1887

Abstract

Summary

Following from our recent work on joint inversion of MT, gravity, and MEQ data from the Darajat field ( ), here we illustrate the pros and cons of quantitative integration of MT and gravity data through 3D joint inversion modeling, including major fault structures. We use both a 3D synthetic example as well as field survey data from the Sorik Marapi geothermal field, Sumatra. While MT results were largely similar for both single and joint domain inversions, gravity inversions – with inherently weaker depth sensitivity than MT – benefited significantly from the integration, in both cooperative and joint workflows. Additionally, by including faults as inversion regularization discontinuities, the graben boundary locations – well constrained by the gravity data – is represented faithfully. Through integrated inversion modeling of multiple geophysical data types over geothermal fields, and allowing sharp boundary structure, we achieve a multi-property 3D model that consistently explains the observations of each geophysical dataset, and should be more geologically reliable than stand-alone efforts.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202021061
2020-11-16
2024-04-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Cumming, W.
    [2009]. Geothermal Resource Conceptual Models Using Surface Exploration Data, Proceedings, 34th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford University.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Feijth, J., J.Hope, A.Ninomiya, H.Ishikawa, A.Shirota, M.Takuji, and G.Nakamoto
    [2018] Interpretation of Heliborne AGG, EM and Magnetic Data for Geothermal Exploration in the Musadake-Teshikaga Area:Proceedings, 13th SEGJ International Symposium.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Rezky, Y., and D.Hermawan
    [2015] Geothermal System of Sorik Marapi - Roburan - Sampuraga, North Sumatera, Indonesia: Proceedings, World Geothermal Congress.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Sagala, B.D., Chandra, V.R., and Purba, D.P.
    [2016]. Conceptual Model of Sorik Marapi Geothermal System based on 3-G Data Interpretation, ITB International Geothermal Workshop, Bandung.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Soyer, W., Mackie, R.L., Hallinan, S., Pavesi, A., Nordquist, G., Suminar, A., Intani, R. and Nelson, C.
    [2018]: Geologically-consistent Multiphysics Imaging of the Darajat Geothermal Steam Field, First Break, 36 (6) 77–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Ussher, G., Harvey, C., Johnstone, R., and Anderson, E.
    [2000]. Understanding the Resistivities Observed in Geothermal Systems.Proceedings, World Geothermal Congress, Kyushu-Tohoku.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202021061
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202021061
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error