BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF Nl=y ~pte .~ .Cfi'l~ED
p"u~~ l~ y ;:~. 'r' kE "Of1Hl$SION
Or Nt Y M)A CARSON CITY
97SEP29 Pii4:37
In the Matter of the Application of
RENO ENERGY, LLC for an Operating
Permit under the provisions of
NAC 704.760 to 704.784, inclusive.
DOCKET NO. 96-11024
PREPARED DIRECT TESTIMONY
OF
COLIN GORANSON
ON BEHALF OF RENO ENERGY, LLC
0.1.
Please state your name, business address and present position.
A.l.
My name is Colin Goranson. I am a consulting geothermal reservoir and
drilling engineer.
My business address is 1498 Aqua Vista Road,
Richmond, California 94805.
0.2.
Please briefly describe your professional experience and background.
A.2.
I have been involved with the development of geothermal systems since
1975. I have been particularly involved in the delineation of geothermal
reservoirs with respect to geological, geochemical and hydrological
characteristics; I have designed exploratory drilling and reservoir
evaluation programs; provided field supervision and management of
geothermal
drillin~l
programs as well as slimhole, production and injection
well testing, data acquisition, data analysis and reporting; analytical and
computer modeling of well and reservoir data; design of well workover
and well and reservoir stimulation programs, etc. My qualifications and
1
experience are included in Exhibit C8G-l .
0.3.
What is the purpose of your testimony?
A.3.
The purpose of my testimony is to respond to questions raised by the
Public Service Commission of Nevada ("PSC") with respect to the
Steamboat Springs Application for Geothermal Operating Permit filing by
Reno Energy, LLC (" Reno Energy").
My testimony addresses the
development of certain geothermal resources on leases to be owned or
used by Reno Energy ("Reno Energy leases") at Steamboat Springs,
Nevada.
My testimony is primarily with respect to the development
program for the Reno Energy leases and geothermal resource availability
and sustainability .
0.4.
Desc ribe the location of the leases and the development program for
these leases.
A.4.
The Meyberg and Giusti leases are considered for development by the
Reno Energy thermal energy project.
These leases, along with other
leases and additional data, are shown in Figure 1, C8G-2.
The Meyberg and Giusti lease development program is based on a similar
development program used for the SB 2 and SB 3 power plants, located
on the adjacent Towne lease. The S8 2 and S8 3 development program
utilized surface geologic mapping of faults and fractures combined with
the drilling of slimholes to depths of less than 1,000 feet. The S8 2 and
2
SB 3 geologic data and slimhole drilling and testing program defined the
resource. The Towne lease development program allowed the project to
acquire all of the necessary permits and financing for the SB 2 and SB 3
power plants.
Q.5.
At what stage is the Reno Energy development program at this time?
A.5.
Surface geologic mapping of fractures in the development area have been
completed. The geologic data indicates conditions similar to those found
on the adjacent Towne lease and SPPCo leases (note: mapped geologic
surface fractures are not shown on Figure 1, CBG-2 for the Towne
leasel.
Resource development wells drilled to date on the Reno Energy leases:
Slimhole MTH 21-33 (location shown in Figure 1, CBG-2) was
drilled on the Meyberg lease in 1994 to a depth of 710 feet. This
hole encountered subsurface geologic, temperature and pressure
conditions identical to those on the adjacent Towne lease.
Injection
tests
performed
on
well
MTH
21-33
permeabilities similar to wells on the Towne lease.
indicate
In addition,
slimhole MTH 21-33 encountered a significant fracture at bottom
hole. This fracture zone is the largest fracture zone encountered
in the area to date.
3
Slimhole GTH 87-29 (location shown in Figure 1, C8G-2) was
drilled on the Giusti lease in 1993 to a depth of 4,000 feet. This
slimhole is the deepest well drilled in the area to date.
The
temperature at 4,000 feet is approximately 295°F . The shallow
portion of slimhole GTH 87-29 has temperatures similar to wells
in the area.
Fractures encountered below 3,000 feet were
injection tested to determine permeability characteristics.
The
data obtained from fracture zones below 3,000 feet indicate that
permeabilities are similar to those encountered in the shallow
portion
«
1 ,000 feet) of the Steamboat Springs geothermal
reservoir.
The shallow portion of the hole was flow tested.
Production test data obtained from the shallow zone indicates
geothermal reservoir conditions similar to production wells in the
area.
Production well HA #4 (location shown in Figure 1, CBG-2) was
drilled on the Giusti lease in 1990 to a depth of 729 feet. This
well was recently produced, as a test well, for periods of up to
several months. Production characteristics of HA #4 are similar
to other production wells in the area .
Figure 2, C8G-3 is a temperature versus depth data plot for
4
slimholes MTH 21-33, GTH 87-29 and TH-3 and production well
HA #4. This data plot summarizes the data described above for
the Reno Energy leases. Also included in Figure 2, C8G-3 are data
for slimhole TH-3, located on the Towne lease. TH-3 was one of
three slimholes used for delineation of the geothermal resource
beneath the Towne lease.
The temperature versus depth data
indicate that geothermal reservoir conditions beneath the Reno
Energy leases are similar to those beneath the Towne lease (and
SPPCo lease).
Slimhole GTH 87-29 is cased to 525 feet.
The first major
productive fracture zone was encountered at 805 feet. It should
be noted that the temperature versus depth data for GTH 87-29
from 250 feet to 800 feet indicate that cooler fluids are leaking
into the wellbore at a depth of approximately 250 feet and exiting
the wellbore at ::::: 800 feet, a major productive fracture zone.
Therefore, this temperature data does not reflect actual reservoir
conditions through this zone (250 feet to 800 feet).
However,
GTH 87-29 was flow tested during the drilling operations at a
depth of ::::: 1,000 feet.
Geothermal production characteristics,
i.e., flowing temperature versus depth, pressure drawdown during
discharge, production rates, geothermal fluid chemistry, etc . are
5
identical to production wells in the area.
0.6.
In your opinion, are there sufficient geologic and geothermal resource
data to proceed with commercial development of the Meyberg and Giusti
leases.
A.6.
In my opinion, there are sufficient data to proceed with commercial
development. The resource data available for the Meyberg and Giusti
leases indicate that geothermal resource conditions beneath these leases
are identical to those on adjacent leases. It should be pointed out that
a greater amount of data are available on geologic and geothermal
resource conditions for the Meyberg and Giusti leases than were
available to obtain permitting and financing for the S8 2 and S8 3 power
plants on the Towne lease.
0.7.
Describe the quantity, size, depth and productive capacities of the wells
and pumps for Reno Energy's proposed operations.
A. 7.
The Reno Energy development will require the use of seven production
wells and two injection wells. Figure 1, C8G-2 shows the location of the
proposed
production
and
injection
wells
for
the
Reno
Energy
development. The distance between the individual production wells is
similar to that used in the S8 2 and S8 3 power plant area. However, it
should be noted, given the high reservoir permeability of the Steamboat
system, distance between production wells is not a major concern.
6
Projected thermal heat load operational data indicate that two to three
production wells and one injection well will initially be drilled. Additional
production wells will be drilled as the heat load on the system increases.
Several slimholes (core holes) will be drilled during the initial production
well drilling . phase.
Based on operation projections, a total of seven
production wells and two injection wells will be drilled.
New production wells will be completed similar to those supplying fluids
to the SB 2 and S8 3 power plants. Well depths will be on the order of
1,000 feet. The wells will have a 12.25 inch inside diameter. Casing
depth will be approximately 600 feet.
Downhole shaft driven pumps
with a 11.75 inch outside diameter will be used to pump geothermal
fluids from the bottom of the wells to the surface.
The well pump
capacities are approximately 2,000 gpm each. Seven wells will allow for
a maximum production rate of 14,000 gpm. Two injection wells will be
sufficient to dispose of the produced geothermal fluid.
0.8.
Explain the system for water injection.
A.B.
Figure 1, CBG-2 shows the proposed location of the Reno Energy
injection wells.
The injection wells will be drilled to depths of
approximately 2,500 feet and completed similar to injection wells located
on the Towne lease. Cased injection well depths will be on the order of
800 feet to 1,000 feet.
Wellbore inside diameter will be 12.25 inch.
7
Spent geothermal fluids will be injected into the geothermal reservoir
system on the southern portion of the Meyberg lease. A slimhole will be
drilled prior to injection well drilling to assist in the design of the injection
wells with respect to the well casing program and maximum injection
well depth.
Injection fluids will be moved to the southern portion of the Meyberg
lease using pressure developed from the downhole production pumps.
0.9.
Are water treatment facilities required?
A.9.
No water treatment facilities are required.
geothermal fluid is relatively benign.
The chemistry of the
Table 1, CBG-4 shows the fluid
chemistry data for a typical production well located on the Towne lease,
PW 2-1. PW 2-1 supplies geothermal fluids to the SB-2 power plant. As
can be noted in Table 1, CBG-4, the geothermal fluids consist mainly of
sodium and chloride. Boron contents are relatively high. The water is
non-potable. Table 1, CBG-4 shows yearly chemical data from 1993 to
1997. As can be noted there have not been any significant changes in
the chemical constituents of the geothermal fluid over time.
The
chemistry data for production well PW 2-1 are similar to other production
wells in the area.
0.10.
In your opinion, what effect will production of geothermal fluids for the
Reno Energy project have on adjacent geothermal areas?
8
A.l0.
In my opinion, I do not believe that production of geothermal fluids for
the Reno Energy project will have any adverse impact on adjacent areas.
All of the produced fluids will be injected back into the geothermal
system. Spent geothermal fluids will be injected south of existing nearby
geothermal developments in the area. In addition, geothermal fluids will
be injected into the geothermal reservoir system and at depths sufficient
to ensure that shallow groundwater users are not impacted.
Figure 3, CBG-5 shows the production data for a typical well on the
Towne lease, production well PW 2-1. PW 2-1 supplies geothermal fluid
to the S8 2 power plant. There has been a small temperature drop over
time. The downhole pressure data shown in the figure is a measurement
of the pressure immediately above the downhole pump. This downhole
pressure is a measure of the pressure in the geothermal reservoir. The
downhole pressure has not changed over time. This lack of reservoir
.----------------------------------
pressure drop (drawdown) is due to the extremely high reservoir
permeability. Engineering calculations indicate that there will not be any
additional reservoir pressure drop due to production of geothermal fluids
from the Reno Energy development.
It should also be noted that this
well, PW 2-1, along with other production wells supplying fluid to the
S8 2 and SB 3 power plants, has been producing approximately 920,000
pounds per hour (:::: 2,025 gallons per minute) of geothermal fluid for four
9
and one-half years with no decrease in production rate.
Has there been any significant change in the produced fluid temperature
Q.11.
over time for existing production wells?
Since S8 2 and S8 3 power plant operations began there has been an
A.11.
average reservoir temperature drop of approximately 8°F .
Figure 4,
CBG-6 shows the temperature data versus time for wells supplying the
S8 3 power plant.
It should be noted that all of the production wells
supplying the S8 2 and SB 3 power plants have different initial
production t emperatures. The temperature versus time data indicate that
the production temperatures are stabilizing.
~
'~
p-Y
,iA
' J1.P',y1,~·-
'ov»
~\
declines are caused by the change in the water level
>s --f0
_ ~0 ..:/. ~
(pressure) in the geothermal reservoir and surrounding groundwater
)J
system.
~
i\'V ~
Q;-~ .f
\~ ~'~
The change in the geothermal reservoir pressure is due to
external water level changes in the overall South Truckee Meadows area
and possibly a reduction of recharge fluid to the geothermal system.
'd\~01'
Water level measurements for the geothermal system and surrounding
South Truckee Meadows area began in 1985.
geothermal
1
o'oY\ l-"£~ /'
~~, r , he temperature
-,r-'o
]
reservoir
and
surrounding
Water levels in the
groundwater
wells
began
decreasing before geothermal operations at the 58 111 A power plant
were initiated (prior to 1985).
Figure 5, CBG-7 is plot of water level
10
/
I
/
versus time for wells drilled into the geothermal system on the Towne,
Giusti and Meyberg leases. The decreasing water levels noted in Figure
5, CBG-7 are most likely due to drought conditions in the area that began
prior to 1985.
The drought conditions reduced the inflow into the
geothermal system and surrounding groundwater aquifers . Water levels
began to stabilize in 1995 and increase in 1996. This corresponds to a
period of increased rainfall. No rainfall data are available for the South
Truckee Meadows area nor for the Carson Range located to the west of
Steamboat Springs . However, stream flow data for Steamboat Creek are
available. Steamboat Creek stream flow data are measured at Rhodes
Road, located approximately three-quarters of a mile southeast of the
Steamboat Springs geothermal area .
Figure 6, CBG-8 shows the
Steamboat Creek stream flow data from 1992 to 1996. As can be noted
in Figure 6, CBG-8 stream flow increased dramatically in 1995 and 1996,
as compared to previous years.
As shown in Figure 5,CBG-7, this
corresponds to the period where water levels began stabilizing in the
geothermal monitoring wells, and therefore, the geothermal reservoir.
A comparison of geothermal water level data shown in Figure 5, CBG-7
and produced fluid temperatures in Figure 4, CBG-6 illustrates that as
J.?
YJ ~
uJVl
water
[
levels
stabilize,
produced
fluid
temperatures
stabilize.
TheoreticallY, if water levels continue to rise in the area, produced
~
11
geothermal fluid temperatures will begin to increase.
Q.12.
What is your confidence level with respect to obtaining sufficient fluid
quantities at sufficient temperatures for the Reno Energy project.
A.12.
I have a one hundred percent confidence level that geothermal fluids with
temperatures and volumes sufficient to operate the project are available.
Historic production data from the two adjacent power plant areas
suggest that geothermal fluids will be available through the life of the
project.
Q.13.
Does this conclude your testimony?
A.13.
Yes.
12
Geological Engineering Consultant
Colin Goranson
1498 Aqua Vista Road
Richmond. California 94805
(510) 234-0522
FAX (510) 234-5881
F.du('~Hion
1972-73: San Francisco St~~~ Uni\-ersity
San Francisco, CA
Major: Civil Engineering
1973-75: University of Califomia
Berkeley, CA
B.S.- Civil Engineering
Major: Geological Engineeling
1975-76: Gradu~te School- DC Berkeley - Material Scienc~ and
Engineering
Major: GcologkaVHydrogeological Engineering
Emphasis in Geothennal Reservoir Er,gineering
1991- : Graduate School· DC Berkeley - Petroleum Engineering
Department (CWTently on Leave)
Major: Drilling and Production Engineering
professional ASi;ociations
Member - Geothenn:J. Resources Council (GRC)
Society of Petroleum En,;-ioeers (SPE)
Occupational HistQfY
1985-presem: Consulting Geothennal GeoIogicalJHydrogeolog1Cal Engineer
1980 1985: Vice Presidt'nt and CQ-Founder of Berkeley Group, Inc.
4
1976-1980: Staff Scientist II-
ue Lawrence Berkeky Laboratory - Reservoir Engineering Group _
Earth Sciences Division
1975-1976: Rese.3Ich Assistant.
University of California, Berkeley
G,eotbermal
· E'
.
ReservOlrn~!pf':erlDg
Delineation of geothermal areas with resrecr
hydrological characteristics.
to
geologic, geochemical and
Hydrogeological geochemical evaluation of geother.nal and nearby groundwater
systems.
Design of exploratory diJHng and eYeJuallon programs.
Design of well and reservoir test programs for production and injection from liquid.
t\vo-phase and vapor dominated geothermal fields in both porous media and
fracture dominated reservoirs. Expertise in both low and high salinity
reservoirs with low or high produced non-condensable gas contents.
Field supervision and management of reservoir test programs including design of
equipment for downhole and surface pressure . temperature and flow
measurements, brine and non-condensable gas sampling.
Environmental permitting repons for drilling. flow testing and power plant projects.
Analytical analyses of reservoir test data including multiple aquifer, leaky aquifer,
closed and open reservoirs systems. porous and fracture dominated
reservoirs and single or multiphase reservoir conditions.
Computer modeling of reservoir test dara and well bore flow characteristics.
Engineerir~g
supervision and field management for production ar.d injection well
testing, data acquisition and reporting.
Reservoir ev~u~rion re,ports for the client. permitting agencies, public hearings,
financlal msrmmons. etc.
Resume of Colin Goranson
Page 2
~lated EXl>erjen~
Prillio.: Engjneerin,J!
Drilling program design for thermal gradient holes. p:o~uc~ion wells (art~si.an,
pumped wells, flash flowing wells. etc.) and lnJectton '.vells. Dnll~ng
expe.rie;1ce in low ternpe,rature (200~), :TIoderate (500F) and hlgh
ternpera~ure (700F) geothermal ~~l~s wuh ,eIther over ~ress.ured?r u~der
pressured reservoir conditions unhzmg vertic3.l a11d!or duectlOnallY dnlIed
wells.
Cost estimates for drillin cr and testing programs, vendor evaluation and selection.
A complete knowledge of available equipment, manufacturers and ser~ice
companies for drilling, completion and testing of geolhemlru exploration,
production and injection wens.
Wellbore design including casing stress analyses, sizing, casing material properties
and setting depth calculations for various reservoir conditions including
high temperature (700F), high wellhead pressure (1500 psi). high salinity
(270,000 ppm) and high gas content wells.
Conceptual design of roads. drilling pads. pits. etc. for vertical and directionally
drilled wells.
Drilling equipment evaluation, selection and procurement for pad and access roads,
downhole drilling equipment. completion equipment, casing materials.
cem~nting material, wellhead, drilling rig, air compressors. mud, logging
services, etc., for all types of reservoir conditions.
Drilling program logistics development.
Engineen.n~
supervision and field management of all aspects of the geothemlal
drilhng project including environmental pennitting, drilling and well testing.
Design of well workover and well/reservoir stimulation programs (acidizinO'
hydro fracturing).
0'
Resume of Colin Goranson
Page 3
'
•
!ieQthermal PrQd.uc:tJ· QO E
. n~meerlni
Design of downhole production equipment.
Conceptual design of single phase and multi phase pipelines.
ConceptUal design of steam-water :ieparators. demistOts and control equipment.
Conceptual themlOdynamic design of binary power plant systems for low to
moderate temperature geothermal systems.
Conceptual thennodynamic design of steam turbine power systems including gas
removal and abatement equipment methods.
a~ditiQnal
Expertise
Design of downhole pressme, temperature and flow measurement tools and
computer acquisition equipment using high accuracy pressme meaSLlrement
devices for interference we1l testing.
Design of downhol! pressure, temperature and flow calibration equipment.
Design of downhole chemical treatment equipment.
Design of surface instrumentation for pressure, temperature and flow measurements
of fluid, vapor and non-condensable gases.
\Vorking knowledge of various geophYS1cal te-ehniques for geothennal exploration
and production monitoring.
Working knowledge of various geochemical techniques used in geothermal
exploration, production monitOring a.'1d injection monitoring in relation to
reservoir production changes versus time, the influence of injection on
nearby groundwarer systems and mixing of geothermal and groundwater
fluids.
Financial evaluation of geothermal projects using various ecoI1omis methods.
Resume of Colin Goranson
Page 4
Current and Previous fi_eotberma\ proj~s:t Areas
Baltazar Hot Springs, NY.
Beowawe, NY.
Black Butte, NY.
Brady Hot Springs, NY.
Darrough Hot Springs, NY.
Dixie Valley, NV.
Lee Hot Springs, NV.
Pumpemickel Hot Springs, NV.
Steamboat Springs, NY.
Stillwater, NV.
Tuscarora, NV.
Wabuska, NY.
Breitenbush, OR.
Klamath Falls, OR.
Lake View, OR
Vale, OR.
Newberry Caldera, OR.
Boise, ID.
Raft River. ID.
Amedee. Hot Springs, CA.
Big Bend Hot Springs, CA.
Brawley, CA.
Casa Diablo Hot Springs. CA.
Coso Hot Springs, CA.
Desert Hot Springs, CA.
East Brawley, CA.
East Mesa, CA.
Geysers (Unit 13, 15, 16 and 19), CA.
Heber, CA.
Niland, CA.
North Brawley, CA.
San Bernadino. CA.
South Brawley, CA.
Surprise Valley, CA.
Susanville, CA.
Ahuachapan, E1 Salvador
Cerro Prieto. Mexico
Hilo, Ha wai i
Lund. Sweden
Paris, France
publications
I have published several professional papers in the Geothermal and Hot Water
Storage fields for the University of California Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. Society of
Petroleum Engineers, Water Resources and Geothennal Resources Council. Publication
list available on request.
References
References available on request
•
Resume of Colin Goranson
Page 5
Exhibit No. CBG-2
Old tW-,
IW-2
Scale
660 feet'I
SPPCo
Lease
,
'II
I
........,,. _. ........
S
I
,
,,
,•
,
....;··..'",!~5...
PVf-1
I
Mea
'.
(on~onl,
t I II
,
Eagle
Valley
,
),',,,
,
"
...
, --1IiI!·
: ..
.. 2-:)··
·~
,'Site
•
• :
-...!~_--,,_~\Pffice:':.2~r~',~,
O
0'
''.'
:
• 2-4
TH-2 • 2-2 ,,:~::=~..
II
..' '!.~?-.~~-~
\ .......
~ ..,,~
•
"'1IIII!--~-IIIII!IfI"------~------'"
!
:.i / ~~;
,
•
,
"
•
II
ctI
"
,. 3
"
•
I
I
•
..
OTH 87-29.
... -;
..----..
- .. -,.. _...
:-
..
,
"
-
::~:.
•
"
"
RE 88-29A- ~0-" - ytJ,29'·· '28..'· .... ,'
..
~
h
~
...
.j
'
.....-..
.,........
.."',.
...
'.....
,:' ......
'''II
.",
, -.,.-~,.. ~- (II!II---~
,• .::,' 32 ~:¥~1~-~~"e.~ 21.-33
%,. ,<,:".. , ~"., MTH 2' -4;3
I
'•
..
.. ..
"II. ...
.~.
:
;'- . .. . ' .
,
TH:'I
0.41 • • • • • • • • • •
. 3-1 I;.-.,.-_'LII
.3,3
.
0
.•"
'J4
•
• ..........
•
.........
' '
,
~.
, RE 88-29
.
••• ,' •• ;' •• 8LM· • • • • • • • • •
I
_
y.
, .
•
~."
3-2 ,.I.
.,'
("\'1'
••••• ,•• 'Lease- . HA #4·:;1;..,
0
"
Area '' .;::;:'
I
on'
~~T18NA20E
,:'
....~..
,
I
·-----L·e·g·e·nd-----~ (;:3~f!:';;;;:1~~%;;i~ ~Aj~/
1--------------11' .,~" ~
1
~I
--
0
,
,
_ Faults, Fractures and
Linear features
I
, / New Injection Well
m
o
I
"
Existing Production Well
Existing Injection Well
::::::
Road
0
.•. 0
,
J0
I
e
•
.
.1. . ......
« 0
. . . I·~
0
.:-:'
.,
Y'
o'~ ..! ~'8LM
,--
~
J.n
0
r
,' .... }~
LI ..
'S't$~~~:
_.
0
0
0
•
0
0
"" .~:;:CI]
. . ..
------IiII!II------1
.
-
'-.'
•
... -.
:
:.:::::;::~
,,
"
,.
,
•,
·..
,
~
e
Meyberg
Lease
II:'rea
..
• • • • • • • • • e e4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14-3~"
'Ae
___
•
I'
_.-
:
·
:
,_ MTH 14-33- .. r
0
RE 14-33A
0
'-(1
,,'
,
0
I
~
'~~j'~;; .... '1 .. ?760~/~ ~
~. _..:'.'
......... D,_ ~~.
• ,
....
0
. . . . . . . . .. ~~..
'I' .."
I,"
... ",
I
:;" \
••
• • • • • e • • • • • •o • • • • e .•, : . . . . . .
RE
•
0
0
.:=(,
m ,~ RE22-33,
~,'..-M~-1'2~33·,'~ .
New Sfim Hole
Existing Slimhole
Location
0
,
-<
New Production Well
shown)
.:
"
" Giusti " : g,'
~
•
"
.llJ
TC7M'le
: Lea.saAraa
• (only poroon
-___
'
.
,
.,:,'
..• ,•,,0,,"
--f.... ,.....•
.0,..,
e
,
,,:
,
,
-------e __; __ ...!, __ _
.,
,
"
Figure 1) Faults, Fractures, Linear Features, and Proposed Well Locations For the
Reno Energy Thennal Energy Development Project
Prepared Direct Testimony of Colin Goranson
September 23, 1997
Page 7
NO.
_ _ _ _ MTH 21·33
o
----O--TH-3
50
100
----G~
150
87·29
CBG-3
---Q----HA ,.
200
250
300
350
200
250
300
350
o
250
500
Leak in casing-
750
Data not valid
1,000
for GTH 87-29 from
250 ft to 800 ft
1,250
1,500
1,750
-
2,000
2,2~
2,506.c
2,791.
<P
3,0~
3,250
3,500
3,750
4,000
4,250
o
50
100
150
Temperature (OF)
Figure 2) Temperature versus Depth Data Plot for Slim Holes MTH 21-33, TH-3,
GTH 87-29 and Production Well HA #4
Prepared Direct Testimony of Colin Goranson
September 23. 1997
Page 8
Exhibit No. CBG-4
Table 1 - Ruid Chemistry Data for Production Well PW 2-1
Facility N arne:
Ii' actin v U wnc:r.
NDEP Pennit If:
Ste.ambo31 Power Pl.lI1t 1l!111
~1e.amDOa1 L>evelOomenl LOI1l.
NEVSOOl8
PW
/Well Identlncaoon Numoer.
Type of Well (Please Circle Tvpe):
IW eli lJetAA;
County:
Date Samolea:
,:r 100M 1b-2~)
Morulonng
I Producoan lJ!i]=on
-}51
Washoe
Townstuo:
A naJ VSI LaO:
I8N
NSTIL
Ranl!e:
SLandani
500 - 1000
Jun-':i2
Jun-':i3
Jun-';/4
Jun-95
21 82.7
7.8
0.0
2152.0
1).0
0 .0
llTLO
2147.0
629':5
l)Jll.u
53.0
14m
1440
20E
Section:
28
RetXlrtln g Pen cd
Parameter:
'IDS (mvll
~C1um
\mvl)
125-150
Magne5lum \mg/I)
Sodium lm~i)
5).b
PotasSIum lmvl)
Sull31e (mit/I)
ChJonde I mvl)
[NItrate (as N03. me/i)
!HIC\rtx)na!e I mvl)
Car1x>nate I mit/ j)
Alkallrutv as LaCUJ (mgtl)
Rounoe (mvl)
.Ancmc IITlg! 1)
Iron (mvj)
Maneanese I mvl)
CQPper I m~1)
146.7
11 24.8
250
250-400
133.0
~40.0
u.u
(CV
.143.0
'ETOlJ
I91J1J
13J .(j
910.0
2.6
2.8
2.6
log
_. )
l.CI
1.. 7
1.-7
j':l.4
!l.2.5
89.4
217.1
2.3
2.2
2.4
2.2
0.1
0.0
0 .0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
I
0.1
u.2
0.7)
6.5 - a.S
43.9
42.0
~0.3
42.0
3':1.0
'10
3787.0
<.001
<.007
0.0
<.00)
NM
<.(0)
b.)
t>':1
6.8
/'.~
6.2
)27D.{f
<WI
< .007
D.lT
<.005
I-I"M
<.00)
l'-NI
t-.¥
233.6
.:35.0
2
IB311um I mvl)
iBoron lm~l)
oH
EI=caI ConducnVllV l\lmnOSlcm
::acimlUm lml!)i)
ChromlWTl \mg/l)
...cad (m2Jl)
IM=:w-v \m~l)
ISelcru um 1m 211)
ISil vet' (m vi)
Gross Alona (PC1II)
Mar-1)7
2144.0
0.0
293 .0
0.0
240.0
0.05
0.3 - 0.5
10-05 - 0. 10 .
I
5
~lm2Ji)
1VIar-':IO
2159.0
Z)°C)
0.05
0.0'5
lLO)
U.002
0.01
0.5
IS
Gross tku (OLIJ1)
ISilica I mVII
v.O
iUU.U
7.1
3174.0 I
!'1M
I
jeomments:
·=Oata Corrected for Steam Rash
"Bbni:" = Nol Measu=i
NO = None Deteaed or Below Detection Limiu
IChlondeJBoron Kano
I
18 .8
I
20.0
20'.T
T
19':0
2.).3
I
Ill.1
I
Prepared Direct Testimony of Colin Goranson
September 23, 1997
Page 9
PW2-17197.TPOplo
Temperature
---<>--
Downhole
•
Pressure
Annulus
Pressure
----Flow
Rate
350
- 1000
325
900
300
- 800
275
-_.-
700
250
.c:
a.
~ 0; 225
Q)
~
"tJ
e;
80
~.
n
M
co
....
a.. :l
-
Q)
Q)
C/)
0.
E
Q)
600
en
:; s
en
500
400
t-Q. 150
100
300
200
75
'0
0
f-'.
a.
~
t)
f-'.
rt
?f 5"11
50
~~~II
25
n
to
'ntrF~IIIIlJ1!I~IlI1lIJ[dIfi~llIfrtIlTnnnml"lIl1~
"10
100
a
.....
Jan-93
.
C'l
~n
O-l:::J
>::
Z
:l
o\OVlII
-\00
tIJ
:l
0
Vl'<
O'Q
c
a..
~'II
30
0::
0
Q)
....
Vl
all
~....,
Q)
......
0
:;::;
175
125
~
..:.::
'-'
ro
200
~II
a
-
Jun-93
Oec-93
Jun-94
Oec-94
Jun-95
Oec-95
Jun-96
Oec-96
Figure 3) Production Well PW 2-1 Temperature, Pressure and Flow Rate Data
Jun-97
I
Ul
Exhibit No. CBG-6
,....
0)
C:
:::l
-,
<0
0)
I
(J
Q)
0
co
c:
0)
I
:::l
-,
It)
0)
I
(J
Q)
C
It)
0)
I
C
:::l
-,
~
I
(J
CD
0
~
0)
C:
::I
-,
M
0)
I
(J
Q)
0
S
C:
::I
-,
M
0)
...,C:
C'CI
0
0
u;
0
0
gJ
~
0
M
0
Prepared Direct Testimony of Colin Goranson
September 23, 1997
Page 11
"
Watley
5II~7.plo
I
TH·.
- - . - HA.. ---{}-- 11...
----4---
TH·'
GTH
-6--
87-29
MTH-]
21-33
4625
4620
.Q)
.-
Q)
c
o
:;:;
~
'0
>
Q)
[
W
tJ
j
~.
....o
~
en
~.
4615 -
C\J
(j)
>
4610
L-
OJ
trl
cu
X
::r
~
f-"
0-
f-'.
o
::l
(1)'<
rt
4605
Z
°0
o
~n
30
ntJj
~g:
""10
""dNO
$l)~cl
(JQ .....
5
0\0(1)
-\00
N-JP
G)
I
4600
--t-.L-&--'-....L.....J'-+-'-L-L-'-...l-.jf-L..-'-L-L-'-+-J-'--'-L-L-+-.i.-J-'--'-J.4-LJI'II--l-.1....J.~IIu..'_'LWJ{lI-L-I~I'
Jan-93
Jun-93
Oec-93
Jun-94
Oec-94
Fhmre 5) WMr:rl ,." .. 1 rh .. n
Jun-95
.... : .. ' ' ' ... r . ~
___ , ·
Oec-95
Jun-96
I
I
I'
11-'-' .....' -'-~-+-...L.-L......I..-'
Oec-96
Jun-97
-.l
,
SBCt"k.pkl
- - - - Steamboat Creek
7,000
6,000
-...
;=
•
Q)
5,000 -
0
CO
-..Q)
Ol
....
CO
~
"U
~
atJ
~.
o
....
~
CII
O.
3
0
.c
4,000
0
(/)
0
-ctS
3,000
tx:
0
X
::Y
t-
I-'
~
0-
.s::.
1-"
rt
c: 2,000
0
Z
:E
o
:J
tn'-<
n. 0
'S! .....
n.()
3 0
If:::
~ ::s
~IVCl
wO
!1Q :...
o
§
10",
-100
Ul-...l:::l
ntJj
1,000
GJ
I
OJ
o
JUI-92
Oec-92
Jun-93
Oec-93
Jun-94
Oec-94
FiP-JlIl': tI) M o nth1., T nt!> ' u,.. ~ .... ~ r.1 ~ . . . ~ -
. ,...
Jun-95
Oec-95
Jun-96
Oec-96
Jun-97