IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i11p3306-d569049.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Review of Recent Drilling Projects in Unconventional Geothermal Resources at Campi Flegrei Caldera, Cornubian Batholith, and Williston Sedimentary Basin

Author

Listed:
  • Renato Somma

    (Osservatorio Vesuviano, INGV, 80124 Naples, Italy
    IRISS, CNR, 80134 Naples, Italy)

  • Daniela Blessent

    (Programa Ingeniería Ambiental, Universidad de Medellin, 050026 Medellin, Antioquia, Colombia)

  • Jasmin Raymond

    (Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique, 490 Couronne St., Quebec City, QC G1K 9A9, Canada)

  • Madeline Constance

    (GeoScience Limited Unit 1Falmouth Business Park, Bickland Water Road, Falmouth TR11 4SZ, UK)

  • Lucy Cotton

    (GeoScience Limited Unit 1Falmouth Business Park, Bickland Water Road, Falmouth TR11 4SZ, UK)

  • Giuseppe De Natale

    (Osservatorio Vesuviano, INGV, 80124 Naples, Italy)

  • Alessandro Fedele

    (Osservatorio Vesuviano, INGV, 80124 Naples, Italy)

  • Maria Jose Jurado

    (Geosciences Barcelona CSIC, 08028 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Kirsten Marcia

    (DEEP Earth Energy Production Corp. Box 6 Site 515 RR5, Saskatoon, SK S7K 3J8, Canada)

  • Mafalda Miranda

    (Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique, 490 Couronne St., Quebec City, QC G1K 9A9, Canada)

  • Claudia Troise

    (Osservatorio Vesuviano, INGV, 80124 Naples, Italy)

  • Thomas Wiersberg

    (Helmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam—Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ, 14473 Potsdam, Germany)

Abstract

Unconventional geothermal resource development can contribute to increase power generation from renewable energy sources in countries without conventional hydrothermal reservoirs, which are usually associated with magmatic activity and extensional faulting, as well as to expand the generation in those regions where conventional resources are already used. Three recent drilling experiences focused on the characterization of unconventional resources are described and compared: the Campi Flegrei Deep Drilling Project (CFDDP) in Italy, the United Downs Deep Geothermal Power (UDDGP) project in the United Kingdom, and the DEEP Earth Energy Production in Canada. The main aspects of each project are described (geology, drilling, data collection, communication strategies) and compared to discuss challenges encountered at the tree sites considered, including a scientific drilling project (CFDDP) and two industrial ones (UDDGP and DEEP). The first project, at the first stage of pilot hole, although not reaching deep supercritical targets, showed extremely high, very rare thermal gradients even at shallow depths. Although each project has its own history, as well as social and economic context, the lessons learned at each drilling site can be used to further facilitate geothermal energy development.

Suggested Citation

  • Renato Somma & Daniela Blessent & Jasmin Raymond & Madeline Constance & Lucy Cotton & Giuseppe De Natale & Alessandro Fedele & Maria Jose Jurado & Kirsten Marcia & Mafalda Miranda & Claudia Troise & T, 2021. "Review of Recent Drilling Projects in Unconventional Geothermal Resources at Campi Flegrei Caldera, Cornubian Batholith, and Williston Sedimentary Basin," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-23, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:11:p:3306-:d:569049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/11/3306/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/11/3306/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alessandro Franco & Maurizio Vaccaro, 2020. "Sustainable Sizing of Geothermal Power Plants: Appropriate Potential Assessment Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Pellizzone, Anna & Allansdottir, Agnes & De Franco, Roberto & Muttoni, Giovanni & Manzella, Adele, 2017. "Geothermal energy and the public: A case study on deliberative citizens’ engagement in central Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 561-570.
    3. Simone Carr-Cornish & Lygia Romanach, 2014. "Differences in Public Perceptions of Geothermal Energy Technology in Australia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christopher Simon Brown, 2023. "Revisiting the Deep Geothermal Potential of the Cheshire Basin, UK," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-19, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.
    2. Baek, Haein & Chung, Ji-Bum & Yun, Gi Woong, 2021. "Differences in public perceptions of geothermal energy based on EGS technology in Korea after the Pohang earthquake: National vs. local," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    3. Elisa Bustaffa & Olivia Curzio & Fabrizio Bianchi & Fabrizio Minichilli & Daniela Nuvolone & Davide Petri & Giorgia Stoppa & Fabio Voller & Liliana Cori, 2022. "Community Concern about the Health Effects of Pollutants: Risk Perception in an Italian Geothermal Area," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-17, October.
    4. Barbara Pavlakovič & Milica Rančić Demir & Nejc Pozvek & Maja Turnšek, 2021. "Role of Tourism in Promoting Geothermal Energy: Public Interest and Motivation for Geothermal Energy Tourism in Slovenia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Bleicher, Alena & David, Martin & Rutjes, Henriette & Wallkamm, Magdalena, 2017. "Rohstoffgewinnung und Technologieentwicklung in Deutschland im Wandel: Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven," UFZ Reports 05/2017, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ).
    6. Sun, Qingxuan & Wang, Yaxiong & Cheng, Ziyang & Wang, Jiangfeng & Zhao, Pan & Dai, Yiping, 2020. "Thermodynamic and economic optimization of a double-pressure organic Rankine cycle driven by low-temperature heat source," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(P3), pages 2822-2832.
    7. Ibrahim Mosly & Anas A. Makki, 2018. "Current Status and Willingness to Adopt Renewable Energy Technologies in Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    8. Evgeniya Lupova-Henry & Nicola Francesco Dotti, 2019. "Governance of sustainable innovation: Moving beyond the hierarchy-market-network trichotomy? A systematic literature review using the ‘who-how-what’ framework," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/283521, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    9. Franziska Steinberger & Tobias Minder & Evelina Trutnevyte, 2020. "Efficiency versus Equity in Spatial Siting of Electricity Generation: Citizen Preferences in a Serious Board Game in Switzerland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Cesare Saccani & Marco Pellegrini & Alessandro Guzzini, 2020. "Analysis of the Existing Barriers for the Market Development of Power to Hydrogen (P2H) in Italy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-29, September.
    11. Tena Bilić & Sara Raos & Perica Ilak & Ivan Rajšl & Robert Pašičko, 2020. "Assessment of Geothermal Fields in the South Pannonian Basin System Using a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Tool," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-23, February.
    12. Alejandro García-Gil & Miguel Mejías Moreno & Eduardo Garrido Schneider & Miguel Ángel Marazuela & Corinna Abesser & Jesús Mateo Lázaro & José Ángel Sánchez Navarro, 2020. "Nested Shallow Geothermal Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-13, June.
    13. Huijts, Nicole M.A. & Contzen, Nadja & Roeser, Sabine, 2022. "Unequal means more unfair means more negative emotions? Ethical concerns and emotions about an unequal distribution of negative outcomes of a local energy project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    14. Stefania Troiano & Veronica Novelli & Paola Geatti & Matteo Carzedda & Francesco Marangon & Luciano Ceccon, 2021. "Households? preferences for wood in home heating systems: Does sustainability matter?," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2021(2), pages 101-120.
    15. Romanach, Lygia & Carr-Cornish, Simone & Muriuki, Grace, 2015. "Societal acceptance of an emerging energy technology: How is geothermal energy portrayed in Australian media?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1143-1150.
    16. Spampatti, Tobia & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Brosch, Tobias, 2022. "Short and long-term dominance of negative information in shaping public energy perceptions: The case of shallow geothermal systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    17. Shakibi, Hamid & Faal, Mehrdad Yousefi & Assareh, Ehsanolah & Agarwal, Neha & Yari, Mortaza & Latifi, Seyed Ali & Ghodrat, Maryam & Lee, Moonyong, 2023. "Design and multi-objective optimization of a multi-generation system based on PEM electrolyzer, RO unit, absorption cooling system, and ORC utilizing machine learning approaches; a case study of Austr," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    18. Soltani, M. & Moradi Kashkooli, Farshad & Souri, Mohammad & Rafiei, Behnam & Jabarifar, Mohammad & Gharali, Kobra & Nathwani, Jatin S., 2021. "Environmental, economic, and social impacts of geothermal energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    19. Cordoves-Sánchez, Minerva & Vallejos-Romero, Arturo, 2019. "Social construction of risk in non-conventional renewable energy: Risk perception as a function of ecosystem services in La Araucanía, Chile," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 261-270.
    20. Hou, Jianchao & Cao, Mengchao & Liu, Pingkuo, 2018. "Development and utilization of geothermal energy in China: Current practices and future strategies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 401-412.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:11:p:3306-:d:569049. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.