Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Compilation of geothermal-gradient data in the conterminous United States
by
T ")Manuel Nathenson and Marianne Guffanti^
Open-File Report 87-592
This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards.
* Menlo Park, California ^ Reston, Virginia
1987
ABSTRACT
Temperature gradients from published temperature/depth measurements made in drill holes generally deeper than 600 m are used to construct a temperature-gradient map of the conterminous United States. The map displays broadly contoured temperature gradients that can be expected to exist regionally in a conductive thermal regime to a depth of 2 km. Patterns of temperature gradients are similar to those for heat flow in some areas, but there are significant differences caused by regional differences in thermal conductivities. The average value of all 284 gradients for the United States is 29°C/km. The average for the eastern United States is 25°C/km and for the west is 34°C/km. Using the temperature gradients found in this study and published heat flows, derived thermal conductivities are calculated for the depth range of a few hundred meters to 2 km. For all data, the average conductivity is 6.0 + 1.9 meal/(cm sec °C).
METHODOLOGY OF MAP CONSTRUCTION
This paper presents basic data used for the map of geothermal gradients in the conterminous United States (Plate 1) by Nathenson and Guffanti (in press), and the reader should refer to that paper for most of the discussion concerning the map. The map shows values for geothermal gradients and the physiographic provinces of Fenneman (1928). Gradient contours are thick lines, dashed where uncertain. Gradients are calculated from equilibrium temperature vs. depth measurements for drill holes generally logged deeper than 600 m, excluding data from convective hydrothermal systems. The primary sources for these data are temperature logs published as part of heat-flow determinations made in deep holes and a compilation of temperature measurements by Spicer (1964). The set of deep equilibrium data used in this study constitutes a unique group of 284 gradients that have not been used before to construct a geothermal-gradient map.
Gradients from published heat-flow determinations comprise 70 per cent of the map data. The gradients reported in this study were selected by us based on analyses of temperature logs and are not necessarily the same as the originally published value. This reinterpretation of the basic data was necessary because a gradient reported as part of a heat-flow study is sometimes given for a restricted depth interval for which there are conductivity measurements and, hence, may not be representative of temperatures over the entire depth. However, large differences between our values and the previously published values are very uncommon.
The map data, current as of April, 1983, are listed by state in Table 1. Latitude, longitude, gradient, calculated surface temperature, logged depth, physiographic province reference (Table 2 and Figure 1), heat flow (when available), and derived conductivity are given for each hole. Units used for heat flow are HFU (1 HFU = 1 pcal/cra^sec =41.8 mW/ra^) and for thermal conductivity are TCU (1 TCU = 1 meal/cm sec°C = 0.418 W/ra°C) because most of the original data are in those units. The reference codes for the data sources are given in Table 3. Multiple references for a code in Table 3 occur where the temperature log is presented in one source and heat flow or other data in another. A code is given to indicate whether a hole is in the eastern or western U.S. The eastern United States is defined here as that part extending from the eastern coast to about the 105°W meridian, encompassing the drill holes in North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas and also including the two easternmost holes in New Mexico.
The calculated surface intercept TQ is not intended to be an estimate of the actual ground temperature. Instead, it is a value defined by the line
chosen and is combined with the gradient G according to the straight-line equation
T = T0 + G z
to give the temperature T at a specified depth z. Thus, negative or very high values listed in Table 1 indicate those holes in which the deeper gradient is significantly different from the shallower gradient.
The conductivities listed in Table 1 are not the values measured as part of heat-flow studies, but rather are derived for each hole by dividing the published heat flow by the gradient determined in this study. The conductivities obtained in this manner are nearly the same as the measured values except in a few cases where the gradients used in this study differ substantially from the gradients used in heat-flow determinations. This calculation imposes a single generalized value of conductivity at a site, whereas measured conductivity may actually vary with depth. These derived conductivities are discussed in a subsequent section.
Calculation of Temperature GradientsTemperature logs were analyzed with the objective of determining a
representative gradient for each site from which approximate temperatures within the upper 2 km of the crust can be calculated. For drill holes in which the temperature log is made in rocks of similar conductivity and the gradient is nearly constant with depth, a single straight-line gradient is easily chosen which represents temperatures at all depths very closely.
In instances where marked variations in the gradient occur over the logged interval, gradient selection was subjective and depended on the significance of the changes (hydrologic interference, conductivity contrast, logging artifact) and on the regional geology. Sometimes, an overall gradient was averaged from two or more straight-line segments weighted by depth interval, although in many cases, the shallower (less than about 300 m) data were generally considered less important than deeper portions of the logs in choosing a representative gradient. In some locations, there are thick sections of layered rocks of strongly contrasting thermal conductivities that make it difficult to represent the temperatures with a single gradient.
In the eastern part of the United States, there are a number of drill-hole locations where contrasting conductivities are likely to occur at shallow depths in sedimentary sections, and gradients cannot accurately be extrapolated to 2 km. In Table 4, data are given for 25 drill holes in the eastern and central United States where logged gradients were modified to yield overall gradients applicable to 2 km. In six cases (KS ROOKS, KS BUTLER, KS SMKYHLL, KS E-14, MD DGT-1J, SC CHRLSTN), measured gradients were adjusted for the presence of higher-conductivity basement rock beneath the logged interval by weighting the measured sedimentary gradient and an estimated basement gradient by depth interval for each hole. For the other drill holes, linear segments were weighted by depth interval, assuming in each case that the deepest logged gradient (whether in basement or not) extends to 2 km. Table 4 also includes data for 10 drill holes in the western United States where two gradients are a better representation of the data than a single gradient. No attempt has been made to determine locations where basement might occur between the total depth of the drill hole and a depth of 2 km in the western United States, because in many cases the definition of basement is less clear.
Table 4 lists a total of 35 drill holes where two gradients are the best representation of the data. A remaining question is in how many holes of this
group are the differences between gradients significant. Figure 2 shows histograms of the shallow gradient minus the average gradient G1-Gav and the deeper gradient minus the average G2~Gav . The small number of occurrences of Gi~Gav near zero is to be expected, since we emphasized the deeper data in selecting a representative gradient. Generally, near-surface gradients G^ are greater than the average for the drill hole, because near surface rocks tend to be lower in conductivity. However, in a significant number of cases, this common assumption is not true. The relatively large number of occurrences of G2~Gav near zero is also to be expected, since in many cases 62 occurs over most of the depth range. For the 35 two-gradient holes, the deeper gradient usually occurs over most of the depth range and thus dominates the average (or overall) gradient. Data for twenty two of these drill holes have both the average gradient and the deeper gradient within the same contour interval. Thus, for most of the drill holes used in this study (95 per cent), it is reasonable to use a single gradient to represent temperatures over the depth interval of a few hundred meters to 2 km.
Although some holes presented difficulties, it was possible to analyze most of the available deep data using the methodology of this study. A group of exceptions is data in Judge and Beck (1973) for the western Ontario and Michigan Basins. For some holes of that study, only a high-conductivity, dolomite-rich portion of a complex rock sequence to 2 km was logged, and thus the gradient obtained was considered not to be stratigraphically representative. Only those holes in Judge and Beck (1973) that penetrated a varied section of the sedimentary sequence comprising shale, limestone, and dolomite in that area were incorporated into our map data.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DATA SET
A histogram of the number of data points in different gradient classes is shown in Figure 3. The gradients lie between 6 and 69°C/km, an appropriate range for conductive temperature gradients. The mean of the 284 gradients is 29°C/km with a standard deviation of ll°C/km. The eastern data comprise a skewed frequency histogram (Figure 4). The mean of the 137 gradients is 25°C/km with a standard deviation of 10°C/km. The frequency histogram of 147 western data (Figure 4) shows a strong grouping of values between 30° and 39*C/km. The mean western gradient is 34°C/km with a standard deviation of ll°C/km.
CONTOURABILITY OF GEOTHERMAL GRADIENT DATA
In contouring a data set such as geothermal gradients, it is important to assess the validity of the resulting map. We compare the contourability of the geothermal gradient data to the heat-flow data obtained in deep holes. Both maps have broad contour intervals to show regional trends, so we examine the fraction of data points having a value not within a contour interval (outliers) and the number of contoured areas. Clearly, one can reduce the percentage of outliers to zero by simply adding more contours; however, one tries to balance the decision to add contours to reduce the number of outliers with the geologic context of adding another contour.
Rather than use all of the available heat-flow data, we use the subset of values measured in deep holes given in Table 1. Gradients for all of these deep heat flows are in the gradient data set, but not all gradient data have associated heat-flow measurements. In order to judge how representative the subset of deep heat-flow data is of the entire heat-flow data set, we compare
histograms and means and standard deviations. Because of the rather different characteristics of heat flow in the east and the west, these data sets are considered separately. Figure 5 shows histograms of the east and west deep heat-flow data. A visual comparison with the corresponding histograms presented in Figure 4 of Lachenbruch and Sass (1977) for the entire heat-flow data set shows that they are similar in appearance. The means and standard deviations for the two heat-flow data sets (Table 5) are similar, although the number of data points differ by factors of 2 and 5. From this comparison, we conclude that the deep heat-flow data set is similar to the entire data set, and it is reasonable to compare the contourability of the gradient data to the deep heat-flow data.
Tables 6 and 7 present data on the characteristics of the temperature gradient and deep heat-flow data sets. The column labeled number of areas is the number of areas that are enclosed by the contour interval given in the first column. The last three columns describe the data within the given contour interval. In both data sets, one contour interval with only one or two occurrences encloses a substantial fraction of the data. For example, in the eastern United States, the 15°-24°C/lun contour has two occurrences and encloses 53 per cent of the data; the 1.0-1.49 HFU contour has one occurrence and encloses 60 per cent of the data. There are many more deep gradient data in the east (137) than deep heat-flow data (60) whereas the two data sets are of similar size in the west.
The number of occurrences of various contour intervals in the heat-flow data set (50) is much greater than in the temperature gradient data set (26), because the data set used to contour the heat-flow map includes about ten times the number of data points as there are deep heat flow values. If one were to contour the subset of heat flow obtained from deep holes, there would be far fewer contours enclosing small areas. The heat-flow contouring in the west has 25 areas above 2.5 HFU, but these areas include only 11 data, of which 4 are outliers. Thus, many of the areas contoured as greater than 2.5 HFU are relatively small and show up only in the large data set. Assuming that perhaps 20 contoured areas in the west are not based on a data set comparable to the gradient data set, the remaining number of contoured areas in the heat-flow map is similar to that found in the temperature-gradient map.
The percentage of outliers for an individual contour interval in either data set must be assessed with care, because some of the contours with the largest percentage of outliers involve only a small number of data. It is more reasonable to compare outliers for the east, west, and total data sets (Tables 6 and 7). For the total sets, the percentage of outliers in each data set is similar (gradient data, 19 per cent; heat flow, 17 per cent). In the east, the percentage of outliers is greater in the gradient data (15 per cent versus 8 per cent); however, it is similar in magnitude to that for the heat flow data. The contourability of heat flow is expected to be better in the east, where the range of heat flow is fairly small. In the west, the percentage of outliers in each data set is similar (gradient data, 24 per cent; heat flow, 22 per cent). The percentage of outliers in both heat flow and temperature gradients is higher in the west than the east, which reflects the greater areal variability of heat flow and temperature gradients in the west. The point of this comparison is that the two data sets have similar measures of contourability, though the heat flow appears to be somewhat more contourable.
DERIVED THERMAL CONDUCTIVITIES
Having analyzed the deep temperature data to obtain representative gradients for the upper 2 km, we now have two representative numbers for many of the holes listed in Table 1: the heat flow and the gradient. From these two values, we derive a thermal conductivity that should be representative of the upper 2 km of the earth. This parameter makes it possible to assess how thermal conductivities vary with regional geology. Histograms of the derived thermal conductivities are shown for the total data set, the east, and the west in Figure 6. The mean values for the three populations are between 5.8 and 6.3 meal/cm sec°C (Table 8).
One contribution of analyzing temperature-depth data to obtain gradients representative to 2 km is the ability to then produce a map of representative thermal conductivities. Plate 2 shows the conductivity values on a map with physiographic provinces from Fenneman (1928). Table 8 gives means and standard deviations for derived thermal conductivities by physiographic province. Some areas show little variation in derived conductivity while others show a wide range of values. The data are too sparse to contour, and the calculation of means and standard deviations for physiographic provinces appears to be the most appropriate representation at this time.
TEXT REFERENCES
Fenneman, N. M., 1928, Physical divisions of the United States, U.S.Geological Survey National Atlas Map, Sheet 59 (1968), scale1:17,000,000.
Guffanti, M. and Mathenson, M., 1980, Preliminary map of temperature gradientsin the conterminous United States: Geothermal Resources CouncilTransactions, v. 4, p. 53-56.
Guffanti, M. and Mathenson, M., 1981, Temperature-depth data for selected deepdrill holes in the United States obtained using maximum thermometers: U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 81-555, lOOp.
Judge, A. S. and Beck, A. E., 1973, Analysis of heat-flow data - severalboreholes in a sedimentary basin: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v.10, p. 1494-1507.
Lachenbruch, A. H., and Sass, J. H., 1977, Heat flow in the United States andthe thermal regime of the crust: American Geophysical Union Monograph 20,p. 626-675.
Mathenson, M., Guffanti, M., Sass, J. H., and Munroe, R. J., 1983, Regionalheat flow and temperature gradients: Assessment of Low-TemperatureGeothermal Resources of the United States 1982, U.S. Geological SurveyCircular 892, p.9-16.
Mathenson, M., and Guffanti, M., in press, Geothermal gradients in theconterminous United States: Journal of Geophysical Research.
Spicer, H. C., 1964, A compilation of deep Earth temperature data: U.S.A.,1910-1945: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 64-147.
DATA REFERENCES
Arney, B. H., Beyer, J. H., Simon, D. B., Tonani, F. B., and Weiss, R.B., 1980, Hot dry rock geothermal site evaluation, western Snake RiverPlain, Idaho: Geothermal Resources Council Transactions, v. 4, 197-200.
Benfield, A. E., 1947, A heat flow value for a well in California: Am.J. Sci., v. 245, p. 1-18.
Birch, Francis, 1954, Thermal conductivity, climatic variation, andheat flow near Calumet, Michigan: American Journal of Science, v. 252,p. 1-25.
Blackwell, D. D., 1967, Terrestrial heat flow determinations in thenorthwestern United States: Ph.D thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge,Massachusetts.
Blackwell, D. D., 1980, Heat flow and geothermal gradient measurementsin Washington to 1979 and temperature-depth data collected during 1979:Washington Department of Geology and Earth Resources Open-File Report80-9, 524 p.
Blackwell, D. D., Black, G. L., and Priest, G. R., 1982a, Geothermalgradient data (1981): Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral ResourcesOpen-File Report O-82-4, 429 p.
Blackwell, D. D., Bowen, R. G., Hull, D. A., Riccio, J., and Steele, J.L., 1982b, Heat flow, arc volcanism, and subduction in northern Oregon:Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 87, p. 8735-8754.
Blackwell, D. D., and Robertson, E. C., 1973, Thermal studies of theBoulder batholith and vicinity, Montana: Society of Economic GeologistsGuidebook, Butte Field Meeting, Aug. 1973, p. D-l-8.
Blackwell, D. D., and Steele, J. L., 1981, Heat flow and geothermalpotential of Kansas: Final Report, Kansas State Agency ContractNo. 949, 69p.
Blackwell, D. D., and Steele, J. L., 1982, Temperature logs of deepholes in Kansas: Final Report, Kansas State Agency Contract #949, 13 p.
Bodell, J. M., and Chapman, D. S., 1982, Heat flow in thenorth-central Colorado Plateau: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 87,p. 2869-2884.
Brewster, D. and Pollack, H. N., 1976, Continued heat flowinvestigations in the Michigan Basin deep borehole (abs.): EOS, v. 57,p. 760.
Brott, C. A., Blackwell, D. D., and Mitchell, J. C., 1978, Tectonicimplications of the heat flow of the western Snake River Plain, Idaho:Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 89, p. 1697-1707.
Brott, C. A., Blackwell, D. D., and Ziagos, J. P., 1981, Thermal andtectonic implications of heat flow in the eastern Snake River Plain,Idaho: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 86, p. 11,709-11,734.
Carlson, A. J., 1930, Geothermal conditions in oil producing areas ofCalifornia: American Petroleum Institute Production Bulletin 205,p.109-139.
Cermak, V., and Jessop, A. M., 1971, Heat flow, heat generation, andcrustal temperature in the Kapuskasing area of the Canadian Shield:Tectonophysics, v. 11, p. 287-303.
Combs, J. B., 1970, Terrestrial heat flow in north central United States:Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,Massachusetts, 317p.
Combs, J. B., and Simmons, G., 1973, Terrestrial heat-flowdeterminations in the north central United States: Journal of GeophysicalResearch, v. 78, p. 441-461.
Costain, J. K., Perry, L. D., Dunbar, J. A., 1977, Geothermalgradients and heat flow, in Costain, J. K., Glover, L., III, and Sinha, A.K., Evaluation and targeting of geotherraal energy resources in thesoutheastern U.S.: April 1-June 30 1977: Virginia Polytechnic Instituteand State University, VPI-SU-5103-4, p. C-l-C-30.
Costain, J. K., and Wright, P. H., 1973, Heat flow at Spor Mountain,Jordan Valley, Bingham, and La Sal, Utah: Journal of Geophysical Research,v. 78, p. 8687-8698.
Dashevsky, S. S., 1978, Geothermal gradients in the southeasternUnited States, in Costain, J. K., Glover, L., III, and Sinha, A. K.,Evaluation and targeting of geotherraal energy resources in thesoutheastern U.S.: April 1-June 30, 1978: Virginia Polytechnic Instituteand State University, VPI-SU-56A8-3, p.C-2A-C-6A.
Dashevsky, S. S., and HcClung, W. S., 1980a, Summary of temperaturelogging of Crisfield, Maryland geothermal test hole, in Costain,J. K., Glover, L., Ill, Sinha, A. K., Evaluation and targeting ofgeothermal energy resources in the southeastern U.S.: July 1-Sept.30 1979: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,VPI-SU-27001-7, p. A-22-A-32.
Dashevsky, S. S., and McClung, W. S., 1980b, personal communication. Decker, E. R., Baker, K. R., Bucher, G. J., and Heasler, H. P., 1980,
Preliminary heat flow and radioactivity studies in Wyoming: Journal ofGeophysical Research, v. 85, p. 311-321.
Decker, E. R. and Birch, Francis, 197A, Basic heat-flow data fromColorado, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Texas, in Sass, J. H. and Munroe, R.J., Basic heat-flow data from the United States: U.S. Geological SurveyOpen-File Report 7A-9, p. 5-1 to 5-59.
Decker, E. R., and Bucher, G. J., 1979, Thermal gradients andheat-flow data in Colorado and Wyoming - a preliminary report: Los AlamosScientific Laboratory Informal Report LA-7993-MS, 9p.
Decker, E. R. and Roy, R. F., 197A, Basic heat-flow data from theeastern and western United States, in Sass, J. H. and Munroe, R. J., Basicheat-flow data from the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Open-fileReport 7A-9, p. 7-1 to 7-89.
Decker, E. R., and Smithson, 1975, Heat flow and gravity interpretationacross the Rio Grande rift in southern New Mexico and west Texas: Journalof Geophysical Research, v. 80, p. 25A2-2552.
Diment, W. H., Marine, I. W., Neiheisel, J., and Siple, G. E., 1965,Subsurface temperature, thermal conductivity, and heat flow near Aiken,South Carolina: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 70, p. 5635-56AA.
Diment, W. H., and Robertson, E. C., 1963, Temperature, thermalconductivity, and heat flow in a hole drilled near Oak Ridge, Tennessee:Journal of Geophysical research, v. 68, p. 5035-50A7.
Diment, W. H., and Werre, R. W., 196A, Terrestrial heat flow nearWashington D. C.: J. Geophys. Res., v. 69, p. 21A3-21A9.
Diment, W. H., Urban, T. C., and Revetta, F. A., 1972, Some geophysicalanomalies in the eastern United States, in Robertson, E. C., ed., TheNature of the Solid Earth, McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 5AA-572.
Eckstein, Y., Heimlich, R. A., Palmer, D. F., and Shannon, S. S., Jr.,1982, Geothermal investigations in Ohio and Pennsylvania: Los AlamosNational Laboratory Report LA-9223-HDR, 89p.
Edwards, C. L., Reiter, M., Shearer C., and Young, W., 1978,Terrestrial heat flow and crustal radioactivity in northeastern New Mexicoand southeastern Colorado: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 89,p. 13A1-1350.
10
Gardner, M. C., 1981, personal communication.Hawtof, E. M., 1930, Results of deep well temperature measurements in
Texas: American Petroleum Institute Production Bulletin 205,p. 62-108.
Henyey, T. L. and Wasserburg, G. J., 1971, Heat flow near majorstrike-slip faults in California: Journal of Geophysical Research,v. 76, p. 7924-7946.
Hobba, W. A., Jr., Fisher, D. W., Pearson, F. J., Jr., and Chemerys,J. C., 1979, Hydrology and geochemistry of thermal springs of theAppalachians: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1044-E, 36p.
Hodge, D. S., 1980, personal communication. Hodge, D. S., De Rito, R., Hifiker, K., Morgan, P., and Swanberg, C.
A., 1981, Investigations of low-temperature geothermal potentialin New York State: Los Alamos National Laboratory ReportLA-8960-MS, 74p.
Hull, D. A., Blackwell, D. D., and Black, G. L., 1978, Geothermalgradient data: Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral IndustriesOpen-File Report 0-78-4, 16lp.
Jessop, A. M., and Judge, A. S., 1971, Five measurements of heat flowin southern Canada: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 8,p. 711-716.
Joyner, W. B., 1960, Heat flow in Pennsylvania and West Virginia:Geophysics, v. 25, p. 1229-1241.
Judge. A. S., and Beck, A. E., 1973, Analysis of heat-flow data several boreholes in a sedimentary basin: Canadian Journal ofEarth Sciences, v. 10, 9. 1494-1507.
Keys, W. S. and Eggers, D. E., 1980, personal communication. Keys, W. S., 1980, personal communication. King, W. and Simmons, G., 1972, Heat flow near Orlando, Florida
and Uvalde, Texas determined from well cuttings: Geothermics, v. 1,p. 133-139.
Lachenbruch, A. H., 1968, Preliminary geothermal model of theSierra Nevada: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 73, p. 6977-6989.
Lachenbruch, A. H., and Sass, J. H., 1980, Heat flow and energetics ofthe San Andreas Fault: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 85,p. 6185-6221.
Lang, W. B., 1937, Geologic significance of a geothermal gradientcurve: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 21,p. 1193-1205.
Leonard, R. B. and Wood, W. A., 1980, Geothermal gradients in theMissoula and Bitteroot valleys, west-central Montana: U.S.Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation 80-89, 15p.
Levitte, D., and Gambill, D. T., 1980, Geothermal potential ofwest-central New Mexico from geochemical and thermal gradient data:Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory Report LA-8608-MS, 102 p.
McClung, W. S., 1980, Temperature logs of observation wells in theCoastal Plain of Georgia, in, Costain, J. K. and Glover, L.,III, Evaluation and targeting of geothermal resources in thesoutheastern U.S.: October 1, 1979-June 30, 1980: VirginiaPolytechnic Institute and State University, VPI-SU-27001-8,p. B-22-B-32.
Munroe, R. J. and Sass, J. H., 1974, Basic heat-flow data from thewestern United States, in Sass, J. H. and Munroe, R. J., Basicheat-flow data from the United States: U.S. Geological SurveyOpen-file Report 74-9, p. 3-1 to 3-185.
11
McCutchin, J. A., 1930, Determination of geothermal gradients in oilfields located on anticlinal structures in Oklahoma: AmericanPetroleum Institute Production Bulletin 205, p. 19-61.
Nathenson, M., Urban, T. C., Diment, W. H., and Nehring, N. L., 1980,Temperatures, heat flow, and water chemistry from drill holes in theRaft River geothermal system, Cassia County, Idaho: U.S. GeologicalSurvey Open-File Report 80-2001, 29p.
Olhoeft, G. R., Daniels, J. J., and Scott, J. H., 1981, Physicalproperties of the UPH-3 drill hole (abs.): EOS, v. 62, p. 387-388.
Perry, L. D., Higgins, S. P., and McKinney, M. M., 1980, Heat flow andheat generation in the Atlantic Coastal Plain, in Costain, J. K.,Glover, L., Ill, Evaluation and targeting of geothermal energyresources in the southeastern U.S.: Oct. 1, 1979-March 31, 1980:Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, VPI-SU-27001-8,p. B-114-B-153.
Rahman, J. L., and Roy, R. F., 1981, Preliminary heat-flow measurementat the Illinois deep drill hole (abs.): EOS, V. 62, p. 388.
Reiter, M. A., and Costain, J. K., 1973, Heat flow in southwesternVirginia: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 78, p. 1323-1333.
Reiter, M., Edwards, C. L., Hartman H., and Weidman, C., 1975,Terrestrial heat flow along the Rio Grande rift, New Mexico andsouthern Colorado: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 86,p. 811-818.
Reiter, M., Hansure, A. J., and Shearer, C., 1979a, Geothermalcharacteristics of the Rio Grande rift within the southern RockyMountain complex, in Riecker, R. E., ed., Rio Grande rift: Tectonicsand Magmatism, International Symposium on the Rio Grande Rift, SantaFe, New Mexico, 1978, p. 253-267.
Reiter, M., Mansure, A. J., and Shearer, C., 1979b, Geothermalcharacteristics of the Colorado Plateau: Tectonophysics, v. 61,p. 183-195.
Reiter, M. and Shearer, C., 1979, Terrestrial heat flow in easternArizona: a first report: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 84,p. 6115-6120.
Reiter, M., Shearer, C., and Edwards, C. L., 1978, Geothermalanomalies along the Rio Grande rift in New Mexico: Geology, v. 6,p. 85-88.
Reiter, M., Simmons, G., Chessman, M., England, T., Hartman, H., andWeidman, C., 1976, Terrestrial heat flow near Datil, New Mexico: NewMexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Annual Report, July 1,1975- June 30, 1976, p. 33-37.
Roy, R. F., 1963, Heat flow measurements in the United States: Ph.D.thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Roy, R. F., Decker, E. R., Blackwell, D. D., and Birch, F., 1968,Heat flow in the United States: Journal of Geophysical Research,v. 73, p. 5207-5221.
Roy, R. F., Taylor, B., Pyron, A. J., and Maxwell, J. C., 1980,Heat-flow measurements in the State of Arkansas: Final Report, LosAlamos Scientific Laboratory, LA-8569-MS, 15p.
Sass, J. H., 1981, personal communication. Sass, J. H., Galanis, S. P., Jr., Munroe, R. J., and Urban, T. C.,
1976, Heat-flow data from southeastern Oregon: U.S. GeologicalSurvey Open-File Report 76-217, 52p.
12
Sass, J. H., Killeen, P. G., and Mustonen, E. D., 1968, Heat flow andsurface radioactivity in the Quirke Lake syncline near Elliot Lake,Ontario, Canada: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 5,p. 1417-1428.
Sass, J. H., Lachenbruch, A. H., Munroe, R. J., Greene, G. W., andHoses, T. H., Jr., 1971, Heat flow in the western United States:Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 76, p. 6376-6413.
Sass, J. H., Munroe, R. J., and Stone, C., 1981, Heat flow fromuranium test holes in west-central Arizona: U.S. Geological SurveyOpen-File Report 81-1089, 42p.
Sass, J. H. and Ziagos, J. P., 1977, Heat flow from a corehole nearCharleston, South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey ProfessionalPaper 1028-H, p. 115-117.
Scattolini, Richard, 1978, Heat flow and heat production studiesin North Dakota: Ph.D. thesis, University of North Dakota, GrandForks, North Dakota.
Scott, J. H., and Daniels, J. J., 1980, personal communication. Shearer, C. R., 1979, A regional terrestrial heat-flow study in
Arizona: Ph.D thesis, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology,Socorro, New Mexico.
Shearer, C., And Reiter, M., 1981, Terrestrial heat flow in Arizona:Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 86, p. 6249-6260.
Smith, D. L., and Dees, W. T., 1982, Heat flow in the Gulf CoastalPlain: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 87, p. 7687-7693.
Smith, R. N., 1981, Heat flow, in, Mitchell, J. C., ed., GeothermalInvestigations in Idaho: Idaho Department of Water Resources WaterInformation Bulletin no. 30, part 11, p. 79-113.
Spicer, H. C., 1964, A compilation of deep Earth temperature data:USA, 1910-1945: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 64-147.
Steele, J. L., and Blackwell, D. D., 1982. Heat flow in the vicinity ofthe Mount Hood Volcano, Oregon, in Priest, G. R., and Vogt, B. F.,eds., Geology and geothermal resources of the Mount Hood area,Oregon: Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries SpecialPaper 14, p. 31-42.
Urban, T. C., Diroent, W. H., and Baldwin, A. L., 1974, Basic heat-flowdata from the eastern United States, in Sass, J. H. and Munroe, R.J., Basic heat-flow data from the United States: U.S. GeologicalSurvey Open-file Report 74-9, p. 6-1 to 6-65.
Urban, T. C., Diroent, W. H., and Nathenson, M., 1978, East Mesageothermal anomaly, Imperial County, California significance oftemperatures in a deep drill hole near thermal equilibrium:Geothermal Resources Council Transactions, v. 2, p. 667-670.
Van Orstrand, C. E., 1926, Some evidence on the variation oftemperature with geologic structure in California and Wyoming oildistricts: Economic Geology, v. 21, p. 145-165.
Van Orstrand, C. E., 1930, Description of apparatus for themeasurement of temperatures in deep wells; also, some suggestions inregard to the operation of the apparatus, and methods of reductionand verification of the observations: American Petroleum InstituteProduction Bulletin 205, p. 9-18.
Van Orstrand, C. E., 1938, Temperatures in the lava beds of central-and south-central Oregon: American Journal of Science, v. 35 ofthe fifth series, p. 22-46.
13
Van Orstrand, C. E., 1941, Temperature of the earth in relation to oil locations, in Temperature its measurement and control in science and industry: American Institute of Physics Symposium, New York, 1939, Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York, p. 1015-1033.
Van Orstrand, C. E., 1951, Observed temperatures in the Earth*s crust, in, Gutenberg, B., ed., Internal Constitution of the Earth: Dover Publications, Inc., Second Edition, p. 107-149.
Wang, Jiyang, and Hunroe, R. J., 1982, Heat flow and subsurfacetemperatures in the Great Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 82-844, 102p.
14
Table 1. Basic data for drill holes used in this study. Each data entry lists two letter abbreviation for state name, hole name, physiographic province code (Table 2), latitude and longitude in degrees and decimal minutes, geothermal gradient G, heat flow q, derived thermal conductivity k = q/G, intercept TQ used for calculating temperatures as a function of depth, logged depth H, reference code (Table 3), and division of data into eastern and western sets.
State, Hole Name, Province Code
AL R-10AL 2AL 9AL 11AR 1AR 6AZ A972AZ GM-5AZ NAVAJO-2AZ VD-14AZ CBH-1AZ R-2AZ 807AZ WA7AZ 42AZ 43AZ KlAZ STNFLDAZ 704AZ H2AZ FED1AZ PQ-1AZ PQ-3AZ PQ-4AZ PQ-8AZ PQ-9CA EG- 7CA 326-28RCA 366-24ZCA 385-24ZCA 343-4GCA 344-35SCA 372-35RCA 382-3GCA LB-1CA LB-22
PDGCVRGCIHGCBRBRCOBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRPBPBPBPBPBPBPBPBPBPB
Lat. Deg.Hin.
333433333433313336333234353232323332313432343434343439353535353535353333
16.020.026.645.023.06.253.08.058.023.957.838.522.119.925.323.85.6
46.622.726.330.07.80.39.417.038.542.017.018.018.016.017.017.016.053.049.1
Long. G Deg.Min. °C/km
868786889392
111109109110109113114112111111111111110112114112113113113113122119119119119119119119118118
1.058.644.812.450.039.6
055.09.0
51.937.541.08.1
52.924.423.91.4
59.641.429.944.551.513.110.656.658.648.031.034.033.024.022.028.023.02.0
11.2
141817182245293426283330242933362730302839283434313917363737373636363537
qHFU
0.95
1.09
2.471.91.552.801.981.901.762.06
2.252.262.622.382.01
1.681.901.621.682.191.171.261.01.21.121.21.31.261.74
kTCU
6.8
5.0
8.55.66.010.06.06.37.37.1
6.28.48.77.97.2
6.05.64.85.45.66.93.52.73.23.03.33.63.55.0
To °C
14.415.315.415.814.214.420.417.611.618.820.917.018.823.832.428.522.627.715.013.915.021.025.522.333.524.86.825.324.624.722.522.624.821.811.619.2
H Ref. East m West
722 R+762 SP610 SP
1067 SP530 R+658 SP600 R+700 RS
68 e64 e64 e64 e80 e64 e68 w79 w
1402 R+79b w580 SH1110 SH810 SH880 SH690 SH610 SH650 SH590 SH600 SH570 SH740 SH820 SH905 S+
1317 S+1671 S+625 S+
1574 S+1243 S+1989 S+1876 S+1855 S+2153 S+2239 S+2159 S+2331 S+3223 S+1189 CA
79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w81 w81 w81 w81 w81 w71 w71 w71 w71 w71 w71 w71 w71 w71 w30 w
Notes:A minus following a gradient value indicates that no temperature log was
available for that drill hole.A negative heat flow indicates that the value was obtained by averaging
nearby values. These heat flow values are not included in heat flow statistics but are used to calculate derived thermal conductivities.
A $ sign following a surface intercept indicates that the value was obtained from a map of mean-annual air temperatures.
15
State, Hole Name, Province Code
CA LB-28CA F-4CA C-8CA C-7CA SB-2CA SF-7CA R-3CA KR-2CA KH-2CA SOB-2CA LV1CA SN-STCA SN-SJCA SN-JBCA SN-HCCA MESA 31-1CA MAN-11CA SV01CA GV29CA STNCNYNCA USL1-3CO RYMTARSCO DDH-K1CO 1CO 3CO 5CO 6CO 7CO CRESTED BUTTECO WETMORE 1CO WIN-9CO WINFIELDCO CHICAGOCO LILLY L.CO REDWELLCO L.IRWINCO ALMACO BLACK HOLLOWCO PIERCEFA GT-1GA TRT-1GA S791GA MCC1IA AND 3IA BOOK 1IA PRICE 1IA SPENCERID BOSTIC-IAID G-WID INEL-1ID G2A
Lat. Deg. Min,
PB 33PB 33PB 36PB 36PB 33PB 33PB 34PB 35PB 36PB 35BR 34SN 37SN 37SN 37SN 37BR 32BR 34PB 38PB 36PB 36PB 36GP 39CO 37GP 39GP 38GP 40GP 40GP 40SR 38GP 38SR 38SR 38SR 37SR 37SR 38SR 38SR 39GP 40GP 40AC 28AC 32AC 32AC 32CL 42CL 41CL 41CL 43CP 43BR 42CP 43CP 43
48.054.212.412.246.257.021.332.22.8
27.837.010.06.06.08.0
48.638.850.426.438.402.951.047.00.321.044.445.85.5
55.014.059.058.036.034.054.053.019.036.039.028.056.157.555.038.333.741.510.02.8
14.237.146.0
Long . G Deg. Min. °C/km
1181171201201181181191191201191161201191191181151161211201211201041081041051051051051071051061061071071071071061041048182828294949495
115113112112
9.956.417.617.57.44.525.91.17.1
45.143.44.0
44.023.059.015.720.850.618.415.546.651.051.020.28.23.01.66.47.05.0
27.026.037.035.03.06.07.0
50.050.013.336.838.540.01.26.210.411.026.522.056.841.3
373436353835303234353069
1318402520323049393733393336443027403331214439414444201514161218188
62524360
qHFU
1.291.650.450.610.771.30
1.60.64
1.792.252.02.99
2.401.232.742.842.45
3.62
2.42.30.92
-1.0
0.921.171.160.44
2.52.602.63
kTCU
3.75.57.56.85.97.2
6.43.2
6.04.65.18.1
8.04.66.88.67.9
8.2
5.45.24.66.7
7.76.56.45.5
4.86.04.4
To °C
18.422.421.921.922.718.919.320.421.028.219.422.419.913.45.6
21.019.916.821.617.525.06.74.58.2
12.210.59.69.1
-3.6
11.02.4
-0.41.2
-0.1-1.2
2.8-1.16.76.415.919.419.219.29.4
11.710.57.6
18.018.46.2
-2.0
Hm
2743106713171067137212191067869802
2646700492459491503
1880762646700591860
3658610
12191067914
12191981750580670670900575900900900
2088213417131125750
2115645675585670
295014903125790
Ref. East West
VOSPVOSPSPCAVOSPSPBEHWLALALALAU+ROWMWMLSLSS+DBSPSPSPSPSPR+R+DBDBDBDBDBDBDB
41 w64 w26 w64 w64 w30 w51 w64 w64 w47 w71 w68 w68 w68 w68 w78 w63 w82 w82 w80 w80 w71 w74 w64 w64 w64 w64 w64 w75 w75 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w79 w
R+79a wR+79a wKSMCMCMCCSCSCSR+A+N+B+B+
72 e80 e80 e80 e73 e73 e73 e68 e80 w80 w81 w81 w
16
State, Hole Name Province Code
ID 5N/5E/3CDIL CONDIT 1IL MUSSER1IL UPH-3IL 5IN S-55KS E-14KS SMOKYHILLKS BUTLERKS ROOKSKS GIBS1KS FINEGANKS PAUL LSKS GIBSONKS MERZ2LA MO-4LA CL-1LA BL-1LA Z-3LA Z-4LA PILA SCOTLANDLA BRNLA BRSMD DGT-1JMD PP-1MI N-65MI 4MI 2MI BASINMI NV-106MN DDH-4MO B-20MO LEVASYMS A-2MS J-3MT BUTTEMT MB-2MT MB-4MT C-lNC SP-3NC PD-1NC STUMPY PTNC C14ANC CISND 2894ND 5086ND 3479NH CONWAYNJ 136NJ IBEACH
, Lat, Deg. Min.
NRCLCLCLCLCLCLGPCLGPGPGPGPCLCLGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCACPDSUSUSUCLCLSUIHCLGCGCNRNRNRGPBLPDACACACGPGPGPNEVRAC
434041423940373837393939383739323231313132303030383946474743424738393332464746483535353334474748444139
47.548.61.2
26.221.855.148.052.349.814.741.232.131.528.759.621.850.835.536.035.348.632.826.225.21.0
13.844.01.34.016.226.049.09.05.0
58.218.13.03.2
57.621.654.842.442.258.039.06.6
28.455.31.07.0
48.5
Long . G Deg. Min. °C/kra
115878889878696979699
101101999695919493939393919191757789888884839191948890
1121141141118280757777
103103102717474
50.853.653.751.556.827.156.034.558.332.625.130.355.153.944.752.41.2
46.229.027.053.411.808.508.449.55.2
34.041.437.732.034.043.015.010.025.511.833.017.43.8
57.07.32.3
46.358.219.040.148.026.06.0
35.05.6
28-2018232015292830243330263024424147455036202224311617151722-122015172145312122221414352220414540271328
qHFU
2.01.421.411.8
1.39
1.36
1.241.221.101.82
-0.81.060.930.931.101.200.871.241.17
2.1
1.02
1.291.231.511.621.61.90.91
kTCU
7.17.17.87.8
9.3
4.9
6.25.54.65.95.06.26.25.55.0
10.04.48.36.9
6.8
7.3
5.96.23.73.64.07.07.0
TO °C
5.0$10.511.56.5
14.115.018.015.018.016.520.521.013.715.017.516.520.015.814.411.724.220.220.419.418.010.25.45.12.3
H Ref. East m West
590 B+1065 CS765 CS
1600 SD686 SP
1050 CS737 SP
1050 BS737 BS
1045 BS1455 BS1410 BS1350 BS870 BS
1010 BS610 SP686 SP610 SP762 SP762 SP
1067 SP500 SD500 SD500 SD
78 w73 e73 e80 e64 e73 e64 e81 e81 e81 e82 e82 e82 e82 e82 e64 e64 e64 e64 e64 e64 e82 e82 e82 e
980 DMSOa e770 DMSOb e610 R+504 BI
1905 BI8.0$5324 BP11.23.2
12.111.713.220.26.7
12.812.37.7
11.914.618.920.019.02.94.73.08.08.9
12.9
1006 JB1235 R+610 R+
1186 R+762 SP686 SP
1200 BL692 LW869 LW610 SP
1220 DA630 DA
1350 C+545 P+595 P+
1981 SC1449 SC1800 SC900 KY
1067 D+822 DA
68 e54 e54 e76 e73 e68 e68 e68 e64 e64 e67 w80 w80 w64 w78 e78 e77 e80 e80 e78 e78 e78 e80 e72 e78 e
17
State, Hole Name, Province Code
MM GB-1MM 3MM SUN-1MM AZTEC-NORTHNM AZTEC-NENM CARR1ZO CKNM CEDAR HILLNM CHACO SLOPENM GAV1LAN-EASTNM MUNOZ CKNM VERMAJO RNM ORGAN-1NM OROGRANDENM CARR1ZONM CHAPELLNM ORTIZ-2NM QUESTA-2NM COM-8NM YS1DRONM WNUCLEAR28NM SMITH LAKE29NM GALLUPNV UCE-18NV TN-1NV IC-1NV UCE-9NV UCE-10NV UCE-1NV PM-1NV XD-20NV 14NV B-lNV L-77NV L-5NV UCE-3NY FMC-1NY 1075NY E-TOWNNY 1NY 1A269NY 13000NY 13689NY 13675NY 1A32ANY 14310OH BRBTNOK P-5OK OC-2OK OC-1OK 117OK 116
Lat. Deg. Min,
CO 36GP 32BR 34CO 36CO 36CO 36CO 36CO 35CO 36CO 36GP 36BR 32BR 32BR 34GP 35BR 35SR 36CO 36CO 35CO 35CO 35CO 35BR 38BR 40BR 40BR 38BR 38BR 38BR 37BR 39BR 39BR 38BR 38BR 38BR 38CL 43NE 44NE 44AP 42CL 42CL 42CL 42CL 42CL 42AP 42AP 41CL 36CL 35CL 35CL 35CL 36
41.033.60.854.050.039.057.051.022.036.045.027.025.048.016.019.042.051.032.030.031.839.035.020.033.049.041.034.017.016.014.05.0
55.856.158.012.015.013.010.039.532.850.951.943.93.61.3
59.031.126.028.449.6
Long . G .Deg. Min. °C/kra
10710410710810710710710710610710410610610710310610510710610810810811611611711611611611611411511411911911678757377787976767879819497979696
12.02.0
48.01.0
55.040.059.024.054.025.053.036.07.08.051.010.031.042.059.012.607.231.012.043.06.027.028.056.024.059.034.037.02.53.9
38.028.024.032.040.555.50.450.850.337.418.537.552.030.027.712.258.2
3216513940373734292848363436231921393939243334313139472523313527312853219
1832171720212122242118214240
qHFU
2.01-1.11.751.461.471.261.511.491.511.291.933.122.201.961.401.331.742.191.7
1.611.283.03.501.21.21.791.01.821.771.672.82.42.01.181.080.81
-1.4
1.371.35
k TCU
6.36.93.43.73.73.44.14.45.24.64.08.76.55.46.17.08.35.64.4
4.93.89.7
11.33.12.67.24.35.95.16.29.08.63.85.6
12.04.54.4
5.76.4
To °C
10.214.413.28.08.68.6
10.718.69.9
11.88.418.921.012.318.39.93.9
11.79.35.4
13.913.924.09.6
14.36.3
14.515.119.26.8
13.812.627.918.86.5
12.67.56.64.812.814.112.012.015.211.210.111.014.712.116.015.5
Hm
11881829146386086090010008301400880
1350840600820
1400720690
1878765792591570
164212181410856901623
1798600740630
1194518589879639600
1295567618725695640
1311855640
12191829838914
Ref. East West
S+LAR+R+R+R+R4-R+R+R+R+R+R+E+E+E+E+
71 w37 e76 w75 w75 w75 w75 w75 w75 w75 w75 w78 w78 w78 w78 e78 w78 w
R+79b wR+79a wLGLGDBS+S+S+S+S+S+S+R+R+R+SAROS+D+D+R+SPH+H+HOHOH+H+E+R+MCSPMCSP
80 w80 w74 w71 w71 w71 w71 w71 w71 w71 w68 w68 w68 w81 w63 w71 w72 e72 e68 e64 e81 e81 e80 e80 e81 e81 e82 e68 e30 e64 e30 e64 e
18
State, Hole Name, Province Code
OK 114OK 110OK HE- 7OK T-16OK T-lOK P-2OK 128OK WE-5OK W-6OK SA-1OK 1OK B-llOK BO-2OK 29OK C-4OK E-5OK CU-16OK HOUGHOR 11S/15E-22CDOR W-1AOR BLUE MTOR OMF7AOR ORE-IDAOR 12S/7E-9DAOR 11N/6W-3BDOR CORRINOR PUCCIPA 2PA 4PA 5PA 8PA 9SC DRB-2SC CHRLSTNSC WIN-1TN JOY-1TX SHAFTERTX BL-15TX L-3TX M-lTX PO-1TX 39BTX RA-1TX 46TX 40TX WOC-1TX P-2TX 47TX UTWUT W-EX-1UT RED WASH
Lat. Deg.Hin.
CLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLCLGPCPPBBRCACPCACPCPCAAPAPAPAPAPACACPDVRBRGPGCGCGCCLCLCLGPGCGPCLGCCOCO
363634363635353534343436353535353536444642454444444445414141404033323435293129313233323335333532293940
13.544.811.731.435.217.60.29.925.128.254.755.110.110.821.414.056.651.635.68.719.023.71.7
32.709.622.119.352.844.435.916.217.117.053.218.855.048.014.043.041.04.0
43.027.038.050.022.035.030.07.2
59.010.0
Long . G Deg.Hin. °C/kra
9797979797969696989796979696969696
101120123117121116121117119121777778797981808184
1041019796969698
10010096
1019899
109109
24.421.123.620.216.519.229.927.015.433.431.813.440.145.627.043.034.435.755.152.754.048.357.657.802.801.742.959.434.849.918.018.240.021.58.719.024.041.044.031.023.059.039.035.019.04.01.0
49.040.936.018.0
313817353543353917142937293141323228383140605869594467323029283016212013191143434019411518371235213227
qHFU
2.03
1.62.84
2.272.48
2.891.31
-1.5-1.5-1.2-1.20.991.301.470.821.5
-1.1
1.111.501.56
k TCU
5.3
4.04.7
3.34.2
4.34.15.05.24.34.06.26.27.46.37.9
10.0
5.34.75.8
To °C
15.316.016.415.315.514.714.515.217.116.314.414.013.811.314.012.413.210.016.89.8
20.912.525.3
-10.418.09.4
-1.03.14.24.28.96.118.218.015.514.626.620.320.418.820.216.718.218.915.517.116.218.423.810.58.2
Hm
914875838
1067860991
1067914610686799
1029991
1067914914838
1920820
1152565
18013036600611765
112516001676213423382077594792574871880882686910838
1122914732
1450610
1044914610960
1463
Ref. East West
SP 64 eSP 64 eSP 64 eSP 64 eHC 30 eMC 30 eSP 64 eHC 30 eSP 64 eSP 64 eSP 64 eSP 64 eSP 64 eSP 64 eHC 30 eHC 30 eSP 64 eBS 82 eH+ 78 wVO 38 wS+ 76 wB+82a wGA 81 wB+82b wSH 81 wB+82a wSB 82 wJO 60 eSP 64 eSP 64 eVO 30 eSP 64 eD+ 65 eSZ 77 eC+ 77 eDR 63 eDS 75 eHA 30 eHA 30 eHA 30 eHA 30 eHA 30 eSP 64 eHA 30 eHA 30 eSP 64 eHA 30 eSP 64 eKS 72 eS+ 71 wR+79b w
19
State, Hole Name, Province Code
UT UP. VALLEYUT SRS-4UT WSR-1UT MCL-1UT D-142VA CC-EVA C25AWA R-4WA RS-1WA DH-3WA SU-4WA NORC01WA HOIDC DRB-3WV 1WV 3WV 13WV 15WV P-21WY PINEDALEWY SC-26WY SC-27WY BM-1WY RF-2WY C-2WY RR-2WY RR-3WY BORIEWY QUEALY DOMEWY PMWY EBETWY RAWLINSCN OTTAWACN WINNIPEGCN PENTICONCN KAPUSKCN HEARSTCN 66-1CN M-75CN RUSSELLCN BF-1CN MML-1CN CG-648CN DW-7
Lat. Deg.Min.
COCOCOCOBRVRACNRCPCPPBCPPBPDAPAPAPAPVRWBGPGPGPWBMRWBWBGPWBWBMRWBSUCLNRSUSUSUCLSUCLCLCLCL
3738393840363648464646474739393939403842434342424441414141424541454949494946424543434242
41.046.410.731.032.049,054.154.426.021.032.022.114.30.020.225.416.50.29.2
46.025.025.050.110.522.439.839.29.0
36.018.20.044.023.748.719.825.041.425.06.019.027.040.059.044.0
Long . G Deg.Min. °C/km
1111111101091128176
117119119122120124778080808080
1091061061051071081061061041051061081077597
119828382837580797981
44.03.724.139.29.06.028.820.447.017.050.018.011.50.0
12.72.8
45.741.90.9
34.015.015.059.19.457.07.67.2
57.059.047.152.227.042.97.9
37.622.832.140.01.0
24.07.0
52.011.033.0
191618242010262737402527281727282725221649433736322426353514-30-
15141135121611182014162017
qHFU
1.521.291.581.552.31.031.942.251.391.50.831.480.861.12
-1.2-1.21.22
-1.2-1.2
1.3
1.51.51.301.61.11.010.911.860.781.231.21.21,20.91.11.20.9
k TCU
8.08.18.86.5
11.510.37.58.33.83.83.35.53.16.64.44.34.54.85.58.1
4.34.39.35.37.37.28.35.36.57.7
10.96.76.06.46.96.05.3
TO °C
19.912.013.016.04.99.8
20.09.7
12.414.010.111.45.2
12.35.97.65.48.49.4
11.44.45.88.25.6
10.08.37.75.38.04.0$
H Ref. East m West
1380 R+79b w560 BC575 BC600 BC1180 CW900 RC612 P+701 RO
2531 S+697 S+760 S+900 BL
1067 BL1424 DW2228 SP2286 SP2134 JO1360 SP3111 H+2996 S+838 VO808 SP991 SP884 SP
1295 SP884 SP914 SP
82 w82 w82 w73 w73 e80 e63 w71 w71 w71 w80 w80 w64 e64 e64 e60 e64 e79 e71 w26 w64 w64 w64 w64 w64 w64 w
2134 R+79a w1524 R+79a w645 D+
4.0$1723 D+11.77.65.9
10.02.51.45.76.98.110.711.79.07.6
760 DB630 JJ650 JJ660 JJ605 CJ654 CJ900 S+945 JB600 JB1100 JB710 JB
1000 JB1000 JB
80 w80 w79 w71 e71 e71 w71 e71 e68 e73 e73 e73 e73 e73 e73 e
20
Table 2. Physiographic province codes used in Table 1 and Figure 1.
AC Atlantic Coastal Plain
AP Appalachian Plateaus (subprovince of Appalachian Highlands)
BL Blue Ridge (subprovince of Appalachian Highlands)
BR Basin and Range
CL Central Lowland
CA Cascade Mountains
CO Colorado Plateaus
CP Colombia Plateaus
GC Gulf Coastal Plain
GP Great Plains
IH Interior Highlands
MR Middle Rocky Mountains
HE New England and Adirondack AD (subprovinces of Appalachian Highlands)
NR Northern Rocky Mountains
PB Pacific Border
PD Piedmont (subprovince of Appalachian Highlands)
SN Sierra Nevada
SR Southern Rocky Mountains
SU Superior Upland
VR Valley and Ridge (subprovince of Appalachian Highlands)
WB Wyoming Basin
21
Table 3. Reference codes used in Table 1.
A+ 80 Arney and others, 1980BC 82 Bodell, J. M., and Chapman, D. S., 1982BE 47 Benfield, A. E,, 1947; Spicer, H, C,, 1964BI 54 Birch, F., 1954; Spicer, H. C., 1964BL 67 Blackwell, D. D., 1967; Blackwell, D. D., and Robertson, E. C.,
1973BL 80 Blackwell, D. D., 1980 BP 76 . Brewster, D., and Pollack, H, K., 1976BS 81 Blackwell, D. D., and Steele, J. L., 1981BS 82 Blackwell, D. D., and Steele, J. L., 1982B+ 78 Brott, C. A., and others, 1978B+ 81 Brott, C. A., and others, 1981; Keys, W. S., and Eggers, D. E.,
1980 B+82a Blackwell, D. D., and others, 1982a; Steele, J. L., and
Blackwell, D. D., 1982B+82b Blackwell, D. D., and others, 1982bCA 30 Carlson, A. J., 1930; Spicer, H, C., 1964CJ 71 Cermak, V., and Jessop, A. M., 1971CS 73 Combs, J. B., and Sirnmons, G. 1973; Combs, J. B., 1970CW 73 Costain, J. K., and Wright, P. M., 1973C+ 77 Costain, J. K., and others, 1977DA 78 Dashevsky, S. S., 1978DB 74 Decker, E. R., and Birch, F., 1974DB 79 Decker, E. R., and Bucher, G. J., 1979DMSOa Dashevsky, S. S., and MeClung, W. S., 1980aDMSOb Dashevsky, S. S., and MeClung, W. S., 1980bDR 63 Diment, W. H., and Robertson, E, C., 1963; Urban, T. C., and
others, 1974 DS 75 Decker, E. R., and Smithson, S. B., 1975; Decker, E. R., and
Birch, F., 1974DW 64 Diment, W. H., and Uerre, R. W., 1964D+ 65 Diment, W. H., and others, 1965; Urban, T. CD+ 72 Diment, W. H., and others, 1972; Urban, T. CD+ 80 Decker, E. R., and others, 1980E+ 78 Edwards, C. L., and others, 1978E+ 82 Eckstein, Y., and others, 1982GA 81 Gardner, M. C., 1981HA 30 Hawtof, E. M., 1930; Spicer, H. C., 1964HO 80 Hodge, D. S., 1980HW 71 Henyey, T. L., and Wasserburg, G. J., 1971H+ 78 Hull, D. A., and others, 1978; Blackwell and others, 1982bH+ 79 Hobba, W. A., and others, 1979H+ 81 Hodge, D. S., and others, 1981JB 73 Judge, A. S., and Beck, A. E., 1973JJ 71 Jessop, A. M., and Judge, A. S., 1971JO 60 Joyner, W. B., 1960; Spicer, H. C., 1964KY 80 Keys, W. S., 1980KS 72 King, W., and Simmons, G., 1972LA 37 Lang. W. B., 1937; Spicer, H. C., 1964LA 68 Lachenbruch, A. H., 1968LG 80 Levitte, D., and Gambill, D. T., 1980LS 80 Lachenbruch, A. H., and Sass, J. H., 1980LW 80 Leonard, R. B., and Wood, W. A., 1980
and others, 1974 and others, 1974
22
MC 30 McCutchin, J. A., 1930; Spicer, H. C. , 1964MC 80 McClung, W. S. , 1980N+ 80 Nathenson, H. and others, 1980P+ 80 Perry, L. D., and others, 1980RC 73 Reiter, M. A., and Costain, J. K., 1973RO 63 Roy, R. F., 1963RS 79 Reiter, M., and Shearer, C., 1979R+ 68 Roy, R. F., and others, 1968; Decker, E. R., and Roy, R. F.,
1974R+ 75 Reiter, M., and others, 1975R+ 76 Reiter, M., and others, 1976R+ 78 Reiter, M., and others, 1978R+79a Reiter, M., and others, 1979aR+79b Reiter, M., and others, 1979bR+ 80 Roy, R. F., and others, 1980SA 81 Sass, J. H., 1981SB 82 Steele, J. L., and Blackwell, D. D., 1982.SC 78 Scattolini, R., 1978SD 80 Scott, J. H., and Daniels, J. J., 1980; Olhoeft, G.R., and
others, 1981; Rahman, J. L., and Roy, R. F., 1981 SD 82 Smith, D. L., and Dees, W. T., 1982SH 79 Shearer, C. R., 1979; Shearer, C., and Reiter, M., 1981SM 81 Smith, R. N., 1981SP 64 Spicer, H. C., 1964SZ 77 Sass, J. H., and Ziagos, J. P., 1977S+ 68 Sass, J, H, and others, 1968S+ 71 Sass, J. H., and others, 1971; Munroe, R. J., and Sass, J. H.,
1974S+ 76 Sass, J. H., and others, 1976S+ 81 Sass, J. H., and others, 1981U+ 78 Urban, T. C., and others, 1978VO 26 Van Orstrand, C. E., 1926; Spicer, H. C., 1964VO 30 Van Orstrand, C. E., 1930; Spicer, H. C., 1964VO 38 Van Orstrand, C. E., 1938; Spicer, H. C., 1964VO 41 Van Orstrand, C. E., 1941; Spicer, H. C., 1964VO 51 Van Orstrand, C. E., 1951; Spicer, H. C., 1964WM 82 Hang, J., and Munroe, R. J., 1982
23
Table 4. Holes with two representative gradients. G^ is near surface gradient to depth H^, 62 is assumed be the gradient to 2 km. Total depth TD is logged depth. When TD is less than HI, deeper gradient is an estimate. Gav is the gradient that best represents temperature from a few hundred meters to 2 km. NY 13689 and 13675 have three gradients.
Nameo
AZ 42CA USL 1-3KS E-14KS SmokyhillKS ButlerKS RooksKS GibslKS FineganKS Merz2MD DGT-1JNC Stumpy PtNC C14ANC CISNM 3NV UCE-18NY 13689
NY 13675
NY 14310OR 11S/15E-22CDOR OMF7AOR ORE-IDAOR 11N/6W-3BDPA 4PA 5PA 9SC CHRLSTNTX SHAFTERVA C25AWA R-4WV 1WV 3WV 13WV 15WY Quealy DomeCN DW-7
C/km
5069353237264547373543313013372538263928476770721924262725323724242322429
m
4606101160128011601300610560800
1362700460500
120013253205602905508806309601200400680760
11008205005604601500140013009501050500
G2 °C/km
334421a21a21a21a302715163519161825
17
18163157435933303116172327363732292926
TDm
610860737
1050737
10451455141010109801350545595
18291642
725
695131182018013036611
167621342077792880612701
222822862134136015241000
°C/km
334929283024333024313522201634
20
21223860585930293021192627272827253517
Note: a KS 21°C/km based on OK P-5.
24
Table 5. Statistics for heat-flow data from Lachenbruch and Sass (1977), subset used in this study, and geothermal gradient data.
Mean
Heat flow All data 1.23 (HFU) (1977)
This study 1.19
Gradients 25 (°C/km)
East
Standard a NumberDeviation m
0.37 0.30 129
0.28 0.24 60
10 0.41 137
West
Mean Standard Deviation
1.95 0.75
1.82 0.62
34 11
o Numberm
0.38 496
0.34 109
0.31 147
Table 6. Characteristics of gradient data
25
Contour range, °C/km
Number of areas
Number of data
Number of outliers
Percent outliers
East
<15
15-24
25-34
35-44
Subtotal
2
2
3.5
4
11.5
7
73
30
27
137
0
12
2
6
20
0
16
7
22
15
West
<15
15-24
25-34
35-44
>45
Subtotal
Total
1
2
0.5
9
2
14.5
26
3
7
78
50
9
147
284
0
0
26
8
1
35
55
0
0
33
16
11
24
19
26
Table 7. Contour statistics for subset of heat-flow data obtained by measurements in deep wells.
Contour range, HFU
Number of areas
Number of data
Number of outliers
Percent outliers
East
<1.0
1.0-1.49
1.5-2.49
Subtotal
8
1
6.5
15.5
16
36
8
60
2
2
1
5
13
6
13
8
West
<0.75
.75-1.49
1.5-2.49
>2.5
Subtotal
Total
1
7
1.5
25
34.5
50
2
33
63
11
109
169
0
7
13
4
24
29
0
21
21
36
22
17
27
Table 8. Statistics of derived thermal conductivities (racal/cra sec°C) by physiographic province and east/west division.
Standard Number Location mean deviation of data
Atlantic Coastal Plain 6.2 0.8 8
Appalachian Plateaus 4.6 0.5 11
Blue Ridge, Piedmont, New England and 7.1 2.1 12
Adirondack, Valley and Ridge
without 12.0 in NY 6.7 1.5 11
Central Lowland and Interior Highlands 6.9 1.4 21
Great Plains 5.2 1.7 13
Superior Upland 6.7 1.8 9
without 10.9 value in Canada 6.2 1.0 8
Gulf Coastal Plain 5.4 0.7 4
Rocky Mountains and Wyoming Basin 7.3 1.4 15
Colorado Plateaus 5.6 1.7 19
Columbia Plateaus and Cascade Mountains 4.5 0.8 10
Southern Basin and Range 6.7 1.5 25
Arizona part of Southern Basin and Range 6.9 1.4 17
Great Basin 6.3 2.9 16
Sierra Nevada 6.9 0.7 4
Pacific Border (8 points in CA grouped 4.4 1.4 8
as one point)
East 6.3 1.7 73
West 5.8 2.0 109
All 6.0 1.9 182
Figure 1.
Physiographic provinces in
th
e conterminous United States from
Fenneman (1928).
Abbreviations given in
Ta
ble
2.
N)
CO
20
29
QC LJ CD
Z
15
10
-20 -10 10 20
(°C/km)
20
QC LJ CD
15
10
-20 -10 10 20
(°C/km)
Figure 2. Histograms of upper gradient GI minus average gradient Gav and lower 62 gradient minus average Gav gradient in holes where there are different gradients over substantial thicknesses in the depth range 0 to 2 km.
50
40
30
OC UJ
30
20
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 GRADIENT (°C/km)
Figure 3. Histogram of gradients obtained from drill holes generally greater than 600 m deep in the conterminous United States.
31
40
oc
ID z
20
10
EAST
10 20 30 40 50 60
GRADIENT (°C/km)
70
40
85 30 m
20
10
I r
WEST
10 20 30 40 50 60
GRADIENT (°C/km)
70
Figure 4. Histograms of gradients in the east and west obtained from drill holes generally greater than 600 m deep in the conterminous United States.
\J
c
Figure 5.
Histoj
holes
generally $ u
w
UM
\~
f
2 *
(D
Q30)
3
rt
CD
(D
*
0rt
^
3* =
rOJ
(D
3
0) rt
ON
0
h
hO
!-
3§
a (D
H*
(D
3 rt
XH-
cr
m3
(D
^
if
(D
HS
* *
(D CD
-TI
roo
n r-
oo)
O2.
3 ^
l?a
^^
^
.«.
S* m
5
3
rt
vJ
0
1C
o
«m
S" °
i*^
*
^^
^^
3
H-
X.
H-
3
^
ff
(D
0
2La
3 hh
wCO
^
wJ?
2
*
ft 3
2.
ro ex
*-
TO
^
H
«
^
*
NU
MB
ER
-
ro
c 3
0
o
ci
i
\ F
* "
J
0)
H
]1
1
SO
X in > H TI
ror-
o ^ o
1 0> o
S-
01X
*"
c?
3 ro(A
(D o^
^
NU
MB
ER
.
ro
o ^
0
0
CI
i
i 1-
in
>
c/> H
1 1
4 >
ho
33
30
a:UJ§ 20
10
ALL
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY (I0"3cal/(cm sec°O)
<L\J
a:UJ CD
i 10
O
I
i r
i
i
i i iEAST
.-T-4TU ^0 8 10 12 14
-3.THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY (I0"°cal/(cm sec°C))
a:UJCD
20
10
0
i r
WEST
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY (I0"3 cal/(cm sec°C))
Figure 6. Histograms of derived thermal conductivity values for conterminous U.S., east, and west. See text for method of calculation.
