skip to main content

Title: McGee Mountain Geoprobe Survey, Humboldt County, Nevada

This shapefile contains location and attribute data for a Geoprobe temperature survey conducted by Geothermal Technical Partners, Inc. during 2010. The purpose of direct push technology (“DPT”) probe activity at the McGee Mtn. Project, Nevada was to 1) determine bottom hole temperatures using nominal 1.5 inch probe tooling to place resistance temperature detectors (“RTD”) and 2) take water samples, if possible, to characterize the geothermometry of the system. A total of 23 holes were probed in five days for a cumulative total of 857.5 ft. at 21 sites at McGee Mountain. The probed holes ranged in depth from a maximum of 75 ft to a minimum of 10 ft and averaged 37.3ft. The average temperature of the 23 holes was 18.9⁰C, with a range of 12.0⁰C at site MMTG#1b to 42.0⁰C at site MMTG#19. . No water was encountered in any of the probed holes, with the exception of MMTG#10, and no water was collected for sampling. Zip file containing Arcview shapefile in UTM11 NAD83 projection. 5kb file size.
Authors:
Publication Date:
Report Number(s):
122
DOE Contract Number:
EE0002830
Product Type:
Dataset
Research Org(s):
DOE Geothermal Data Repository; Geothermal Technical Partners, Inc.
Collaborations:
Geothermal Technical Partners, Inc.
Sponsoring Org:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Geothermal Technologies Program (EE-2C)
Subject:
15 Geothermal Energy; geothermal; geoprobe; shallow temperature survey; mcgee mountain; humboldt county; nevada; exploration; heat flow; water sampling
OSTI Identifier:
1261911
  1. The Geothermal Data Repository (GDR) is the submission point for all data collected from researchers funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's Geothermal Technologies Office (DOE GTO). The DOE GTO is providing access to its geothermal project information through the GDR. The GDR is powered by OpenEI, an energy information portal sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).
No associated Collections found.
  1. This shapefile contains location and attribute data for a shallow (2 meter) temperature survey conducted by Geothermal Technical Partners, Inc. during late 2008 and early 2009. Temperatures at 2m depth were measured at 192 separate points as outlined by Coolbaugh et al., 2007. The purposemore » of the survey was to try and detect a shallow thermal anomaly associated with the McGee Mountain geothermal area as discovered by Phillips Petroleum and Earth Power Resources in the late 1970’s. Drilling identified ~120oC temperatures at ~100m depth. This 2-meter survey delineated what was interpreted as a steam-heated fault zone centered along a range front fault in the vicinity of the drilled holes and fumaroles. Coolbaugh, M.F., Sladek, C., Faulds, J.E., Zehner, R.E., and Oppliger, G.L., 2007, Use of rapid temperature measurements at a 2-meter depth to augment deeper temperature gradient drilling: Proceedings, 32nd Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, Jan. 22-24, 2007, p. 109-116. Zehner, R., Tullar, K., and Rutledge, E., 2012, Effectiveness of 2-Meter and geoprobe shallow temperature surveys in early stage geothermal exploration: Geothermal Resources Council Transactions, v. 36, in press. « less
  2. Over the course of the entire project, field visits were made to 117 geothermal systems in the Great Basin region. Major field excursions, incorporating visits to large groups of systems, were conducted in western Nevada, central Nevada, northwestern Nevada, northeastern Nevada, east‐central Nevada, eastern California,more » southern Oregon, and western Utah. For example, field excursions to the following areas included visits of multiple geothermal systems: - Northwestern Nevada: Baltazor Hot Spring, Blue Mountain, Bog Hot Spring, Dyke Hot Springs, Howard Hot Spring, MacFarlane Hot Spring, McGee Mountain, and Pinto Hot Springs in northwest Nevada. - North‐central to northeastern Nevada: Beowawe, Crescent Valley (Hot Springs Point), Dann Ranch (Hand‐me‐Down Hot Springs), Golconda, and Pumpernickel Valley (Tipton Hot Springs) in north‐central to northeast Nevada. - Eastern Nevada: Ash Springs, Chimney Hot Spring, Duckwater, Hiko Hot Spring, Hot Creek Butte, Iverson Spring, Moon River Hot Spring, Moorman Spring, Railroad Valley, and Williams Hot Spring in eastern Nevada. - Southwestern Nevada‐eastern California: Walley’s Hot Spring, Antelope Valley, Fales Hot Springs, Buckeye Hot Springs, Travertine Hot Springs, Teels Marsh, Rhodes Marsh, Columbus Marsh, Alum‐Silver Peak, Fish Lake Valley, Gabbs Valley, Wild Rose, Rawhide‐ Wedell Hot Springs, Alkali Hot Springs, and Baileys/Hicks/Burrell Hot Springs. - Southern Oregon: Alvord Hot Spring, Antelope Hot Spring‐Hart Mountain, Borax Lake, Crump Geyser, and Mickey Hot Spring in southern Oregon. - Western Utah: Newcastle, Veyo Hot Spring, Dixie Hot Spring, Thermo, Roosevelt, Cove Fort, Red Hill Hot Spring, Joseph Hot Spring, Hatton Hot Spring, and Abraham‐Baker Hot Springs. Structural controls of 426 geothermal systems were analyzed with literature research, air photos, google‐Earth imagery, and/or field reviews (Figures 1 and 2). Of the systems analyzed, we were able to determine the structural settings of more than 240 sites. However, we found that many “systems” consisted of little more than a warm or hot well in the central part of a basin. Such “systems” were difficult to evaluate in terms of structural setting in areas lacking in geophysical data. Developed database for structural catalogue in a master spreadsheet. Data components include structural setting, primary fault orientation, presence or absence of Quaternary faulting, reservoir lithology, geothermometry, presence or absence of recent magmatism, and distinguishing blind systems from those that have surface expressions. Reviewed site locations for all 426 geothermal systems– Confirmed and/or relocated spring and geothermal sites based on imagery, maps, and other information for master database. Many systems were mislocated in the original database. In addition, some systems that included several separate springs spread over large areas were divided into two or more distinct systems. Further, all hot wells were assigned names based on their location to facilitate subsequent analyses. We catalogued systems into the following eight major groups, based on the dominant pattern of faulting (Figure 1): - Major normal fault segments (i.e., near displacement maxima). - Fault bends. - Fault terminations or tips. - Step‐overs or relay ramps in normal faults. - Fault intersections. - Accommodation zones (i.e., belts of intermeshing oppositely dipping normal faults), - Displacement transfer zones whereby strike‐slip faults terminate in arrays of normal faults. - Transtensional pull‐aparts. These settings form a hierarchal pattern with respect to fault complexity. - Major normal faults and fault bends are the simplest. - Fault terminations are typically more complex than mid‐segments, as faults commonly break up into multiple strands or horsetail near their ends. - A fault intersection is generally more complex, as it generally contains both multiple fault strands and can include discrete di... « less
  3. The objective of this project is to use a multi-disciplinary, three-tiered approach to assess the geothermal resource and determine the feasibility of implementing a large-scale, direct-use facility for the Hawthorne Army Depot (HAD) and the various town and county facilities in Hawthorne, Nevada. This assessmentmore » directly targets a geothermal resource recently characterized by the Navy Geothermal Program Office (GPO) as part of a focused exploration and development campaign. This data includes but is not limited to: OD Data, Map of Hawthorne Area 3D Seismic Survey, HAW 3D Seismic interpretation report, Zip folder containing DBF files pertaining to the Spring Well Seismic Survey Zone, Zip file containing one shapefile of 3D seismic data. « less
  4. This submission contains raster and vector data for the entire state of Washington, with specific emphasis on the three geothermal play fairway sites: Mount St. Helens seismic zone (MSHSZ), Wind River valley (WRV), and Mount Baker (MB). Data are provided for 3 major geothermal models:more » heat, permeability, and fluid-filled fractures, and an additional infrastructure model. Both of the permeability and fluid-filled-fracture models are produced at 200 m and at 2 km depths; the heat model is only produced at the 200 m depth. Values are provided for both model favorability and model confidence. A combined model at 200m and 2 km depths is provided for favorability, confidence, and exploration risk. Raster data are provided in GeoTiff format and have a statewide coverage. Cell size is 104.355 ft; file type is unsigned 8-bit integer (0-255); 0 represents no favorability or confidence; 255 represents maximum favorability or confidence. The NAD83(HARN)/Washington South (ftUS) projection is used (EPSG:2927). Vector data are provided in shapefile or comma-delimited text file formats. Geographic coordinates, where provided, are in WGS84. A readme file accompanies each folder and provides an overview and description of the enclosed data. The heat model combines 5 intermediate raster layers (which are included in the download package): temperature gradient wells, young volcanic vents, hot springs, young intrusive volcanic rocks, and geothermometry. The permeability model combines 8 intermediate raster layers: density of mapped faults, 2D dilation tendency of mapped faults, 2D slip tendency of mapped faults, seismicity, 3D dilation tendency, 3D slip tendency, 3D maximum coulomb shear stress, and 3D slip gradients. The fluid-filled fracture model combines up to 4 intermediate rasters: resistivity from magneto-telluric 3D inversions, seismicity, Vp/Vs anomalies from passive seismic tomography, and Vs anomalies from ambient-noise tomography. A statewide infrastructure model is also provided that formalizes land-use constraints and restrictions relevant for geothermal prospecting and development. This model combines 10 intermediate rasters: areas off limits to drilling, existing or proposed geothermal leases, DNR-owned land, land-use restrictions along the Columbia River Gorge, areas inundated by water, availability of potential process water, proximity to existing roads, proximity to transmission lines, distance from urban areas, and snow-related elevation restrictions. Supporting vector data for the development of each raster layer is provided. For details on the areas of interest and modeling process please see the 'WA_State_Play_Fairway_Phase_2_Technical_Report' in the download package. « less
  5. This submission includes a gravity data in text format and as a GIS point shapefile and transient electromagnetic (TEM) raw data. Each text file additionally contains location data (UTM Zone 12, NAD83) and elevation (meters) data for that station. The gravity data shapefile was inmore » part downloaded from PACES, University of Texas at El Paso, http://gis.utep.edu/subpages/GMData.html, and in part collected by the Utah Geological Survey (UGS) as part of the DOE GTO supported Utah FORGE geothermal energy project near Milford, Utah. The PACES data were examined and scrubbed to eliminate any questionable data. A 2.67 g/cm^3 reduction density was used for the Bouguer correction. The attribute table column headers for the gravity data shapefile are explained below. There is also metadata attached to the GIS shapefile. name: the individual gravity station name. HAE: height above ellipsoid [meter] NGVD29: vertical datum for geoid [meter] obs: observed gravity ERRG: gravity measurement error [mGal] IZTC: inner zone terrain correction [mGal] OZTC: outer zone terrain correction [mGal] Gfa: free air gravity gSBGA: Bouguer horizontal slab sCBGA: Complete Bouguer anomaly « less