Proceedings The 5th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition (IIGCE) 2017
2 - 4 August 2017, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia
Exploitation of supercritical geothermal fluid –experience gained and remaining challenges
Ari Ingimundarson, Kristinn Ingason
Mannvit hf. Ögurhvarf 6, Kópavogur, Iceland
arii@mannvit.is, kristinn@mannvit.is
Keywords: deep root geothermal, supercritical fluid
ABSTRACT
Exploitation of the deep roots of geothermal systems has
received increased attention in the geothermal community
recently. The key issue is if it can be economically feasible
to extract energy from these systems where the fluid is at
high pressure and high temperature and can be superheated
or supercritical.
The Iceland Deep Drilling Project (IDDP) has been ongoing
since 2000. The drilling of IDDP-1 was completed in 2009
and drilling of IDDP-2, reaching 4,5 km depth, was
completed in beginning of 2017. IDDP-1 was drilled in the
Krafla geothermal area and produced superheated steam
with well head temperature up to 450 °C. Electrical
generating capacity of the well estimated around 30 MW.
IDDP-2 was drilled in Reykjanes geothermal area, is
presently being stimulated and discharge test will start in
2018. Currently, several countries have ongoing research
projects regarding exploitation of supercritical fluids from
deep geothermal systems.
Mannvit has been involved in the IDDP project from the
earliest phases and was the lead consultant for the designing
of IDDP-1 and IDDP-2. Mannvit was also the lead
engineering consultant for the design of wellhead and
discharge system for IDDP-1.
This article discusses in a general way the challenges that
drilling, production and exploitation of superheated or
supercritical geothermal fluid entails taking into
consideration the experience gained from the IDDP project.
A power plant utilizing superheated or supercritical
geothermal fluid is compared to a conventional geothermal
power plant.
1. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this article is to present challenges of
exploitation of the deep roots of geothermal systems. The
fluid, which may be extracted from such systems, will be at
higher temperature and higher pressure making it attractive
for power generation. The condition of the fluid is however
not known in advance. Not only is the pressure and
temperature unknown but also the chemical composition.
The main challenges are related to the unknown design
conditions, how exploration can be carried out in a safe
manner and at the same time use existing technology at
moderate cost. The roots of geothermal systems can be
found at relatively shallow depth such as in the case of Krafla
where superheated steam of 450°C was found at a depth of
2100 meters.
1.1 The IDDP project
The IDDP project was founded in 2000 by a consortium of
three energy companies. Two wells have been drilled as part
of this program, IDDP1 in the Krafla geothermal field and
IDDP2 in the Reykjanes geothermal field.
The drilling of IDDP-1 was completed in 2009 and drilling
of IDDP-2, reaching 4,5 km depth, was completed in
beginning of 2017. IDDP-1 was drilled in the Krafla
geothermal area and produced superheated steam with well
head temperature up to 450 °C. Electrical generating
capacity of the well estimated around 30 MW. IDDP-2 was
drilled in Reykjanes geothermal area, is presently being
stimulated and discharge test will start in 2018.
Note that IDDP-1 had to be plugged and abandoned due to
heavy damage to the casings and is therefore currently not in
operation. Several important lessons were learned during the
drilling and subsequent production tests.
1.2 Other deep geothermal projects
In addition to the IDDP project, several projects are ongoing
worldwide regarding exploitation of supercritical
geothermal fluids. In Japan, the “Japan Beyond the Brittle”
(JBBP) involves drilling into the ductile zone of the
basement. Potential advantages of this include recovery of
injected water and suppression of induced seismicity around
the reservoir.
In the DESCRAMBLE project which is supported by the
Horizon 2020 program and led by Enel, Italy, the aim is to
drill into continental-crust, super-critical geothermal
reservoir, test and demonstrate novel drilling techniques to
control gas emission and the aggressive environment. The
aim was also to demonstrate safe drilling in high pressure
and temperature conditions.
In Mexico, the GEMex the aim is to investigate the super-
hot geothermal system in the Los Humeros geothermal field
in Mexico. Material selection and well design are part of the
tasks to be completed.
In New Zealand the Hades project has been ongoing for
some time. Other projects have been mentioned such as the
Taupo Volcanic Zone - Deep Geothermal Drilling Project.
Most of these projects have in common that the identified
technical challenges involve the well design, drilling,
material selection in the aggressive environment. The fact of
the matter is that many of these problems have been
addressed and solved in the drilling of IDDP1 and IDDP2.
On the other hand, even though the drilling and testing of
IDDP-1 revealed several unexpected problems, it can be
expected that several more will be discovered during testing
of IDDP2.
page 1
 Proceedings The 5th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition (IIGCE) 2017
2 - 4 August 2017, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia
The article is organized in the following way. In Section 2 a
brief overview of the technical challenges regarding drilling
and exploitation is presented. At the same time, the
experience from the IDDP project is recounted. In Section 3,
a brief comparison between the risk profile of developing a
conventional geothermal project, compared to developing a
deep root geothermal project, is given. Finally, in Section 4,
conclusions are drawn.
2. TECHNICAL CHALLENGES
2.1 Well design and drilling
The design and drilling of wells into the deep roots of
geothermal systems pose several additional challenges
compared to conventional geothermal wells. One of them is
related to the depth and consequently additional casings as
well as deeper. Another is related to the high temperature
and pressure and the third the chemical properties of the
geothermal fluid.
Considerable experience was gained during drilling of
IDDP-1, see (Pálsson et al., 2014). On the other hand, IDDP-
1 represents only one well and even though it reached very
high enthalpy fluid, it only reached down to 2100m before
drilling had to be abandoned because it hit magma at the
bottom. Further experience was gained during drilling of
IDDP-2 which reached down to 4,650m.
Traditional geothermal drilling methods and equipment was
used for drilling both IDDP-1 and IDDP-2. In order to do
this successfully, the well must be kept cool at all times
during the drilling. The water supply must therefore be more
robust than in conventional geothermal drilling.
The design condition for temperature and pressure down
hole was based on measurements in existing wells and below
that the BPD curve until the critical point was reached.
Below the critical point fixed temperature gradient is
assumed, see (Thórhallsson et al., 2014) and (Ingason et al.,
2015).. In reality, the temperature in IDDP-1 turned out to
be higher than according to these design conditions and the
same indications are for the temperature in IDDP-2.
These extreme temperatures preset increased challenges in
terms of thermal stresses that must be considered in the well
design. Not only does the design need to consider the
structural integrity during heat up and production but also
during upsets in the operation.
The casing material used in IDDP-1 and IDDP-2 is standard
API material. By using more advanced material, such as
titanium, some of the design criteria can be better met, but
that will come at very high cost and may add other
weaknesses in the well design.
Although the chemistry of the fluid from the deep roots of
geothermal are not known, it is likely to be corrosive,
especially if wet. The type of corrosion is, however, not
known and therefore difficult to select the right material. The
design of IDDP-1 and IDDP-2 includes sacrificial casings
and even if the fluid proves to be very aggressive, the well
integrity will be maintained long enough to identify the fluid.
Well heads for IDDP-1 and IDDP-2 were designed with
equipment according to standard ANSI pressure classes.
Figure 1 shows pressure and temperature curves for fixed
enthalpy that can be expected ad depth above the
supercritical limit. The saturation curve for water along the
lines for fixed enthalpy. Also shown is the temperature-
pressure rating for ANSI classes CL 1500 and CL 2500.
As can be seen in the figure, the high enthalpy curves are far
removed from the saturation curve of water which is the
standard curve when considering wet geothermal reservoirs.
The highest temperature and pressure encountered at the
well head in the IDDP1 well was a temperature of 459°C and
pressure 150 bars.
Figure 1. Saturation curve with enthalpy curves and
temperature tolerance for class ANSI CL1500 and CL2500.
Drilling issues such as well control can be approached with
standard methodologies. But the drilling program must
consider the extreme conditions. For example, cementing in
IDDP-2 was performed with the reversed circulation
cementing method after the experience of drilling IDDP-1.
It is the opinion of Mannvit that there is nothing that
indicates that challenges present when drilling for
supercritical fluids cannot be successfully met. With careful
planning and taking previous experience into account, the
wells can be drilled and completed safely.
Experience in operating these wells for long term production
is on the other hand severely lacking. The experience from
IDDP-1 shows that several things can go wrong and further
investigation and development will be needed. However, no
indications from the short production testing of IDDP-1
indicate that the well could not be operated for longer
periods of time. The problems appear during process upsets.
2.2 Experience from discharge testing IDDP-1
During flow testing of IDDP-1, a fluid handling test setup,
based on wet scrubbing, successfully cleaned the
superheated steam with good results. However, reaching that
point was due to substantial effort and only after going
through a steep learning curve. IDDP-1 was plugged and
abandoned and therefore, its cost can be viewed as sunk
development cost for the advancement of exploitation of
steam from deep geothermal systems. The drilling and
page 2
 Proceedings The 5th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition (IIGCE) 2017
2 - 4 August 2017, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia
discharge testing of IDDP-1 were all thoroughly described
in a special issue of Geothermics in January 2014.
The challenges associated with exploiting deep geothermal
steam became apparent during the discharge testing. The
mechanical design of the discharge system had to be
adjusted several times during the discharge tests. Pressure at
the well head during maximum flow was 80 bars. The well
turned out to be capable of producing up to 50 kg/s of steam
at the later stages of the discharge testing. The power in MW
was estimated to be around This high well head pressure had
to be managed by dropping the pressure in several steps, see
(Ingason et al., 2014). One of the consequence of the high
flow and pressure were vibration problems.
Extreme erosion was experienced where steam velocities
were high. Pipe thickness was monitored carefully during
the discharge test. A remedy to the erosion was to design the
system for lower steam velocities.
Mechanical failures of critical equipment occurred during
the discharge testing. Valves were found to be difficult to
operate. A remedy was to install two valves in series. The
outer valves could then be closed first while the inner should
only be opened and closed when no flow was present.
The most severe mechanical failure was that of the master
valves. Due to a leak on the well head, the valves on the well
head were closed so that either of the two master valves
could be closed. When it was attempted to close the master
valves, they did not move and were stuck in their open
position. It was then decided to quench the well by pumping
water into it.
The chemistry of the fluid turned out to be quite challenging,
see (Hauksson et al., 2014). Due to a very high HCl content
in the steam, it was clear that when wet, the fluid would be
highly corrosive. But the well went relatively quickly into
discharging superheated steam at which time the high HCl
content was not as harmful. But it became clear that when
this steam would reach two phase conditions due to injection
of water or condensation, extreme corrosion would occur
due to the high HCl amount.
The steam was found to contain a substantial amount of
dissolved silica as well as sulfur compounds. Other scaling
materials were also found, see (Hauksson et al., 2014). When
pressure was dropped the silica appeared as dust within the
steam phase.
Several experiments were performed to reach proper
cleaning of the steam by wet scrubbing. This involved
changing the composition of the cleaning liquid. As
mentioned before, the discharge tests were successful in
terms of reaching a steam quality that could be used for
power generation.
2.3 Production and exploitation of fluid from deep
geothermal roots
The main challenge in terms of exploitation of supercritical
fluids is the chemical content which can cause extreme
corrosion and scaling problems. Temperature and pressure
of super-critical steam from deep geothermal systems is not
expected to be high on the surface compared to conventional
coal driven power plants who use supercritical steam.
Three main exploitation ideas have been considered for
harnessing super critical steam. These are wet scrubbing, dry
steam scrubbing and the use of a heat exchanger.
Wet scrubbing involves injecting a scrubbing liquid into the
steam stream so that the steam phase is brought into contact
with the scrubbing liquid. The liquid is usually water mixed
with chemicals so the steam is in this case brought into the
wet zone from a possible superheated condition with the
corresponding loss in exergy due to the reduction in
temperature.
Both dust and chemicals dissolved in the steam can be
removed with this method. The liquid phase is then separated
from the gas with a mist eliminator or other separation
devises.
Dry scrubbing in principle does not require a reduction in
temperature. In a reactor vessel, the steam meets solid or
liquid material which captures impurities in the steam. The
steam is not cooled down to the water steam zone but rather
maintains the temperature and pressure which means exergy
is not lost.
By using a heat exchanger, the supercritical steam can be
exploited by heating up a secondary liquid which can be
water or other in the same way as is done in a binary cycle.
The loss in efficiency due to the use of heat exchangers is
due to the heat exchangers pinches which cause a reduction
in the temperature of the fluid used in the turbine equipment.
A rough estimate shows that up to 30% loss in generation
power can be expected due to the cooling of the fluid that is
performed with wet scrubbing. That assumes that the
pressure is reduced to what is found in standard geothermal
steam gathering systems, i.e. ANSI class 150 for example.
Wet scrubbing was one of the exploitation method
mentioned above that was tested during flow testing of
IDDP-1. Even though commercial exploitation of IDDP-1
never happened, a reasonable level of certainty was reached
regarding the technical feasibility of exploiting the steam
from IDDP-1. More experience will be collected regarding
exploitation of supercritical fluids when IDDP-2 will be
discharge tested later. The conditions there can be expected
to be different due to the salinity of the fluid.
Given the increase in capacity that could be achieved using
other methods of exploitation, it is clear that challenges
remain to be overcome regarding exploitation of
supercritical steam from deep roots geothermal systems.
3. RISKS OF EXPLOITING DEEP GEOTHERMAL
SYSTEMS
The risk profile of conventional geothermal projects is well
known and documented, see for example (Gehringer and
Loksha, 2012). A short summary of the risk factors for
geothermal projects is the following:
page 3
 Proceedings The 5th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition (IIGCE) 2017
2 - 4 August 2017, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia
• Geological risk
• Legal and regulatory risk
• Development and construction risk
• Economical risk
• Operational risk
A deep geothermal project exploiting supercritical fluid has
all the above-mentioned risk factors. Furthermore, at the
current stage of development, additional risk factors can be
identified. Some of the additional risk factors are:
• P and T too high. If pressure and temperature are
too high, it could be that well head and casing are
not designed with sufficient strength. Experience
from IDDP-1 showed that when going deeper into
the reservoir, extreme temperatures can be
expected.
• Reduced permeability due to scaling. In
(Fridriksson et al., 2015) it was argued that in
some of the possible fluid pathways scenarios in
the IDDP-2 case, massive deposition of solids
could limit long term productivity of the reservoir.
• Chemical properties of geothermal fluid. Due to
the aggressive corrosion and scaling potential of
supercritical geothermal fluids, there will always
be additional risks involved with its exploitation.
Damage to equipment or more frequent
maintenance stops are possible.
• Failure in well or well head requiring quenching.
Due to the extreme temperatures, wells drilled are
much more sensitive to thermal cycling. Loss of
wells or increased well maintenance can be
expected.
• Failure of scrubbing equipment. Due to the
extremely aggressive nature of the steam, failure
in the scrubbing equipment can cause damage to
the steam supply system.
• Special treatment of effluents from the wet
scrubbing. The effluents from the wet scrubbing
can have aggressive properties such as high acidity.
It is possible that special disposal methods have to
be implemented.
4. CONCLUSIONS
A brief overview of the challenges presented in exploiting
supercritical fluid from deep geothermal systems was
presented. Experience from the drilling of IDDP-1 and
IDDP-2 in Iceland was recounted. Experience from
discharge testing of IDDP-1 was reported as well.
Mannvit has been lead designer of both IDDP-1 and IDDP-
2. Currently there are no visible show stoppers regarding the
technical feasibility in drilling wells reaching dep
geothermal systems. Two wells have been drilled. But
experience regarding long term operation of these type of
wells is very limited.
Experience from discharge testing of IDDP-1 indicate the
exploitation of steam from supercritical systems is
technically feasible with wet scrubbing. But IDDP-1 was
only one well and it is expected that more experience will be
gained when IDDP-2 will be discharge tested.
In summary, it can be stated that exploitation of deep roots
geothermal systems remains an interesting option to explore
further. Many technical challenges probably remain to be
overcome as the technology and its related projects are at a
very early stage of development. Plans to drill IDDP-3 are
already underway in Iceland.
REFERENCES
Fridriksson, T., Stefánsson, A., Óskarsson, F., Eyjólfsdóttir,
E., Sigurdsson, Ó., 2015. Fluid chemistry
scenarios anticipated for IDDP-2 to be drilled in
Reykjanes, Iceland.
Gehringer, M., Loksha, V., 2012. Geothermal handbook:
planning and financing power generation. Energy
Sector Management Assistance Program, The
World Bank, Washington, DC.
Hauksson, T., Markusson, S., Einarsson, K., Karlsdóttir,
S.N., Einarsson, Á., Möller, A., Sigmarsson, Þ.,
2014. Pilot testing of handling the fluids from the
IDDP-1 exploratory geothermal well, Krafla,
N.E. Iceland. Geothermics, Iceland Deep Drilling
Project:The first well, IDDP-1, drilled into
Magma 49, 76–82.
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2013.07.003
Iceland Deep Drilling Project Feasibility Report (No. OS-
2003/007), 2003. . Orkustofnun, Reykjavik.
Ingason, K., Árnason, A.B., Bóasson, H.Á., Sverrisson, H.,
Sigurjónsson, K.Ö., Gíslason, Þ., 2015. IDDP-2
Well Design, in: Proceedings World Geothermal
Congress.
Ingason, K., Kristjánsson, V., Einarsson, K., 2014. Design
and development of the discharge system of
IDDP-1. Geothermics, Iceland Deep Drilling
Project:The first well, IDDP-1, drilled into
Magma 49, 58–65.
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2013.05.002
Pálsson, B., Hólmgeirsson, S., Guðmundsson, Á., Bóasson,
H.Á., Ingason, K., Sverrisson, H., Thórhallsson,
S., 2014. Drilling of the well IDDP-1.
Geothermics, Iceland Deep Drilling Project:The
first well, IDDP-1, drilled into Magma 49, 23–30.
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2013.08.010
Thórhallsson, S., Pálsson, B., Hólmgeirsson, S., Ingason,
K., Matthíasson, M., Bóasson, H.Á., Sverrisson,
H., 2014. Well design for the Iceland Deep
Drilling Project (IDDP). Geothermics, Iceland
Deep Drilling Project:The first well, IDDP-1,
drilled into Magma 49, 16–22.
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2013.08.004
page 4