Top Banner
hin 1 ev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and 2 - SC “Geotherm”
28

Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Dec 26, 2015

Download

Documents

Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Alexey V. Kiryukhin1

Leonid K. Moskalev2

1 -Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 -SC “Geotherm”

Page 2: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

OUTLINE:

Page 3: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

V-Mutnovsky Site: 12 MWe PP put in operation since 1999

Mutnovsky Geothermal Field Introduction

Dachny Site: 50 MWe PP put in operation since 2002

Page 4: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

History of exploitation:

V-Mutnovsky Site: 12 MWe PP put in operation since 1999

Dachny Site: 50 MWe PP put inoperation since 2002

Mutnovsky Geothermal Field Introduction

Mutnovsky area include magmaticsystem of the active Mutnovsky volcano,numerios steam fields and hot springs

Page 5: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

History of exploitation:

V-Mutnovsky Site: 12 MWe PP put in operation since 1999

Dachny Site: 50 MWe PP put inoperation since 2002

Mutnovsky Geothermal Field Introduction

Mutnovsky area include magmaticsystem of the active Mutnovsky volcano,numerios steam fields and hot springs

Mutnovsky is a fracture type geothermalfield:Main and North-East single-faulttype zones include Dachny and V-Mutnovskyproduction reservoirs (Kiryukhin et al, 1998).

Page 6: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Streamlines of fluids from Mutnovsky volcano recharge area to discharge areas through deeper part of zone, where heat and massmagmatic component exchange took place. Main Production Zone shown as a polygon area.

Steam fields: 1 – Active crater of Mutnovsky volcano, 2 – Bottom Field,3 – North Mutnovsky (W), 4 – Dachny;

Hot springs: 5 – Piratovsky, 6 – Verkhne-Zhirovsky.

Conceptual Hydrogeological Model (Recharge\Discharge Conditions)

Page 7: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Conceptual Hydrogeological Model (Geometry of Production Zone)

“Single fault” nature of the Main Production Zone demonstrated by small deviations of the points of the production () and full circulation loss () from plane equation formula Z = -1.691076246561*Х +0.48880109651512*Y +65583.1 Filled symbols correspond to production wells.

Page 8: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Conceptual Hydrogeological Model (Geometry of Production Zone)

Wells isolated from “Single fault” in Dachny Site show low productivity

Page 9: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Conceptual hydrogeological model of the Dachny site Mutnovsky geothermal field was verified based on

Dachny SiteConceptual Hydrogeological Model

•circulation losses and production zones distribution data,•mapping of active fracture zones, •gas and fluid chemistry data, •secondary minerals distributions,•recent results of drilling,•geothermal analog data

Central part of the Dachny represent a “single fault”type geothermal reservoir. Upflow of the high temperature fluids occur in the south-east partof this zone

Page 10: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Numerical Model Setup

In October 2002 Mutnovsky 50 MWe PP was put into operation in Dachny site. The problem of steam supply shortage (60%) to Mutnovsky 50 MWe PP (Dachny) trigged the new reservoir model study.

Basic Software used: TOUGH2V2.0, A-Mesh, HOLA,additional subroutines implementedto model complexreservoir geometry,Graphics software.

Page 11: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

3D Grid Generation

3D numerical grid correspond to the fault type geothermal reservoir of the Main Production Zone (120 m thick) connected with the 5-layers array of the Host Rocks.

Numerical Model Setup

Page 12: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Numerical Model Setup

Counters correspond to the top of the Main Production Zone.

Open circles - sources assigned in the model(total upflow recharge estimated 54 kg/s,1390 kJ/kg) Squares – inactive boundary elements (P,T=const) natural state steam discharge.

Crossed squares- inactive boundary elements(P,T=const) liquid discharge.

Sinks/Sources, Boundary Conditions

Page 13: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Numerical Model Setup

Model domains properties based on model calibration

Page 14: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Model Calibration

Temperature Matches: 1 - key elements data 2 – modeling results

Natural State

Page 15: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Model Calibration

Pressure Matches: 1 - key elements data 2 – modeling results

Natural State

Page 16: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Natural State Modeling Output

Temperatures & Flows Distributions Temperatures & Pressure Distributions.

Page 17: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Well Head Pressures (WHP, bars, i) in exploitation wells (SC “Geotherm” data)

Model Calibration

Based on 2002-2004 exploitation data

Page 18: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Mutnovsky PP electricity output, total steam, total separate water production, and separator pressure (bars, i) (SC “Geotherm” data). Note: individual wells parameters data not available.

Model Calibration

Based on 2002-2004 exploitation data

Page 19: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Exploitation wells assigned in the model based on TOUGH2V2.0 coupled wellbore flow option.

Productivity indexes PI0 of five production

wells estimated accordingly to initial exploitation data (rate Q, wellhead pressures WHP) andflowing enthalpies h, reservoir pressure Pr,

bottomhole Pb pressures tables, relative

permeabilities (krs, krw) derived from the

model (TOUGH2 or HOLA).

Model Calibration

Page 20: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Three possible scenarios of additionalrecharge into the Main Production Zoneunder exploitation conditions(including up-flow and reinjection)were tested in the model:

(1) No additional recharge(2) Marginal recharge(3) Downflow recharge

Model Calibration

Page 21: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Best model match (scenario #3, downflow recharge): modeling steam and separate production from wells 016, 26, Е4, 029W, Е5 ( at 5.2 bar i separation pressure) against total production (dots).

Model Calibration

Based on 2002-2004exploitation data

Page 22: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Modeling of Exploitation

Analysis of additional exploitation wells drilling in the high temperature upflow zone and reinjection to maintain sustainable production for 50 MWe Power Plant.

Page 23: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Scenario #1 (no additional recharge): sustainable steam production (96.3 kg/s or 48.2 MWe) during 10-year exploitation period.

Modeling of Exploitation

Page 24: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Scenario #2 (marginal recharge): sustainable steam production (116.7 kg/s or 58.4 MWe) during 10-year exploitation period.

Modeling of Exploitation

Page 25: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Scenario #3 (downflow recharge): sustainable steam production (86.7 kg/s or 43.4 MWe) during 10-year exploitation period.

Modeling of Exploitation

Page 26: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Influence of reinjection on sustainable steam production (based on model scenario #1): 1 - no reinjection, 2 - reinjection 150 kg/s (North Reinjection Site), 3- reinjection 150 kg/s (South Reinjection Site). Upper graphs - total production rates, lower graphs - steam production at 7 bars.

Modeling of Exploitation (20 years)

Page 27: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Conclusions:

Page 28: Alexey V. Kiryukhin 1 Leonid K. Moskalev 2 1 - Institute of Volcanology and Seismology FEB RAS 2 - SC “Geotherm”

Acknowledgements: