Wednesday, June 6, 2018 2:18 pm

This dataset is based on the Geologic Map of North America (scale 1 to 3,000,000, Reed et al., 2005) from DDS 424 (Garrity and Soller, 2009) and the Sherrod et al. (2007) compilation of Hawaii (scale 1 to 100000). The dataset is distributed as the USA USGIN 3M Geology Web Map Service (WMS) by the Arizona Geological Survey for inclusion with One Geology. Data were prepared by clipping data from Garrity and Soller (2009) to the boundaries of the United States including the offshore exclusive economic zone, as defined by NOAA (coastalmap.marine.usgs.gov/GISdata/basemaps/boundaries/eez/NOAA/useez_noaa.htm). US Pacific Island territories are not included. Data for Hawaii were acquired from Sherrod et al. (2007), and units were reclassified to better match the granularity of the Reed et al. (2005) map, and boundaries between reclassified units were dissolved to simplify the map. Offshore data around Hawaii were not found that could be included in the compilation. Data from Garrity and Soller (2009) and the Sherrod et al. (2007) generalization were merged into a single database using the NCGMP09 data structure (USGS NCGMP, 2010). Representative lithology and age properties were associated with each map unit. These property values are specified using CGI vocabularies for rock type (CGI Simple Lithology, resource.geosciml.org/Vocab2011html/SimpleLithology201012.html) and stratigraphic age (International Stratigraphic Chart, 2009-08, resource.geosciml.org/ISC2009/CGI2011TimeScale.rdf). Finer-scale granularity on some polygon-level representative lithology and age assignments than that presented in the Reed et al. (2005) mapping using the state geologic map compilation by the USGS Mineral Resources Division (e.g. Ludington et al., 2007). Data were exported from the NCGMP09 database into database tables conforming to the CGI GeoSciML Portrayal schema, and web services are deployed using these tables as the data source. Spatial data from Garrity and Soller (2009) has been reprojected into WGS 1984 decimal degrees. The Web map service view of the data presents three portrayals, based on representative age, representative lithology and lithostratigraphy. The representative age portrayal uses the color scheme presented on the International Stratigraphic Chart, 2009-08 (pdf cached at resource.geosciml.org/ISC2009/ISChart2009.pdf). RGB and CMYK colors for this legend were imported from OneGeology Europe color scheme (Asch et al., 2009, accessed at onegeology-europe.brgm.fr/how_to201002/OneGeologyWP3-DataSpec_Portrayal_v 201 205KA.doc, Table 1-1). The color scheme for the representative lithology portrayal was updated from a scheme developed by the GeoSciML workgroup (thanks to Eric Boisvert, GSC) using URN identifiers; the colors in that scheme were creatively adapted from Moyer,Hasting and Raines (2005, pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1314/of2005-1314.pdf) which provides xls spreadsheets for various color schemes. Most of the colors come from lithclass 6.1 and 6.2 (see www.nadm-geo.org/dmdt/pdf/lithclass61.pdf for lithclass 6.1). The lithostratigraphic scheme was created from the map legend included with Garrity and Soller (2009) by removing overlay patterns because they are incompatible with OGC Styled Layer Description (SLD) of map symbolization, and adjusting colors to preserve distinction between map units defined by Reed et al. (2005). Portrayal of the contact and fault themes use conventional geologic map symbolization. Additional feature classes that can not be mapped into the GeoSciML Portrayal scheme are included on the Reed et al. (2005) map and were digitized by Garrity and Soller (2009). These features are not currently exposed via web services. The additional features were clipped to the extent of the US geology polygons, and have been included in the NCGMP09-format geodatabase distribution of this dataset. Miscellaneous geologic line features including special submarine features, calderas, glaciation extent, impact structure outlines from Reed et al. (2005) were digitized by Garrity and Soller (2009) into a variety of feature classes. These were merged into a single otherLines feature class in the NCGMP09 version of the dataset. FeatureType terms correspond to the names of the original feature classes or feature types within the original feature classes if there were multiple kinds of features. Miscellaneous geologic point features including diapirs, mineral occurrences, gas seeps, hydrothermal vents, unusual igneous rock occurrences, volcanic vents from Reed et al. (2005) were digitized by Garrity and Soller (2009) into a variety of feature classes. These were merged into a single geoPointFeature feature class as an extension to the NCGMP09 model in this dataset. FeatureType terms correspond to the names of the original feature classes or feature types within the original feature classes if there were multiple kinds of features. Miscellaneous geologic overlay polygons that delineate areas of metamorphism, continental deposits, zones of abundant diapirs, and offshore outcrops (?) from Reed et al. (2005) were digitized by Garrity and Soller (2009) into multiple feature classes. These were merged back into a single OverlayPoly feature class of the NCGMP09 model. FeatureType terms correspond to the names of the original feature classes or feature types within the original feature classes if there were multiple kinds of features. References Garrity, C.P., and Soller, D.R., 2009, Database of the Geologic Map of North America- Adapted from the Map by J.C. Reed, Jr. and others (2005), U. S. Geological Survey USGS Data Series DS-DS424, 1 CDROM. 2009 Sherrod, D. R., Sinton, J. M., Watkins, S. E., and Brunt, K. M., 2007, Geologic Map of the State of Hawai I Reston, VA, U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007 1089, resolution variable. Reed Jr., J. C., Wheeler, J.O., and Tucholke, J.E., 2005, Geologic Map of North America Geological Society of America, DNAG Continent Scale Map 001, Scale 1 to 5,000,000, 3 sheets. USGS National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program (NCGMP), 2010, NCGMP09 Draft Standard Format for Digital Publication of Geologic Maps, Version 1.1 in Soller, D.R. Editor, Digital Mapping Techniques 2009 Workshop Proceedings USGS Open File Report 2010 1335, p. 93 147. (accessed at pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1335/pdf/usgs_of2010 1335_NCGMP09.pdf 2012/01/25) Ludington, Steve, Moring, B.C., Miller, R.J., Stone, P.A., Bookstrom, A.A., Bedford, D.R., Evans, J.G., Haxel, G.A., Nutt, C. J., Flyn, K.S., and Hopkins, M.J., 2007, Preliminary integrated geologic map databases for the United States, Western States: California, Nevada, Arizona, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Utah, Version 1.3, updated December 2007: U. S. Geological Survey Open file Report 2005 1305, accessed online at pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1305/ (2011/11/08).

Media file
Wednesday, June 6, 2018 1:21 pm

The 3D geologic model for the Fallon for site was constructed in EarthVision software using methods similar to (Moeck et al., 2009, 2010; Faulds et al., 2010b; Jolie et al., 2012, 2015; Hinz et al., 2013a; Siler and Faulds, 2013; Siler et al., 2016a, b) - References are included in archive.

The model contains 48 faults (numbered 1-48), and 4 stratigraphic surfaces from oldest to youngest (1) undivided Mesozoic basement, consisting of Mesozoic metasedimentary, metavolcanic, and plutonic units (Mzu); (2) Miocene volcanic and interbedded sedimentary rocks, consisting primarily of basaltic and basaltic andesite lava flows (Tvs); and (3) late Miocene to Pliocene (i.e., Neogene) undivided sedimentary rocks (Ns); and (4) Quaternary sediments (Qs).
The two files contain points that describe nodes along the fault surfaces and stratigraphic horizons. FallonPhase2Model_faults.dat fields include 1) x meters; UTM NAD83 Zone 11M, 2) y meters; UTM NAD83 Zone 11M, 3) z meters; relative to mean sea-level, 4) Surface non-numeric; fault name, 5) Surfacetype non-numeric; type of surface (fault or horizon), 6) FaultBlock non-numeric; name of fault block, and 7) Zone non-numeric; stratigraphic unit of the point. FallonPhase2Model_zones.dat fields include 1) x meters; UTM NAD83 Zone 11M, 2) y meters; UTM NAD83 Zone 11M, 3) z meters; relative to mean sea-level, 4) Surface non-numeric; fault block name/surface name, 5) Surfacetype non-numeric; type of surface (fault or horizon), 6) FaultBlock non-numeric; name of fault block, and 7) Zone non-numeric; stratigraphic unit of the point. Text file containing references is also included.

Media file
Wednesday, June 6, 2018 1:19 pm

This project aims to develop an innovative Geothermal ThermoElectric Generation (G-TEG) system specially designed to both generate electricity and extract high-value lithium (Li) from low-temperature geothermal brines. The process combined five modular technologies including silica removal, nanofiltration (NF), membrane distillation (MD), Mn-oxide sorbent for Li recovery, and TEG. This project provides a proof of concept for each of these technologies.

This is the final report from the project. It includes corrections and the final data. The final report supersedes all previous submissions. This is the final report from the project. It supersedes all previous submissions. It has the corrected information and final data. Includes discussions and results for SiO2 precipitation, nanofiltration, membrane distillation and Mn-oxide sorbent. Also includes detailed explanation of thermoelectric power generation system and a technical and economic assessment.

Media file
Wednesday, June 6, 2018 1:15 pm

This submission contains a link to the EDX Collaborative Workspace where the MT data collected in support of the DOE GTO 4D EGS monitoring project is stored.

Daily production reports-- Oregon State University (OSU) had 6 stations running continuously.
--Dynamic survey map, KML file with MT locations on the west flank. Read off at location, created excel file for locations of each NBL. Zonge has two N-S lines of MT stations, 1-x and 2-x. Created excel file for locations of each 1-x and 2-x.
--In stations, each station has day file with calibration of magnetometers, 6 channels. .Z3d are proprietary data files (refer to Zonge Int'l)
--MT Section: has four channels that went into it, in edi format are given frequenices, coordinate system. Tensor-- four elements of this tensor at each frequency. The tensor is complex-valued-- it has a real part and an imaginary part at each frequency. In .zxr the impedance sensor relates N-S to E-W. "r" is imaginary. "ZXYVAR" is variance, error on each impedance tensor. Transmuted into apparent resistivity "ro". phase.
Links to the EDX Collaborative Workspace hosting the MT data

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:32 am

Input and output files used for fault characterization through numerical simulation using iTOUGH2. The synthetic data for the push period are generated by running a forward simulation (input parameters are provided in iTOUGH2 Brady GF6 Input Parameters.txt [InvExt6i.txt]). In general, the permeability of the fault gouge, damage zone, and matrix are assumed to be unknown. The input and output files are for the inversion scenario where only pressure transients are available at the monitoring well located 200 m above the injection well and only the fault gouge permeability is estimated. The input files are named InvExt6i, INPUT.tpl, FOFT.ins, CO2TAB, and the output files are InvExt6i.out, pest.fof, and pest.sav (names below are display names).

The table graphic in the data files below summarizes the inversion results, and indicates the fault gouge permeability can be estimated even if imperfect guesses are used for matrix and damage zone permeabilities, and permeability anisotropy is not taken into account.
Description of the files and workflow related to the data files below.

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:32 am

Input and output files used for fault characterization through numerical simulation using iTOUGH2. The synthetic data for the push period are generated by running a forward simulation (input parameters are provided in iTOUGH2 Brady GF6 Input Parameters.txt [InvExt6i.txt]). In general, the permeability of the fault gouge, damage zone, and matrix are assumed to be unknown. The input and output files are for the inversion scenario where only pressure transients are available at the monitoring well located 200 m above the injection well and only the fault gouge permeability is estimated. The input files are named InvExt6i, INPUT.tpl, FOFT.ins, CO2TAB, and the output files are InvExt6i.out, pest.fof, and pest.sav (names below are display names).

The table graphic in the data files below summarizes the inversion results, and indicates the fault gouge permeability can be estimated even if imperfect guesses are used for matrix and damage zone permeabilities, and permeability anisotropy is not taken into account.
Parameter estimation (PEST) output file

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:32 am

Input and output files used for fault characterization through numerical simulation using iTOUGH2. The synthetic data for the push period are generated by running a forward simulation (input parameters are provided in iTOUGH2 Brady GF6 Input Parameters.txt [InvExt6i.txt]). In general, the permeability of the fault gouge, damage zone, and matrix are assumed to be unknown. The input and output files are for the inversion scenario where only pressure transients are available at the monitoring well located 200 m above the injection well and only the fault gouge permeability is estimated. The input files are named InvExt6i, INPUT.tpl, FOFT.ins, CO2TAB, and the output files are InvExt6i.out, pest.fof, and pest.sav (names below are display names).

The table graphic in the data files below summarizes the inversion results, and indicates the fault gouge permeability can be estimated even if imperfect guesses are used for matrix and damage zone permeabilities, and permeability anisotropy is not taken into account.
TOUGH2 Initial Conditions (INCON) file

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:32 am

Input and output files used for fault characterization through numerical simulation using iTOUGH2. The synthetic data for the push period are generated by running a forward simulation (input parameters are provided in iTOUGH2 Brady GF6 Input Parameters.txt [InvExt6i.txt]). In general, the permeability of the fault gouge, damage zone, and matrix are assumed to be unknown. The input and output files are for the inversion scenario where only pressure transients are available at the monitoring well located 200 m above the injection well and only the fault gouge permeability is estimated. The input files are named InvExt6i, INPUT.tpl, FOFT.ins, CO2TAB, and the output files are InvExt6i.out, pest.fof, and pest.sav (names below are display names).

The table graphic in the data files below summarizes the inversion results, and indicates the fault gouge permeability can be estimated even if imperfect guesses are used for matrix and damage zone permeabilities, and permeability anisotropy is not taken into account.
Website including short courses, user forum, documentation, and availability and licensing for iTOUGH2 and TOUGH2

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:32 am

Input and output files used for fault characterization through numerical simulation using iTOUGH2. The synthetic data for the push period are generated by running a forward simulation (input parameters are provided in iTOUGH2 Brady GF6 Input Parameters.txt [InvExt6i.txt]). In general, the permeability of the fault gouge, damage zone, and matrix are assumed to be unknown. The input and output files are for the inversion scenario where only pressure transients are available at the monitoring well located 200 m above the injection well and only the fault gouge permeability is estimated. The input files are named InvExt6i, INPUT.tpl, FOFT.ins, CO2TAB, and the output files are InvExt6i.out, pest.fof, and pest.sav (names below are display names).

The table graphic in the data files below summarizes the inversion results, and indicates the fault gouge permeability can be estimated even if imperfect guesses are used for matrix and damage zone permeabilities, and permeability anisotropy is not taken into account.
TOUGH2 input file. Brady's Exp. 6, 2D, NaClv% 0.0; CO2 gsat 0.0% IC hydrostatic

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:31 am

CBIL and STAR image logs as pre-processed DLIS files, and mud log of well 83-11 Mud log of well 83-11

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:31 am

CBIL and STAR image logs as pre-processed DLIS files, and mud log of well 83-11 CBIL log in pre-processed DLIS format

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:31 am

CBIL and STAR image logs as pre-processed DLIS files, and mud log of well 83-11 STAR image log in DLIS format

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:31 am

Initial 3D gravity results from Zonge Int'l recorded for the 4D EGS Monitoring project at Newberry, during stimulation of Well 55-29 by AltaRock Energy Gravity station locations for the 4D EGS Monitoring project gravity survey at Newberry

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:24 am

Initial 3D gravity results from Zonge Int'l recorded for the 4D EGS Monitoring project at Newberry, during stimulation of Well 55-29 by AltaRock Energy Initial 3D gravity recordings at Newberry

Media file
Friday, May 4, 2018 10:23 am

Results for fluid rare earth element analyses from four Reykjanes peninsula high-temperature geothermal fields. Data for fluids from hydrothermal vents located 2400 m below sea level from Middle Valley on the Juan de Fuca Ridge are also included. Data have been corrected for flashing. Samples preconcentrated using a chelating resin with IDA functional group (InertSep ME-1). Analyzed using an Element magnetic sector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). Results for fluid rare earth element analyses from four Reykjanes peninsula high-temperature geothermal fields. Data for fluids from hydrothermal vents located 2400 m below sea level from Middle Valley on the Juan de Fuca Ridge are also included. Data have been corrected for flashing. Samples preconcentrated using a chelating resin with IDA functional group (InertSep ME-1). Analyzed using an Element magnetic sector ICP-MS. Formatted as the AASG Aqueous Chemistry Content Model

Media file

Pages