Geology topics

Whitney J. Trainor-Guitton

Publications and source records attributed to Whitney J. Trainor-Guitton.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Geothermal district energy systems coupled with seasonal underground thermal energy storage: A U.S. techno-economic screening by climate and geology

In the United States, cooling-dominated commercial building loads can cause geothermal heat pump-based district energy systems to accumulate a long-term subsurface thermal imbalance, motivating the incorporation of seasonal underground thermal energy storage. We developed a transferable workflow to evaluate geothermal district systems that pair ground heat exchangers with seasonal underground thermal energy storage. Using standardized hourly loads for seven commercial buildings and a uniform cost framework, we simulated ten U.S. cities with a physics-based ground heat exchanger model, subsurface storage simulations, and economic assessment to isolate the roles of climate and hydrogeology. In cooling-dominated cities, underground thermal energy storage supplied the majority of annual cooling, cutting electricity use and summer peaks substantially while achieving levelized costs comparable to or below conventional chiller-boiler plants. In cooler climates, the storage share shrunk, required borefield size and costs rose, and levelized cost of energy increased nearly linearly with declining underground thermal energy storage fraction, indicating storage fraction as the primary economic lever. Sensitivity analysis showed capital risk dominated by borefield drilling and surface heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning and piping, with underground thermal energy storage costs secondary. This workflow provides a transparent foundation for site-specific design and screening of next-generation geothermal district energy systems.

Arizona, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi↗

USGS2019

Uncertainty and risk evaluation during the exploration stage of geothermal development: A review

Quantifying and representing uncertainty for geothermal systems is often ignored, in practice, during the exploration phase of a geothermal development project. We propose that this occurs potentially because the task seems so formidable. The primary goal of this paper is to initiate a dialogue within the geothermal community about: which geothermal uncertainties should receive the most attention and which uncertainty analysis methods could provide the greatest benefit for the advancement of the geothermal energy industry. Specifically, in this paper, we review uncertainty quantification techniques that are applicable to geothermal exploration. In general, uncertainty associated with data acquisition/processing (i.e., objective uncertainty) is small compared to the uncertainty in interpretational space (i.e., subjective uncertainty) that lies between data points where extrapolation is required. Therefore, it is important to classify, assess, and quantify uncertainty to help select strategies to reduce uncertainty and to better gauge the impact that separate uncertainties have on the overall likelihood of project success. The discipline of geostatistics provides multiple quantitative methods for producing stochastic models which adhere to measured data and spatial correlation. The petroleum industry has successfully used both geostatistics and decision analysis methods to combine diverse and multiple types of uncertainties. We argue that instead of one single and final interpretation of the geothermal system, numerous interpretations may be more indicative of the possible subsurface scenarios, and these different scenarios can be evaluated using decision analyses and value of information methodologies. Finally, we recommend that the potential power generation of a geothermal reservoir should be grounded in the geologic data and modeling for a specific field and their estimated uncertainties.

Geothermics↗

USGS2014

Uncertainty and risk evaluation during the exploration stage of geothermal development

Quantifying and representing uncertainty for geothermal systems is often ignored, in practice, during the exploration phase of a geothermal development project. We propose that this occurs potentially because the task seems so formidable. The primary goal of this paper is to initiate a dialogue within the geothermal community about: which geothermal uncertainties should receive the most attention and which uncertainty analysis methods could provide the greatest benefit for the advancement of the geothermal energy industry. In this paper, we discuss uncertainty quantification techniques that are applicable to geothermal exploration. In general, uncertainty associated with data acquisition/processing (i.e., objective uncertainty) is small compared to the uncertainty in interpretational space (i.e., subjective uncertainty) that lies between data points where extrapolation is required. Therefore, it is important to classify, assess, and quantify uncertainty to help select strategies to reduce uncertainty, and to better gauge the impact that separate uncertainties have on the overall likelihood of project success. In addition, geostatistics provides multiple quantitative methods for producing stochastic models which adhere to measured data and spatial correlation. The petroleum industry has successfully used both geostastistics and decision analysis methods to combine diverse and multiple types of uncertainties. We argue that instead of one single and final interpretation of the geothermal system, numerous interpretations may be more indicative of the possible subsurface scenarios, and these different scenarios can be evaluated using decision analyses and value of information methodologies. Lastly, we recommend that the potential power generation of a geothermal reservoir should be grounded in the geologic data and modeling for a specific field and their estimated uncertainties. In this paper, we provide a brief overview of many of these topics while a more complete review has been recently published in Witter et al. (2019).

Conference Paper↗