NOTICE CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS

This document may contain copyrighted materials. These materials have been made available for use in research, teaching, and private study, but may not be used for any commercial purpose. Users may not otherwise copy, reproduce, retransmit, distribute, publish, commercially exploit or otherwise transfer any material.

The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material.

Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement.

This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.

Chapter I O

Utah Geothermal

Commercialization Project

Utah Geothermal Commercialization Project: Semi -annual Progress Repor€ 4 J

T January, 1980

1 .O Introduction The Utah Geothermal Commercialization Prcrject i s part o a United States

Department of Energy regional program t o commercialize geothermal resources. The DOE has contracted w i t h an agency i n each s t a t e to conduct planning and outreach ac t iv i t ies ; i n Utah, the contracting agency i s the Division of Water Righ t s . supervisor, L, Ward Wagstaff, planning and technicaT analysis, and Douglas Nielsen, information and outreach.

Personnel working on the Utah project are Stanley Green, project

2.0 Specific Task .Descriptions and Products

2.1 Geothermal Prospect fdenti f i ca t i on Geothermal exploration o f a l l types mrttinued i n Utah through the l a t -

t e r ha l f of 1979, b u t a shift in emphasis from h i g h temperatwre resources t o moderate temperature resources was evident. Exploration for resources suitable fo r e lectr ical production continued, b u t a t a tower r a t e t h a n ear- l i e r years; on the other hand, the exploratian and commercfalfzation of mod- erate temperature resources has accelerated. much larger i n terms o f potential project s ize and energy uti l ized; however, more visible act ivi ty has occurred i n connection w i t h d i rect applicatfons,)

(Electrical development is s t i l l

Table 1

Electrical Prospects i n Utah

Measured We1 1 Prospect . Temp. OC Depth Notes

Roosevel t Hot 265 1200-7000 f t . 20 MWe plant planned fo r 1982, Springs (Proven) about 1985 and 1986. Develop-

Thermo 177-205 7300 f t , May be suitable for binary

Cove Fort 150 5200-7800 ft, Does not appear sui table for ( Inferred)

followed by 55 We plants

ment by P h i l l i p s - AT0

(Potential ) sys tem . *.

electr ical resources -Cove Fort U n i t dissalved. L

Notes - Production well drilled

Production well drilled

Salt Lake by Utah Roses; Geological investigations planned by the State of Utah

wells drilled

rystal Hot Sec. 11 , 86(’ ) 1665 (3) prings T4S, R1W

1120 Two production Sec. 1,

Salt Lake co .

astle , Sec. 20, 96 T36S. Rl5W

Iron Co.

7 T3S, RlW

Deep well drilled for electrical expl ora t i on program

Table 3

't Potential Prospects For Direct Uti1 ization o f Geothermal Resources (1 1

Maximum Measured Prospect Location Temperature , OC

Springs Sa l t Lake County

S a l t Lake County

Wasatch County

Wasatch Hot Springs Sec. 25, TlN, R1W 40'2) L

Beck's Hot Springs Sec. 14, TlN, R1W d2) , T3S, R4E 46(3)

Udy (Belmont) Sec. 23, T13NI R31.J 4 5 @ ) Hot Springs Box Elder County

Crystal (Madsen's) Sec. 29, T l l N , R2W 60"' Box E l der County

Weber County

,

rings Sec. 14, T7N, R2W 5 9 ( * )

Ogden Hot Springs Sec. 23, T6N, R1W Weber County

, , 1 .

2. Peter J. Murphy, UGMS 3. Johlcr, 1979 .

Updated.data on electr ical prospects are presented i n Table 1; data on d i rec t use prospects a re presented i n Tables 2, 3, and 4.

Sites investigated by UGMS , including temperature gradient surveys.

9

Most o f the exploration for e lectr ical -qual f ty resources was associated w i t h major prospect$, 5 . e , , Roosevelt Hot Springs, where development is quite advanced, and Cove Fort - Sulphurdale, where considerable exploration has been conducted without the discovery of a suitable resource. A t Roosevelt, a working agreement was reached between Phi 11 ips Petroleum Company and the A-T-0 Consor- t i u m (AMAX Exploration Inc., Thermal Power Company, and O'Brien Resources, Inc.). Testing of the reservoir has continued.

~

I

I

Union O i l Compa rilled a deep 11 a t Cove Fort du r ing the Spring o f 1979, ~ the i r fourth i n the 'prospect. The we1 as l a t e r plugged and abandoned. Later *

i n the f a l l , Union relinquished i ts leases, dissolved the Cove Fort - Sulphurdale I ' U n i t , and a gned two wells to.Forminco, Inc., a mining company w i t h property

i n the area. The two wells .- may be usable for direct applications. -

I . ' ! _ I

I I

I

L

I

6)

Figure 1.

Areas of Hot and Warn Water in - Utah

I I

'om Goode, 1.978.

264 c

kd . w

I

Prospect

Lower Bear River Area TO5 Bonneville S a l t Flats 88 Cove Fort - Sulphurdale 165 Curfew Valley 43 East Shore Area 62

Escai ante Desert 149 Escal ante Val ley 85 F i s h Springs 61 Grouse Creek 42

4 Heber Val 1 ey 44

Jordan Val 1 ey 89 Pavant Val ley/rBl ack Rock Desert 6T Sevi er Desert 82 Sevier Valley 77 i

46 I 'Utah Valley

1 Central Vi rg in River Basin 42 I Uintah Basin 55 i Beaver Val 1 ey 24

Blue Creek Valley 28 Cache Val 1 ey 49

28 Canyon1 ands Cedar City and Parowan Val 1 ey 21 Cedar Valley 27 Northern Juab Val 1 ey 20 Park Valley 2'3

Promontory Mountains Area 25 Rush Valley 27

, Skull Valley 24 Snake Val 1 ey 27 Tooel e Val 1 ey 32

, Tule Valley 28 Wah Wah Valley 29

~ Castil la Hot Springs 40

Diamond Fork Warm Springs 2g.

I

I r*

I

i

j -

I I

I I

1

,

I

Coma Warm Springs 25 , I I *

b_

265.

A shallow well a t Crystal Hot Springs (Bluffdale) was dr i l led by Utah Roses, Inc., a floral industry. near 88' C (190' F). Test data from the well are not yet available. Utah Roses also d r i l l e d a 5009 f t . well near Sandy City as part o f a DOE cbst- share program; the well reportedly has a s l i g h t artesian flow, w i t h a maxi- mum downhole temperature of 75' C (157' F) . Test ing of the well is scheduled

uary. Although the temperatures reached are not as h igh as had been they will be warm enough to heat the greenhouses as planned.

A t Newcastle, a second shallow well was drilled by Christensen Brothers

The well was successful w i t h temperatures

-

for a greenhouse (hydroponic) operation. T h i s we1 1 was reportedly similar t o a well drilled i n 1975, w i t h goo temperatures a t shallow depths.

uali ty water a t near-boiling p o i n t

erature-gradient wells were drilled a t Hill Air Force t t o locate resources suitable for space heating. The

the temperatures) was less than a normal predicted on the basis of cold water i n f i l -

-

temperature gradient ( gradjent, a condition whic t ra t ion from the Weber River Delta.

the leases which were issued during the reporting period; a complete l i s t . Several s t a t e geothermal leases were issued i n 1979. Table 5 lists

New State Geothermal Leases - July - December 1979

2.2 Area Development Plans

2.2.1 State Geothermal Planning Areas v

, 1

ea Development Plans (ADP's) are intended t o match projec energy demand for a given area w i t h the geothermal energy potentia?

m i g h t be sat isf ied through commercialization of the geothermal resource. for t h a t area, i n order t o estimate the port ion of energy demand which *

The data generated by the ADP's should provide the basis for further mar- ket analysis, such as market penetration analysis, as well as indicate which s i t e specific s i t e s are the best candidates for s i t e specific studies.

The first step i n the ADP process was t o d iv ide the s t a t e i suitable for analysis. For this i n i t i a l analysis, county l ines were used as area boundaries, and counties were grouped according t o existing Mul t i - County 'Planning Districts. They were t h e n further subdivided according to geographic and social characterist ics and according to the s ize and characterist ics of the i r economic base and geothermal resources. The planning areas for the ADP's are shown i n Figure 2 and listed by pr ior i ty

. i n Table 6. The primary and secondary pr ior i ty areas are planning ta r - gets for the past and coming contract years.

2.2.2 Specific ADP's Completed work on Area Development Plans is sumarired i n Tables 7 ,

8, and 9. sumption for the primary and secondary planning areas i n Utah. As used

would be consumed if natural gas were used i n the home. Space and water heating data are derived from equivalent natural gas projections. Elec-

Table 7 shows the resul ts of projected residential energy con- i

!

i ~

I here, equivalent natural gas is the estimated amount of natural gas which 1

t r i c i t y projections are based on existing records for Utah; the assumption is implied t h a t the dwellings a re serviced by both e lec t r ic i ty and natural gas. More specific and detailed data as well as explanations of the assum- ptions and methodology used to derive.these figures are found i n the Appendices of t h i s report.

1 I

I I I

~

*i

I

GP ~ 1 I

I i I

!red

268.

Table 6

AREAS TO BE CONSIDERED IN AREA DEVELOPMENT PLANS b v PRIMARY SECONDARY

Areas Counties Area Counties Area Counties

+WASATCH Morgan BAS IN Duchesne FRONT Weber Uintah

Sa l t Lake NORTHERN Davis U I NTAH Daggett

Beaver WEST Iron UTAH Utah SOUTH UTAH Washington VALLEY CENTRAL Kane

SEVIER Sanpe t e WEST Juab VALLEY Sevi e r CENTRAL M i 11 ard SOUTH Carbon

UTAH

Piute UTAH . EASTERN Emery Wayne UTAH Grand

Rich

NORTHERN Box Elder San Juan UTAH Cache

NORTHERN Summit MOUNTAIN- Wasa tch LANDS

GREAT Tooel e SALT LAKE DES E RT

Industrial energy demand projections for the years 1979 and 2020 are found i n Table 8. These data were generated by the Physical Sciences Laboratory a t New Mexico State University a t Las Cruces, based on employment information contained i n the 1979-1980 Directory of Utah Manufacturers.

pleted for most of the resource areas i n Utah. Table 9 contains estimates of beneficial heat several hot spr ings i n Utah, as reported i n USGS Circular 790, Assessment Geothermal Resources of the United States - 1978. These es- timates do not ref lect the updated resource information which is now available for some of the s i t e s , nor do they cover a l l of the resource s i t e s for which data are now available. and general assumptions, which may have limited application i n the case of smaller,

Estimates of geothermal resource capacity have not yet been com-

In addition, these estimates are based on rather broad

.~ fault-controlled hydrothermal systems such as those comonly found i n Utah. c

it

\

Space and Water Heating (109 Btu's)

1980 - 2000 2020 2000 - 2020 - 1980 - - Jordan Val 1 ey 53,700 78,000 21,100 36,900 53,600 123 ,OOO\ 21 6,OOO 31 3,000

Salt Lake County 30,700 53,700 21,100 36 ,qOO 53,600 123,000 21 6,000 31 3,000

1,483 . 2,686 4,492 12,330 070 40,790

Beaver 241 436 728 163 295 494 1,280 51 0 4,190 916 1,659 2,774 621 1,124 1,880 4,900 9,560 16,500 Iron

699 1,267 2,118 6,150 12,000 20,100 Washing ton 1,031 1,869 3,124 1,199 1,902 2,625 9,560 16,400 22,620 Sevi er Val 1 ey 1,760 2,805 3,873 '

Sanpete 532 849 1,172 4,270 7,380 10,180 Sevier 536 855 1,180 4,300

Wayne 106 169 234 72 115 158 570 970 1,340

Northern Wasatch 13,903 24,321 35,345 9,555 16,716 24,293 45,280 80,000 116,270 Front

Davis 6,513 11,395 16,560 4,477 7,832 11,382 22,140 38,990 56,660 Morgan 340 594 863 233 4 08 593 1,180 2,130 3,100 Weber 7,050 12,332 17,922 4,845 8,476 12,318 21,960 38,880 56,510

Utah Valley 9,145 15,750 24,000 6,199 10,678 16,767 33,060 58,300 88,810

9,145 15,750 24,000 6,199 10,678 16,267 33,060 58,300 88,810

Southwest Utah 2,188 3,964

h) QI W 7,330 10,110

Piute 59 83 115 420 720 990

Utah

Table 7 Continued

Equival ent Space and Water Natural gas^, (lo3 Mcf) Heating (109 Btu's)

2020 - 1980 __ 2000 - 2020 - 1980 - 2000 - 2020 - 1980 _I 2000 - West Central Utah 806 1,285 1,772 547 870 1,202, ' 4,110 6,980 9,620

Juab 320 51 0 7 03 21 7 345 477 1,510 2,520 3,470 M i 11 ard 486 775 1,069 330 52 5 725 2,600 4,460 6,150

Nort hern Utah 4,619 7,591 10,364 3,002 4,944 6,737 16,420 27,580 37,890

Box Elder 1,587 2,817 3,561 1,085 1,926 2,436 4,930 8,850 11,190 Cache 2,920 4,597 6,551 1,840 2,897 '4,128 11,100 18,100 25,800

Norther! 935 1,605 2,443 643 1,103 1,680 3,220 3,440 5,250

963 1,780 920 1,400 633 47 0 717 1,440 2,520 3,850

Rich 112 177 252 77 121 173 390 630 900

Mountain1 ands Iu u 0

sumi t 537 922 1,401 369 Wasa t c h 3 98 683 1,042 274

Great S a l t Lake 1,059 1,854 2,694 728 1,274 1,851 4,950 Desert -

Toad e 1,059 1,854 2,694 728 1,274 1,851 4,950 8,680 12,620

r; * 1 d 6'

,

Table 9

Estimated Thermal Energy

Recoverable Mean Estimated Mean Reservoir Benef i c i a 1

Temperature (OC) Thermal Energp Heat (Quads 1 (Quads)

Abraham Hot Springs 972 7 1.295 0.46 0.77

1015 8 f .03+-0.36 0.062

Joseph Hot Springs 107+ 9 0.79f_ 0.24 0.047

Thermo Hot Springs 1422 4 2.7 f. 1.1 0.162

wcastle Area 1 3 e 11 1.8% 0.86 0.108

stimates of temperature, reservoir thermal energyz and beneficial 3rooketa2, USGS Circular 790.

The results of the ADP's to date should be considered qualltatively; never-

1 Quad = 1015 Btu

theless, they do provide some Insight i n t o possible energy use patterns for the state. The data indicate, for example, t h a t the demand fur space and water heating energy for S a l t take County wtll 6e'nearly as wch BS fo 11 the other areas combined (about 47% 'of the tota? analyzed demand fn both 1980 and 2020)- The populated area along the klasatch Front would account for up t o 83% of the to ta l space and water heating demand for the areas analyzed. The industrial energy projections indicate that the Jordan Valley would also account for about 44% of the total for the areas analyzed. Another interesting aspect i's that in most of the counties analyzed, the projected residential energy use is much more than the projected industrial energy use; i n some cases, the projected industrial energy use is only a few percent of the projected space and water heating energy use.

The projections presented here do not take into account several pos- s ib le modes of development for the s t a t e {such as the MX Missile Project) which might drast ical ly affect population and industrial 'distribution patterns. Policy decisions regarding development of resources such as coal , oi l . shale, and t a r sands could also affect these dis t r fbut ions, A case i n point i s the s i t ing of the I.P.P. Power Plant near Lynndyl, far from the Source of the coal

*

-

b f

L

273.

-

be used i n the plant; the s i t i n g decision was based on pol icy, omical o r technical considerations i s much simpler t o p ro jec t the amount of energy which i s by na- laceable by geothermal energy than I t i s t o p red ic t the amount o f

geothermal u t i l i z a t i o n which w i l l ac tua l l y occur. Development o f the re-

sources w i l l undoubtedly occur e a r l i e r i n be t te r known resource areas, and,

ment w i l l probably be l i m i t e d by the capacity o f the resource. On the other

placement o f convential energy sourcesL but would be very d i f f i c u l t t o pre-

e the resource a t a pa r t i cu la r s i t e becomes economical t o recover, develop-

e widespread use of t pumps could provide a substantial d i s -

Mexico Energy t i t U t e has completed a prel iminary market pene- analysis f o r Utah, but i t was no t avai lab le f o r jnclusion itri-thfs,report.

c i f i c Development Analysis S i t e Speci f ic DevelopInent Analyses (SSDA'S) are intended t o por t ray

various aspect f development for a pa r t i cu la r appl icat ion a t a speci f ic geothermal res ce s i te . The analysis would consist of a step-by-step o u t l i n e o f development procedures, time frame estimates f o r expediential development, a prel iminary analysis of the technical and 'economic feas i - b i l i t y of the project , and the i den t i f i ca t i on o f spec i f i c factors whlch might hinder o r p r o h i b i t the successful completion o f the project . The

SSDA's are more deta i led and technical than the Area Development Plans, and 'so would o f fe r more i ns igh t i n t o the rea l developments potent ia l a t

be candidate s has occurred

( "potent ia l " s candidate s i t es are l i s t e d ,in Table 10. Two categ

e tab le - - s i tes where spec i f i c projects are alrea i

development bu

274.

Table 10

Candidate Sites fo r Lf

P Site Specific Development Analysis \

P I anned Devel opments

Crystal Springs - Space Heating

Crystal Hot Springs - Greenhouses

Sandy City - Greenhouses

Uddy Hot Springs - District Heating Newcastle '

*

Cove Fort Beck's Hot Springs Ilasatch Hot Springs Utah Hot Springs Ogden Hot Springs Hooper Hot Springs

Midway

Abraham iiot Springg Them

- Beryl

2.3.2. Site Specific Development Analyses: Completed and i n Preparation

ses were attempted. The data base for these analyses was as good as was available, b u t the projections whr'ch were made were not bas on the real potential or fikelihoocl of development. The SSDA's w i l l be based on thhs's ea r l i e r work but w i l l go Jnto much more detail ; they are envisioned as being an effect jve tool i n comnercial iration effor ts .

SSDA's, but sites where a project i s only contemplated m i g h t benefit more from an SSDA than more advanced projects. By the time a project actually gets underway, much o f the planning and analysis has usually been completed, whereas a project in the very ear ly stages might benefit substantially by the SSDA's. for these reasonsI, the s i t e s for which SSDA's will be completed will be carefulay selected.

2.4 Time Phased Project Plans

During the first year of the project; rough site specific analy-

/

Si tes where development is already underway are candidates for

Time Phased Project Plans (TPPP's) are intended t o be a of a l l the factors involved in a particular development pro- hasizing the specif ic steps % sequence i n which they occur., -r

and estimates ~f when they w i l l begin endb The project 1.s fa9 through all stages o f development including pre-lease ac t iv i t i e s ,

275. J

I

g, exploration, developer negotiations, reservoir analysis, marketing ot ia t ions, permit t ing, power plant construction, and transmission l ine

Constructions. The TPPP should de9 ineate i n detail the actions required for development to occur, which should a s s i s t planning effor ts and allow potential barriers and impediments to be detected. The end goal would

o use the TPPP as a basis for recommendations which would f a c i l i t a t e the development.

Acti4e Direct Use Projects

are listed i n Table 11. The only active electr ical project i n Utah is a t Roosevelt Hot Springs. A brief summary o f each project follows:

Active direct use projects i n Utah are candidates for TPPP's and

- Utah Roses a t Crystal Hot Springs (Bluffdale): a 410 f t . (125 m) well was d r i l l e d by Utah Roses to heat green- houses. Utah Roses would l ike t o eventually expand to as much as 20 acres of greenhouses if the resource is adequate, and hopes t o begin construction o f the i n i t i a l greenhouses early i n 1980.

Utah State Prison a t Crystal Hot Springs (Bluffdale): The Utah Department of Social Services is proceeding on a project to heat the minimum security bui ld ing a t the State Prison using geo- thermal fluids. The project i s par t ia l ly funded by a DOE grant throuqh the PON program.

In November 1979

Geological - - and geophysical studies are i n process to si te a production well.

- Utah Roses a t Sandy City:, In December, a 5009 ft. (1527 m) well was dr i l led by Utah Roses a t the i r present greenhouse f ac i l i t y a t Sandy City i n S a l t Lake County. The project is par t ia l ly fun- ded by a DOE grant through the PON program. The well reportedly had a s l i g h t artesian flow w i t h temperatures as h i g h as 1570 F. Although h i g h temperatures were hoped for a t shallower depths , the resource will be suitable for heating the greenhouses.

Christensen Brothers a t Newcastle: In the f a l l of 1979, Christen- sen Brothers converted an existing hot well and drilled a second, both of which will be used t o heat greenhouses for the production of tomatoes using hydroponics. The water is h o t a t shallow depths and of exceptional qual Tty.

, .

- U.S. Air Force a t Hill Air Force Base (Ogden): Two deep temper- ature-gradient holes have been dr i l led i n an e f for t to locate resources suitable for space h e a t i n g , probably i n warehouses. The temperatures encountered were reportedly lower than would be expected from normal temperature gradients because of in f i l t ra t ion from the Weber River delta, but may s t i l l be warm enough for the

contemplated. .

Table 11

Active Direct Use Geothermal Projects

Site Resource Geothermal IDevel oper) Application Characteri s t i e s Energy Requirements

Crystal Hot Greenhouses Artesian flow Development will Springs of 200 QPm a t occur as supported (Utah Roses) 193' F-.in 125m by the resource, !Ip well. to about 234 x 10

Btu ' s/yr .

Statis o f Project

Utah Roses has acquired the land and has dr i l led a hot well and a fresh water well The hot well has not y e t been f u l l y tested.

Crystal Hot Space Heating Probably simil- In i t ia l phase, Mini- Geophysjcal surveys completed - mum Secur t y Building: temperature gradient survey and Spr ings ar to Utah

(State of Utah) Roses We1 1. 10.9 x 10 Btu's/yr. siting of production well planned. Possi bl e eventual de elopment to 55.7 x

4

N 4* OI

10 8 Btu's/yr,

Sandy City Greenhouses 1527 m well Greenhouse conversion Deep production we1 1 d r i 11 ed , testing (Utah Roses) from natural gas -

s l i g h t artesian 70.0 x 109 Btu's/yr. flow, bottom operation.

not yet completed; resource i s expected to be adequate fo r the greenhouse

hole temperature 75' C. /

Newcastle Greenhouses 152 m well Oevel opment w i 1 1 ty hot water a t shallow ( ChrS stensen Bros . ) 95.50 c probably occur as depths. 2 wells d r i l l e d . Will be

supported by the resource.

used for hydroponic greenhouses.

Hill Air Space Heating 2 deep temp- Development will occur Temperatures apparently abnormally low, Force Base erature grad- as supported by the due t o cold water i n f i l t r a t ion I n the (U.S. Air Force) ient holes resource. Weber River Delta, Resour

adequate for the uses cont dr i l led

278.

- City of Monroe a t Monroe Hot Springs: Monroe City has d r i l l e d

phase o f a d i s t r i c t heating project , p a r t i a l l y funded by the DOE through the PON program. Several observation holes were d r i l l e d by the Univers i ty o f Utah (w i th DQE funding) i n connec- t i o n w i th studies o f the resource. The pro jec t i s now i n the engineering and design phase.

(Honeyvi l le): The -new owners of the resor t are undertaking extensive remodeling o f the reso r t f a c i l i t y and plan t o upgrade and expand the use o f the geothermal f l u i d s from the hot springs.

- Midway: Several bomeowners and resor ts already use warm water from hot springs o r from the warm water aqui fer , and more p lan t o bui I d geothermal l y heated homes.

a production we l l near Monroe Hot Springs as pa r t of the f i r s t G\ *

- Crystal Hot Springs Resort a t Crystal (Madsen's) Hot Springs P

2.4.2 Time Phased Project Plans - Completed o r i n Preparation During the f i r s t h a l f o f 1979, much o f the e f f o r t o f the Utah

Geothermal Commercial i za t i an Team was d i rected towards the completion of a Time Phased Project Plan f o r the e l e c t r i c a l development a t Roose- v e l t Hot Springs. The plan was completed i n July, and was included as an appendix t o the progress report-of the Utah Geothermal Commercial- i za t i on Project f o r the period o f January - June, 1979,

Several important events re la ted t o the develapment a t Roosevelt Hot Springs have taken place dur ing the la t te r h a l f o f 1979. A major event was the f i n a l i z a t i o n and approval o f an agreement between P h i l l i p s Petroleum Company ( the u n i t operator) and the AT0 Consortium (AMAX Ex- plorat ion, Inc., Thermal Power Company, and O'Brien Resources Corp.) ¶

and the j o i n i n g o f the u n i t by ATO. The agreement was the r e s u l t of long and d i f f i c u l t negotiat ions between the groups, and w i l l undoubtedly contr ibute t o the reasonable and e f f i c i e n t development o f the resource.

Current plans f o r the pro jec t are f o r a 20 We demonstration p lan t t o come on l i n e i n 1982 o r 1983, fol lowed by 55 We plants a few years. l a te r , probably about 1985 and 1986. The p ro jec t i s now i n a phase of market negotiat ions, which are also proving slow and d i f f i c u l t . The primary market being considered i s Utah Power and t i g h t , because i t I S

the major e l e c t r i c a l u t i l i t y i n the state; however, other groups are a l - so under consideration as p lant constructors and/or operators and as

4

power cus torners .

L

, 279.

useful aggregation of projected geothermal utilization for U t a h on a statewide basis. Energy demand data were generated as part o f the ADP process, but estimates o f resource energy capacity are no t avai 1 able. New Mexico Energy Institute made some energy-on-1 ine projections for the state, b u t these projections were completed late in December and were not available for integration i n t o this report. The NMEI projections

t h a t this interactive effort will take place early i n 1980.

which was intended t o resolve a number of problems related to the com- mercialization o f geothermal resources i n Utah. The legislation was not adopted, and will be introduced to the 1980 budget session of the

1 resources as

geothermal resources, specify ownership and rights t o geothermal resour- ces, delineate the role and authority of the State Engineer as the regu-

-

tory officer, and provide guidelines for unitization, There is some

2.7.1 Outreach Mechanisms The outreach program i s designed not only t o i n

e advantages of ut i l iz ing geothermal energy, but a LJ

* tance t o prospective users. A complete discussion o mechanisms is too lengthy for inclusion i n this report. Several of the more important features of the Utah geothermal outreach program are sum- marized below:

I A

- Information Services: Providing data and informatian to develop-

- User Assistance: Assisting developers, usually w i t h i n s t i t u t ion - a l procedures and requirements, b u t also w i t h research.

- Coordination w i t h contracted User Assistance Programs: Referring users t o the assistance programs available through WRI (resource assessment assistance) and EG&G Idaho, Inc. (technical ass is ta and coordinating w i t h those programs t o follow up w i t h the use

4 Legislation: Assisting the s t a t e legislature to draf t geothermal legislation for the s ta te . In particular, Stanley Green, t h e team leader, acted i n an advisory capacity t o the legislative’ committee and coordinated much of the work on the b i l l .

points for coordfnation between varfous s t a t e (and sometimes federal ) agencies invdlved i n geothermal development.

- Active Outreach: Conducting a coordinated e f for t .o f publ ic out- reach. Mr. Douglas Nielsen, a communications spec ia l i s t , joined the Geathermal Commercialization Project i n November to work specific- a l l y i n expanding and refining the outreach program.

The Utah Geothermal Commercialization Project i s considering a number of outreach mechanisms to enhance the existing program. o f the regulatory nature of the Division of Water Rights, outreach mechanisms must be carefully selected. Several planned outreach mechan- isms are sumnarized below:

’ ers , researchers , governmental agencies, etc.

I

~ - Interagency Coodination: Serving as one o f the primary contact i I ~

Because

- Increased User Assistance: Expansion of user assistance to technfcaf and economic analysis, particularly on an intensive level for specific projects.

- Publications: Publication of the Institutional Handbook and t h e i I

I I State Geothermal Map, i n preparation by the Urns, both of which

will a id greatly i n outreach activftfes. A number of pamphl and brochures on specific subjects are also planned.

I.

, I

281.

Use of Planning Results: Use of S i te Analyses and Technical and Economic Analyses as user assistance tools, both direct ly and indirectly.

- Outreach Coordination w i t h Other Programs: Coordination, through weekly semi-formal contacts, w i t h the outreach ef for t s of UURI and the UGMS, as well as EG&G Idaho, Inc. when applicable.

c i f i c Devel opment

utreach ac t iv i t ies by the Utah Geothermal Commercialization Program will not be included i n th i s report. Contacts listed i n the Midterm Progress Report, issued i n July, 1979, will also not be dupTicated i n this report. A few o f the more significant projects w i t h which the program has been involved w i l l be summarized.

A project w h i c h may prove t o be a major-geothermal development i n the s t a t e is an alcohol d i s t i l l a t i on plant currently planned fo r the

he plant will u t i l i ze the hot water which uring d r i l l i n g operations a t the Cove Fort rcial izatjon Program assisted the develop- acting the resource owners, Forminco, Inc. scaded through several uses, including sul-

Project personnel have a1 so interacted closely w i t h groups involved i n active geothermal projects, particularly the PON projects a t Monroe, Sandy City, and Bluffdale. The project has become involved i n assist ing on heat pump projects, ranging i n scope from i n d i v i d u a l homes to major ur- ban redevelopment complexes. The resul ts of some of these contacts are d i f f i c u l t t o assess, while w i t h others i t is apparent t h a t the State Team has been instrumental in the progress of the project. I

2.7,3 Overall Prospects fo r Future Geothermal Activity Interest i n geothermal energy ut i l izat ion is growing rapidly

Use of the resource fo r e lectr ical production was bolstered by the unitiza- t ion agreement a t Roosevelt Hot Springs, although i t was se t back somewhat by the cessation of Union’s operatf gress has been i n d i rect use.

ove Fort. The most V S

The d i s t r i c t beating system at-Monroe and the space heating I a t the State Prison progressed dur ing the period. Major mileston

achieved by the d r i l l i n g of production wells for greenhousing projects a t Sandy City, Bluffdale, and Newcastle. The alcohol d i s t i l l a t ion plant a t

+ 4’

Cove Fort became a viable project and entered into a planning and funding

62 se. culative projects b u t also in. firm develqmmt ~1.m

The interest i n direct. use, has been compTemented4 est i n and u t i l ization. of groundwater heat pumps, whi-ch, may become a

hteres& i n other areas has, burgeone

Ir

widely-used energy source in, areas of the s ta te where %ground&ater is avai 1.- able.

In summary, it, i s apparent t h a t geotherma4s u t o expand! i n Utah. the emphasis i n outreach will shift from soWcWbg interes i n geothermal u t i l iqzatian t o keeping up w i t h assistance requests.

Summary a f Major Findings and Kecammendati’cms,

I t appears now that i t wn’.l;l- be. on13 a short time

3.0 commendations of the Utah Geothe Cmmerei.aTiita

tfiose outlsined i n the m Progress the most urgent and substantive recommendations are

i n c luded. he re.

ermal legislatibn for Utah shouTd passed .. Whether the 1 egis- is i.h the ~ Q ~ T W of the a r r e n t b a: modi;fYed vmsi.on, i t attempt. to, effecti vel’y address w fssues, The, 1:egi”slation. define geothermal L crampatibTe w , i t h nature

and w t t h other standard rrh: as. the definb t b n in fed- eral’ law) and such t h a t h: e’kctricad and direct use, will be faci‘laitated; i t should clarify ownership of the resource; i t should clarify and specify the regulatory authori ty of the State En- g i neer; i t should clarify the re1ationshi.p between geothermal resources and water i n such a way as t o facilitate development of: both‘ high and low temperature resources;, i t should define and clarify the re- Tationship between geothermal r igh t s , water rights, and correlative (praperty) rights; and i t should elari. o f the State Engineer t o unitize. Leg would specifically authorize geotherma her h e a t h s.ystems ¶.

and remove small dlist-ributors of direct h resources 9 including groundwater ) om being classified as. u t i

nectian w i t h spen These guide1 ines should reconcile environmental, hydrologic, and statutory requirements i n a reasonabl issues should be resol veci,. particular use and heat pumps. f l

and specify the authori ati,sn is also needed’ wh

- The s t a t e should rmulate guideli‘nes f a r reinjection, bath i n con- eothermal fluids and wiW heat pump appTications.

d economic way. hase assaiated.

.

L

283.