In-Situ Stress Measurements at the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) Site

Pengju Xing, John McLennan and Joseph Moore
Additional contact information
Pengju Xing: Energy & Geoscience Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA
John McLennan: Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
Joseph Moore: Energy & Geoscience Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA

Energies, 2020, vol. 13, issue 21, 1-20

Abstract: A scientific injection campaign was conducted at the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) site in 2017 and 2019. The testing included pump-in/shut-in, pump-in/flowback, and step rate tests. Various methods have been employed to interpret the in-situ stress from the test dataset. This study focuses on methods to interpret the minimum in-situ stress from step rate, pump-in/extended shut-in tests data obtained during the stimulation of two zones in Well 58-32. This well was drilled in low-permeability granitoid. A temperature of 199 °C was recorded at the well’s total depth of 2297 m relative to the rotary Kelly bushing (RKB). The lower zone (Zone 1) consisted of 46 m of the openhole at the toe of the well. Fractures in the upper zone (Zone 2) were stimulated between 2123–2126 m measured depths (MD) behind the casing. The closure stress gradient variation depended on the depth and the injection chronology. The closure stress was found to increase with the pumping rate/volume. This stress variation could indicate that poroelastic effects (“back stress”) and the presence of adjacent natural fractures may play an important role in the interpretation of fracture closure stress. Further, progressively increasing local total stresses may, consequently, have practical applications when moderate volumes of fluid are injected in a naturally fractured or high-temperature reservoir. The alternative techniques that use pump-in/flowback tests and temperature signatures provide a valuable perspective view of the in-situ stress measurements.

Keywords: in-situ stress; Enhanced geothermal system (EGS); FORGE; DFIT (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/21/5842/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/21/5842/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:21:p:5842-:d:442131

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().