meaning
o f
the se factors.
6.6 [ Y , G ] ,
Edit RISK Factors for UNIT COSTS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EDITING: Estimation Errors for UNIT COSTS:
A .
0
B.
0
C. RISK: Wel? Cost, Extension,
SM
[Nom.=l.O]
/
NOW
= 1
D. 0
E . 0
F.
0 .
G.
0 -
H.
0
ENTER
x o f
Data Item t o Change, o r
Z
to CONTINUE:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Here RISK Factor [C] represents the an estimate of the average non-
optimized cost risk associated with drilling and completing an "incident-free''
well.
Se e the technical discussion sections f or the detailed explanation.
B - 1 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 82/164
6.7 [Y , J ] ,
E d i t
Financial Factors
EDITING: Financial Factor
Data
Values
:
A . Royalty Rate
B.
Severance Tax
Default: .04 / CURRENT Value - .04
C. Pe rcen t Depl e t on A1 1owance Default:
.15 / C U R R E N T Value
=
.I5
D.
Intangible Fract . of Well Cost
Default :
.75
/
CURRENT
Value
=
. 7 5
ENTER
x
of Data Item t o Change, or 2
t o
CONTINUE:
Default: .10 /
CURRENT
Value = . I
I
This screen l e t s you ed i t a few geo thermal -spec i f i c f inanc ia l fac to r s .
They are included only because they were available as local values i n the
o ld e r model from which IMGEO was deve loped.
These fac to rs a re descr ibed
i n
discussions of "Financial Factors"
i n
the
more technical se ct i on s of th is report .
8 - 1 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 83/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 84/164
DETAILS OF MODEL REPORTING OPTIONS
This section provides examples of the major reports that issue from I M -
GEO's calculations and presentations.
on the reasonability
of
the RbD Achievements used t o produce the reports, or
th e possible implications o f the exa mple results.
You
migh t note that t he reports indicate which method of weiqhted
averaginq is in effect, for those reports which include weighted averages.
They are presented here without comment
1.0 Sensitivity Factors in Effect for These Example Reports
The report immediately below results fro m Option [Y,L], "Show R&D
Achievements".
exa mpl e calculations and Reports sho wn in this section.
The factors show n there were in effect when producing the
IM-GEO: SENSITIVITY FACTORS IN EFFECT 03-1 6-19 87
-
15: 14:04
R&D Achvmt: Well Prblms, Lost Circul
RbD
Achvmt: TOTAL Cost, Avg. Well
R&D Achvmt: Efficiency, FLASH Plant
RbD Achvrnt: Efficiency, BINARY Plant
RbD Achvmt: Cap. Cost, Heat Exchange
RbD Achvmt:
0&M
Cost, Heat Exchange
[Nom.=l
.O]:
0.70
[Nom.=l.O]: 0.85
[Nom.-1.01: 1.05
[Norn.=l.O]: 1.20
[Nom.=l.O]: 1.30
[Nom.=l.O]: 1.20
RISK: Wellhead Temperature, F
[Nom.=l .O] :
0.70
RISK: Prod. Well Flow, Klb/hr [Nom.=l.O]
: 0.50
RISK: Inject. Well Flow, Klb/hr [Nom.=l.O]
:
0.50
RISK: Decline Coeff., l/Years [Nom.=l .O]
: 0.70
RegioKal Weights
-
Regional Capacity
c - 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 85/164
2.0
M u l t i - S i t e R e s u l t s R e p o r t s
or
i s
p r i n t e d d i r e c t l y w i t h o u t b e i n g shown on t h e s c re en .
Each o f t he se r e p o r t s i s e i t h e r p r i n t a b l e a f t e r
i t
appears on the screen ,
2.1
The Main Mu l t i - S i t e R es ult s Report , ACCOUNTS
X
PERCENT
T h e r e p o r t f r o m [Y,W]: "RUN: M u l t i - R e g i o n A n a l y si s
(ACCOUNTS
X PERCENT)
R eport", i s t h e m a i n r e p o r t
o f
IM- GEO. Example:
GEOTHERMAL COST OF POWER EST I M AT E RUN: 03-16-1987 - 15:14:04
Mu lt i - Ee g.: n Weighted Averaged Data
WEIGHTS =
Reg iona l Capac i ty
1986
[From I M ~ L O oaei J TiCHNOL.
;. UF
1586 0 COST %
OF NEW
*********
TECHNOLOGY
CHANGE
TECH. TOTAL
ACCOUNT X OF COST
ELECT.
COST FROM
1986 ELECT.
COST
- - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
+**** ;Ehl
- -
e W:n
OGY
S Y S T E M ******
c
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _
TOTAL :
100.0 76.8 - 23.2
100.0
R I S K F R A C T I O N
: 32.2 18.0
- 44.1 23.5
1. I d e n t
i
y Rese rvo i r 5 .6 4.7
-
16.6 6.1
2. C on f i rm Re se r vo i r
6.4 5.4
-
14.7 7.1
3 . Wel ls
33.5 21.1 -
37.2 27.4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
- - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _
4. Downhole Pumps
1.4 0.9
- 32.2 1.2
5. Ga ther in g Equ ip .
5.7 3.8 - 33.1
4.9
6 . Power P lan t
33.7 28.2
- 16 .1 36 .8
7. Heat Exchangers 4.1 3.8
-
7.7 5.0
8. B r i ne S t a b i l i z i n g 2
.o
2 .o -
0.0
2.6
9. Env i ronmenta l 4.4 4.4
-
0.0 5.7
10.
Insu rance
3.2 2.4
-
25.2 3.1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The
s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s i n e f f e c t a r e p r i n t e d a t t h e bottom .
T h i s r e p o r t r e f l e c t s t h r e e a sp ec ts o f t h e c o s t i mp ac ts o f
RBD
changes:
1. Column 2,
X OF
1986 TECHNOLOGY ELECT. COST", shows t h a t t h e w e igh te d
ave rage cos t o f t h e New Techno logy sys tem i s
76.8
p e r c e n t of t h e 1986
cos t .
f r a c t i o n s o f t h e 1986 t o t a l c o st .
those subsys tems i n w h ic h t h e g r ea t e s t d o l l a r c o s t changes have
occu r red .
It
a l s o
shows New Technology subsystem costs expressed as
T h i s g i v e s a c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n
o f
2. Column 3, "% COST CHANGE
FROM
1986", shows percen tage changes i n
c o s t s . H i g h p e r ce n t ag e c ha ng es c o u l d be e s p e c i a l l y r e l e v a n t f o r t h e
I d e n t i f y R e s e r v o i r a nd C o n f i r m R e s e r v o i r s u bs ys te ms ( p r o j e c t p ha se s).
These m i g h t r ed uc e t h e o v e r a l l r i s k t o t h e p r i v a t e s e ct o r w i t h r e g ar d
t o i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and c o n f ir m a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s , even i f o t h e r a s p e c t s
o f t h e c o s t o f power do not change much.
d i s t r i b u t i o n of t o t a l c o st s a c ro ss t h e e le me nt s o f t h e N e w Technology
3. Column 4, ' X
OF
NEW TECH. TOTAL ELECT.
COST",
shows t he percentage
c - 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 86/164
system. Under t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s e t
o f R&D
Achievements, th e power
p lan t accoun ts (6 ,
7, 8,
and
9)
w o u l d m a k e u p a s u b s t a n t i a l l y g re a t e r
p er ce nt ag e o f t h e t o t a l s ys te m c o s t th a n t h e y d i d w i t h 1986
technology.
You
s ho ul d n o t e t h a t
" R I S K
F r a c ti o n " here a nd i n a l l o t h e r
I M G E O
r e p o r t s
i s
an i n d e p e n d e n t v e s t i m a t e d f r a c t i o n of t h e Co st o f Power, and i s n o t a
s p e c i f i c a cc ou nt t h a t i s summed t o g e t t h e T o t a l Cost. The T o t a l C o x i s
e x p l i c i t l y t h e sum o f A cc ou nts 1 through 10.
A l s o n o t e t h e t i m e s ta mp on t h i s r e p o r t and o t h e rs . The t i m e shown there
i s t h e t i m e a t w h ic h a ny o f t h e R&D Achievment o r Reg iona l We igh t i ng f ac to rs
was e d it e d . T ha t t i m e i s t h e n "s ta mp ed " o n any re p o r t y o u g en e ra te , u n t i l yo u
e d i t t h e f a c t o r s a ga in .
r e p or t s a re t i e d t o a s p e c i f i c s e t o f R&D Achievements, es p ec ia l l y when you
are running many analyses on the same day.
T h i s t i m e s t a m p
w i l l
h e l p y ou i d e n t i f y w hic h p r i n t e d
A l t hough i t i s n o t shown h ere, t h i s r e p o r t ( a nd a f e w o th e rs )
w i l l
a lways
have th e v al ue s of t h e c u r r e n t l y a c t i v e
R&D
Achievements p r i n te d ou t benea th
i t . T h a t e n s u re s t h a t a g i v e n s e t o f R&D Achievements and t h e i r impac ts on
t h e c o s t o f p ow er a r e a l wa y s k e p t t og e t he r .
I f t h e r e s u l t s f r o m t h e m a in M u lt i- R e gi o n R ep or t l o o k l i k e th os e
immed ia te l y be low ,
t h e n y o u a re s e e i ng t h e re p o r t f o r t h e Base Case. T ha t i s ,
a l l
R&D
Achievements were set
=
1.0 b e f o r e t h e M u l t i - R e g i o n c a l c u l a t i o n w a s
r u n . N o t i c e t h a t a l l o f t h e " P e rc e nt C os t Change fr o m 1986" va lues a re ze ro .
GEOTHERMAL
COST
OF
POWER
E S T I M A T E
RUN: 03-16-1987
-
1 4 ~ 5 8 ~ 1 8
Mul t i -Region Weighted Averaged Data WEIGHTS = Reg iona l Capac i t y
1986
*****
NEW
TECHNOLOGY
SYSTEM
******
[From IMGEO Model] TECHNOL. X
OF
1986 X
COST
X
OF
NEW
********* TECHNOLOGY CHANGE TECH. TOTAL
ACCOUNT X OF COST ELECT. COST FROM 1986 ELECT. COST
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TOTAL :
100.0
100.0
- 0 .0 100.0
R I S K FRACTION : 32.2 32 .2
- 0 .0
32.2
1.
I d e n t i f y R e se rv oi r
5 .6 5 .6
- *o.o 5.6
2 .
C o n f i rm R e s e rv o i r
6 . 4
6 .4 - 0 .0 6 .4
3 . Wel l s
33 .5
33.5
- 0 .0 33 .5
4 .
Downhole Pumps
1.4
1.4
- 0 . 0
1.4
5. Gather ing Equip .
5.7
, 5 . 7
- 0.0 5 .7
6.
Power Plant
33.7 33 .7
-
0 .0
33.7
7. Heat Exchangers 4 . 1
4 . 1
-
0 .0
4 . 1
8.
B r in e S t a b i l i z i n g
2 .0
2.0
- 0.0 2.0
9. Environmental
4.4
4.4
- 0 .0 4.4
10. I nsu rance
3 .2 3 .2
- 0.0 3 . 2
A l l
S e n s i t i v i t y F a ct or s
= 1 . 0
Regional Weights
=
Reg iona l Capac i t y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IM-GEO: SENSITIVITY FACTORS
I N
EFFECT
03-16-1987
-
14:58:18
c -4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 87/164
2.2 M u l t i - S i t e Re po rt , C os ts
X
Region
The repo r t f r om [ Y , Q ) : "SHOW:
Mult i -Reg., Costs
X
Region" i s shown here.
T h i s l e t s y ou s e t t h e m a j o r c o s t e s t i m a t e s and c o s t o f p ow er ( mi ll s/ KW h)
e s t i m a t e s
for
e ac h o f t h e e i g h t R e gio ns .
WEIGHTS
= Regiona l Capac i ty
Example:
GEOTHERMAL COST OF POWER ESTIMATE 03-16-1987 15:14:04
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CAP.
O&M
CAP.,
O&M, TOTAL, TOTAL,
X
COST,
COST, MILLS MILLS MILLS CHANGE
R E G I O N
SM
SM/Y
/KWH
/KWH /KWH
FROM
B A S E
- - - - - - - - _ - -
- - - - - e - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1. IV -FL 153.3 7.0 39.0 19.5 58.5
-12.1
1
?
43.6 8.9 52.5
-26.5
. 1 V - B l 368.7
.
3 0 P
7.0
37.0 -14.6
:-
1".9
- ? 2 . ^
3. BR-FL
4. B R - E I
5.
CS-FL
i67.7 318 64.5 10.7 75.2 -22.7
6.
CS-BI
312.5 6.3 83.4 17.2
100.6
-29.0
7. Y V - F 1 223.3 12.3 53.6 34.9 88.5 -29.9
8.
Y V - F 2
123.5 4.8 31.3 13.2 44.5 -10.3
WEIGHTED: 204.4 6.3 51.7 17.5 69.2 -23.2
~
3;:
t c
.
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s i n e f f e c t a r e p r i n t e d a t t h e b o tto m.
e f f e c ts o n d i f f e r e n t r eg i on s .
U s u a ll y , b u t n o t a lw ay s, t h e s i t e s w i t h
r e l a t i v e l y h i g h Base Case c o s t o f p ow e r
w i l l show
t h e h i g h e s t a b s o l u t e a n d
perce ntage changes i n the New Technology cost o f power.
below.
I f
you see t h a t a l l t h e "Percen t Changes" he re a re zero , t hen you
a r e
l o o k i n g a t
a
"Base Case" Report.
As you m i gh t expect , t h e same se t o f R&D A c h i e v e m e n t s h a s d i f f e r e r s t
For
g e n e r a l i n t e r e s t , t h e Base Case v e r s i o n o f t h i s r e p o r t i s shown
GEOTHERMAL COST
OF
POWER ESTIMATE
03-16-1987 1458: 8
WEIGHTS
=
Regiona l Capac i ty
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CAP.
O&M
CAP.,
O&M,
TOTAL, TOTAL,
X
COST,
COST, MILLS
MILLS
MILLS CHANGE
R E G I O N
SM
$M/Y /KWH /KWH
/KWH
FROM BASE
1. IV -FL
179.8
7.7 45.2 21.4 66.5
0.0
2. I V - B I 234.9
4.0
60.3
11.0
71.3
0.0
3.
BR-FL
148.9 2.5 36.3
7.0
43.3
0.0
4.
BR-BI
398.5 10.7 104.4
30.0
134.4
0.0
5.
CS-FL
355.8 4.4
85.0
12.2 97.3
0.0
6. CS-BI
448.3
8.4
118.6 23.0 141.6 0.0
7. Y V - F 1
271.0 21.6 64.4
61.8
126.3 0.0
8. YV-FZ
144.8 4.9
36.3
13.3
49.6 0.0
WEIGHTED:
266.7 8.2 67.0 23.1
90.1
0.0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -
_ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
c - 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 88/164
2.3
M u l t i - S i t e Re po rt , C os ts
X
Regions
X
Accounts
f o r each Reg ion .
B as e Case r e s u l t s a r e a t t h e t o p , a nd c u r r e n t c a s e (New .
T ec h no lo gy ) c o s t s a r e a t t h e b o t to m .
R&D a t
t h e d i f f e r e n t m o d e l l e d r eg i on s .
The
[Y,R]
"FINE
G RAI N"
r e p o r t s hows t h e M il l s/ K Wh t o t a l s f o r t h e A cc ou nts
T h i s i s t h e
most
u s e f u l r e p o r t f o r m a ki n g q u i c k c o m p a r i s o n s o f i m p a c t s on
GEOTHERMAL COST OF POWER
03-16-1987 15~14~04
IM- GEO:
ACCOUNTS-BY-SITE COST DATA
BASE CASE VALUES, MILLS/KWH
IV-FL IV-BI BR-FL BR-BI CS-FL C S - B I Y V - F 1
YV-F2
EXPLR
CNFRM
WELLS
PUMPS
GATHR
PLANT
HTXCH
STABL
E N V I R
I N S U R
TOTAL
R I S K
4.2
5.4
19.3
0.0
3.6
19.8
0.0
4.8
7.6
I
.8
66.5
20.9
4.2
4.4
15.2
2.0
5.4
30.1
7.2
0.0
0.0
2.6
71.3
18.7
4.8 3.1 7.3 3.7 8.2 3.9
5.4 3.0 8.7 3.3 8.9 4.4
11.2 38.1 47.5 26.8 71.1 9.2
0.0
5.8
0.0
5.6
0.0
0.0
2.5 8.3 6.0 7.2 6.9 2.8
18.0 57.4 23.9 72.1
18.0
18.0
0.0 13.7 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2.3 2.3
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
8.3 7.6
1.4 5.0 3.8 5.6 2.6 1.4
43.3 134.4 97.3 141.6 126.3 49.6
8.7 42.2 33.2 36.0 57.0 15.7
CURRENT CASE VALUES, MILLS/KWH
IV-FL IV-BI BR-FL BR-BI CS-FL C S - B I Y V - F l
YV-F2
EXPLR
CNFRM
WELLS
PUMPS
GATHR
PLANT
HTXCH
STABL
ENVI
I N S U R
TOTAL
3.5 3.6
4.7 3.8
14.3 8.6
0.0 1.4
2.0 3.3
19.3 22.9
0.0 7.0
4.8 0.0
7.6 0.0
1.5
1.8
58.5 52.5
4.1
4.7
7.9
0.0
2.0
17.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
37.0
2.5 6.2 2.9 6.9 3.3
2.6 7.3 2.8
7.6 3.8
19.5
32.1 15.2 40.2 .6.8
3.9
0.0 3.8
0.0
0.0
4.6 4.7 4.3 3.5
2.3
41.8 22.2 51.9 17.7 17.2
12.7
0.0
15.8
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0
2.3
2.3
0.0 0.0
0.0
8.3
7.6
3.3
2.8 3.9
2.1 1.2
90.9 75.2 100.6
88.5 44.5
R I S K 16.0
8.7 4.5 16.7 20.2 15.6 26.3 13.0
C-6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 89/164
3 . 0 R e s u l t s f r o m S i n g l e - S i t e A na ly se s
[ Y , U ] .
asked f o r y o u r s e l e c t i o n .
The s i n g l e s i t e a na ly ze d f o r t he se r e p o r t s i s t h a t s e l e c t ed a t O p t i o n
When you s e l ec t t h a t op t ion , you are shown a l i s t of t h e s i t e s , and
3 . 1 R e p o r t f r o m "RUN: S i n g l e - S i t e C o st o f P ower A n a l y s i s "
The r e p o r t f r o m
[ Y , V ] ,
"RUN: S i n g l e - S i t e C os t o f
P o w e r
A n al ys is " i s shown
be low.
S i t e
(ACCOUNTS
X PERCENT) Report.
s i t e .
Y o u s h o ul d n o t e t h a t t h e f o r m a t h e r e i s t h e same as t h e M a i n M u l t i -
B ut t h e r e s u l t s a r e
f o r
t h e c u r r e n t
s i n g l e
GFcTH Et:IAL
COST
0 POh'F-
E S T I M A T E
R U K: :3-16-1987 - I f . ; 3 : G
Region
: 2
I m p e r i a l V a l l e y
-
B i n a r y
[From I M G E O Model] TECHNOL. X OF 1986 % COST
%
OF
NEW
ACCOUNT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1986
*****
NEW
TEC"9OLOGY
S Y S T E M
******
********* TECHNOLOGY CHANGE
TECH. T O T A L
% OF COST ELECT. COST
FROM
1986 ELECT.
COST
- - - - - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TOTAL : 100.0
73 .5
-
26.5
100.0
R I S K FRACTION
: 26.2 12.2 - 53.5
16.6
1.
I d e n t i f y R e s e r v o i r 5 . 9
5.0 - 16.0
6.8
2 . C o n f i r m R e s e r v o i r 6 . 2
5.4 - 13.2
7 . 3
3 . W e l l s
21.4
1 2 . 1 - 43.5
16.4
4 . Downhole Pumps 2.9
2 . 0 - 3 1 . 1
2 . 7
5 . G a t h e r i n g E q u i p .
7 . 6 4 . 7
- 38 .5
6 . 4
6 .
Power Plan t 42.3 32.2
-
23.9 43.7
7 . Heat Exchangers 10.1
9.8
- 3 . 2 1 3 . 3
8 . B r i ne S t a b i l i z i n g
0.0
0.0
-
0 . 0
0.0
9. Env i ronmenta l
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
0.0
10. I n s u r a n c e
3.7 2.5 - 31.1 3.4
The s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r s i n e f f e c t a r e p r i n t e d a t t h e bo t tom .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
You g e t t o t h i s r e p o r t
by
u s i n g O p t i o n [ Y , V ] ,
"RUN:
S i n g l e - S i t e
C o s t
of
I f t h e t h i r d column, X COST
CHANGE
FROM 1986' , i s a l l zeros, you w o u ld
Pow er An a 1y
s
i
" .
b e l o o k i n g
a t
t h e
Base Case v e r s i o n o f t h i s r e p o r t .
c - 7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 90/164
3.2 Single-Site Current Costs Report
The report from [ Y , M ] , "SHOW: O ne -S ite Cu rre nt C os ts"
is s h o w n
below.
T h i s
format i s d i f f e r e n t f r om
any
of the Mu lt i-Site repo r ts . Here you
can
see ,
for
each
o f
the
major
accounts,
C a p i t a l
Cost,
O&M
Cost/Year,
and
Mills/KWh values for the capita l components and T o t a l .
GEOTHERMAL COST OF POWER ESTIMATE RUN:
03-16-1987
-
15:14:04
Current Case Costs: Imperial Valley
-
Binary
[From IMGEO Model J
C a p i t a l
O&M C a p i t a l T o t a l
ACCOUNT s S / Y
r System cost
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Mills/KWhour
- - - - -
- - - -
M i l l i o n
$ - - - - - - - - - -
c o s t , c o s t , P a r t
o f
Busbar
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - _
TOTAL
:
168.7
3 .2 43 .6
5 2 . 5
RISK
FRACTION
:
28.6
0 .5
7 . 3
8 . 7
1. Ident i fy Rese rvoi r 17.9
0 . 0
3 . 6 3 . 6
2 . Confirm
Reservoi
r 17.3
0.0 3 . 8 3 . 8
3 . Wells 29 .5
0 . 7
6 . 7
0 . 6
4 . Downhole Pumps
1 .7
0 . 3 0 . 5 1.4
5.
Gathering
E q u i p .
9 . 5
0 .2
2 . 7
3 . 3
6 . Power
P l a n t
6 8 . 2
1.3 19.4 2 2 . 9
7 . Heat Exchangers 18.2
0.7 5 .2 7 .0
8.
Brine S t a b i l i z i n g 0.0
0 . 0
0 . 0 0 . 0
9 . Environmental 0 . 0
0 . 0 0.0
0 . 0
10. Insurance
6.4
0 . 0 1 . 8 1 . 8
The se ns i t i v i t y f a c t o r s i n e f f e c t a r e p r in t e d a t t he
bottom.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C-8
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 91/164
3.3
Single- Site Base Case Costs Report
The report from
[ Y , N ] ,
"SHOW: One-Site Base Case Costs" is shown here.
The f orm at is the sam e as that of th e One-Site Current Costs report.
GEOTHERMAL COST
OF
POWER ESTIMATE
R U N : 03-16-1987
-
15:14:04
Base Case Costs: Imperial Valley - Binary
[From IMGE O Model Capital O&M Capi t 1 Tot
a1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - -
Million
f
- - _ - - -
- - _ - Mills/KWhour - - - - -
cost, cost Part of Busbar
ACCOUNT
s S/Y r System
C o s t
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
_ - - - - - _ - - _ _
TOTA :
234.9
4 . 0 6 0 . 3 7 1 . 3
RISK FRACTIC' :
64 .2
0 . 9
1 6 . 2
18.7
1.
Identify Reservoir
21.3
0.0 4.2 4 .2
2.
Confirm Reservoir
19.9
0.0
4 . 4 4 . 4
3 .
Wells 58 .2
0 .7
13.2 15.2
4 .
Downhole Pumps
2 .5
0.5
0.7 2 . 0
5. Gathering Equip.
15 .8
0.4
4 . 5 5 . 4
6 . Power Plant
89.7
1.7 2 5 . 5 3 0 . 1
7. Heat Exchangers
18.4
0.7
5 . 2 7 . 2
8 .
Brine Stabilizing
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9 .
Environmental
0.0
0 . 0 0.0
0.0
10.
Insurance 9 . 2
0 . 0 2.6 2.6
An indication is shown that all
sensitivity factors in effect are nominal.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
- _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
c - 9
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 92/164
3.4 S i n gl e -S i te l e
h ica l F a c t o r s Report
T h i s repor t shows in te rm edia te ca lcu la t ion va lues. I t s purpose i s so le ly
for checking on the reasonableness o f ce r t a i n i n t e rmed i a t e r e s u l t s .
Resul ts
from
t h i s r e p or t
-----
h o u l d
n o t
be c ite d as " p e r f o r m s values"
-
r
----cost e s t i m a t e s " - f ~ ~ a r t i cu I a r s i t e o r r eg io n.
Some of the values shown here
do n o t
appear when
Binary
Plants or
Deep
Well pumps are not used fo r the spec i f i c reg ion .
Page I
Region analyzed: 2 Imperial Valley - Binary
*****
SITE DETAILS
- - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _
03-16-1987
-
1 5 ~ 1 4 ~ 0 4
******* PR OJEC T MAJOR PARAMETERS
************
Pl an t n e t s i ze , M W E 50
P l a n t
F i n a l
GROSS
Power estimate,
MW 74.17367
(571 Well -Head Temperature, Deg-F
Flow
I n t o
P l a n t
r eq u i r ed ,
10A6
b / h r 7.320121
Flow From P l a n t , t o I n j e c t o r s , 10A6 b/hr 7.320121
(5271 P l a n t Type ]=BIN E d L A 3=STEAM
1
336
[S12] Brine Contam. Index = B C I
0
[S28] Down Hole Pumps 1 = YES 1
*******
W E L L
PARAMETERS
AND COSTS ***********
( 5 2 1 1 Producer Well Flow, 10A6 b/Hour .515
In j ec t o r s / producer .6
[S15]*[R6]
Prod.
r e d r i l l f r a c t . add-on cost .I5
. 2
[S13]
Well
Depth, K-Feet -
DE E P 9
Spare wells/ producer . I
Dry
Holes
/
Active Producer
No. of Producer Wells
( a t p l a n t
s t a r t ) 15
Producers plus spares
17
In jec to rs requ i red 9
Tota l Number of I n i t i a l W e l l s 30
Base cost
(no risk)
of bare well
Fract ion
o f
wells t o be extended
.75
F r a c ti o n t o be r e d r i l l e d
.15
Cost to Extend bare well
5.259376E-02
Cost
t o
Redri l l bare wel l
*2.011185E-02
Adjus t : Per Well Cost Multiplier
.85
Well cos t , w/ inc iden t s , n o t e s t s .9423407
Cost of 3-Day Well Test .04
Cost
o f
10-Day Well Test
.061
Cost of
21-Day Well Test .1375
Test Cost for W i l d c a t , I n j . , Dry .182033
Test Cost for Confirmation Producers .319533
Test Cost for Phase 3 Producers ,203033
Tota l
Cost per Wildcat Well 1.124374
Tota l Cost per Producer Well i n Phase
3 1.145374
Tota l Cost per Injector or Dry Well 1.124374
Capcost
o f
a l l i n i t i a l w e l l s ( i n Phase 3) 29.49145
.8126
Tota l Cost per Confirmation
Well
1.261874 .
c - 1 0
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 93/164
***** SITE
DETAILS
_ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - -
age
2
Region analyzed:
2
Imperial Valley
-
Binary
*******
IDENTIFY, CONFIRM RESERVOIR
********
[S3]*[R1
J
P(success). Identification .2
No. o f Ident. units 5
Cost, Geol. and Geophysics, Regional
.05
Cost, Therm. Grad. Holes/ Wildcat,
.005
# 50
MWe Power Plants/Area (per
GROSS
MWe) 3.370468
UNIT Identific. Cost, not P.V.'d 5.696868
Duration of Identific. period, years
6.7
Total Regional Prod lr''on Life, Yrs. 43.48187
Cap recoil 'ict. for
:?
I.D. over plants .1609883
\
'd, Per Plant 4.546623
[S4]*R3], Prob. of Coni/Unit .6
No. of Confirm. Units .6666666
[R4]
Unit Cost, Confirmation 7.571242
Duration of confirmation, years. 3
Total confirm
S , P.V., All
alloc'd to
1
plant 17.31182
OK
Producers after CONFIRM 4
OK Injectors after CONFIRM 1.5
03-16-1987 - 15:14:04
Years between plants, 4
-
nominal
4
- --
J l?::-ific.
Cc.
e***** S U P P L E M E N T A L
WELLS
*tt***************
[S24] Flow Rate Decline Coefficient.
Per [S19] Adjusted Decline Coefficient.
[S23]
'
Initial flow rate, for Decline Calcs
(5211
'
Minimum flow per initial well
No.
of suppl. pr0d.s added over
L I F E
years
Discounted
N o .
of supplemental wells.
Sum
o f
Disc'td O&M Units for suppl. wells.
Cap. Cost Part of Supplm., Final Unacost
O&M
Part of Supplm., INCOMPLETE CALC. *****
.0282
.0282
,798
.515
8.00001
.633004
1.636164
.1223586
.2 18281
***** DEEP WELL
PUMPS
t * * * t t t t * t t *+**** t * t t * *
Deep Pumps,
N o .
to purchase at start
17
No.
of Pumps on line (active) at start
15
-Per pump horsepower (1000s) .6
FINAL, Net to
D.W. PUMPS,
MW 6.7113
..
Deep Pumps, Total capital cost, fM
1.7
.02
Deep Pumps, Total ObM, SM/yr .3128105
Deep Pumps, Cap. Cost & Installation,
SM
OhM per active pump per year.
c - 1 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 94/164
***** SITE DETAILS
_ _ - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - -
age
3
Reg i on ana l yzed :
2
I m pe r i a l Va l l ey - Bi na r y
*****
G A T H E R I N G
SYSTEM DETAILS
**************
[S14]
Sep . be t w 'n p r oduce r we l l s ,
F t . 2600
Length of p r o d . p i p e , r e c t a n g . f i e l d , F t
87890.09
P r o du c ti o n g a t h . c o s t c ap . t o t a l , M$
4.734505
C o s t of p i p e f o r f o u r a v e r ag e i n j e c t o r s , M$
2.057781
C a pc o st o f i n j e c t o r g a t h e r i n g , SM
4.810008
Fi e l d S ur fa ce Equipment, T ota l Cap. , SM
9.54451
TOTAL F i e l d , C ap , SM ( I n c l u d e s P ha se 3 Wel l s )
45.28259
Length of p i p e for
s u p p l m .
g a t h e r i n g , f e e t
155534.6
G a t h e r i n g
f o r
s upp l m . p r oduce r s , S M ,
.2802799
F l : F i e l d s t a f f a n n u a l c o s t , SM/yr
.456
F2: I n i t i a l PROD and INJ wells a n n u a l c o s t .075
F3:
G a t h e r i n g P i p e s a nd v a l v e s an n ua l c o s t
F5:
Supplm.
w el l s ,
C a p i t a l p o r t i o n , u n a c o s t
03-16-1987
-
15:14:04
Gat h f o r s uppl m . p r od , as JM/yr
3.739232E-02
.1908902
,1223586
F6: Supplm. wells, O&M p o r t i o n , u n a c o s t
6.821303E-04
F7: Supplm.
wel ls
G a t h . c a p i t a l , u n a c o s t
3.739232E- 2
F8: Supplm. Wells Gath . O&M, unacos t
5.605598E-03
t******
POWER PLANT FACTORS
e***********
BINARY SIZING DETAILS
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -
B in ar y n e t b r i n e e f f e c t i v e n e s s 'Wh/LB, NET
6.035786
Added Gross to Make I More MWe
n e t
o u t .
.23803 6
F I T T E D , Net t o
D . W .
PUMPS, MW 3
299534
ADJUSTED GROSS Brine E f f e c t i v e n e s s
8.444039
A u x Power, W/O D.W. Pumps (Pr im. loop b c o o l ) 15.86487
Power
P l a n t
C a p i t a l c o s t ,
SM
82.20496
P l a n t O&M, SM/Year, w/o
Proper.
Tax & I n s u r .
1.890714
Brine S t a b i l . , C a p . SM
.00001
Brine S t a b i l . , O&M, SM/yr . 000
1
(Sll] H2S,
ppm
50
H2S
Equip ,
SM .00001
H2S O&M, SM/yr
. 000 1
- - - - - - E N D , B INAR Y SIZING DETAILS
- - - - - - - - - - -
***** FINANCIAL FACTORS tt*****tt************
Power p l an t book l i f e , Years
C a p i t a l R e c o v e r y f a c t o r
.I334106
Di s coun t Rate, Pl an t and Gene r a l
.13
ECON: ( F i e l d VLAFCR)/( P1a n t VLAFCR) 1
ECON:
(F ie ld DISC) / (Plant DISC)
1
Discount Rate
for
Fie ld Equipment
. I 3
.36
"30
Income t a x r a t e ( Fede r a l + S t a t e )
Adj . a l l costs f o r ROYR,
SEVR, (INTXR)*DEPL
.914
e*****
FINAL COST FACTORS
***************e*+*
F i e l d Total cap, Reduced
re
t a x c r e d i t s
21.52876
C a p i t a l
cost
to be i n s u r e d , SM
127.1334
c - 1 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 95/164
APPENDIX
D
IM-GEO
D A T A
FILES
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 96/164
IM-GEO SITE DATA FILE
The fo ll ow in g pages d ep ic t t h e c on te nt s of t h e f i l e "SITEDATO.DAT", t h e
main
f i l e o f s i t e c ha r ac t er i st i cs .
Not
a l l o f t h e
d a t a
lines (numbered) are used
i n
th e IMGEO code.
T h i s
f i l e was compi led during a group e f fo r t t o develop the
model , w i t h
the
understanding
t h a t
some factors would be more i m p o r t a n t t h a n o t h e r s .
The explanation of the
major
l i n e s i s a s f o l lows , u s ing va r i a b le 1 as
an
example:
I . , "YES",
"YES", "Energy in Region,
MWf30Y
5750, 1041, 3060,1751, 4559, 51490.,3250, 3250, 4000
-750,
-41 , -1500, -751 , -1559, -48490. , -750 ,
-750,-1500
The f i r s t l i n e
o f
numbers represents the "Best Case" value for each
Region. The second l i n e of numbers re pr es en ts th e
a m o u n t by
which t h e "Best
Case" value i s amended t o f ind the ''Worst Case" value.
the second l ine i s always i n t he d i r e c t ion o f m a k ing the p r o je c t l e s s l e s s
ef f i c i en t o r more expensive .
T h e f i r s t "YES" means t h a t t he va r i a b le i s used somewhere i n the cos t ing
code. The second
"YES"
means t h a t the va r iab le has risk a ssoc ia t e d w i t h
i t .
I M - G E O
se nse s the se log ic a l f l a gs t o de te r m ine i f th i s variable can be edited
by one of the three " r i sk" ed i t ing sc reens .
ed it i ng i s t o be a llowed by the user .
Note t h a t t he s i g n o f
Both
flags must be
"YES"
i f
0 - 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 97/164
"Imperial Val ley - Flash , Imperial Valley
-
Binary I'
" B a s i n S Range
-
Flash
,
Bas i n
& Range
-
Binary
It
"Cascades - Flash , "Cascades - Binary
"Young Volcanics - Flash l", "Young Volcanics
- F l a s h
2"
"Dry
Steam
1..
" Y E S " , "YES", "Energy i n Region, MW*30Y
I'
5750, 1041, 3060,1751, 4559, 51490. ,3250, 3250, 4000
2 . , " Y E S " , "NO", "Energy i n SubArea, MW*30Y"
500, 250,
250,
250.
500, 250, 250,
250,
500
3., " Y E S " ,
"NO", "Wildcat Success Rate
4 . , "YES", " N O " ,
"Confirmation Success Rate"
5., "YES",
"YES", "R ese rvi or S at ur . Temp, F I
6.,
"NO",
" N O " ,
"Resv.
Temp
a t 10 Years, F
7.,
"YES",
" Y E S " ,
"Wellhead Temperature, F "
8. ,
"NO" ,
" N O " ,
"We1 1head Pressure. ,
PSIA 'I
9 . ,
" N O " , " N O " , "Wellhead Enthalpy,
BTU/lb"
10.
NO ,
"NO",
"Non-Cond. Gases, PPM
Il.,"YES' ,
" Y E S " , "HZS, PPM
12.,"YES", "YES", "Tot. D i s . S o l i d s , PPK "
13.,"YES", " N O " , "Well Depth, 1000 Feet "
14..
NO ,
NO , "Wellhead Separat. , F t
"
15. ,"YES","YES",
"Producer Redri l l Fract ion"
16.,"VES","YES",
"Dry Holes per Producer "
II
n
*I IV-FL" ,
IV-BI " , BR- FL , B R - B I
'I
"CS
-
F L ",
CS
B I
I
,
Y V
- F 1
"
, Y V - F2 , GY -DS I'
-750, -41, -1500,-753, -1559,-48490. ,-750, -750,-1500
0,
0, 0, 0,
0, 0,
0,
0, 0
.20,
.20, .20, .20,
.20, .20,
.20,
.20, .20
0,
0, 0, 0,
0,
0,
0,
0, 0
0 ,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0, 0, 0,
0
.60, .60, .60, .60, .60, .60,
.60,
.60, .60
525, 360, 450, 300, 425, 280, 600, 550, 375
548, 358, 448, 298, 423, 278, 590, 520, 370
375, 350, 400, 288, 375, 270, 385, 406, 347
380, 500, 225, 500, 225, 500, 166, 235,
100
419, 340, 375, 280, 366, 260,
900,
370,
1100
- 2 5 ,
-20,
-50, -20, -50, -10, -25, -75, -3
-10, -10, -10, -10, -10, -10, -10, -10, -10
-20,
-20,
- 2 5 ,
-10, -65, -10, -10, -31,
-2
-38, -50,
-23,
-50, -23,
-50,
-17, -24,
-10
-42, -34, -38, -28, -37, -26, -90, -37, -110
I(
5000 ,1000 ,
1000,
2000
,
1000, 1000, 2000
1000,10000
15000,5000,
5000, 8000, 1000,
1000, 700,
200,10000
50, 0, 10,
0, 0,
0, 1500
50,
2000
50, 50, 50,
200, 25, 25, 500,
75, 2500
250,
5, 1.5,
1.2, 1.0,
0.5, 15, 10, 0
125, 1, 1.0, 1.3, 1.5,
0.5, 20,
5,
0
I(
6,
9,
8 ,
3, 10,
3, 6,
5, 10
0 ,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0 ,
0,
0,
0
0,
0, 0,
0, 0,
0 ,
0,
0, 0
015,
. l o ,
3 3 ,
.20,
.35,
.20,
.35, .20,
.35
2600,
2600,
2600, 1000, 2600,
1000,
1320, 2600, 2600
.OS, .05, .07, .05, .lo, .05,
.lo,
.05, .10
.17, .17, .25, .If, .17, .17, .20, .14, .14 ,
.03, -03, .08, .03, .33, .OB, .13, .06, .06
D - 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 98/164
17. ,"YES", "YES",
"Yrs
Btwn. Workover, PRODU"
18.
,"YES", "YES", "Yrs Btwn. Workover,
I N J C T
19. ,"NO", "NO", "N-Plant Drawd'n Effect 'I
20. , NO", "NO",
"NOT
I N CURRENT USE
2l.,"YES", "YES", "Prod. Well Flow, Klb/hr I'
22.,"YES", "YES", "Inject.
Well
Flow,
Klb/hr"
23. ,"YES", "YES", "Flow for Decline,
Klb/hr
I
24. ,"YES", "YES", "Decline Coeff., l/Years
I
25.,"YES", " N O " , "Flow
into
Plant, Klb/hr I'
26.,"YES", "NO", "Flow from Plant, Klb/hr I
27.,"YES", "NO", "Plant: l=Bin 2dla 3=Stm I'
28. ,"YES", "NO", "Downhole
Pump:
O=No/l=Yes"
29. ,"NO","NO", "Brine
Stability
l=POOR
30. ,"NO","NO", "Wellhead Layout
]=Pads
31. ,"NO","NO", "Identification Cost,
SM
I'
2.0, lo., 15., 3., lo., lo., 7., IO.,
-1.5, -2.,
- 5 . ,
-2., -2.. -1., -2., -3.,
2.0, lo., 15., 3.9 lo., lo., 7., lo.,
-1.5, -2., -5., -2.. -2., -1., -2.1
- 3 . ,
0 ,
0 ,
0 , 0 ,
0 , 0 ,
0 ,
0 ,
0 ,
0 , 0 ,
0 , 0 , 0,
01
0 ,
10,
10, 10,
10, 10,
10,
10,
10,
51
5, 5, 5,
5, 5,
5, 5,
450, 580, 750, 400, 350, 500, 70, 550,
-100, -130, -250, -50, -100, -50, -5, -100,
1350, 1160, 2250, 1200, 700, 1500, 210,
2200,
720, 928, 1200, 640, 560, 800, 112, 880,
.002, .024, ,020, .027, .020,
.010,
.036,
.020, .012
.008, .OO6, .015, .011, .025, .010, .064, .010,
.008
5450, 7140, 6600,10500, 6850,20000, 1250, 6655, 850
0 , 0 , 0 , 0 ,
0 , 0 , 0, 0, 0
4250, 7140, 5400,10500, 5650,20000, 590, 5460, 50
0, 0 , 0 , 0 ,
0 ,
0 ,
0,
0,
0
21
1,
2,
1,
2, 1, 2,
2,
3
0 ,
0 ,
01 01
0 , 01
0, 0,
0
0 , 1, 0 ,
1 1
0, 1, 0, 0, 0
0 , 0 ,
0, 0 ,
0 ,
0, 0, 0, 0
1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0
0;
0,
0, 0, 0 , 0 , 0, 0, 0
1, 1,
1,
01 1, 0, 0, 1, 1
0 , 0 , 0, 0, 0 , 0,
0,
0 ,
0
I . , I . , I . , I . , I . ,
l., l., I . , 1.
-450, -580, -750, -800,
-175,
-500, -70, -550,
-100,
-130,
-250, -50, -100, -50,
-5,
-100,
15.
-5.
15.
-5.
0
0
10
5
100
-25
900
-00
160
-25
0, 01
0, 0,
0,
0,
0 ,
0 ,
0
32.
"NO",
"NO", "Confirmation Cost,
SM
I'
I . , I . , I . , I . , I . , I . , I . , l . , 1.
0, 0, 0, 0, 01 0, 0, 01 0
I .123,0.956,1.217,0.556,2.032,0.576,2.038,0.906,1 .I55
0.112,0.110,0.171,0.062,0.144,0.032,0.179,0.102,0.127
0.149,0.053,0.097,0.048,0.253,0.088,0.219,0.120,0.100
.ol .o, .o, .o,
.o,
.o, .o, .o, .o
33.,"YES", "YES", "Well Cost, Extension,
SM
"
34.
" Y E S " ,
" N O " ,
"Well Lost
Circ. Probs.
MS"
0-4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 99/164
35.
" Y E S " , "NO",
"Well Cementing
P r o b s . ,
MS"
36.. " Y E S " ,
" N O " ,
"Well Other Prob lems,
MS
It
37 . . " Y E S " , " N O " , "Workover Cost, SM, PRODU I'
3 8 . , " Y E S " ,
"NO",
"Workover Cost, SM,
INJCT
'I
0.067,0.001,0.040,0.001,0.107,0.027,0.191,0.0B6,0.100
.o, .o, .o,
.o,
.o,
.o,
.o, .o,
.o
0.034,0 .029,0 .036,0 .017,0 .061,0 .017,0 .06~,0 .027,0 .035
.o, .o, .o, .o, .o, .o, .o, .o, .o
.055, .025, .025, .025, .025,
.025,
.055, .025, .050
.o, .o,
.o,
.o, .o, .o, .o,
.o, .o
.055, .025,
.025,
,025, .025,
.025, ,055,
,025
.050
.o, .o, .o, .o, .o, .o, .o, .o, .o
D - 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 100/164
. -
IM-GEO FINANCIAL FACTS
F I L E
The contents o f "BUSFNFCT.GE0" are presented here only as a matter o f
record .
E n t i n g h ,
Meridian Corporation, Falls Church, Virginia, (703) 998-0922, f o r
guidance
and
as s i s t an ce .
I f you need t o change the contents o f t h e s e f i l e s , p l e a s e c o n t a c t Dan
1986
1986 1986 3
.85 .9747237 1.089035 .I408685
1.413805 1.413805
1 1 1
30 .I3 .04
F nanci a1 Fac tors :
Generated
by:
BUS1MGEO.BAS
Used
by:
1MGEOnnn.EXE
C A S E T i t l e :
SET
IM-GEO
FACTORS,
AS-BUILT, N O
AFDC
A F D C
(]=yes):
0
Overnight =
0 ,
As Built
=
1:
R u n
Date:
03-12-1987
1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 101/164
.
..
.
APPENDIX
E
INSTALLATION and START UP
E - 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 102/164
I N S T ,
1.0 R e q u i r e d F i l e s
You
c a n r u n
I M - G E O
d i r e c t
The d i s t r i b u t i o n d i s k e t t e
y o u r h a r d d i s k .
c o nt a in s t h e f o l l o w i n g
f i l e s :
L L A T I O N and START U P
IMGE0300.EXE
HWEIGHT.HLP
HTOPMENU.HLP
H E D I T .HLP
HSHOW . LP
BUSFNFCT.GE0
DATATEST.BAS
SITEDATO.MAS
SITEDATO.DAT
IMGE0300.
BAS
1MGEOUT.TXT
128764
1024
1024
1152
1152
427
2176
6656
6656
88388
1
3-16-87
3- 15-87
3-14-87
3-15-87
3-15-87
3 - 12-87
3-04-87
3-16-87
3-16-87
3-16-87
3
- 16-87
y f ro m th e d i s t r i b u t i o n d i s k e t t e , o r copy i t t o
f o r I M - G E O Ve rs io n 3.00, da te d 16 March
1985
l l : 0 2 a
l l : 5 7 p
7 : 0p
8: 56p
8: 58p
l l : 2 2 a
12:53p
11:52a
l l : 5 2 a
10:42a
1:21p
Execu tab le I M - G E O Program,
HELP
F i l e
HELP F i l e
HELP F i l e
HELP
F i l e
F i n a n c i a1 Fac to rs
F o r T e s t i n g E d i t e d S I T E D A T O . D A T
" O f f i c i a1
I
S I T E D A T O .
DAT
F i
e
S i t e Data Base read by I M - G E O
Source Code ( i n Q U I C K
B A S I C 2.0)
File f o r I M - G E O Report O u t p u t s
A l l o f t h es e f i l e s e x ce pt
D A T A T E S T B A S , SITEDATO.MAS,
IMGE0300.BAS, and
1MGEOUT.TXT must be on t h e same d e f a u l t d i s k d r i v e ( d i s k e t t e o r h a r d d i s k )
from which you execute IMGE0300.
2 .0 S ta r t in g th e Prog ram
T o s t a r t
I M - G E O ,
t y p e :
D>
IMGE0300
and press the <Enter> key .
("D>", h er e, i n d i c a t e s t h e
DOS
system prom pt on yo ur screen.) The program
l o a d s i n about 20 seconds f rom d iske t te ,
and then uses about 25 more seconds
(on an
XT)
t o r ea d f i l e s and i n i t i a l i z e data.
f a s t e r i f you use a ha rd d isk o r an AT computer.)
( T h i n g s a r e s u b s t a n t i a l l y
You
w i l l
hear a beep when th e p rogram i s ready
' f o r
you t o use.
NOTES:
I . P r e s s i n g t h e c C t r l - B r e a k > k e y c o m b i n a t i o n w i l l s t o p t h i s p r og ra m.
2. The f i l e IMGE0300.BAS on t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n d i s k e t t e i s the Source code
You
c an a l s o e x i t t h i s p ro gr am b y s e l e c t i n g O p ti o n
Q
f r o m t h e
[Z]
MENU.
f o r
I M - G E O i n Q U I C K B A S I C 2.0.
The p rog ramming conven t ions a re s im i la r
t o
t h o s e f o r I B M B A S I C A and M ic roSo f t
GW-BASIC,
b u t a re s u f f i c i e n t l y d i f f e r e n t
t h a t IM-GEO.BAS w i l l
pJ
run as a
B A S I C A
program.
f i l e s .
3.
Any d oc u me n ta t io n f i l e s on t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n d i s k e t t e a r e W ordS ta r ( TM)
E-2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 103/164
APPENDIX
F
IM-GEO PROGRAM SOURCE CODE
F - 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 104/164
IM-GEO
PROGRAM SOURCE
C O D E
The IM-GEO program source code
i s
presented here.
The code consists o f
seven conceptual sections.
subrout ines
.
Each section contains one or more routines
or
* ZINIT -
I n i t i a l i z e s a r r a y s , d is p la y s progam i d en t i f i ca t i o n s c reen .
*
Z E N G N
- The main cos t ing rou t ines . These a re con t ro l l ed
by
processes
located i n s ec t i o n s
Z M E N U
and ZCTRL.
*
Z M E N U -
Pr ese nts op tion s t o User, and con tro ls much of t h e l o g i c
o f
program flow to ensure
t h a t
re su l t s conform t o the cur ren t
va lues o f se ns i t i v i ty parameters.
* ZCTRL
- Executes lower leve l con t ro l fo r s in g l e- s i t e and mul t i - s i t e
ca l cu a l a t i o n s .
* ZEDIT - Enables e d i t i n g
o f
sens i t iv i ty parameters .
* Z L O A D - Loads Si t e
Data
and
o t h e r
f a c t o r s . Resets Base
Case
v a l u e s .
* ZOUTS - Creates major screen and printed report outputs .
*
ZMISC
- Creates other screen and report outputs .
Note t h a t
program
c o n t r o l a t s t a r t u p begins
w i t h Z I N I T ,
and jumps
from
Z E N G N ,
the "cost ing engine",
i s
presented early
i n
the fol lowing pages
t h e r e t o t h e t o p of s ec t i o n
Z M E N U .
because i t contains the code for most of the technical relat ionships among
reservoir p h ys ica l ch a ra c t e r i s t i c s , s en s i t i v i t y f ac t o r s , and t h e eq u a ti o ns fo r
performance and cost of technology.
The programmed l i s t of %on-risk" RLD Achievements i s on page F-36. T h a t
l i s t will
h e l p
you t i e t h e f a c t o r s
on
E d i t i n g Menus [ Y , A ] ,
[ Y , B ] , and [ Y C ] t o
s p e c i f i c l i n e s i n t h e Z E N G N costing codes.
f a c t o r s on t h e
e d i t i n g
screens i s cont ro l l ed by the vec to rs R E V ( i ) .
o f f by comm ent-controll ing apostrophes. These r e fl e c t pla ce s where usef ule
addi t ional features could easi ly be added t o t h e co d e l a t e r .
This s ec t io n s t a r t s on page F-6.
Note t h a t the sequence of these
In
some
places
i n
t h e Z E N G N code you wil l f ind features
t h a t
are blocked
F - 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 105/164
' *** ZINIT
'
Last Edited 14 March 87
I
'PROGRAM NAME:
"
IMGE0300. EXE"
'PURPOSE:
CALCULAT E IMPACTS OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ON
COST OF GEOTHERMAL ELECTRIC POWER
'Version: 3.00 16 March 1987
'Author: Daniel 3. Entingh, Meridian Corporation,
'Language: QUICKBASIC
2.0,
Microsoft (CR)
'PROGRAM HISTORY:
Falls
Church, V A
'(from GEO.BAS) Copyright, Daniel
J.
Entingh, April
2 , 198
'Use permitted by Meridian Corporation, Falls Church VA 5/8
'Use permitted by U.S. Department
o f
Energy 5/84
'Revised: GEO.BAS
V1.l
5/85 Added constant
S
costs to displays.
'Revised: IM-GEO.EXE 12/86 V1.08 Adds Menus, Editors, Risk Calcs.
'Use Permitted Sandia Corporation, 12/86
'Revised: IM-GEO.EXE Jan & Feb 87, Version 2.xxx:
'Revised: Version 3.00, 13- 16 March
1987
'
Prepared By Meridian Corporation, Falls Church, Virginia
' as final de liverable under Contract No. 02- 194 7 from
'
Sandi a Corporation, A1 buquerque, New Mexico.
'
Meridian Corporation Project No. 275.
'Copyright, Meridian Corporation, 1986, 1987
' NOTICE: LICENSE T O USE AND DISTRIBUTE HEREBY
'
I
Extensive revisions of costing codes per technical inputs
from
Bill
Livesay, Susan Petty, Stanley Unitt
I
I
GRANTED T O SANDIA CORPORATION,
16
March 1987
' ***** INITIALIZATION ROUTINES ************
I
OPTION BASE
1
'Least subscript
- 1
on all arrays.
DIM MTBS(18), MV(18), MMf(l8)
DIM RADRISK$(50), RADRISK(50)
'R&D,
Estimation Errors
DIM RADACHS(60), RADACH(60)
I R & D ,
Other Achievements
DIM REV(60)
'R&D
Ach. Editing Vectors
DIM SITENAME$(
10) 'Region Names
DIM
SITESHORTS
(10)
'Region Short Name Stubs
DIM SITEUSES (40) '"YES" i f Datum i s active
DIM SITERISKS(40)
"YES"
i f
R i s k offset
i s
active
DIM
SITEDATAS(40) 'Physical Data Categ. Names
DIM SITEDATA(2,40,10) 'Physical Data, by Categ./Region
'
'
SITEDATA(2,1,3)
-
Worst Case values.
These are
'
compounded
i n
*** SUBR: ADJUST. WORST. D A T A
from
SITEDATA(l,I,J),
SITERISK(1,J) and RADRISK(1)
I
I
SITEDATA(l,l,J) -
B e s t
Case values
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 106/164
DIM SITERISK(40,lO) 'Measurernent/Ri sk Dat a
DIM RESULTS(2,10,12,5) ' M A I N RESULTS M A T R I X
' RESULTS( I , J,K, L)
'
I:
1
- Base Case, 2
-
Current Case
'
3:
Vec to r s f o r 10 Reg ions .
K: A c co un ts f o r P r o j e c t E l em e nt s
11
= T o t a l
12 = P o r t i o n Due t o R i s k .
'
1: C a l c u l a t i o n S u b t ot a l s
1 = Cap i ta l Cos t , S M i l l i o n
2 -
0 M,
3
=
C a p i t a l , m i l l s / k w h , C o ns t an t D o l l a r s
4 - O&M,
5 -
T o t a l ,
8
ac t i ve on 16 Jan
87.
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
I
S
M i 11
i
n/Year
II II
II
II
DIM ACCOUNTS(l2) 'C os t Ac co un t Names
DIM IUEIGHT(8)
DIM WEIGHT.USER(8) 'User 's w ei gh ts , E d it a b l e
DIM RESCAPADJ (12)
'
DIM PICOST(5)
DIM RESMUL(2,lZ) 'R es ul ts: 8 - S i t e Weighted Avgs, 12 Acc ount s
DIM RSUM(20)
DIM WCOSTL( 2 ,5 )
'
DIM SHOWOUT(12,4)
' R e s u l t w e i g h t s f o r R eg io ns
' R e s u l ts , A d j u s t e d C a p i t a l C o st s
' Co st T o t a l s f r o m En gi ne o u t e r l o o p
'Sums f o r i n t e r m e d i a t e r e s u l t s .
'Resu l t s : 8 - S i t e Weigh ted:
' R e s u l t s f o r SUBR: SHOW.MAIN
(U sed o n l y i n C o s t i n g E n g in e )
1
1
= Base Case,
2 = Curren t Case
(See L
i n
RESULTS(I,J,K,L) f o r t h e
5
c o s t c a t e g o r i e s )
' Mi sc el la ne ou s I n i t i a t i o n S te ps :
' P r i n t - t me con t ro l codes
:
CHANNELlS
-
"PRINTER
CHANNELES
-
" F i l e : 1MGEOUT.TXT"
CHANNELS = CHANNELIS
PSWITCHS = *P"
I
I t
' F i r s t s i t e f o r s i ng l e s i t e a na ly s i s:
' U se r 's w e i g h t s f o r r e g i o n s :
' D at a n o t e d i t e d y e t :
I n i t i a l i z a t i o n c o m p l e t e d .
JSITE =
1
FOR 1-1
TO 8:WEIGHT.USER(I)-l: NEXT
I
EDFLAGS="NO" : EDFLAGES="NO"
F - 4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 107/164
' Begin Operation:
WELCOMES "WELCOME TO IM-GEO.
(
Setting
u p
Base Case ) 'I
GOSU B sublBASELOAD 'LOAD Base Case Site Data
WELCOMES
-
'
'No 1 onger appropr ate.
PRIN T CHRS
(7)
'Beep tel ls user that program is ready.
Program Identification Screen:
C L S :
PRINT ' VERSION 3.00 [ IMGE03003 16 Mar.
1987"
PRINT ' IMPACTS OF R&D ON COST OF GEOTHERMAL POWER"
PR NT
PRINT '
PRINT ' Falls Church, Virginia"
PR NT
(I
PRINT ' A 1 buquerque, New Mexico"
PRINT ' Contract
N o .
02-1947 '
"
Project Team:
'
'
'
PRINT: PRINT:
PRI NT PRESS ANY KEY TO START OPERATION ==-===>
GOS UB INLETTER 'Get response
TTIMES
-
TIMES 'Inital Stat ic Time f o r Reports
GOT0 TOPMENU 'Start at TOPMENU (MAIN MENU)
'
NOTE: EXIT
to
SYSTEM is at TOPMENU subroutine in ZMENU Section
'
IM-GEO
11
Prepared By Meridian Corporation"
Under Contract t o Sandia Corporation"
Dan Entingh, Bill Livesay, Susan Petty,"
Richard Traeger, Stanley Unitt"
'
*****
End o f "Initialize" Section **+**
..
F - 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 108/164
'*** ZENGN
'***** COSTING CALCULATION ROUTINES FOR ONE PROJECT
*********
I
' A u t h o r : D a n i e l
J.
E n t in g h , M e r i d i a n C o r p o r a t i o n
I
March 1987
' L a s t e d i t e d : 1 5 M ar ch 1 98 7
F a l l s Church, VA 22041
CALC .A. S ITE :
'***
SUBR: Ca lc u l a t io n : One Res er vo i r
Used
f o r
s i n g l e an d m u l t i - s i t e ca ses .
' D a t a S et up s, N o t a f f e c t e d by
R I S K :
FEXCS = RADACH(2) ' [R02] I d e n t i f i c a t i o n U n i t Co st
FWLCS = RADACH(5) ' [ROS] U n i t c o s t
o f
avg. Wel l
PTYPE = SITEDATA(1,27,JSITE) ' [S27] P l an t Type
DPUMP
-
SITEDATA(1,28,JSITE)
'
[S28]
Down
Hole Pumps
'
Power P l a n t C o st M u l t i p l i e r :
FPTCS
-
1
I F SITEDATA(1,27,JSITE) -
1
THEN FPTCS - RADACH(17) 'Binary
IF SITEDATA(1,27,JSITE) = 2 THEN FPTCS
=
RADACH(16) 'Flash
'
Power p l a n t e f f i c i e n c y m u l t i p l i e r :
FPTEF
=
1
I F SITEDATA(1,27,JSITE)
- 1
THEN FPTEF
=
RADACH(1S) 'Binary
I F SITEDATA(1,27,JSITE)
= 2
THEN FPTEF
-
RADACH(14) 'Flash
'
C o s t a d j u s t m e n t s f r o m J a n
1
1980
t o
Jan
1
1986:
ESClWELL
*
0. 940 'SERIES 7, DONE
2
Jan
86
d j e
ESClGENRL
= 1.425
'****
F a c t o r V al u e S e t :
NSPR
-
0.1
'Spare w el ls / produc er. BJL/SP/DJE
I
O VARIABLE I N NEW SET, YET,
15
Feb 87:
POUT
= 50. '50
MWE
'
In co me t a x r a t e : .34 F e d e r a l
t .02
S t a t e :
INTXR =
0.36 'July
1 1 9 8 7 a n d f o l l o w i n g
'
C a p l t a l R e c ov e r y F a c t o r . F o r u s es
i n
Engine.
(Spreads PV
a t
P.O.L. d a t e ov er
30
Year as a unacos t : )
'
DISC = D i s c o u n t R at e, f rom BUSFNFCT.GE0 F i na nc ia l F ac to rs f i l e .
'
FBL
=
P r o j e c t Book L i f e ,
I
.
L I F E
=
FBL
D
= (1 +
D1SC)"LIFE
I
I
1
'GNP IMPL IC IT DEFL., DONE 2 J a n 86 d j e
I
I
KROK 1 'MED-HARD ROCK [NOT USED]
1
I
'Nominal
=
30
y e a r s
CAPRECOV (DISC*D)/(D
- 1)
'***
END
OF
ENGINE FACTOR SET-UP SECTION
**********
1
F-6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 109/164
I
Two
passes he re ca lcu la te and save cos t
o f
"non - r i sky " and
' " r i s k - l o a d e d " p r o j e c t .
'
Pass
1
-
No
Risk :
Z R I =
1 Uses BEST C A S E d at a f o r s i t e .
BASECOP - 100' Avo id D iv /Ze ro
GOSUB ENGINE.CORE ' C a l c u l a t e c o s t
w/o
r i s k
BASECOP
-
BUSBAR
'
Co st w/o Risk ,
i n
m i l l s / k w h
FOR 1-1 TO 5 :
PlCOST(I)=RESULTS(2,JSITE,ll,I)
:
NEXT I
ZRI
=
2 Uses WORST CASE da ta f o r s i t e .
GOSUB ENGINE.CORE ' C a l c u l a t e c o s t w i t h r i s k .
Z R I S K
-
BUSBAR
-
BASECOP
' R I S K
Cost,
i n
m i l l s / k w h
BASECOP
-
BUSBAR
' Save P r e s e n t a t i o n t o t a l s :
' T ot al , I n c l . R i sk i s
i n :
RESULTS(2,JSITE,ll,I)
FOR
I
1 TO 5 ' Risk amounts:
NEXT
I
I * * * *
NEW
c - - >
OLD Correspondence:
' RESULTS(2,3SITE,11,5) - BASECOP I * * * Total, W/RISK, m/kwh
' RESULTS(2,JSITE,12,5)
=
ZRISK I * * * Risk, m/kwh
'For OLD D is p l ay Header : Fo r GOSUB RESULT1 ****
RETURN
I * * * END SUBR: OUTER CALCULATION
ENGINE,
o n e s i t e
/
I
I
S a v e a c c o u n t t o t a l s :
Pass 2
=
With R i s k :
I
/
'16 Jan, OLD/ May be needed ? ? ? ? ?
RESULTS( 2, JSITE, 12, I) RESULTS( 2, J S I T E , 11,
I )
- PICOST( I)
' ****
COSTPOW
=
lOO*BUSBAR/BASECOP
' R e l a ti v e , p e r c en t p o i n t s
C O S T R I S K
-
lOO*ZRISK/BASECOP ' R e l at i v e , p e r c en t p o i n t s
I
ENGINE. ORE :
I * * * SUBR: ONE
PASS
SIZES,
'Dua l va lue
( Z R I :
l - N o R i s k
I
I
/
COSTS, AND PRICES
21Risk-Loaded) Data Fa ct or s s e t her e:
' 51 Re se rv o i r Sa t . Tempera tu re , Deg-F
ZZTRES
-
SITEDATA(ZRI,5, JSITE)
' [
71 F or TEMP: Well -Head Temperature, Deg-F
ZZT - SITEDATA(ZRI.7,JSITE)
TEMP - ZZT
' (121 Fo r TDS, T o t a l D isso lved So l ids ,
l
and
BCI: B r i n e Contam. Index:
F - 7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 110/164
TDS
-
SITED ,TA(Z
,12, JSITE
'
P e r H o l t 1 987 a p p a r e n t
cu
I F TDS >
10.
THEN ZZB
=
I F TDS
> 100.
THEN ZZB -
BCI
=
ZZB
I
.
p o i n t s :
1 ELSE ZZB = 0.
2
" ' -Note INEL/Technecon 1980 l o w e r c u t p o i n t was:
I
I F TDS >
2.
THEN ZZB =
1
' [13] Fo r DEEP: We l l Depth, K- Fee t
ZZD = SITEDATA(ZRI,13,JSITE)
:
DEEP = ZZD
' [15] F o r WRED: - R e d r i l l i n g i n c i d e n c e f r a c t i o n
' 161 F o r WDRY: D r y we11 / p ro d u ce r
WRED
=
SITEDATA(ZRI,IS,JSITE) * RADACH(6)
WDRY
=
SITEDATA(ZRI,16,JSITE)
*
RADACH(7)
'[ 21 ] F o r FLOW:
' Da ta s t a r t a s 1000 l b /Ho u r :
P ro d u ce r F lo w ,
10*6
l b / H o u r
ZZF = SITEDATA(ZRI,21,JSlTE)*RADACH(8)/lOOO.
FLOW
-
ZZF
'Programmer's note:
' No t u se d i n Ve rs 3.00: ZZW
=
WLIF
'*****
Ot he r NEW Dat a Se tups s hou ld go h e re :
Correspondences of va r i a b le n a me s :
' ZZB - BCI : ZZD = DEEP : ZZF = FLOW
:
ZZT = TEMP
'T he c o s t i n g s t ep s s t a r t he r e:
PLANT. SIZ E:
I F PTYPE = 2 THEN GOT0 FLASH.SIZE
BINARY.SIZE : ' PTYPE = 1
'1. GROSS WITHOUT PUMPS, FROM PUMP3.BAS, DJE, 6 FEB
S e t gr o ss p l a n t
s i z e
t o
me et a ux . re q u i r e me n ts .
t
I
I
'1.1
FIND FLOW AND GROSS FROM NET POWER AT TEMP, DEGyF
NETBE * -14.64212 + (0.06154139)*(ZZT)
TFLOWINO
=
5O/NETBE 'M-LB/HR
GROBE
=
(1.450921E-05)*(ZZT"2.281921) 'WH/LB, GROSS
'WH/LB, NET
GROSSO
-
TFLOWINO*GROBE 'MW, SHADOW
'1.2 SUBTRACT FITTED PUMP POWER, USING "KB IN " FORMULA:
'
KBIN
+
1
=
Added Gross
t o
Make
1
Mo re MWe n e t
ou t .
'1.3
SET
BARE-AUX ->
15
MW ( P r i m a ry l o o p & c o o l i n g ) .
'
Gro ss Po we r n e t o f F i e l d A u x i l l i a r y Power Needs:
KBIN = 3.243886
-
.5167263*LOG(ZZT)
PUMPF
-
GROSSO*(l-KBIN) - 50 'FIT, NET TO D.W. PUMPS
BARE.AUX = GROSSO - 50 - (l+KBIN)*PUMPF
I F BARE.AUX
< 15
THEN BARE.AUX = 1 5
MW
GROSS1 = 50 + BARE.AUX
GROSSO = GROSS1
+
(l+KBIN)*PUMPF
FACTOR FOR CALC'ING GROSS POWER:
GROBEl - GROSSO/TFLOWINO
GROSS
W/O
PUMPING
' ADJUSTED SHADOW GROSS
ADJUSTED
GROSS
B.E.
F - 8
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 111/164
'
****************
Adjust for POUT:
' 1
' 1 '
GROSSl - GROSSl*POUT/SO
'
Convergence loop below sets binary gross power
and
plant inlet/outlet flow requirements, adjusted
To
fit Auxilliary power requirements.
' Starting Guesses:
' WNUM
- #
of Primary Producer Wells and Pumps
at
Start
:
BINARY.SIZE2 : ' Top of conv. loop .
' Previous Gross for conv. test:
'2. Add Pump Power from previous producer well count:
'1000
Horsepow er per pump: depends on well depth:
I F
ZZD
>
1.
THEN PER.PUMP
-
0.6
ELSE PER.PUMP
-
0.4
PUMP.POWER
-
0.7457*PER.PUMP*WNUM
' @
lOOOHP
-
0.7457 MW
GROSS
-
GROSSl
t
(ltKBIN)*PUMP.POWER
' FPTEF
-
Plant Efficiency Multiplier [R15]
TFLOWIN - GROSS/(GROBEl*FPTEF)'Flow required
' ZZF
-
Flo w per producer, initialized above:
WNUM - INT(TFLOWIN/ZZF) t 1
'
Convergence test:
IF ABS(GR0SS - GROSSTEST)
>
1.0 THEN GOTO BINARY.SIZE2
' Test met:
GOT0 BASEWELLCOST
'****
End of binary sizing. *****
FLASH.SIZE : PTYPE
-
2
GROSSl
=
52.5 'Net
+
2.5 MW Internal
'Add Brine stabliization power requirement:
GROSS
-
GROSSl + 3*ZZB
-
0.5*22B*(ZZB-I)
'Flash Flow Requirement:
OLD: Spe cif ic energy: Net Whr/lb brine:
' OLD: TFLOW = POUT/SPE'Plant flow, 10A6 b/hr
TFLOWIN = SITEDATA(ZRI,25, SITE)/( 1000*FPTEF)
TFLOWIN
=
TFLOWIN*GROSS/52.5
'
Adj, f or Gross.
WNUM
-
INT(TFLOWIN/ZZF)
+
1
GOTO BAS EWE LCOST
'***
End o f Flash sizing. ****
1
GROSS - 1.3*POUT ' MW
WNUM
-
GROSS/15
I
GROSSTEST
-
GROSS
1
I
'
No. of PRODUCERS needed. ***
1
I
'Unitt
OLD:
SPE
= ( -16.9t
.0614*ZZT+2.344*PTYPE-. 534*ZZB)*FPTEF
'FPTEF
-
Adjust per Plant Efficiency Multiplier
~ 1 4 3
'
No. of PRODUCERS needed.
***
F - 9
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 112/164
BASEW
L
LCOST
:
I
WCPW: Well Cost, pe r well,
$
Millions
' Livesay Estimates, February
87:
Base cost part of bare well:
WCBASE
-
SITEDATA(
1,33,
SITE)
'
Extension add-on, full cost:
WCEXTEND - SITEDATA(ZRI,33,JSITE)
-
WCBASE 'Still "RISKED"
WCPW
-
WCBASE 'Base cost, "Non-Optimized"
I
t SITEDATATZRI ,34,3SITE)*RADACH(30) -
'Lost circulation Problems
t
SITEDATA(ZRI,35,JSITE)*RADACH(31) - 'Cementing Problems
t SITEDATA(ZRI,36,JSITE)*RADACH(32)
'Other Problems
WCPW
-
WCPW
*
FWLCS 'Adjust by Well Cost Multiplier.
'
Set ups for adding Extension and Redrill Costs to the
WCBASE
-
WCBASE
*
FWLCS 'Adjusted, For use below.
WCEXTEND - WCEXTEND
*
FWLCS '
PR.EXTEND
= 1
- . 2
-
.25*WDRY 'Fraction of wells to be extended.
PR.REDRILL
-
WRED 'Fraction to be redrilled.
MODAL.FR
-
0.75
'Fraction of full cost o f operation that is
expended in modal (expected) case.
'Cost to
E x t e n d :
CST.EXTEND - (MODAL.FR)*(PR.EXTEND)*(WCEXTEND)
'Cost
to
Redrill (Cost t o redrill is
22%
of well base cost.)
CST. REDRI LL - (MODAL. FR)*( PR. REDRILL)*(. 22)*(WCBASE)
'
Adjust WCPW to reflect Extension and Redrill Costs:
'
WCPW
-
Fully loaded well cost, sans testing costs.
'
TESTING
COST
-
INITIAL
+
DAYS*($/DAY)
; S
Million
'
3
Day Test:
base price o f the wells:
II I t
It
I
I
WCPW
-
WCPW t CST.EXTEND
t
CST.REDRILL
I
SET
UP
COSTS
OF
TESTING:
'
I F TDS < 100
10
Day Test:
I F
TDS
< 100
'
21 Day Test:
I F TDS e 100
THEN TESTT3D
ELSE TEST.3D
-
.035
t
5
*
.005
-
.025
t
5
* .003 -
THEN TESTTIOD
-
.025 t 12 * .003 -
ELSE TEST.IOD
-
.035
t
12
* .005
THEN
TESTT21D -
.050
t
25
*
.0035
-
ELSE
TEST.2lD
-
.IO0
t
25
*
.0060
Logging:
I F ZZTRES c 400
THEN
TEST. lOE -
(2.53
t ZZD*10.667)/1000
-
ELSE TEST.LOG
-
(5.33
t ZZD*
6.667)/1000
Analysis
o f All
Tests:
TEST.ANSIS - 0.0435
F - I O
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 113/164
'
Combos of tests needed:
TESTO
-
TEST.LOG t TEST.ANSIS All wells
TESTl - TESTO
t
TEST.3D For WC.GENL
TEST2 - TESTl
t
TEST.21D ' For WC.CONF
TEST3
-
TESTO
t
TEST.lOD Development ProducersI
I
WC.WILD
=
WCPW t TESTl *RADACH(2)
WC.CONF
-
WCPW t TEST 2 *RADACH(4) ' PRODUCER I N PHASE 2, CONFIRMATION
WC.PROD
=
WCPW t TEST 3 *RADACH(33) ' PRODUCER I N PHASE 3, DEVELOPMENT
WC.GENL = WCPW
t
TESTl *RADACH(35)
I * * *
End: Well Capital Cost
WILDCAT W E L L
INJECTOR
OR
DRY W E L L
I
I * * * SUBSYSTEM Costing Modules L I N E l
-
LINE9 Start Here.
LINEl
:
' IDENTIFY RESERVOIR
I
EXPL
-
Exploration Cost, S Millions, Jan 1980
I * * IDENTIFICATION UNIT COST
Unit of Identification Consists o f :
' 1. Geological and Geophysical Survey Work, Per Region
' 2. Gradient Wells, per Wildcat sited
I
I
3. Wildcat Wells, per Wildcat Success Ratio, to achieve one
J
I
successful well,
used
later as Observation Well.
Unit costs depend on depth of prospect:
I F ZZD > 3000 THEN GOTO ID.UC.l
'
Shallower system costs:
' SM, Geology and Geophysics, Regional
'
JM, Therm. Gradient Holes/ Wildcat
UCOSTl
-
0.053
UCOST2
=
0.005
GOT0 ID.UC.2
ID.UC
- 1
:
Deeper system
UCOSTl = 0.200
+
0.100
UCOST2 = 0.010
ID.
C. 2:
Adjust non-we
UCOSTl
-
UCOSTl
UCOST2
-
UCOST2
costs:
-
' SM,
Geology and Geophysics, Regional
' SM, "Deep Geology"
' SM, Therm. Gradient Holes/ Wildcat
1
costs
v i s
RhD factor:
*
RADACH(2)
RADACH(2)
Probability o f wildcat success:
UPROB
-
S EDATA
(
1 ,3,
S TE
*RADACH ( 1
)
I F UPROB > I THEN UPROB = 1 'Protect
I F UPROB <
.1
THEN UPROB
- .1
' Number o f Wildcat Wells to get one good one :
N.IDENT
-
l/UPROB
' TOTAL Identification UNIT Cost (not present valued):
' S3 , R ]
'
UCOST.ID
=
UCOSTl t N.IDENT*(UCOST2
t
W C . W I L D )
SM
I
F - 1 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 114/164
The next probability, UPROBl, reflects the probability that
a confimation effort will
fail.
to preceed that failed Confirmation effort is added here.
Some additional time for failed portion is added here.
The identification effort spent
I
UPROBl = SITfDATA( 1,4,3SITE)*RADACH(3) 1 ~ 3 3
IF UPROBl >= 1 THEN UPROBl
-
1
'
Protect
IF UPROBl <
.1
THEN UPROBl
= .1
'
Total Identification cost (not present valued):
EXPL
-
UCOST.ID/UPROBl
'I.D.
Work, Includes extra
'
Spread Exploration ov er a number of
50
MWe Plants:
' Duration
o f
exploration unit:
DUR.EXPL -
2.0
'Geological
,
geophys. surveys.
I exploration for unsuccessful confirmation.
P.PER.SITE -
SITEDATA(ZRI,Z,JSITE)/GROSS
1521
'
?
+
0.5 7UPROB
t 3.0
(1-UPROBl)
-
'Failed confirmation work
t
1.0
'Permitting re confirmation
'Per wildcat attempt
'
Spread ov er all P.PER.SITE plants, as unacost:
BTWN.PLANTS - 4*RADACH(34)
AREA.LIFE
- BTWN.PLANTS*(P.PER.SITE)
D
=
(ltDISC)AAREA.LIFE
EXPLRECOV
-
(DISC*D)/(D - 1 )
E
- (1tDISC)"BTWN.PLANTS
PAYMENTS
=
(E - l)/(DISC*E)
'
o f payments required for each plant.
EXPL
-
EXPL
*
EXPLRECOV
*
PAYMENTS
AREA.LIFE
=
AREA.LIFE
t
LIFE 'Total Production Life, Yrs.
RESULTS (2 SITE
,
,
)
-
EXPL' CAP
'
NOTE:
RESULTS(2,JSITE,192)
- .000001
'OM
' 4
years between plants, nominal.
'
Unacost factor for each year.
'P.V. factor for BTWN.PLANTS number
1
1
I
RESULTS(Z,JSITf,l,l) i s escalated to P.O.L.
yea r at end o f Section LINEE.)
Count of
OK
Production Wells so far:
GOOD.PRODS
- 0
'Assumes no good producers from Ident. Phase.
LINE2
:
CONFIRM RESERVOIR
'**
CONFIRMATION UNIT COST
'
drill and test the following:
I
Unit o f Confirmation consists o f activity over 3 years
to
GOOD.
PRODS
-
4
'
Production wells
G00D.INJS
-
1.5 Injection wells
DRY.COUNT
- 0.5
Dry Holes
All o f this results in a reservoir for which developer i s ready
to go to bank for loan. Certainty of achieving
30
years of
' power production
i s
assumed t o be 0.95.
I
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 115/164
..
Total cost (not present valued),
SM:
UC0ST.CF
-
GOOD.PRODS
*
(WC.CONF)
-
'Producers
+ GOOD*.INJS
*
(WC.CONF)
-
' njectors
+ DRY.COUNT (WC.CONF) 'Dry Holes
All of 1 Unit of CONF is allocated to a single plant.
'
In addition, UPROBI, from above, is used to add an amount of
'
'
t o fail.
thi s prospect.
' Distribu te those N.CONF units of CONF over P.PER.SITE plants
Raw total
o f
confirmation costs:
CONF -
( 1
+ N.CONF*EXPLRECOV*PAYMENTS)*UCOST.CF
'
Escalate confirmation cost t o plant start up:
' YCN
-
years
of
construction, from above,
3
years nominal,
'
YCN/2 avoids double count from AFDC adjustments later:
CONF
-
CONF
*
((1
+
DISC)A(DUR.CONF
t
YCN/Z))
RESULTS(2,JS1TE92,1)
-
CONF 'CAP
RESULTS(2,JSITE,2,2)
-
0.00001 'OM
' And, escala te cost o f EXPL:
C
-
RESULTS(2,JSITE,I,l)
' YCN = yea rs of construction, from above,
3
years nominal,
'
YCN/2 avoids double count from AFDC adjustments later:
C
=
C
*
((1 t DISC)^(DUR.EXPL
t
DUR.CONF + YCN/2))
RESULTS(E,JSITE,l,l)
-
C
confirmation effort (at a different prospect) that is assumed
Its costs are then spread over all plants at
I
Number o f failed Confirmation Units:
N.CONF (1 - UPROBl)/UPROBI
I
I
LINE3
:
I PRODUCTION AND INJECTION WELLS
'Cal cul ate required num ber of Vel
1
s
:
Flow int o plant:
TFLOW - TFLOWIN
'
Flow
from
plant:
'
I
NOTE: TFLO WIN was calculated in plant sizing routine, above.
'For old displays
I
Note: Relationship to SITEDATA for flash is not highly
I
and should be remodelled f rom data with a broader
temperatu re range, and perhaps
a
more explicit code for
expected steam quality of t he brine.
I F PTYPE -
1
THEN TFLOWbUT = TFLOWIN
ELSE TFLOWOUT
-
TFLOWIN*SITEDATA(ZRI
,26,
JSITE)/SITEDATA(ZRI ,'25, JSITE)
"Else" clau se reflects steam quality at wellhead, for flash plant
Binary Plant, must balance
'WIJN variable i s new,
19 Jan
8
WIJN
-
INT(TFLOWOUT/(SITEDATA(ZRI,22,JSITE)/lOOO))
+
1
WIJN - WIJN*RADACH(9) '(R91
WIN3 - WIJN/WNUM
'Total Number
o f
Wells
&
Total Well Cost:
WPSPR - INT(WNUM*WSPR) + 1 Spare Producers
WPDRY -
INT((WNUM)*WDRY)
+
1
'
Dry "Producers"
'Rat i o , In /Producer
F - 1 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 116/164
' T o t a l Number o f I n i t i a l W e ll s:
WCNT = WNUM t
WIJN
t
WPSPR t
WPDRY
' C a p i t a l c o s t
of
a l l i n i t i a l we l l s, i n c l u d in g t e st i n g :
'
GOOD.PRODS and GOOD.INJS a r e pa i d f o r p r e v i o u s l y :
'
I n j e c t o r t e s t s a r e i n cl u de d
i n
p ro d uc e r t e s t c o s t s .
1
*
(WNUM
t
WPSPR
-
GOOD.PRODS)
*
(WC.PROD* ( l tWRED)
+
0)
1 2
13
(WIJN
-
GOOD.INJS) * WC-GENL
(WPDRY - DRY.COUNT)
*
WC-GENL
WCTL
=
T 1 t T2
t 13
'CAP COST, WELLS
' E s c a l a t e t o P.0.L d a t e , f o r 3 y e a r c o n s t r u c t i o n l a g :
'
T h is i s t u r n ed o f f because
AFDC
i s added be low :
'
WCTL
=
WCTL*((l+DISC)A(l.5))
C al c u l a te No.
and D iscounted No. o f Supplementa l We1 1s :
'
1.
F a c to r t o a d j u s t d e c l in e c o e f f i c i e n t t o m u l t i p l a n t i n te r fe r e nc e
e f f e c t .
As
paramete r
C P I F
[S19] i nc rea ses f ro m
0
t o 1, t h e
'
i m pa c t o f d rawdown i n t e r f e r e n c e f r o m a l l o t h e r p l a n t s o n same
' p r o s p e c t i n c r ea s e s , by a n a l g o r i t h m he r e t h a t i n c r e a s e s t h e
'
o n e -p l a nt f l o w d e c l i n e c o e f f i c i e n t v i a a power f u n c t i o n o f t h e
s u p p o r t a b l e number o f p l a n t s .
'
NOTE: T h i s f e a t u r e i s n o t
used
i n
V e rs i o n
3 . 0 0 or
e a r l i e r .
(13 March 87)
DRWDN
=
SITEDATA(ZRI,24,3SITE)
'
D e c l i n e C o e f f i c i e n t .
CPIF
=
SITEDATA(ZRI,19,JSITE)
'
A d j u s t m e n t f a c t o r
' CPIF
=
0 i n SIT E DATA BASE o f 12 March 87.
PPSITE
=
(P.PER.SITE)"0.7 ' f r om LINE1 calcs . , f r a c t a l
2. S up p le m en ta l w e l l s t o comp en sate f o r p re s s u re d e c l i n e :
DECLINE
:
'DISC Di sc ou nt Fa cto r, fr om above. (FINFACT)
'L IFE L i f e o f P l an t , Yrs ., f rom above. (F INFACT)
'DRWDNE
'
D e c l i n e C o e f f i c i e n t , a d j u s t e d f o r N P l a n t s
VSTART
=
SITEDATA(ZRI,23,JSITE)
'
I n i t i a l f l o w r a t e
VNEEDED = SITEDATA(ZRI,21,JSITE)
NWO = WNUM ' No.
o f
p ro du ce rs a t s t a r t
NW1 = 0.00001
NWD
=
0.00001 'Re sul t : Disc ounte d No. o f wel l s added .
SNWOAM =
0
' R e s u l t : Sum o f D i s c ' t d
O&M
U n i t s f o r t h e s e w e l l s .
FOR I Y R =
1
TO LIFE ' I n years .
NW
= 0
'#
o f
new we l l s needed t h i s year .
S1
- 0
' D i s c ' t d
O&M
u n i t s added, t h i s ye a r .
FLOW0
-
VSTART*EXP(-IYR*DRWDNE)
DECLINE1
:
FLOWQ
-
FLOWO*(NWOtNWl)/NWO
'
Tes t F low
I F FLOWQ
>
VNEEDED THEN
GOTO
DECLINE2
'Loop: Add new w e l l s t h i s year :
I
t
DRWDNE DRWDN*(l
t
CPIF*(PPSITE-1))
I
'
Min. f l o w p er i n i t i a l w e l l
'Result : No. o f w e l l s ad ded o v e r L I F E y e a rs
'
Flow, s t a r t o f
Y r .
NW
-
NW t
1 :
NWl
-
NWl t 1
:
GOTO DECLINE1
DECLINE2
:
I F NW
- 0
THEN GOTO DECLINE3
'Accumulate Prese nt Va lue
of
No.
o f
new wel ls :
NWD NWD t NW/(( l tDISC)A(IYR-l ))
f - 1 4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 117/164
'Accumula te O&M U n i t s due t o t h i s y e ar :
'
DECLINE3
:
NEXT I Y R
' C o n v e r t P r e s e nt V al u e s t o An nu al U n i t O&M c o s t s :
WDECLOMl - NWD *
( WC .
PROD*( l + W R E D ) * ( l +WSPR ) + TEST.WELL)
*
CAPRECOV
' WDECLOMl, t h e C a p i t a l Pa r t ,
i s FULLY costed here.
WDECLOMZ - SNWOAM
*
CAPRECOV
'
'
s - 0
FOR K
Th en , d i s c o u n t t o P.O.L. y e a r , a nd t o t a l :
SNWOAM
-
SNWOAM
t
S*NW/(
( l t D I S C)A I Y R)
I Y R
TO LIFE: S=S
+
l/((ltDISC)A(LIFE-IYR)):
NEXT
K
'O&M P a r t .
MUST
b e mu1 t i p 1 e d
by
annua l O&M c o s t p e r w e l l t o g e t f i n a l SM/year value.
B o th WDECLOMl and WDECLOME a r e added i n t o F i e l d O&M, b e l o w .
I
'** End o f S u p pl e m en t al W e l l C o s t s .
' F i n a l R e s u l t: W e ll c a p c o s t :
'
W e l l s
O&M
Cos t s a r e be low , unde r L INE5 :
RESULTS(Z,JSITE,3,1)
-
WCTL
' C A P
LINE4: 'DEEP WELL PUMPS
I
' * Deep Pump Cost and O&M
I F DPUMP
-
0 THEN DPTL=.00001
:
DPOM=.00001 : GOT0 PUMPENDED
I
'OLD: DPC - ZZF*( .2068-. 1681*LO G(ZZF)) 'EGbG, me ga $/ we ll
' P u m p C a p i t a l a n d I n s t a l l a t i o n , SM :
'
Depends on depth
o f
w e l l :
DPC
=
DPC*RADACH(20) R20]
PNUM
=
WNUM
+
INT(WNUM*WSPR)
+
1
' #
o f
pumps t o pu rchase
DPTL
-
DPC*PNUM 't ot al c a p i t a l cos t ,
SM
' OLD: DPTL = DPTL * ESClGENRL 'To 198 6.0
I F
ZZD > 1. THEN DPC
=
0.100 ELSE DPC = 0.075
'PUMP O&M:
'OLD: DPM - .05724+ .02348*LOG(ZZF) 'megaS/yr/WELL me ch an ic al
'OLD: DPM - DPM * ESClWELL 'TO 1986 .0
DPM -
0.020
' P e r a c t i v e pump p e r y e a r .
DPM = DPM*RADACH(21) ' [ R Z l ]
D1 = (DPM)*WNUM ' I n i t i a l pumps
D2 = NWD*DPC*CAPRECOV
D3 - WDECLOM2*DPM 'O&M, s u p p l .
' C a p i t a l , s u p pl e me n t al w e l l s
' T o t a l pump 08M, megaS/yr
POM - D1
+
D2 + D3
PUMPENDED
:
RESULTS(2,3SITE,4,1) = DPTL
'CAP
RESULTS(Z,JSITE,4,2) = DPOM 'OM
'*** End o f P u m p C a l c u l a t i o n s
1
t
I
F - 1 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 118/164
LINE5 : ' GATHERING SYSTEM
'*** Field Surface Equipment Capital costs: S/kWe net
'
1.
Initial Gathe ring Sys tem Cost:
'
1.A. Producer Wells:
'
NOTE:
'
'
' Separati on between pro ducer s wells, in feet:
SEPAR = SITEDATA(ZRI,l4,3SITE) (141
WPRODSUM
=
INT(WNUM*(ltWSPR))
t
1 ' Producers plus spares
' Total length of pipe, rectangular field,
' one full run fo r each well:
NFEET -
(WPRODSUMA(l.48))*(0.51039)*SEPAR
'2 Feb 87 DJE
1986
Cost is then
$50.00
per foot,
'
Plus
$20,000
for control valv e on each well:
1.B. Inj ect or Wells:
I
I
Feb
87:
No provisi on is made f or pipe cost saving due
t o having a W of pro ducers o n a single pad. All wells are
assumed t o be drilled vertically, not directionally.
CPRODGATH
=
(50.*NFEET
+
20000.*WPRODSUM)/(10A6)
' M.$
CPRODGATH
=
CPRODGATH*RADACH(28) 'R[28]
'
Assumes four wells per pipe run, with injectors heads
'
set at
6
times SEPAR distance
from
plant.
COSTPER4 - 6*SEPAR*50.*SQR(4*(SITEDATA(ZRI ,22,JSITE)/500))
COSTPER4
=
COSTPER4/(10A6)
'
Total, and add $20K per well f or valve:
CINJGATH - COSTPER4*(WIJN/4) t 0.020*WIJN
CSNJGATH
-
CINJGATH*RADACH(28) 'R[28]
Field surface equipment total cost:
SPTL
-
CPRODGATH + CINJGATH
' SPTL-SPTL/FPTEF 'Ad just: P1 ant efficiency mu1 ti l i er
I
TTL
-
EXPL+WCTLtDPTLtSPTL
RESULTS(E,JSITE,5,1) = SPTL
' TOTAL Field, cap, mega$
I
'Capital, Gathering Sys.
' 2.
Gathering System Cost fo r Decline Producers
:
' NOTE: It
i s
assumed that initial injectors will
2.A.
Capital Portion
o f
Added gathering:
Pipe run, based o n in crement t o original piping:
t
same total flow rat e through life of plant. 2 Feb.
..
A - (WPRODSUM
t
NW1)"(1.480)
A - A*(0.51039)
NFEET2 - A*SEPAR
CPRODGATHl
-
(5O.*(NFEET2 - NFEET)
+
20000.*NW1)/(10A6)
' M$
I F
N W l <
1 THEN NFEET2
-
0
:
CPRODGATHE
= 0
CPRODGATHl = CPRODGATHl*RADACH(28) [R28]
' Discount to POL year:
CPRODGATHE = CPRODGATHl * (NWD/NWl)
' Apply unacost to treat as an annual cost:
'
'Did not compile
as
one line
' $M
CPRODGATH3 - CPRODGATH2 * CAPRECOV $M/year
Added t o Well O&M Costs, Later
I
F - 1 6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 119/164
' 3. Miscellaneous Field O&M Costs, mega$/year
'From INEL 1980 Analysis:
B B B
=
2 Z B V
-
ZZB t 2
F1
=
.320 *
ESClGENRL
'
Field staff
'NOTE: NO RID impact on Field Staff cost.
'OLD:
F2
= 0.01
*
BBB
WCTL
'
Initial PROD and IN3 wells.
'Unit annual costs for reworking initial wells:
PROD. REWORK
-
SITEDATA(
ZRI(37,
SITE)*RADACH(
1 1 )
/
-
1NJ.REWORK
= SITEDATA(ZRI,38,JSITE)*RADACH(13) / -
F2 =
WNUM*PROD.REWORK
t
WIJN*lNJ.REWORK 'Total Rework
F3
=
0.01 * B B B * SPTL
F3 = F3 *
RADACH(29)
I F4
-
ZZBf(ZZB-1)*.0075*(TTL-EXPL)
'Schilling, Solid Waste
'For supplemental we1
1
s needed du e t o pressure decl ine:
(All R&D impacts for
F5
and
F6
are via factors from above)
F5
=
WDECLOMl 'Capital portion, unacost
'OLD:
F6
= WDECLOM2*(O.Ol*BBB*WCPW)
F6 =
WDECLOM2*PROD.REWORK 'OIM portion, unacost
'For Gathering Cap. & O&M f or supplemental wells:
F7 = CPRODGATH3 'Supplm. Wel ls Gathering Cap., unacost
'R&D Ach. on F7 is via CPRODGATHl, above.
F8
-
O.Ol*BBB*CPRODGATH2 'Supplm. Gathering O&M
F8 = F8
RADACH(29)
' Note: [R28] also afects
F8.
'Old summation, f or Reports (DPOM-Pump O&M)
:
FOAM - FltF2tF3 tF5tF6tF7tF8 t DPOM
't
F4 ??
'ObM Cost totals:
RESULTS(2,JSITE,3,2)
=
FltF2tF5tF6
'OIM, WELLS
RESULTS(
2 ,
JSITE,
5,2)
=
F3tF7tF8
megaS/year, revised 2 Feb 87
'(0,l.Z) maps to (2,2,4)
S TEDATA
(ZR ,
7,
S T )*RADACH
( 10
S I
TEDATA ZR , 18,JS TE )*RADACH 1 2)
'
Gathering Pipes and valves.
I F4 from OLD model : 2 Feb:
' [R29]
f
'O&M,
GATHERING
t
F4
? ?
LINE6
: ' PLANT
'*** Electric Plant Capital Costs: HegaS
I
f
I F
PTYPE
=
'2THE N GO T0 FLASH.PLANT.COST
..
BINARY. PLANT. COST:
' NOTE: Changed markedly on 15 March
87,
DJE:
'
Based on Input Flow Requirement and Temperature, as best
way
to
match Unitt Dec. 86 cost estimates:
'
COST.PER.FLOW
units
-
$Million per Million Lb/Hr:
COST. PER.
FLOW = 2.83 t 0.025*ZZT
PPC
-
TFLOWIN
*
COST.PER.FLOW
'JM,
1986.0
'
SET
BELOW:
PPC = PPC*FPTCS ' Plant Cost Mult. [R17]
' PPC - PPC*((POUT/50)A.7) 'Scale
to
net
s i r e
'
Scale to BCI per Technecon Heb er Analysis,1983:
B=ZZB
'End o f Binary Plant Costing.
Pl=EXP(
7.7103-
(
.001968-B*(
Btl)*.
000006)*ZZTt6.456001 E-O2*B)
PPC
=
PPC*PI/EXP( 7.7103 -
.001968*ZZT)
F - 1 7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 120/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 121/164
LINE8 : BRINE STABILIZATION
1
'
A t
13
M a r c h 8 7, c o v e r s
o n l y
c o s t
o f
c r y s t a l l i z e r - c l a r i f i e r .
BSCAP-.00001 : BSOAM=.00001 ' N i l
I F PTYPE
-
2 AND ZZB
=
1 THEN BSCAP
-
6.6
I F PTYPE - 2 AND ZZB = 2 THEN BSCAP = 14.0
I F PTYPE -
2
THEN
BSOAM - 0.15*ZZB
BSCAP = BSCAP
*
RADACH(26)
BSOAM = BSOAM RADACH( 18)
RESULTS(Z,JSITE,8,1) - BSCAP 'CAP
RESULTS(Z,JSITE,8,2) - BSOAM 'OM
' R26]
'[R18]
LINE9 : ' ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
' A t
13
M a r c h 87, c o v e r s
o n l y
c o s t o f H 2 S c o n t r o l .
ENVCAP=0.00001
:
ENVOAM=0.00001 ' N i l
HSULF
-
(SITEDATA(ZRI, l l , JSIT E)) 'ppm
I
I F HSULF >
70
AND PTYPE
2
THEN ENVCAP - 6.0 '
SM
I F HSULF > 500 AND PTYPE -
2
THEN ENVCAP - 8.3 ' SM
I F HSULF > 70 AND PTYPE -
2
THEN ENVOAM = 2.2 ' $M/yr
ENVCAP - ENVCAP*RADACH(27)
ENVOAM - ENVOAM*RADACH(19)
RESULTS(2,JSITE,9,1)
-
ENVCAP 'CAP
RESULTS(Z,JSITE,9,2) - ENVOAM 'OM
' R27]
' R19]
'
'LINEIO: ' RESERVOIR INSURANCE
' 16 J a n
87,
Rough es t im a t e :
' I n s u r a n c e s e t a t 5
pe r cen t
o f p o s t - c o n f i r m a t i o n Cap. C o s t:
ZINSUR
- 0
FO R I - 3 TO
9
ZINSUR
-
ZINSUR
t
RESULTS(Z,JSITE, I,])
NEXT
I
RESULTS(2,JSITE,lO,l)
-
0.05 ZINSUR 'CAP
RESULTS(2,JSITE,10,2) * .00001 'OM
1
'LI NE12: CONTINGENT RI SK
'
4 s
RESULTS(2,JSITE,12,1) - .00001-'CAP
RESULTS(2,JSITE,12,2)
-
.00001
'OM
F - 1 9
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 122/164
'**** FINANCIAL ADJUSTMENTS, AS COST CHANGES:
'*** ADJUST FIEL D COSTS:
'
keeps RESULTS(I,J,K,l) as capital cost estimates.
FOR I=l TO 12:RESCAPADJ(I)=RESULTS(2,JSITE,I,I):NEXT I
I * *
NOTE: Hand Calculate PTOF,DTOF from 2 BUSIMGOE.BAS runs.
'
Version 3.00:
PTOF=l .OOO
DTOF=1.000 '(Field DISC)/(Plant DISC)
FLAFCR-PTOF*VLAFCR : FISC=DTOF*DISC ' Fie1 d Rates
I * * Expense INTANGIBLE % of wells
'
I
Set Capital Costs into RESCAPADJ(12), which
I
Sam e economics for plant and field:
I
(Field VLAFCR)/(Plant VLAFCR)
I
I
' LINE1 - IDENTIFY:
RESCAPADJ(1)
=
RESCAPADJ(1)
*
(1
-
(l.O)*INTXR)
'
LINE2
-
CONFIRM:
' Large additional fraction
is intangible:
RESCAPADJ(2)
' LINE3
-
FIEL D DEVEL OPMENT WELLS:
RESCAPADJ(3) RESCAPADJ(3)
-
WCTL*FINT*INTXR
Entire cost assu med intangible and expensed:
I
RESCAPADJ(2) * (1 - INTXR*(FINT +.3)/1.3)
I
' The nominal fraction o f well costs is intangible:
I
I
'***
LEVELIZED COSTING CALCULATIONS:
I * * * *
ROYALT ES
,
ETC
'
SEVFAC "Severance Factor" i s used t o adjust all
costs to
I
reflect positive effects of royalty rate, resource severance
tax, and negative effect of resource depletion allowance tax
saving on the final cost
of
power.
SEVFAC=l/(l - ROYR - SEVR
+
(INTXR)*DEPL )
RMILLS - 1000*COSTADJ/( 8,76*POUT*FLVLCF)
'SET UP FACTO RS FOR MILLS/KWH,
LEVELIZED I N CONSTANT DOLLARS
1
I
NOTE: "Constant $ " cos t is January
1986
cost.
This must be
I
I
I
multiplied by th e assumed general rate of inflation to
get the s ales cost in each succeeding year.
HFCP
-
FABC*FAFRD*YOAM*FLAFCR*RMILLS*SEVFAC/GLVL
MPCP -
FABC*FAFRD*ZOAM*VLAFCR*RMILLS/GLVL
MFOM -
YOAM FLVL RMILLS SEVFAC/GLVL
MPOM - ZOAM*GLVL*RMILLS/GLVL
I
F - 2 0
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 123/164
'CONVERT Capital and O&M Costs to mills/kwh
FOR
I - 1 TO 3
NEXT
1
FOR
I = 4 TO 10
RESULTS(2,JSITE,I,3)
-
MPCP
*
RESCAPADJ(1)
NEXT I
'
O&M ACCOUNTS:
'
Deep
Pump
O&M, per Field Equipment
F a c t o r :
FOR
I - 1
TO
4
FOR
I - 5
TO 10
f
CAPITAL ACCOUNTS:
RESULTS(E,JSITE, 1,3)
-
MFCP
*
RESCAPADJ(
)
RESULTS(Z,JSITE,I,4)
-
MFOM RESULTS(2,JSITE,1,2)
:
NEXT
I
RESULTS(Z,JSITE,I,4)
-
MPOM
*
RESULTS(2,JSITE,I,2)
: NEXT I
I
'Find Account Subtotals: Cap + O&M, mills/kwh:
FOR
I
-
1
TO
10
NEXT
I
RESULTS( 2, JSITE, , 5)
-
RESULTS( 2, SITE, ,S)tRESULTS(
2 ,
JSITE, I,4)
I
RISK (LINE12)
IS ZERO DURING THESE SUMMATIONS
f
L I N E l l :
'COST TOTALS
'
And, B o t t o m Line Totals,
S ,
S/Yr,
3
X Mills/kwh :
FOR
I -
1 TO 5 : ZZXR = 0
1
FOR J=l
TO
10
NEXT J
:
RESULTS(2,JSITE,ll,I)
-
ZZXR
ZZXR
-
ZZXR
+
RESULTS (2, SITE,3,
)
NEXT
1
'AND FINAL BUSBAR COST:
BUSBAR
-
RESULTS( 2, JSITE, 11,5)
RETURN
'***
END SUBR: ENGINE.CORE ***
'
I
I
I * * * * *
END OF SUB-FILE: CALCULATION
E N G I N E *****
.
F - 2 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 124/164
'
LASl EDITED
14
March
1987
TOPMENU :
'*** ENTRY POINT and INTIATION for TOP MENUS: *******
BXPS
= "
MLITS 0 AXPStAXPSt"--"
MLIBf - " I tBXP$+BXPSt"
It
PRINT MLITS
1
IM-GEO-[Z] STAR T-U P and QUIT MENU
PRINT MLIMS
I'
I
1
I C. SHOW: Files/Print Control STATUS
PRINT MLIMS
PRINT MLIBO
PRINT 'I* I
PRINT MLIBf
PRINT MLIMS
PRINT 'I
I
R. CHANGE: Where REPORTS are sent:
PRINT 'I
I
NOW -
'I;
CHANNEL$
;
I'
PRINT MLIMd
PRINT MLIBS
PRINT 1
Y.
GO TO: OPERATIONS Menu
PRINT MLIBS
PRINT MLIMS
1
Q. QUIT to DOS
PRINT MLITS
PRINT "ENTER SELECTION
=====>
" e
TOPMENUl : GOSUB INLETTER: IF A k S - I1 THEN GOTO TOPMENUI
'
AXP$
=
'I- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I'
I1
:
MLIMS = I'
I
"tAXPS+AXPS+" I'
CLS f*t*t********** TOP MENU ******e*************
A. HELP: What Y o u Can
/
Should Do Here
B .
SELECT: Report Contents
F. SET: BASE CASE to Current Data
G. RESET: BASE CASE to Original Defaults
I
I It
::
I
I
'
IF ANSS="A" THEN HELPS = "HTOPMENU.HLP" : GOSUB SUBHELP
'IF
ANS$="C" THEN GOSUB MENSTATUS
'IF
ANSS="B" THEN GOSUB SUBREPCON '
7
Dec 86
IF ANSS= "F" THEN GOSUB CALC.MULTI.SITES
:
'Get C.O.P. Values
I F ANSS="G" THEN GOSUB SublBASELOAD ' Reset ALL
I F
ANSf="Y" THEN GOTO MENUEDIT '
8
DEC.
IF ANS$="Q" THE N CLS
:
SYSTEM
I F ANSJ-"R" THEN
I F PSWITCHS - kP"
IF PSWITCHS = " P " -
GOSUB MAKE.BASE.CASE
'
- ' L o a d
values
'*e****
THE EXIT Point
e*****
THEN PSWITCHS = - "F " ELSE PSWITCHS = "PI'
THE N CHANNELS --CHANNELIS ELSE CHANNELS
=
CHANNELES
GOTO TOPMENU
No valid option selected.
'*** END: MENU: START-UP = "TOPMENU"
F - 2 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 125/164
MENUED IT :
I
PRINl
PR N7
PRINl
PR Nl
PR N'I
PRINl
PRINl
PRINl
PR N1
PRINl
EDFLAGS="NO" & EDFLAG2S="NO" Set in INIT & elsewhere.
CLS
M2LTS
-
STRING4(72,"-")
'I +
STRING$(?O,"-")+ I' 'I
M2LBf = "
I'
+ STRINGf(70,"-")+ 'I I'
PRINT MELTS
PRINT 1 IM-GEO-[Y]
OPERATI t ;
M2LMf
- I I
I
PRINT "ONS MENU
I
I t
.
RINT M2LMf
PRINT ' '1 A. HELP: Editing Options
'I K .
HELP: Report Options
" 1 B .
EDIT: R&D Achvmnts, RESERVOIR";
' ' 1
C. EDIT: R&D Achvmnts, WELLS
'I.
PRINT M. SHOW: 1-Site Current Costs
1 D.
EDIT: R&D Achvmnts, PLANTS ;
PRINT "
0.
PRINT 1 -Site Technical Details
1
PRINT " 1 F. EDIT: RISKs, WELLS & FLOW
PRINT " P. ****
PRINT 1 G. EDIT: RISKs, UNIT COSTS
PRINT "
Q.
SHOW: Multi-Reg., Costs
X
Region 1
PRINT " R. PRlNT Multi-Reg., F I N E GRAIN Rbt I "
PRINT 1
1. ****
'
1
' 1
PRINT 'I L. SHOW: R&D Achievements
"
N. SHOW: 1-Site Base Case Costs
I
PRINT 1 E. EDIT: RISKs, RESERVOIR
$1
.
' I *
9
' 1 "
*I.
1
H. EDIT: Regional WEIGHTS
PRINT 1 J. EDIT: Financial Factors
PRINT STRS(JSITE1; I
of
;
I "
11 .
(1 .
PRINT " S.
****
' I "
PRINT " T. EJECT Page (After cPrt.Scr>) ' I "
.
PRINT MELMS
1
U. SELECT: Single Analysis Site, NOW =
;
'
1
V. RUN: Single- Site Cost
. "Power
Analysis
MELMS
' 1
U. RUN: Multi-Region Ana
' , (ACCOUNTS X PERCENT Report)
'
MELMS
' 1 2. GO TO: START-UP / QUIT
' I
* MELTS
' "ENTER SELECTION =====> ;
F - 2 3
ysis";
I
MENU
;
It
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 126/164
MENUEDITl :
'OPERATIONS A c t i o n
L i s t :
" ' Se t s t a t i c TTIMES
i f
e d i t i n g
o f
f a c t o r s o cc ur s:
" ' I F
0
<> INSTR("BCDEFGHM",ANSS) THEN TTIMES
=
TIMES
SAVS - ANS$ ' To r e s t o r e s e l e c t i o n a f t e r *** SUBR: changes.
I F ANSS="A" THEN HELPS
=
"HEDIT.HLP" : GOSUB SUBHELP
I F ANS$="K" THEN HELPS = "HSHOW.HLP" : GOSUB SUBHELP
I F
ANS$="B" THEN GOSUB EDIT.ACH.FIELD
I F ANS$="C" THEN GOSUB EDIT.ACH.WELLS
I F
ANS$="D" THEN GOSUB EDIT.ACH. PLANT
I F
ANS$="E" THEN GOSUB EDIT.RISK.RESVOIR
I F ANS$="F" THEN GOSUB EDIT.RISK.WELLS
I F ANS$="G" THEN GOSUB EDIT.RISK.COSTS
GOSUB INLETTER: I F ANS$ =
'In
THEN GOTO MENUEDITl
'
' F i x up r i s k f a c t o r s :
I F
(0
<>
INSTR("EFG",SAV$)) AND EDFLAGS="YES" THEN
-
GOSUB ADJUST. WORST. DATA
I F ANS$="J" THEN GOSUB ED FI N
I F
ANS$="L" THEN GOSUB RADACH.SCRN
I F A N S $ = " T " THEN LPRINT CHRS(12); : ANSf = "ZAP" 'Ej. page
I F LEN(ANS$) > 1 THEN GOTO MENUEDIT 'Done w i t h ab ove, ZAP.
' U n r e s o l v e d e f f e c t s
f o r
both S i n g l e a n d M u l t i p l e c a se s:
I F EDFLAGS = "YES" THEN EDFLAGES = "YES"
' I f n o u n r e s o l v e d ch a ng e s, d o n ' t me ss a bo u t :
' Reca l c f o r s i n g l e - s i t e r e p o r t s :
'Reca lc
f o r
m u l t i - s i t e re p o r t s :
GOSUB CALC.MULTI .SITES
:
EDFLAG2S -"NO"
EDFLAGS
-
"NO"
'
E v e r y t h i n g
i s
f i x e d
f o r
s i n g l e c as e.
ANSS - SAVS
R e s t o r e u s e r ' s o p t i o n s e l e c t i o n .
'
I F EDFLAGS
<>
"YES" AND EDFLAGES
<>
"YES" THEN GOTO MENUEDIT3
I F 0 <> INSTR("MNOV",SAV$) AND EDFLAG$ = "YES" THEN
-
GOSUB SUBlENGINE
I F 0 <> INSTR("QRW",SAVS) AND EDFLAGES
-
"YES" THEN
-
HENUEDIT3 :
I F
ANS$="M" THEN IXCOST-2
:
OSUB COSTS. OUT ' C u r r e n t 1 s i e
I F ANSS-"N" THEN IXCOST=I:GOSUB COSTS.OUT 'B as e 1 s i t e
I F ANSS="O" THEN GOSUB SUBlENGINE : ' I n t e r m e d . D a t a
=
JSITE
I F ANS$="Q" THEN GOSUB REGIONS.SCR
I F
ANSS="R" THEN GOSUB COSTS.LIST: 'C os ts , S i t e s
X
Accounts
I F ANS$="U" THEN GOSUB PICK.ONE.SITE :
I F ANSS="V" THEN GOSUB SUBGENCOP 'Run/Show 1 P r o s p e c t
I F ANS$="W" THEN GOSUB RUN.MULT1 'Run Mu1
t i
S i t e
I F
ANSS-"2" THEN ANSS - "ZAP" : GOTO TOPMENU
GOTO MENUEDIT '
NO GOOD
RESPONSE
I F ANSS-"H" THEN GOSUB MENUWEIGHTS
GOSUB SITE.TECH.FAC3 ' I - S i t e Te c hn ic al
' C o s t s , M u l t i - S i t e
'
I F EDFLAGPS - "YES" THEN GOSUB-SUBlENGINE
'
#
F - 2 4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 127/164
SUBHELP :
'***
SUBR:
Writes simple HELP t o screen.
HELP.YOU2 :
I F
EOF(3) THEN GOTO HELP.YOU4
LINE INPUTU3, BS
:
I F
LEFTS(BS,3)="Sfb" THEN GOTO HELP.YOU4
PRINT Bf : GOTO HELP.YOU2 ' Next Line
HELP.YOU4 : PRINT
CLS
:
axb$
* t t * * * t * t t t * * * t t * * ****** t * * ***********~~
print axbS t
HELP " t axbS : OPEN HELP$ FOR INPUT AS # 3
PRINT " *tf*t **t*t*****+*******>RESS ANY KEY 1 1 ;
PRINT "to CONTINUE (*+*t*****************t*n
GOSUB INLETTER : CLOSE U3 : ANSS ="ZAP" : RETURN
'***
END SUBR: Give HELP ******
'
"
PRINT "
"
I. Weight - Regional Capacity
[
- DEFAULT ]
3.
Weight - Equal fo r all Regions
K. Weight - User's Numerical Values
L. Weight
-
Relevance to R&D Program
I t
II
II
II
IF ANSS="A" T HEN HEL PS
-
'HWEIGHT.HLP"
I F ANSS-"S" THEN GO SUB UEIGHTS.SHOW
I F ANSS="Z" THEN ANSS-"ZAP" : RETURN
GOTO
MENUWEIGHTS '
No v a l i d o p t i o n se
'***
END:
MENU:
Set Regional Weights
I * * * END
SECTION: ZMENUS
***
F
: GOSUB SUBHELP
ected.
10
Feb
87
2 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 128/164
'***
ZCTRL
'****** CONTROL OF MAJOR CALCULATIONS
*******
I
'
L a s t E d i t e d
2 1
Feb
87
SUBGENCOP
:
'***
SUBR: C a l c u l a t e One P l a n t Case, Show/Pr in t
' GOSUB subIENGINE
'*** END SUBR: SUBGENCOP
*****
'
CLS
GOSUB SCONSOLEI ' how/ P r i n t Resu l t s
ANSS - "ZAP"
:
RETURN ' t o CALLER
SUBlENGINE
:
I***
SUBR: SINGLE SITE CALC VERSION
' D i r e c t c a l l
t o
h e r e
wi l l
c a l c u l a t e ,
not
Show/Pr in t .
' I s
c a l l e d
f rom 4 or
5 p l a c e s : 21 Feb
87.
' JSITE
- [1-8]
( S i t e
#
t o
Do).
Must
be
set above.
PRINT WELCOMES : PRINT
:
PRINT "WAIT: RECALCULATING SINGLE SI TE No. : ; SITE
'*** END SUBR: SINGLE SITE CALC
V E R S I O N
I
CLS
GOSUB CALC.A.SITE
RETURN
'*******
CONTROL CALC-ENGINE F O R MULTI-CASE USES ********
RUN. MULTI
:
I * * *
SUBR: Ca lc and Show M u l t i - S i t e Case
'
GOSUB CALC.MULTI.SITES 'C a lc . 8 S i t e s
RETURN
'**+
END SUBR: C a l c
and
S how M u l t i -S i t e Case
I
GOSUB SHOW. MULTI
' D is p la y t h e r e s u l t s
SHOW.
MULTI
:
'***
SUBR:
Show
M u l t i - S i t e Case
SHOW. MULT
I 1
:
I
GOSUB LOAD.OUT.MULT1 'Lo ad Ou t p u t A r r a y
GOSUB SHOW.ACCOUNTS
TO
SCREEN
GOSUB SHOW.CHOICE USER RESPONSE
IF
ANSS c>
"ZAP"
THEN GOT0 SHOW.MULTI1 'RESHOW
RETURN
I ND
SUBR:
Show
M u l t i - S i t e Case
F - 2 6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 129/164
. CALC.MULTI.SITES
:
I
'*** SUBR: Calculate and Show MultiSite Case
CLS
:
PRINT WELCOME$ : PRINT
PRINT "WAIT: CALCULATING
8
REGIONS:
'
:
TEMPSITE = JS IT E 'Save User's Selection
FOR IXSITE = 1
TO 8
PRINT " REGION:"; IXSITE
JSITE
-
IXSITE : GOSUB CALC.A.SITE ' ENGINE. Do one
o f 8.
NEXT IXSITE
GOSUB WAY. SUM S
JSITE - TEMPSITE
IF JSITE <> 8 THEN GOSUB SUBlENGINE
RETURN
I * * * END SUBR: Calculate MultiSite Case
'Reset Weighted Averages
'Restore User's Selection, Data:
LOAD.OUT.MULT1:
'***
SUBR: Out-Load Multi-Sit e Results:
BS
-
"Multi-Region Weighted Averaged Data
CASETITLE$
-
Bf t "WEIGHTS
- "
+ WEIGHTS
ZREPORTS - "A" 'No-cost report
' Move 8-c ase results to SHOWOUT(12,4):
' Base Cas e Percents:
' Current/Base Total :
Current, Change from Base:
'
Current Cas e Percents:
NEXT
I
' Ready t o display a
RETURN
I * * *
END
SUBR: Load-Out Mul ti- Site Case
I
FOR I - 1 TO 12
SHOWOUT(
I, 1 )
= 100*( RESMUL
1, I
)/RESMUL ( 1 , l l )
SHOWOUT( I,
2)
= loo*( RESMUL( 2, I )/RESMUL ( 1 , l l ) )
SHOWOUT( I ,3) - loo*( (RESMUL(2, I)/RESMUL( 1,
I))
SHOWOUT(
I,4)
-
100*RESMUL(2, I)/RESMUL(E,ll)
WAY. SUMS
:
I * * * SUBR: Hake Weighted Averages:
'12
Accounts, weighted and normalized:
FOR
K -
1 TO 12
: 8 = 0 : C
= 0 'Base
&
Current cases
B
- 8 t
RESULTS(l,J,K,S)*WEIGHT(J)
C = C + RESULTS(Z,J,K,S)*WEIGHT(J)
I
FOR J
=
1
TO
8
NEXT J : RESMUL( l,K)=B/WAYSUM : RESMUL(2,K)=C/WAYSUM
N E X T
K
'5 Cost Values, weighted and normalized:
FOR I = 1
TO
2
:
FOR L =
1
TO 5 : A = 0
FOR J
=
1 TO 8
NEXT 3
WCOSTL
I,
L) - A/WAYSUM
A
-
A t RESULTS(I,J,ll,L)*WEIGHT(J)
NEXT
L :
NEXT I
RETURN
'*** END
SUBR: Make Weighted Averages
F - 2 7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 130/164
'*** FOUR WEIGHT SETTING ROUTINES ******
WEIGHT. CAPAC ITY :
I
UBR:
EDFLAGS
-
"YES"
TTIMES
-
TIMES
WEIGHT.CAPACITY.EX
: <--
For automatic use,
w/o
top flags.
C L S :
WAYSUM - 0
FOR J -
1
T O
8
' RISK SE T HERE, 20 Feb.
NEXT J
WEIGHTS - "Regional Capacity
ZWAYZ = 1
:
ANSS
=
"ZAP"
:
RETURN
'***
END SUBR: WEIGHT.CAPACITY
WEIGHT.UNITY
:
'***
SUBR:
WEIGHTS - "Equal f or all Regions
ZWAYZ - 2
:
EDFLAGS - "YES"
:
TTIMES - TIMES 'Set tim e stamp.
ANSI - "ZAP" : RETURN
'*** E N D SUBR: WEIGHT.UNITY
r
WEIGHT. USER
:
I UBR:
'
Restore Users Earlier Weights
:
AR E IN WEIGHT.USER
Let User edit t he weights (using DATACH)
C L S
MNAMES
-
" WEIGHT for Region's Cont ribu tion to Totals"
MSlZE
-
8
I
I
Weight
=
Region's gross potential
'Set time stamp.
Per S.P. & D.J.E.
WEIGHT(3) - SITEDATA(E,l,J)
WAYSUM - WAYSUM
t
WEIGHT(J)
11
t
I
All weights set to
1.0
CLS:
FOR 1 - 1
TO
8 : WEIGHT(1) = 1 : NEXT I
WAYSUM - 8
'I
'
Weigh ts entered by user.
FOR
I -
1
TO 8
MV(
I) -
WEIGHT.USER(
I)
IF MV(1) < .00001 THEN MV(1) - 0
MM$(I)="WEIGHT
o f "
t SITENAMES(1)
'Hide protection
'Region name
'Time stamp, EDFLAGf are there.
NEXT I
GOSUB SUBDATACH
'And store results:
WAYSUM
-
0
FOR
I
-
1
TO
8
IF MV(1) <=
0
THEN MV(1) = .000001 'Protection
WEIGHT.USER(1)
-
MV(1) 'User's We ight s
WEIGHT( I) = WEIGHT.USER( I)
WAYSUM - WAYSUM + WEIGHT(1)
'Active Weights = User's
'Active sum
NEXT I
WEIGHTS = "User's Numerical Values
TTIMES -.TIMES
ZWAYZ
- 3 ; ANSS - "ZAP" : RETURN
'***
END
SUBR: WEIGHT.USER
"
'User may be just checking, and keeping
thi s selection.
F - 2 8
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 131/164
I
WEIGHT. RELEVANCE :
'*** SUBR: Weighted by Res ource and C.O.P. utility
T h e utility function here assumes that the program's interes t
*
i n
a region decreases on eithe r side
o f
an assumed competitive
' cost
of
power of
80
mills/KWh. C.O.P. used is from Base Case.
EDFLAGS = "YES"
TTIMES
-
TI MES 'Set ti me stamp.
WEIGHT.RELEVANCE.EX
:
C L S
FOR
3
-
1 TO
8
'
CO P utility curve:
NEXT
J
WAY UM=O
FO R 1-1 TO 8:WAYSUM=WAYSUMtWEIGHT(I)
:
NEXT I
WEIGHTS
-
"Relevance t o R&D Program "
ZWAYZ
- 4
ANSS - "ZAP" : RETURN
'*** EN D SUBR: WE1GHT.RELEVANCE
I * * *
END OF TH E WEIGHT SETTING ROUTINES
******
'
*
f
'<--
For automatic use, w/o top
flags.
COP - RESULTS(l,J,ll,S)
MWE
-
SITEDATA(E,l,J)
IF COP <= 80 THEN U - COP/80 ELSE U - 80/COP
WEIGHT(3)
-
MWE*U/1000
'Mills/KWh Total, Base Case
'Resource potential, Risk Loaded
I
MAKE. BASE. CAS E
:
'***
SUBR: Fill base ca se from current case, all Regions:
CLS
:
PRINT WELCOMES
:
PRI NT "WAIT: FILLING BASE CASE VALUES"
FOR 3 = 1
TO
1 0
I
FOR K = 1 TO 12
FOR L - 1 TO 5
RESULTS( 1 ,J,K, L) = RESULTS( 2,3, , L)
I F
RESULTS(
1, J,
, L)-0 THEN
I F
RESULTS(E,J,K,L)-0 THEN
NEXT L
RESULTS(1,J,K,L)-.OOOOOi '** Prevent Div
by Zero
RESULTS(2,J,K,L)-.OOOOOi '** Prevent Div by Zero
NEXT
K
NEXT
3
RETURN
' *** EN D SUBR: HAKE.BASE.CASE
'***
END OF ZCTRL PORTION OF CO DE
***
F - 2 9
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 132/164
'***
ZED11
'*** EDIT MAJOR FACTORS
********
I
' L a s t E d i t e d : 13 M arch 87
PICK.ONE. SITE :
'For S i n g l e - S i t e A n a l y s i s :
CLS
:
PRINT "SELECT SINGLE S I T E FROM ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:
PRINT : PRINT
FOR I 1
TO
8
I
'I
PRINT USING " # # # # # # # # . ;I;
PRINT SITENAMES(1)
NEXT 1
LOCATE 14,8 : PRINT "CURRENT SITE
#
IS: I; JSITE
LOCATE 16,8
INPUT "SELECT S ITE NUMBER
[ l
-
81,
<Enter>
:
'I,
ZNSITE
ZNSITE = INT(ZNSITE1
I F (ZNSI TE ( ' 1 ) OR iZNSITE > 8) THEN GOT0 PICK.ONE.SITE
JSITE
=
ZNSITE
ANSS="ZAP" ; RETURN
'***
END SUBR: PICK.ONE.SITE
ED IT . ACH .
I
LD :
'***SUBR: E d i t R&D Achi evem ents, R es e rv o ir *****
'Var iables: REV(1)
= 1
- 9
CLS : MNAMES=" R&D Ac h ie ve me nt s for RESEVOIR"
MSIZE=9
FOR
I = I
TO MSIZE
NEXT
1
GOSUB subDATACH 'D at a Changer, t h e n Ou tl oa d:
MV( I)=RADACH( REV( I ) ) :MMS ( )=RADACHS (REV (I)
FOR I
-
1 TO MSIZE : RADACH(REV(1)) = MV(1)
: NEXT I
'** END SUBR: EDIT.ACH.FIELD ***
NSf="ZAP" : RETURN
EDIT. ACH. WELLS :
'***SUBR: E d i t R&D Ach.s, WELLS ***** ..
'Var iables: REV(1) = 10 -
2 2
CLS
:
MNAMES=" R&D Ac hi ev eme nt s for WELLS"
MS
ZE = l3
FOR
I
- 1 TO MSIZE
NEXT I
GOSUB subDATACH
ANSS-"ZAP" : RETURN
MV( I ) =RADACH (REV(
I
t 9 ) )
:
MMf
(I)
RADACHS (REV
(
I
9 )
)
FOR I = 1 TO MSIZE : RADACH(REV(It9)) = MV(1) : NEXT I
'** END SUBR: EDIT.ACH.WELLS ***
F - 3 0
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 133/164
EDIT.ACH.PLANT :
'***SUBR: Edit R&D Ach.s, PLAN TS *****
'Variables:
CLS : MNAMES=" R&D Achievements for PLAN
MS ZE-13
FOR
I = l TO
MSIZE
GOSUB subDATACH
REV(1) = 23 -
35
MV( I)-RADACH( REV( 1t22) :MMS (
I
)=RADACHS
FOR I -
1
TO MSIZE
:
RADACH(REV(It22))
ANSf="ZAP" : RETURN
'**
END SUBR: EDIT.ACH.PLANT ***
S I
REV(It22)):NEXT I
- MV(1)
:
NEXT I
EDIT.RISK.RESVOIR
:
'***SUBR: Edit Estimation Errors, RESERVOIR
*****
'Variables: 1 - 12
CLS
:
MNAMES=" Estimation Errors for RESERVOIR"
MS
IZE- 2
FOR
1-1
TO
MSIZE
SAVPOT - RADRISK(1)
GOSUB subDATACH
'Reset weights under certain conditions:
IF SAVPOT - RADRISK(1) THEN GOT O EDIT.RISK.RESV9 'OK
IF ZWAYZ
-
2 OR ZWAYZ
=
3
'OK
'Reset Weights, and recalculate all:
'
MV(1)-RADRISK(1)
:
MMS(I)=RADRISK$(I):NEXT I
'Re Weight Resetting
FOR I
-
1 TO MSIZE
:
RADRISK(1) = MV(1)
:
NEXT I
THEN GOTO EDIT.RISK.RESV9
IF ZWAYZ -
1
THEN G OSUB WEIGHT.CAPACITY
IF ZWAYZ - 4 THEN GOSUB WEIGHT.RELEVANCE
GOS UB ADJUST. WORST. DATA
EDFLAGS - " N O "
:
EDFLAGES ="NO"
EDIT.RISK.RESV9
:
'**
EN D SUBR: EDIT.RISK.RESVOIR
+**
' ' :
GOSUB CALC . ULTI . ITES
ANSS-"ZAP"
:
RETURN
EDIT.RISK.WELLS :
'***SUBR: Edit Estimation Errors, WELLS & FLOW *****
'Variables: 13
-
26
CLS : MNAMES-" Estimation Errors fo r WELLS & FLOW"
M S ZE-I4
FOR 1-1
TO
MSIZE
MV( I)-RADRISK( 1t12) : MMS( I)-RADRISKS( It12) :NEXT I
GOSU B subDATACH
ANSS-"ZAP" : RETURN
'**
END SUBR: EDIT.RISK.WELLS
***
FOR 1
1
TO
MSIZE
:
RADRISK(1+12) - MV(1)
:
NEXT I
'Programming Note: 18 Jan 87
' Variab les RADRISK(27-30) are not edited. They are integer
'
values that select aspects
of
technol ogy for each region.
'
The se variables can be changed only by editing the site
da ta fil e "SITEDATO.SIT" or other versions
o f
site
dat a files.
F - 3 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 134/164
EDIT.RISK.COSTS
:
'***SUBR: E d i t E s t i m a t i o n E rr or s, UNIT COSTS
*****
' V a r i a b l e s :
31-38
CLS : MNAMES=" E s t i ma t io n E r r o r s
f o r
UNIT COSTS"
MSIZE=8
FOR
111 TO
MSIZE
MV(I)=RADRISK( I t 3 0 ) : MM$(I)=RADRISKS(It30):NEXT I
FOR I 1 TO MSIZE : RADRISK(It30) = MV(1) : NEXT I
GOSUB subDATACH
ANSS-"ZAP"
:
RETURN
'** END SUBR: EDIT.RISK.COSTS
***
'Programming Note :
' T he f o l l o w i n g OLD E d i t o r s we re m oved t o
' f i l e : ZHOLD on 19 Feb 87:
"EDPROSP:
'***SUBR: EDIT Ba se Case G.T. P r o s p e c t
"EDLOGI
:
'***SUBR: EDIT R e s e r v o i r LOGICAL D a t a
"EDRISK
:
'***SUBR: ED IT RESERVOIR RI SK FACTORS
"EDRAND :
***SUBR: ED IT MAJOR IMPACT MULTIPLIERS
EDFIN :
'***SUBR: EDFIN: EDIT F i n a n c i a l F ac t or s *****
MNAME$=*' F i na n c i a l F ac to r Da ta Va lues
I'
MSIZE=4
MM$(l)
- O f
MV(l)=ROYR
:
MV(2)mSEVR
*
: MMS(2) = PS : MMS(3) - QS : MMS(4)=RS
:
MV(3)sDEPL
:
MV(4)sFINT
GOSUB subDATACH
' R e l o a d n ew d a t a v a l u e s :
'**
END SUBR: EDF IN
***
'DATACH = Da ta Changer
ROYR=MV(l)
:
SEVR =MV(2) : DEPL-MV(3) : FINT-MV(4)
ANSS-"ZAP"
:
RETURN
'****
DATA AND TABLE EDIT ING SUBROUTINES:
INLETTER : ** SUBR **
'
Get /C lean Up 1-char ALPHA I n p u t
' A c c e p t s one key p r e s s . R e t u r n s :
'
-
ANSS
=
A-Z
or " "
'
- ANS =
1-26
o r
0
INLETTERl: ANSS - INKEYS
I F AN$$
- ""
THEN GOT0 INLETTER1
ANS ASC(ANSS): I F ANS > 90 THEN ANSsANS-32
AN$$ CHR$(ANS) : ANS
=
ANS
-
6 4
I F (ANS <
1)
OR (AN$
>
26) THEN ANSS="": ANSO
RETURN
'**
END SUBR: INLETTER
**
..
F - 3 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 135/164
subDATACH:
'** SUBR: DATACH: GENERAL DATA CHANGING HANDLER ***
' C a l l i n g :
E d i t s
by
c h a n g i n g a b s o l u t e v a l u e .
I
I
I
I
I
MSIZE = Number o f d a t a e l e m e n t s ( r ow s )
MMS(i)
-
i - t h
Data element name
M V ( i )
-
i - t h D a t a e l e m e n t n u m e r i c a l v a l u e
MNAMES
=
Henu T i t l e
BLANK5 - STRINGS(79,"
)
' P r i n t MENU T i t l e an d (n = MSIZE) Opt ions:
subDATACH1 : CLS : LOCATE 1 , l
PRINT "EDITING: "
+
MNAME5 : PRINT: PRINT
FOR I = 1 TO MSIZE
' #
NO OF LINES I N MENU
PRINT CHRS(64t l) +
.
" + M M S ( 1 ) ;
I F MM$(I) " "
THEN PRINT " / NOW =
;
MV(1)
-
ELSE PRINT M V ( 1 )
NEXT
I
PRINT "ENTER x o f D a t a I t e m t o Change, o r Z t o CONTINUE:
' I ;
GOSUB INLETTER :
I F
ANSS - " " THEN GOTO SUBDATACH3
subDATACH2 : LOCATE 20,1,
1 '
Response PROMPT
subDATACH3
:
I F ANS5
=
"Z" THEN GOTO SUBDATACH9 'Done, g e t o u t .
I F ANS <= MSIZE THEN GOTO SUBDATACHS
'IS
OK
'Reminder re O p t i o n s :
GOTO subDATACH2
'
E n t e r n ew d a tu m v a l u e :
subDATACH5
:
LOCATE 20,l : PRINT BLANKS : PRINT BLANK$
EDFLAGS
-
"YES"
TTIMES
-
TIMES
LOCATE 22,l : PRINT "EDITING: ; N$$; .
"t
MM$(ANS);
LOCATE
23,l:
INPUT "ENTER NEW VALUE
-
, EWVAL
MV(ANS) = NEWVAL
GOTO subDATACH1
subDATACH9 : CLS : RETURN
'
*** END SUBR: DATA CHANGING HANDLER
***
LOCATE 20,l : PRINT BLANK5
:
PRINT BLANK$
:
LOCATE 21,l
P RI NT " S e lec t i on ; NSS;"
i s n o t
on
Menu.
S e l e c t a g a i n . "
' Se t f l a g t o show e d i t i n g o c c u rr e d
' S e t t i m e s tamp .
PRINT "
/
NOW = ;MV(ANS)
'New v a l u e t o M enu V a r i ab l e
'
*** END OF DATA EDITORS SECTION
***
F - 3 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 136/164
'
L a s t E d i t e d 1 4 M ar c h
87
sublBASELOAD :
I
UBR: l o a d BASE CASE
'Loa d M u l t i - S i t e D a ta :
GOSUB LOAD.SITE.DATA 'LOAD Reg iona l Case Da t a
GOSUB LOADFIN 'Read F i n a n c i a l F a c t o r s BUSFNFCT.GE0:
I
OPEN "1MGEOUT.TXT" FOR OUTPUT AS A12 : CLOSE
# 2
GOSUB LOAD. RAD. FACTS
GOSUB
ADJUST. WORST. DATA 'MUST be a f t e r LOAD. RAD. FACTS
GOSUB WEIGHT.CAPACITY.EX ' A v o i d a d i v .b y . ze ro .
C L S
:
WELCOMES
PRINT "WAIT: LOADING BASE CASE VALUES"
I
No te : N e x t tw o, LOAD.RAD.FACTS
&
ADJUST.WORST.DATA,
Open and c l o s e r e p o r t s c r o l l f i l e t o empty i t :
MUST be a f t e r LOAD.SITE.DATA, bec aus e t h e y use
T i t l e S t r i n g s o r D a ta f r o m th er e.
I
I
GOSUB
LOADBASE
GOSUB LOAD. ACCOUNTS
GOSUB CALC.MULTI.SITES ' S e t C.O.P. Va lues
GOSUB
MAKE.BASE.CASE 'S et bas e ca se v a l u e s .
GOSUB WEIGHT.CAPACITY .EX ' D e f a u l t Weight s
GOSUB WAY.SUMS
ANSI ="ZAP" ; RETURN
'***
END SUBR: sublBASELOAD
****
'LOAD: BASE CASE param et e r va l ues .
'Loa d Acc ou nt TITLES f o r SHOW.MAIN>
' We ig hte d r e s u l t s f o r d i s p l a y s
LOADBASE :
'*** SUBR:
'***
V a lues
i n [. ]
a r e D e f a u l t V al ue s
1
Base Case"
Note: 18 Feb
87:
T h i s w a s o l d r o u t i n e f o r l o a d i n g f a c t o r s a nd
'
s t u b s
for
1 s i t e m od el . C om pl et e c o p y o f t h e o r i g i n a l c a n b e
' o u n d i n "ZOLDO". A f e w re mn an ts a r e k e p t h e r e f o r
*** L o c a l F i n a n c i a l F a c t o r s : ( P r o b a b l y U se d)
ROYR
=
.1 :OS-"Royal t y R a te D e f a u l t : . 10 'I
SEVR 1.04
:
S="Severance
Tax
D e f a u l t :
.04 I'
DEPL 1 .15 :QS-"Percent De p l e t io n A l lowa nce De fa u l t : . 15
It
FINT 1 .75 :RS-" In tang ib le F r ac t . o f W e l l C o s t D e f a u l t :
.75
I'
I
I n i t i a l r e Ph ys ic al /E co n F a c to r Da ta
i n i t i a l i z a t i o n p u r p o s e s :
'*** RLD DETAILED IMPACT MULTIPLIERS:
'Note: None o f t h e s e a r e use d, a s o f 4 March 87:
RI DE T(1 ) I l .
RETURN
'***END SUBR: e****
F - 3 4
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 137/164
LOADF I N:
'**SUBR: Read F i n a n c i a l Fa ct or s:
OPEN I , # 1 , "BUSFNFCT.GE0"
INPUT # l , YCB, YPL, YRP, YCN
INPUT
01,
FLVLCF, FABC, FAFRD, VLAFCR
INPUT
#1,
GLVL, FLVL, COSTADJ, ZOAM, YOAM
INPUT # I , FBL, DISC, FI F L
CLOSE 4 1
RETURN
I * * * END SUBR: Read F i n . F a c t o r s
****
I
LOAD. SITE . DATA:
'**SUBR: Load M u l t i - S i t e Base Case Da ta
CLS : PRINT WELCOMES : PRINT
PRINT "WAIT:
'Open S i t e D a t a F i l e :
'Read R e g i o n a l T i t l e s :
'Read S i t e D at a Names and Values:
f
LOADING PHYSICAL DATA FOR REGIONS"
OPEN "SITEDATO.DAT" FOR INPUT AS #1
FOR
I
1 TO 9 : INPUT
Y 1 ,
SITENAMES(1) i NEXT
I
FOR
I 1
TO
9
: INPUT
#1,
SITESHORTS(1) : NEXT
I
FOR I
1
TO 38 SETS OF DATA
INPUT #1, DUMMY ' I t e m Number, Dump
INPUT #1, SITEUSES(1) D a t a I t e m Used? YES/NO
INPUT # I , SITERISKS(1) R i s k O f f s e t Used? YES/NO
INPUT #1, SITEDATAS(1)
'
DATA ITEM HEADER
FOR
3 = 1 TO
9 : INPUT #1, SITEDAT A(l,I, J) : NEXT 3
FOR
3
=
1
TO
9
:
INPUT # l , SITERISK(I.3)
:
NEXT
3
S i t e s p hy s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s i t i c s d a t a l i n e :
S i t e s r i s k a dd -o ns d a t a l i n e :
NEXT
I
CLOSE # I : RETURN
'**END SUBR:
L oa d M u l t i - S i t e B as e C ase D a t a
LOAD. RAD. FACTS :
'***
SUBR: 'Loa d R&D T i t l e s
and
F a c t o r s
'NOTE:
'
FOR
I - 1 TO
38
'ELSE:
T i t l e
f r o m SITEDATO
f i l e .
ZLRF4 :
NEXT I
I
M u s t occur on ly a f t e r f i r s t
c a l l t o
LOAD.SITE.DATA,
because t h i s u se s T i t l e S t r i n g s f r o m t h er e .
1.
Make RADRISKS T i t l e S t r i n g s f r om SITEDATAS(1) :
I
I
I F SITEUSES(1)
<>
"YES" THEN RISKS-"" : GOTO ZLRF4
I F S ITERISKS(1)
<>
"YES" THEN RISKS=""
:
GOTO
ZLRF4
RISKS- "RISK: *+ SITEDATAS(1) t [Nom.=l.O)"
RADRISKS(1) = RISKS
IF RISKS -"" THEN RADRISK(
I ) - 0
ELSE RADRISK(
1)=1
O
'
F - 3 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 138/164
I 2. S e t RADACH T i t l e s , t h e n V al ue s:
V e c to r s a r e e s t a b l i s h e d h e r e t o a l l o w programmer t o s e t
'
d i f f e r e n t o r d e r s a nd g r o u pi n g s when t h e R&D achievements
'
a r e b e i ng e d i t e d
by
t h e u s e r .
' a re ca l cu la t ed au tom a t ica l l y be low. Groupings a re
' s e t a n d o p e r a t e d u p o n a t t h e r e l e v a n t E d i t i n g S c r e e n s .
CRITICAL: Use# MUST - S u b s c r i p t
of
RADACH$(i) --.
PROGRAMMING NOTE:
R&D
Ach ievement Ed i t in g Vectors .
The reverse vectors, RACH(i)
I
I
I
I
i
V
EDITING VECTOR: E d i t #
/
Use#
RADACHS(1)
=
"W i ldca t Success Ra t io 'I : REV(1) = 1
RADACHI(2)
=
" T e s t i n g C os ts , I d e n t i f y 'I : REV(2)
=
2
RADACHb(3)
=
"Conf i rm. Success Ra t i o
'I
: REV(3) - 3
RADACHb(4) - "Tes t ing Cos ts , Con f i rm I' : REV(4) = 4
RADACHI(7)
-
Dry H o l e s / Producer 'I
:
REV(5) = 7
RADACHS(8)
-
"Flow Rate, P roducer
"
:
REV(6)
=
8
RADACHs(9)
-
" Fl ow R at e, I n j e c t o r
"
: REV(7)
-
9
RADACHS(33)
-
"T es t i ng Costs , Producer 'I
:
REV(8)
-
33
RADACHI(35) - "Tes t Costs ,
I n j .
o r
Dry
"
: REV(9)
=
35
RADACHb(6) = " P r o d u c e r R e d r i l l F r a c t .
''
: REV(l0) = 6
RADACHS(30) = "Wel l Prb lms, L o st C i r c u l "
:
REV(I1) - 30
RADACHI(31) = "Wel l Prb lms, Cementing " : REV(12) - 31
RADACHI(32) = "Wel l Prb lms, Other " : REV(13) = 32
RADACHI(5) - "TOTAL Cost, Avg. Well
:
REV(14)
= 5
RADACH$(20) - "Cap.C ost, Deep W el l Pump" : REV(15) - 20
RADACHS(21) -
"O&M
Co st, Deep W el l Pump"
:
REV(16) = 21
RADACHS(28) - "Cap.Cost, Ga th er in g Sys." : REV(17) - 28
RADACHI(29) - "O&M Cost, Ga the r in g Sys." : REV(18) = 29
RADACHI(10)
-
"Workove r In te rva l , P rod . "
:
REV(19)
-
10
RADACHS(l1)
-
"Cost p e r Workover, Prod." : REV(20)
-
11
RADACHS(12) = " W o r k o v e r I n t e r v a l , I n j c . " : REV(21) - 12
RADACHI(l3) = "Cost p e r Workover , In jc . "
:
REV(22) - 13
RADACHf(34) - "Years Between Plants
"
: REV(23) = 34
RADACHS(14) - "E f f i c iency , FLASH P lan t "
:
REV(24)
-
14
RADACHS(16)
-
"Cap. Cos t, FLASH P l a n t " : REV(25)
=
16
RADACHI(22)
- "ObM
Cost, FLASH P la nt " : REV(26) 1 . 2 2
RADACHS(l5)
-
"E f f i c i enc y , BINARY P la n t "
:
REV(27) = 15
RADACHS(17) - "Cap. Cos t, BINARY P l a n t " : REV(28) -
1 7
RADACHS(23)
- "O6M
Cost, BINARY P la n t"
:
REV(29) = 23
RADACHI(24) - "Cap. Cost, He at Exchange" : REV(30) = 24
RADACHI(25)
=
"OLM
Cost, Heat Exchange"
:
REV(31)
=
25
RADACHS(26) = "Cap.
C os t, B r i n e S t a b i l . " : REV(32)
=
26
RADACHS(18) = "ObM C os t, B r i n e S t a b i l . "
:
REV(33) = 18
RADACHS(27) - "Cap. Co st, H2S Tre atm en t" : REV(34)
= 27
RADACHS(19)
=
O M Cost,
H2S
Treatment" : REV(35)
=
19
I - - -
# - - -
I
I
F - 3 6
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 139/164
'
Set nominal value and String:
FOR
I -
1 TO 35
'&
Augment the se Strings:
NEXT
I
RADACH(1) - 1.0 'Nominal R&D Achievements
RADACHS(1)
-
"R&D Achvmt:
t
RADACHS(1)t" [Nom.=l.O]"
f
Se t Null Strings (For Later, and NULL Editing)
FOR I - 36 TO 40 'DIM IS
60
REV(1) - I
RADACH(1)
- 1.0
RADACHS(1) - "R&D Achvmt: EMPTY SLOT"
NEXT I
RETURN
'**END SUBR:
Load R&D Achievement Strings
&
Values
LOAD.ACCOUNTS :
'***
SUBR: LOAD ACCOUNT STUBS
ACCOUNTS(1)
-
"Identify Reservoir
ACCOUNTS
(2)
-
"Conf rm Reservoir
"
ACCOUNTS (3)
-
"We1 1
s
ACCOUNTS (4) - "Downhol e Pumps
ACCOUNTS(5)
-
"Gathering Equip. I'
ACCOUNTS(6)
-
"Power Plant
ACCOUNfS(7)
-
"Heat Exchangers
'I
ACCOUNTS(8) - "Brine Stabilizing "
ACCOUNTS (9) - "Environmental
ACCOUNTS(10) - "Insurance
ACCOUNTS(l1)
- "
TOTAL :
"
. .
ACCOUNTS(12)
-
" RISK FRACTION :
"
RETURN
I * * * END SUBR: LOAD ACCOUNTS
f
"
11
N
n
n
ADJUST.WORST.DATA :
Make SITEDATA(E,I,J) to reflect w orst case values:
CLS : PRINT WELCOMES : PRINT
PRI NT "WAIT: ADJUSTING WORST CASE DATA"
FOR I -
1
TO
40 : FOR 3 - 1
TO
10
*
SITEDATA(2,
I,
3 ) -
SITEDATA(l,I,J)-t RADRISK(I)*SITERISK(I,J)
NEXT J : NEXT I
RETURN
**END
SUBR: ADJUST .WORST .DATA
'********* END OF ZLOAD PORTION
OF
CODE
************
F - 3 7
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 140/164
'***
ZOUT
'***** DISPLAY AND REPORTS SECTION *******
'
L a s t E d i t e d
21
Feb
87
I
'**** DISPLAY RESULTS TO CONSOLE *******
9CONSOLEl:
I
'** SUBR: SHOW-A: 1-CASE RESULTS TO CONSOLE:
CLS
GOSUB LOAD. OUT. 1 STANDARD RESULTS
GOSUB SHOW.ACCOUNTS TO SCREEN
GOSUB SHOW.CHOICE
'
USER RESPONSE
RETURN
'***
END SUBR:
Show
One Case To Console
I F ANS$ <> "ZAP" THEN GOTO 9CONSOLEl 'RESHOW
COSTS. OUT :
' ***
SUBR: COSTS.OUT
' S i n g l e - s i t e 4 - c o l u m n c o s t
report.
CLS: GOSUB LOAD. OUT. COSTS :
IF IXCOST-1 THEN CASETITLES =
IF IXCOST=2 THEN CASETITLES
=
GOSUB SHOW.ACCOUNTS ' TO SCREEN
GOSUB SHOW.CHOICE
'
USER RESPONSE
CASETITLE$
-
" "
' E r a d i c a t e
i t .
RETURN
'***
END SUBR: C o s t s O u t t o Conso le
I
IXCOST - 1: Base Case = 2: C ur re nt Case
"Base Case Costs: "
+
SITENAMES(JS1TE)
"Current
Case Costs:
+ SITENAMES (JSITE)
I F ANSf c> "ZAP" THEN GOTO COSTS.OUT 'RESHOW
SHOW.ACCOUNTS :
' *** SUBR: Ma in Ou tp ut
t o
Screen:
WIDTH "SCRN:",
255
OPEN "SCRN:"
FOR
OUTPUT AS # 2 :
CLS
GOSUB SHOW.MAIN1
CLOSE 1 2 'Release # 2 .
RETURN
'
***
END Show m a i n
t o
Screen.
******
/
' 1 2
Accounts, X
o f
B ase , R i sk
REGIONS. SCR :
'*** SUBR: Re gi on al R es ul ts
t o
Screen.
WIDTH "SCRN:"
255
OPEN "SCRN:" :OR OUTPUT
AS t 2
CLS : GOSUB REGIONALS : CLOSE 1 2 'Show r e s u l t s
PRIN' TAB(8) ; "ENTER:
I
'Open Console
f o r
O u t p u t .
P = PRINT Resul ts,
Z = C o n t i n u e ===+
'I;
F-38
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 141/164
REGIONS.SCR1 : GOSUB INLETTER
I F
ANSS
-
"P" THEN GOSUB REGIONS.PRN : GOTO REGIONS.SCR
I F
ANSS = "Z" THEN ANSS - "ZAP"
:
RETURN 'EXIT
GOTO REGIONS. SCRl
'***
END SUBR: REGIONS TO SCREEN
SHOW. CHOICE : .
'***
SUBR: Get User Prompt Re Print:
PRINT TAB(8); "ENTER: P = PRINT Results,
Z =
Continue
= = = e
I ;
SHOW.CHOICE1: GOSUB INLETTER
1
IF ANSS = "P" THEN GOSUB PRINT.MAIN.RES : CLS : RETURN 'RESHOW
I F
ANSS
=
"2" THEN ANSS = "ZAP"
:
RETURN 'EXIT
GOTO SHOW.CHOICE1
'*** END SUBR: SHOW.CH0ICE ***
'****PRINTER OUTPUT ROUTINES
*****************
PRINT.MAIN.RES :
'***
SUBR: SHOW.OUT Results to PRINTER
GOS UB ZOPEN.PRINTER 'Open as
# 2
GOSU B SHOW .MAIN1
U 2 "
'I
GOSU B RADACH.OUT
GOS UB 2CLOSE.PRINTER 'Close
U 2 .
ANSS - "ZAP"
:
RETURN
1
'Percentage o f Base, Risk Points
'*** END SUBR: Show Main to Printer ******
REGIONS. PRN
:
'*** SUBR: Regional Results to PRINTER
I
GOSUB
ZOPEN.PRINTER
GOSUB REGIONALS
12, " "
GOSU B RADACH .OUT
GOSU B ZCLOSE. PRINTER
ANSS - "ZAP" : RETURN
'*** END SUBR: REGIONS, TO PRINTER
'******
ROUTINES FOR DEVICE P 2 OUTPUT
****************
I PROGAMMING NOTE:
t
These routines send results to any device that has been
previously opened as device #2.
As o f 14 Feb 87 they are used only for SCRN: and LPTl:.
SHOW.MAIN1 :
'
***
SUBR: Master Display for the 12 Accounts
' For Screen or Printer:
t
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 142/164
GOSUB SHOW.STUB1
I F ZREPORT) - "A" THEN GOSUB SHOW.STUB2 'NO c o s t
I F ZREPORT)
''B"
THEN GOSUB SHOW.STUB3 ' 1 - S i t e 4 - c o l c o s t
GOSUB SHOW. RESUL1
RETURN
'
***
END MAIN P a r t
of
OUTPUT SUBR
******
SHOW. STUB1 :
I
I
PRINT #2, TAB(8); "GEOTHERMAL COST OF POWER ESTIMATE
'I
;
I F CASETITLES C> I HEN PRINT U2, T AB(8 ); CASETITLES
PRINT #2, RUN: 'I; DATES; I - 'I ; TTIMES
'Case T i t l e S t r i n g ,
i f
D e f i n e d :
RETURN
SHOW.STUB2 :
I
'
Z B L I P l s
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
*I
.
RINT U2, TAB(8); ZB LI Pl S
t
ZBLIPlS
PRINT U2, TAB(8 ); 19 86
9
PRINT #2, I*****EW TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM
*******I
PRINT #2 , TAB(8); "[From I M G E O Model] TECHNOL.
9
X
OF NEW 'I
RINT U2, "%
OF
1986 % COST
PRINT #2, TAB(8 ); '
PRINT #2, "TECHNOLOGY CHANGE TECH. TOTAL"
U2,
TAB(8)
;
"ACCOUNT % OF COST ' I ;
# 2 ,
"ELECT. COST FROM 1986 ELECT. COST"
PRINT #2, TAB(8); ZBLIP2S
t
ZBLIP3S
11 .
********* ( 1 .
ZBLIP2)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - - - - - -
fBLIP3$
" - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - ' I
n
RETURN
SHOW. STUB3 :
I
I
' F o r o
ZB L I P l
PR
I
T
ZBLIP2
ZBLIP3
In
s
#
#
#
#
#
I
cy
I
I
'5
;$
PRINT #2, TAB(8); ZBL IP2 $ t ZBLIP3f
RETURN
I
SHOW. RESULI :
I
PRINT 12, TAB( l2) ; ' "
TOTAL : . I * * * * * * *
PRINT 1.2, TAB(12); "
RISK FRACTION:
'I.
'*******
- 11
: GOSUB SHOW.RESULl.1
F - 4 0
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 143/164
I
1 2
:
GOSUB SHOW .RESULl .l
PRINT #2, TAB(8); ZBLIPZS t ZBLIP3S
'DATA ACCOUNTS
FOR
I - 1
TO
10
PRINT 12, TAB(8);
:
PRINT #2, USING
' I ## ' ' ;
I ; : PRINT
# 2 ,
'. 'I;
NEXT
1
PRINT #2, TAB(8); ZBLIPlS + ZBLIPIS
GOSUB SHOW. RESULl
.
1
RETURN
SHOW. RESULl
.
1
:
I
I
'SUBR: One l i n e o f
Is
for SHOW.MAIN1
ou tpu t :
PRINT 12, ACCOUNTS(
I ) ;
TAB(33);
#2,
USING #####.I "
;
SHOWOUT(1,l);
#2,
USING " # # # # . #
"
; SHOWOUT(I,) ;
#2,
ZBLIP4S;
#2,
USING
I##.#
PRINT #2, USING
" # # # # . # "
; SHOWOUT(I,4)
RETURN
'*** END SUBR: One Line for SHOW.MAIN1 SUBR
'*** END o f Main ACCOUNTS
Output
SUBRs
I F SHOWOUT(I,3)>0 THEN ZBLIP4S="
"
ELSE ZBLIP4S="- 'I
"
;
ABS( SHOWOUT(
I
3))
;
I
******
REGIONALS
:
'** SUBR: Show RESULTS BY REGION
CLS
I
ZBLIPAS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ZBLIPBf =
m - - - - - _ - _ - - - - - _ - _
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I '
PRINT #2,TAB(8) ;"GEOTHERMAL COST OF POWER ESTIMATE
PRINT #2,TAB(8) ; "WEIGHTS
-
"
+
WEIGHTS
PRINT #2,TAB(8) ; ZBLIPAS
PRINT #2,TAB(8); " CAP. O&M CAP.,
O&M,
TOTAL, TOTAL, %"
PRINT #2,TAB(8 ); COST, COST, MI LL S MILLS MI LL S CHANGE 'I
PRINT #2,TAB(8); "REGION
SM
$M/Y /KWH /KWH /KWH FROM BASE"
PRINT #2,TAB(8); ZBLIPBS
'PRINT " 111.2
++5.6
130.4 110.2 240.'6 +45.2"
FOR 3
- 1 TO
8
PRINT #2,TAB(8);
:
PRINT I2,USING
" # " ; 3 ;
PRINT #2,". ; ITESHORTS(3);" " *
FOR K=1 TO 5 : PRINT I2,USING
"
NEXT
K
B RESULTS(l,J,ll,S) :
A
lOO*(RESULTS(2,J,11,5)-B)/B
PRINTY2, USING
"
### . I ;
NEXT J :
PRINT #2,TAB(8); ZBLIPBS
' Weighted averages:
PRINT #2,TAB(8) ;"WEIGHTED: " ;
;
ATES;"
-
";TTIMES
'PRINT 1. I V - F L bbxxx.xbbxxx.xbbxxx.xbbXxX.Xbbxxx . x b b X X X . XI'
&.#";
RESULTS(2,J,ll,K);
FOR K - 1 TO
5
NEXT
K
PRINT #2,USING "
I## .# ;
COSTL(2,K);
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 144/164
B = KOST
A
=
loo.*(
PRINT 12,U
PRINT 12,TA
RETURN
1*5)
WCOSTL (2, ) -B)
/B
ING " ###.#"; A
(8) ZBL PAS
I * * *
END SUBR: Show RESULTS
BY
REGION
'***
END
OF
MAJOR OUTPUT ROUTINES
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
'********
ROUTINES FOR PREPPING DATA FOR OUTPUT *******
LOAD. OUT. 1 :
'
Move one c ase results to SHOWOUT(l2,4):
'
Case Identification:
CASETITLES = "Region : "tSTRS(JSITE)+"
ZREPORTS
- " A "
'No-cost report
FOR
I
=
1
TO
12
:
'
Base Case Percents:
SHOWOUT(
I ,
) =
'
Current/Base Totals:
SHOWOUT(I,2)
-
Current, Change from Base:
f
"tSITENAMES(JS1TE)
100* (RESULTS(T S T , I ,5) RESULTS ( 1, JS T , 11 ,5)
100*(RESULTS(?, JSITE
,
,5)/RESULTS( 1, JSITE, 1,5)
)
Z -
RESULTS(l,JSITE,I,5)
SHOWOUT(
I, 3)
SHOWOUT (
I, 4)
=
loo*(
(RESULTS (2 SITE,
,
5 ) / 2 )
-
1 )
'
Current Case Percents:
NEXT
I
RETURN
lOO*(RESULTS(~, SITE,
,
)/RESULTS(2
,
SITE, 1,5))
*** END SUBR: LOAD.OUT. 1
LOAD. OUT. CO STS
:
*** SUBR: Move 1-REGION
cost results to SHOWOUT(12,4):
ZREPORTS
= B
'One-site 4-col costs.
I
IXCOST = 1: Base Case IXCOST = 2: Current Case,
' Capital, MS
FOR 1 1 1
TO
12
:
SHOWOUT(I,1)=RESULTS(IXCOST,JSITE,I,l) : N E X T I
O&M, MS/Yr
FOR 1-1 TO 12
:
SHOWOUT(1,2) = RESULTS(IXCOST,JSITE,1,2) : N E X T
I
'
Capital
,
mills/kwh
FOR
1-1
TO
12
:
SHOWOUT(1,S)
=
RESULTS(IXCOST,JSITE,1,3)
:
N E X T
I
T o t a l , mills/kwh
FOR 1-1 TO 12 : SHOWOUT(1,I) = RESULTS(IXCOST,JSITE,I,5)
: NEXT I
RETURN
'*** END SUBR: LOAD. UT. COSTS
I
'***** END OF ROUTINES FOR PREPPING DATA *******
'***
END SECTION, ZOUTS-
f - 4 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 145/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 146/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 147/164
SITE.TECH.FACS :
'***
SUBR: Print Site Detailed Technical Factors
CLS Pr og ra mi ng Note: "TECHn:" used here for short labels.
GOSUB ZOPEN. PRINTER
t
"
SHOULD BE PRINTING SITE-TECHNICAL-FACTORS REPORT
***
"
t
PRIN T 12,"
PRIN T Y2,
PRIN T 12,"
PRINT 12,""
PRINT #2,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT 12,"
12 ,
PRINT 12,"
PRINT Y2,"
12,"
12,
PRINT 12,"
12,
PRINT 12,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT 12,
PRINT 12 ,
12,
PRIN T 12,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT Y2,"
12,
PRINT Y2,"
PRINT #2,"
PRINT 12,"
PRIN T 12,"
12,
Y 2 , "
PRIN T 12,"
12,"
12,"
PRINT 12,"
12,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT Y2,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT 12,"
PRINT Y2,"
*
*****
SITE DETAILS
- - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - -
Page
1
Region analyzed:
;
JSITE; SITENAME$(JSITE)
*******
PROJECT MAJOR PARAMETERS
************I '
[S27] Plant Typ e I-BIN 2=FLA 3-STEAM
;
PTYPE
Plant net size,
M W E
' I ;
POUT
Plant Final GROSS Power estimate,
M W I ' ;
GROSS
[ S 7 ]
Well-Head Temperature, Deg-F
' I ;
ZZT
[S12] Brine Contam. Index = BCI
I ;
ZZB
Flow Into Plant required,
10A6
lb/hr
'I ;
TFLOWIN
Flow From Plant, to Injectors,
10A6
lb/hr
'I;
TFLOWOUT
(528) Down Hole Pumps
1
-
YES
' I ;
DPUMP
; ATE$;
I' -
; TIME4
******* WELL PARAMETERS AND COSTS
***********'I
(5131 Well Depth, K-Feet
-
DEEP
' I ;
ZZD
($211
Producer Well Flow, 10A6 lb/Hour
' I ;
ZZF
Injectors
/
producer
; I N J
Spare we1
1 s/
producer
"
;
WSPR
[S15]*(R6] Prod. redrill fract. add-on cost
' I ;
WRED
Dry Holes / Active Producer
I' ;
WDRY
No. of Producer Wells (at plant start)
; W N U M
Producers plus spares
'I
; WPRODSUM
Injectors required
' I ;
WIJN
Total Number
o f
Initial Wells
'I;
WCNT
Base cost (no risk) of bare well
I; WCBASE
Fraction of wells to be extended ; R.EXTEND
Fraction
to
be redrilled ; R.REDRILL
Cost t o Extend bare well
;
ST.EXTEND
Cost
to
Redrill bare well
;
ST.REDRILL
Adjust: Per Well Cost Multiplier
;
WLCS
Well cost, w/incidents, no tests
; CPW
Cost of 3- Day Well Test
;
EST.3D
Cost
o f
10-Day Well Test
; EST.lOD
Cost of 21-Da y Well Test
;
TEST.2lD
Test Cost fo r Wildcat, Inj., Dry
'I;
TEST1
Test Cost for Confirmation Producers
;
EST2
Test Cost fo r Phase
3
Producers
;
EST3
Total Cost per Wildcat Well
;
C.WILD
Total Cost per Confirmation Well ; C.CONF
Total Cost per Producer Well
In
Phase
3 ;
C.PROD
Total Cost per Injector or Dry Well
;
C.GENL
Capcost of all initial wells
(in
Phase
3) ;
CTL
F - 4 5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 148/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 149/164
S t a r t Page 3 o f r e po r t .
GOSUB EJECT. PAGE
PRINT # 2 , "
# 2 ,
Region analyzed:
"
;
J S I T E ;
S I T E N A M E S
(JSITE)
U 2 ,
# 2 ,
PRINT # 2 , " [SI41 Sep. betw 'n produce r we l ls , F t . ; SEPAR
# 2 ,
L en gt h o f p ro d. p i p e , r e c t a ng . f i e l d , F t 'I ; N F E E T
# 2 ,
P r o d u c t i o n g a th . c o s t cap. t o t a l , MS
'I ;
CPRODGATH
U 2 ,
Co st o f p i p e f o r f o u r a vera ge i n j e c t o r s , M b 'I; COSTPER4
U 2 ,
C ap co st o f i n j e c t o r g a th e ri n g,
SM
' I ;
C I N J G A T H
Y 2 ,
F i e l d Sur face Equipment, To ta l Cap.,
SM
; SPTL
W 2 ,
TOTAL Field, Cap,
SM
( Inc ludes Phase
3
Wel ls)" ; TTL
# 2 ,
L en gt h o f p i p e f o r s upplm . g a t h e r i n g , f e e t
U 2 ,
Gathe r i ng f o r supplm . p roducers , SM,
" ;
CPRODGATHE
# 2 , "
Gath f o r supplm. prod, as
SM/yr
; CPRODGATH3
# 2 ,
F I : F i e l d s t a f f a nn ua l co s t,
SM/yr
'I ;
F 1
U 2 ,
F 2 : I n i t i a l PROD and IN3 w e l l s annua l co s t
; 2
1 2 ,
F3: Gathe r i ng P ipes and va l ves annua l co s t
;
3
# 2 ,
F5: Supp lm . we l l s , Ca p i t a l po r t i o n , unacos t ; F5
# 2 , F6:
Supplm. wel ls,
O&M
p o r t i o n , u n a c o s t
; F6
PRINT # 2 , "
F7:
Supplm . we l l s Ga th . ca p i t a l , unacos t
; F7
1 2 ,
F8: Supplm. Wells Gath. O&M, unacos t ; F8
# 2 ,
# E ,
BINARY S I Z I N G DETAILS - - - - - - - - - -
RINT
# 2 ,
- - - - - -
# 2 ,
Bi na ry n e t b r in e e f fe ct i v en es s 'Wh/LB, NET ;NETBE
1 2 ,
# 2 ,
FITTED, Net t o D.W. PUMPS,
MU
;
PUMPF
U 2 ,
ADJUSTED GROSS B r i n e E f f e c t i v e n e s s
;
R O B E l
# 2 ,
Aux Power, W/O D.W. Pumps
( P r i m .
l o o p & cool)"; BARE.AUX
#
P R I N T U 2 ,
I' : PRINT
# 2 , "
: PRINT # 2 , " I' :
P R I N T # 2 ,
e**** SITE DETAILS
- - _ - - - - - - _ _ _ - - - - - - -
age
3
# 2 ,
; DATES; 'I -
;
TIMES
***** GATHERING SYSTEM DETAILS **************"
;
NFEETE
e****** POWER PLANT FACTORS +***********
(I
I F
PTYPE
<> 1
THEN GOT0 TECH25
1
Added Gross t o Make 1 More MWe n e t out . ;KBIN
# 2 ,
TECH25 :
1 2 ,
Power P l a n t C a p i t a l c o s t ,
SM
;PPC
1 2 ,
1 2 ,
B r i n e Sta b i l . , Cap.
SM
;BSCAP
1 2 ,
B r i n e S t a b i l ., ObM,
JM/yr ;
BSOAM
1 2 , [ S l l ] H 2 S ,
ppm ; HSULF
1 2 ,
H2S Equip, SM
;
NVCAP
PRINT # 2 , " H2S O&M, SM/yr
;
NVOAM
1 2 ,
1 2 ,
1 2 ,
P o w e r p l a n t b o o k l i f e , Y e a rs
;
IFE
12,"
C a p i t a l R e c o v e r y f a c t o r ; APRECOV
1 2 ,
Dis cou nt Rate, P l an t and Genera l
;
D I S C
a
1 2 ,
ECON: ( F i e l d VLAFCR)/(Plant VLAFCR)
;
TOF
1 2 ,
ECON: ( F i e l d DISC)/( P1 a n t DISC) ; TOF
1 2 ,
D i s c o u nt R a te f o r F i e l d E qu ip me nt ; FISC
Y 2 , "
I n c o m e t a x r a t e (F e d e ra l + S t a t e )
;
NTXR
1 2 ,
Ad j. a l l co s ts f o r ROYR, SEVR, (INTXR)*DEPL ; / S E V F A C
1 2 ,
1 2 ,
- - - - - - END, BINARY SIZING DETAILS I
P l a n t O&M, SM/Year, w/o P ro pe r. l a x & I n s u r . ; OAM
e****
FINANCIAL FACTORS t*t*+**+*t******t****
e*+*** FINAL COST FACTORS
***********t**t+***~
F-47
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 150/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 151/164
ZOPEN. PRINTER:
"'PSWITCH)
-
"P"
' [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
S et f ro m above.
I * * *
SUBR: Open P r i n t e r
o r
S c r o l l F i l e as D e vi ce
#2
ZOPENl :
'Open PRINTER as De vi c e 12:
WIDTH "SCRN:", 255
:
CLS
PRINT: PRINT: PRINT
"
SHOULD BE PRINTING"
:
OPEN "LPTl:" FOR OUTPUT AS
#2
: GOTO ZOPEN3
ZOPEN2
:
WIDTH "SCRN:", 255
:
CLS
PRINT: PRINT: PRINT " S c r o l l i n g t h a t Repo r t To F IL E 1MGEOUT.TXT"
OPEN "1MGEOUT.TXT" FOR APPEND AS #2
ZOPEN3 :
PRINT # 2 , "
" :
PRINT #2," 'I
:
PRINT #2," I'
:
PRINT # 2 , "
'PRINT 12, " ** DRAFT RESULTS, NOT ACCURATE FOR CITATION **I'
RETURN
'***
END SUBR: Open PRINTER o r SCROLL FILE.
I
I
I
I F PSWITCHS = "PI' THEN GOTO ZOPENl ELSE GOTO ZOPENZ
Open SCROLL FILE f o r "PRINTER"
ou tpu t :
4 B l a n k L i n e s
f o r
header :
I ************ DRAFT WARNING ******t*******t****+t
ZCLOSE. PRINTER :
I * * * SUBR: C l o s e PRINTER o r SCROLL f i l e as De v i ce
#2:
GOSUB EJECT.PAGE ' A t e i t h e r de v ic e .
CLOSE 1 2
:
CLS C l o s e e i t h e r d e v i c e .
I F PSWITCHS
=
"P" THEN RETURN
LOCATE 10,lO : PRINT " S e n t t h o s e r e s u l t s t o f i l e 1MGEOUT.TXT"
LOCATE 13,lO : PRINT
"
PRESS ANY KEY TO CONTINUE
=========>
'I
GOSUB INLETTER
: CLS
RETURN ' S c r o l l F i l e
i s
c l osed .
I
*** END SUBR: Cl os e "P r i n t i n g " Ou tpu t Channel
EJECT. PAGE :
I * * * SUBR: E j e c t Page a t PRINTER o r SCROLL f i l e .
I F PSWITCHS
<>
"P" THEN GOTO ZEJECT2
LPRINT CHRS(12); : RETURN Form
feed sent .
ZEJECTP : M ark page border
i n
S c r o l l F i l e :
#2,
""
PRINT 12,
" "
RETURN
'
Page br ea k marked.
I * * * END SUBR: E j e c t Page.
I
D on e a t
p r i n t e r .
F o r S c r o l l F i l e , S i g n al p r o gr es s
t o
SCREEN:
I
I
E j e c t p a g e
f rom
PRINTER, using
a
Form Feed:
92 ,
TAB(8); "*** END OF PAGE
****
I'
I
'***
END OF
- - -
ZMISC - - - MISCELLANEOUS ROUT
I
ES ******
F-49
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 152/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 153/164
_ - . .
A P P E N D I X G
P R O G R A M M E R NOTES
G - 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 154/164
PROGRAMMER
NOTES
1. The T I M E Stamp
The t i m e - s t a m p f o r r e p o r t s , T T I M E S , i s r e s e t f r om
T I M E $
any t i m e t h a t t h e
u s e r h a s a c t u a l l y s e l e c t e d a s e n s i t i v i t y i t e m
f o r
e d i t i n g .
b y s e t t i n g T T I M E S f r o m w i t h i n t h e d at um c ha ng in g c ode o f t h e SUBDATACH
r o u t i n e . M e r el y e n t e r i n g a n E d i t o r O p t io n and v i e w i n g t h e e d i t a b l e l i n e s does
not change the
t i m e
stamp.
T h i s
i s
achieved
The t ime-s ta mp i s a ls o updated when the WEIGHT s e l e c t i o n i s changed.
2 . Repor ts t o Screen, P r i n t e r , and T e x t F i l e
l i n e s o f code t o e i t h e r t h e S creen o r t h e P r i n t e r .
t h e
use
o f
#2,
- - - -
'I
code.
channel # E b e f o r e t h e P R I N T l i nes a re exp ressed .
o f ou tp u t code.
bo th the Screen and pr in ted copy .
The p r og ra m m akes e x t e n s i v e u se o f r e d i r e c t i o n o f o u t p u t f r o m t h e
s a m e
T h i s i s a c c o mp l is h ed by
T h i s m akes f o r e f f i c i e n t use
The d e s i r e d t a r g e t d e v i c e i s o pened
a s
I t a lso ensu res tha t exac t l y the same ma te r ia l appea rs on
A t
t h e
v e r y
e n d o f t h e
B A S I C
source code you w i l l f i n d t h e code t h a t
h an dl es th e u s er s o p t i o n t o r e d i r e c t o u t pu t i n te n de d f o r t h e p r i n t e r t o t h e
f i l e "1MGEOUT.TXT".
i n
a
f i l e
f o r
l a t e r m anual e d i t i n g .
and i s a u t o m a t i c a l l y e m p ti e d a t t h e b eg in n in g
o f
each run o f I M - G E O .
T h i s i s a d ocum ena tion a i d f o r c a p t u r i n g " p r i n t e r " o u t p u t
"1MGEOUT.TXT" i s se t
up
t o A P P E N D o u t p u t ,
3 . EDITFLAGS and
E D I T F
LAGES.
These t w o l o g i c a l f l a g s h a nd l e m ost o f t h e i n t e r a c t i o n s t h a t e ns ur e t h a t
t he r e s u l t s o f s e n s i t i v i t y f a c t o r e d i t i n g a r e r e f l e c t e d a cc ur a te ly i n th e
p re s en e te d r e s u l t s .
I f EDITFLAGS i s "YES", t h a t means t h a t b o t h t h e c u r r e n t s i n g l e - s i t e
o r
m u l t i - s i t e r e s u l t s need t o be r ec a lc u la t ed t o r e f l e c t c ur r e n t s e n s i t i v i t y
f a c t o r c o nd i ti o ns .
i s r es et t o
"NO"
a f t e r a s i n g l e - s i t e o r
m u l t i p l e - s i t e i s p er fo rm ed
EDITFLAGS
I f
EDITFLAGE) i s
"YES",
and EDITFLAGS i s
"NO",
t h a t m e a n s t h a t o n l y t h e
c u r r e n t s i n g l e s i t e ( us er 's
J S I T E )
r e s u l t s a r e c o r r e c t . Any o t h e r s i t e needs
t o
be re ca lc u l a t ed be fo r e be ing shown.
-
A s k i n g f o r
a
d i f f e r e n t
J S I T E
d u r i n g t h i s c o n d i t i o n makes
I M G E O
r e c a l c u l a t e t h a t o ne s i t e . EDI T F L AG ES rema ins
"YES"
t o i n d ic a t e th a t
some o th e r s i n g l e s i t e r e s u l t s (and t h e r e fo r e t h e m u l t i - s i t e r e s u l t s i n
g e n e r a l) a r e n o t c u r r e n t .
t h e m u l t i - s i t e c a l c u l a t i o n s . EDFLAGES i s t h e n r e s e t t o
"NO".
- A sk in g f o r a m u l t i - s i t e r e p o r t under t h i s c o n d i t i o n makes I M G E O redo
EDFLAGS i s s e t t o "YES" any t i m e t h e u se r a l t e r s a s e n s i t i v i t y f a c to r .
T h i s i n cl u d es u s e r' s s e l e c t i o n o f a d i f f e r e n t s e t o f R e g io n al W e ig ht s.
6 - 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 155/164
4 .
"Official Version" provided
w i t h
the model ( o r approved as changed later) f o r
a l l f ina l e s t ima tes of impac ts of R D achievements.
IM-GEO read s th e con te nt s of f i l e 5 I T E D A T O . D A T when i t i n i t i a l i z e s t h e
S i t e da ta base. The f i l e "S1TEDATO.MAS" i s the "m aste r" ve rs io n of t h i s
d a t a
base, and should
n o t
be a l t e r e d .
To change the S i t e da t a va lues , e d i t t he f i l e
S IT E DAT O.DAT
using
a n
"ACSCII-only" word processor, such the N-mode of WordStar or the non-document
mode or "programming" mode of other word processors. Then r u n I M - G E O .
have made ser ious edit ing errors ,
then you' l l get error w a r n i n g s or
un int erp reta ble re s u l ts from th e IM-GEO repo rts. If t h a t i s the case , use
B AS IC A
or
G W - B A S I C t o r u n the Microsof t in te rpre te r BASIC program
DATATEST.BAS
on the d i s t r ib u t i on d i s ke t t e , i . e. D>
B A S I C A D A T A T E S T
<Enter>.
Changing
t h e S i t e Data Base
You can change the contents of the Site Da t a Base, b u t you must
u s e
t h e
I f
yo3
DATATEST.BAS
s i m p l y r e a d s f i l e
SITEDATO.DAT and
o u tp u ts i t s c o n te n ts
t o
the screen i n the expected order , type,
and
number of v ar ia b le s. Use
< S c r o l l
Lock>
t o
ha l t th e d isp la y and look for p laces e r ro rs of
d a t a
type or number
have occurred. Be tte r ye t , i f you are using DOS 3.X, r ed ir ec t the output
from
DATATEST.BAS
t o a sc r o l l i ng f i l e , e . g . :
D >
B A S I C A
DATATEST > SCROLL.TXT <Enter>
th en e d i t t he f i l e
SCROLL.TXT
t o f ind where the e r r or s a re .
5 .
Break the code
i n t o t he
eight modules a t t he Z I N I T ,
Z E N G N , e tc .
boundaries. These ar e
i n
r e a sona b le s i z e f o r e d i t i ng .
Write a "COMPILER.BAT" procedure t h a t concatenates those modules i n t o
a
s in g le f i l e ,
e.g., ZNEW.BAS ,
and then compiles and links the code into the
e i t h e r t h e "BRUN"
(best for development work) o r
BCOM
( be s t
for
export ing
t h e f i n a l
version) versions of o u t p u t from Q U I C K BASIC.
r e p o r t s s u i t a b l e for detect ing when fa ta l compila t ion errors have occurred.
These can be used to abo r t t he l ink ing step .
Hints for Revising the Code
The compiler used i n "separate compilation" mode generates DOS E R R O R L E V E L
6 - 3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 156/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 157/164
A P P E N D I X H
P R E V I O U S S T U D I E S
H - 1
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 158/164
P R E V I O U S
S T U D I E S
O U . S .
Dept. of Energy (DOE/ET/ 27242- T1). Geothe rmal Well Field
a n d P o w e r P l a n t I n v e s t m e n t D e c i s i o n A n al y si s . P h i l a d e l p h i a
P e n n s y l v a n i a , T e c h n e c o n A n a l y t i c R e s e a r c h , Inc., M a y
31,
1981.
G o o d e x p l i c a t i o n
o f
t h e T e c h n e c o n m od e l o f g e o t h e r m a l
i n d u s tr y u t i l i t y p r e f e r e n c e s . A ll d a t a b a s e s u s e d h e r e h a v e
( p r o b a b l y ) b e e n u p d a t e d a f t e r 1981.
O U . S . D e p a r t m e n t o f E n e r g y, B o n n e v i l l e P o w e r A d m i n i st r a t i on .
R e s o u r c e A s s e s s m e n t : E v a l u a t i o n a n d R a n k i n g o f G e o t h e r m a l
R e s o u rc e s f o r E l e c t ri c a l G e n e r a t i o n o r E l e c t r i ca l o f f s e t
i n
I d a h o , M o n t a n a , O r e g o n a nd W a s h i n g to n . P o r t l a n d , O r e g o n ,
W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e E n e r g y O f f i c e , J u n e 1985.
T h i s i s t h e m o s t r e c e n t e x t e n s i v e a n a l y s i s
o f
r e s o u r c e
a v a i l a b i l i t y an d e n g i n e e r i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
i n
t h e P a c i f i c
N o rt h we s t. S h o u l d b e f a c t o r e d i n t o a n y s i t e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
databa se, if on e is used in yo ur study. Some
o f
t h e d a t a p o i n t s
w e r e c r i t i c i z e d a s o v e r l y c o n s e r v a t i v e
b y
i n d u s t r y
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a t 1 9 8 5 G R C a n n u a l m e et i ng .
O U.S.
D e p a r t m e n t o f E n e r g y ( D O E / C S / 3 0 6 7 4 - 2 ) . G e o t h e r m a l P o w e r
Plant
R & D .
A n A n a l y s i s o f C o s t - P e r f o r m a n c e T r a d e o f f s an d t h e
H e b e r B i n a r y - C y c l e D e m o n s t r a t i o n P ro je ct . P h i l a d e l p h i a ,
P e n n s y l v a n i a , T e c h n e c o n A n a l y t i c R e s e a r c h , Inc., J u n e 30, 1983.
S e c t i o n s
1.2,
1.3, and 1.4 are r e l e v a n t t o i m p a c t s o f R &D o n
b i n a r y p l a n t s t o c o s t o f p o we r . R e s u l t s a r e e x p r e s s e d in
H - 2
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 159/164
di f f e r ent i a l me ga wa t t s , no t c os t of power . I t i s not c l e ar
wh e t h e r t h e i mp a c t s of R&D a s s u me d ( i n T a bl e
1- 2
a n d
1- 3)
a r e
i n
f a c t s u pp or t e d by
a
c o h e r e n t R&D p l a n by GT D t o l t d e v e l o p t t uch
t ec hno l o gi e s ... t h e i s s u e her e i s wh at t h e c o s t
o f
t he R&D woul d
be.
O
U. S. Dept . of Ener gy ( DOE / E T/ 2 72 42 - T 2) Nat i o nal F or e c as t f o r
Ge ot he r ma l Re s our c e E xp l o r a t i o n and De ve l o pme nt . P h i l a d el p hi a ,
P e nn s y l v a ni a , Te c hne c on Ana l y t i c Re s e ar c h , I nc . , Ma r c h
3 1 ,
1982.
T he mode l / dat a ba s e f o r t h i s s t udy i s o ne o f t h e be s t
a t t e mp t s t o de al wi t h mi d - t e r m d e v el o p me n t / u s a g e o f
u nd i s c o v er e d po r t i o ns of t h e hy dr ot he r mal r es our c e.
O U. S. Dept . o f
E n e r g y ( D O E / S F / 1 1 7 2 7 - T 1 ) .
F e de r a l Ge o t h er ma l
Roy al I n c ome De r i v ed f r o m t h e Be ne f i t s o f Go v e r n me n t - S p on s o r e d
R&D. P hi l a de l p hi a , P en ns y l v an i a , T ec hnec on Ana l y t i c Re s e ar c h ,
I nc. , J anua r y 3 1 , 1984.
Us e s a b l o c k o f e i g h t F e d er a l R&D i mp ac t s ( T a bl e
1 - 1
page
4 ) .
Co ns i d er s t h r e e mo de s of pr i c i n g F ede r a l r o ya l t y p ay me nt s
( c oa l , o i l , av oi ded cos t ) . Es t i mat es no t R&D c o s t s , but r a t h er
R & D
b ud ge t t h at c o ul d be s u pp or t e d
by
n et pr es e nt v al ue o f
ant i c i pa t ed di f f e r e n t i a l r oy al t y i nc ome ( Tabl e 1 - 2 , p. 6).
T hi s i s o ne of t h e f e w ( t h e o nl y ? ) T ec hn ec o n ge ot he r ma l
ana l y s i s wh os e o ut p ut i s e xp r e s s e d i n t e r ms o f d ol l a r s . Al mos t
al l o t h er Tec hnec on r e po r t s ex pr e s s r e s ul t s i n t e r ms of
( d i f f e r ent i a l ) p ower on l i ne.
O Of f i c e
of
T e c hn ol o gy As s e s s me n t ( OT A- E- 24 6) .
New
El ec t r i c
Power Te chno l o gi es : Pr obl ems
and
P r o s p e c t s f o r t h e 1 9 9 0 ' s .
Wa s h i n gt o n , D. C. ,
U . S .
Go ve r n me nt P r i n t i ng Of f i c e , J u l y
1 9 8 5 .
H-3
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 160/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 161/164
i n put pa r a me t e r s ( e. g. , we l l c o s t ) of g eo t h er ma l R&D p r o g r a m
ec onom c bene f i t ( i . e. , d i f f e r ent i a l po we r on l i ne or
d i f f e r ent i a l c o s t o f p owe r on l i ne ) model s .
U . S . De pt . of E ne r g y. Up d at e a nd As s e s s me n t
o f
Ge ot h e r ma l
Ec ono m c Mo de l s , Geot her mal F l ui d F l o w, Heat Di s t r i but i o n
Mo d e l s a nd Ge o t h e r ma l Da t a b as e s .
Aut ho r i t a t i v e s o ur c e o n c a p a bi l i t i e s and s t a t u s
o f
al l ma j o r
ge ot h er ma l c o s t o f p o we r mo de l s . S o me o f t h es e a c c e pt s i t e
phys i c al c ha r a c t e r i s t i c s and i mpa c t s of
R & D
as i n pu t da t a o r
pa r a me t e r s .
H-5
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 162/164
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 163/164
TIC-4500-R66-UC-66C
DISTRIBUTION
Dr. J. E. Mock, Director
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Departmentof Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
CE-342
D. B. Lombard
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Department
of
Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
R.
R.
Loose
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Departmentof Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
CE-342
CE-342
G. J. Hooper
(5
Copies)
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Department of Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
A. Jelacic
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Department of Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
L. W. Pratsch
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Department
of
Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
CE-342
CE-342
CE-342
4 8
M. J. Reed
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Department
of
Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
CE-342
J. E, Rannels
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Department
of
Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
CE-342
R. J. LaSala
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Department of Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
CE-342
R.
Fortuna
Geothermal Technologies Division
US Departmentof Energy
Forrestal Building
Washington, DC 20585
CE-342
Susan Petty 5 Copies)
329
S.
Quillan
St.
Kennewick, WA 99336
Susan PettyL nsulting
Daniel Entingh
(5
Copies)
Meridian Corporation
4300
KingStreet, Suite 400
Alexandria,
VA
22302-1508
Bill Livesay
(5
Copies)
Livesay Consultants
261 6 Angel1 Ave.
San Diego, CA 92122
8/10/2019 Impact of R&D on Cost of Geothermal Power
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/impact-of-rd-on-cost-of-geothermal-power 164/164