Energy and Groundwater in Montana

Summary of Montana’s Geothermal Areas

John Metesh

Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology

July 31, 2012

Deep Sedimentary Rocks

Crystalline Rocks

Deep Valley Fill

Yellowstone KGRA

Sedimentary

Flat lying (somewhat)

Tertiary through Mesozoic

and Paleozoic

Coal, oil, gas,

geothermal?

Sedimentary (origins)

Rocky Mountain thrust belt

uplift followed by extension

(thrust faults become normal)

intrusives

Coal, oil, gas (minor)

Base metals, Au, Ag

geothermal?

268 warm springs and wells

77% have temperatures less than 40O Celsius

12% have temperatures greater than 50O Celsius

111o

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

DISTRIBUTION OF SITESEAST OF 111 DEGREES LONGITUDE

Number of Sites = 115

Temperature Range (degrees Celsius)

<10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 >50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

DISTRIBUTION OF SITESWEST OF 111 DEGREES LONGITUDE

Number of Sites = 153

Temperature Range (degrees Celsius)

<10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 >50

Distribution by temperature - statewide

(42%) 10 to 20 OC (29%) 20 to 30 OC

(6%) 30 to 40 OC

(11%) 40 to 50 OC

(12%) > 50 OC

Northeast and

eastern Montana (carbonate rocks)

Depth: 2500+m

Madison Limestone – oil/gas wells

90 to 104oC,

flow: 10,000’s Lpm

Saline (TDS = 35,000 to 260,000 mg/L)

West Central Montana (crystalline rocks)

Depth: 2,000m

103oC Marysville

Water quality: TDS=600 mg/L

Flow: 100’s Lpm

0 25 50 75 100Temperature, °C

2000

1750

1500

1250

1000

750

500

250

0

De

pth

, m

ete

rs

BackgroundGradient

Marysville MGE #1 well

southwest Montana (crystalline rock, deep valley fill)

Depth: ? (fault controlled springs)

20 to 80+oC

Spring flow rates: 100’s Lpm

Water quality: TDS = 100’s mg/L

Southcentral Montana (crystalline rock, deep valley fill)

Depth: ? (fault controlled springs)

80+oC

Spring flow rates 100’s Lpm

TDS = 100 to 500 mg/L

Heat Flow (mW/m2)

187 White Earth (east of Helena)

800 Ennis

500 Marysville

Butte

40,000 YNP

Geothermal Gradient (oC/Km and oF/100ft )

72-231 5-13.6 White Earth

400 23 Ennis

240 14 Marysville

32+ 3.0+ Butte

400+ 23.0+ YNP

22.1 0.7 “background”

Yellowstone Controlled Ground Water Area

Montana

Inventoried 400 springs

600 wells

Yellowstone Controlled Ground Water Area

Long-term monitoring (flow/level, chemistry)

5 cold springs

15 hot (>15oC) springs

5 cold wells

10 hot (>15oC) wells

Long-term Program DNRC administration review / issuance of new permits water-use meters MBMG database new well logs water-use monitoring data from YNP Well and Spring Monitoring Special investigations e.g. CUT well abandonment

Butte Historic Mining District

5,600 miles of workings

49 miles of shafts

7 square miles

From: Miller, 1973

Cu exchange with Fe

Production 1880 through 2000

Cu 22,799,000,000 pounds

Zn 4,909,202,540

Mn 3,702,787,341

Pb 854,797,405

Mo 326,671,890

Ag 725,486,448 ounces

Au 2,922,446 ounces

Production 1880 through 2000

$48 billion (2003 dollars)

~half was from copper production

Copper production from the“Richest Hill on Earth”

by method

December 1983 (4320’ amsl)

April 1982 (2140’ amsl)

December 2003 (5252’ amls)

~2,200 feet in 20 months

~930 feet in 20 years

~3100 feet in 30 years (5285 amsl, April 2012)

bottom of pit

Kelley shaft

Orphan Boy

0 0.5 1 mile

SCALE

Kelley

Berkeley

Pit

Ophir

Pittsmontair shaft

Pittsmont #4

Pittsmont #3

OrphanGirl

Anselmo

Travona

Emma

Ophir

Original

Steward

Marget Ann

BelmontPittsmont #1

Mine Shaft (boldwhere sampled)

Lexington GraniteMountain

PilotButte

Missoula

SyndicatePit

Mountain Con

Horseshoe

Bend

LEGEND

NNNNNN

INTERMEDIATE ZONE

PERIPHERAL ZONE

“BARREN” ZONE High Ore

Connection betweenmines (dashed where

bulkheaded)

?

Pittsmont #2

Badger

CENTRAL ZONE

After Sales, 1914

12.82 3.29.07

11.9 3.23.95

32.75 6.22.07 22.14

5.02.07 17.65 5.02.07

26.74 6.22.07

17.4 3.23.00

15.0 4.05.90

Temperature C date

Montana

Tech

(after Miller, 1973)

Diamond drill holes

There’s plenty more where that came from…

State Geological Survey Contributions to the NGDS

$401,000 over 3 years

24 | Geothermal Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

National Geothermal Data System

(NGDS)

The NGDS is a distributed network of repositories and

data sites mitigating the upfront risk of geothermal

energy development by employing state-of-the-art

information science to provide access to quality and

comprehensive data.

What is the NGDS?

State Funding Amount

Washington $1,249,146

Nevada $1,070,639

Utah $966,834

Oregon $958,847

Idaho $873,562

Texas $743,481

Colorado $617,021

New Mexico $605,483

Kentucky $585,977

Massachusetts $515,901

Illinois $507,809

Hawaii $499,951

Montana $401,009

Indiana $378,499

Wisconsin $329,135

Top 15 Funded States

*AZ & CA data collection is part of the AZGS award and is not included in this summary

26 | Geothermal Technologies Program eere.energy.gov

NGDS Architecture: An Integrated, Distributed Data Network

Fluid, heat and permeability all occur naturally in the

geyser and the hydrothermal well below.

Arizona Geological Survey

Kentucky Geological Survey (UK)

Nevada Bureau of Mines & Geology (UNR)

DOE Geothermal Data Repository, Boise State University (BSU)

Illinois State Geological Survey (UIUC)

U.S. Geological Survey

Southern Methodist University (SMU)

State Geological Survey Hub National & Other Geothermal Hub

Interactive map tool provides information on data deliverables by state and category YR 1 Data Compilation

no-cost extension from the U.S.

Department of Energy through

April of 2014

Gunderson, J. A., 2011, Preliminary geothermal map of Montana

using bottom-hole temperature data, Montana Bureau of Mines

and Geology: Open-File Report 608.

Gunderson, J. A., 2011, Preliminary geothermal map of Montana

using bottom-hole temperature data, Montana Bureau of Mines

and Geology: Open-File Report 608.

Analytical Integration

Fluid, heat and permeability all occur naturally in the geyser and the hydrothermal well

below.