Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geothermics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geothermics

An approach to reconstruct the thermal history in active magmatic systems:

Implications for the Los Humeros volcanic complex, Mexico
Paromita Deb a, *, Guido Giordano b, Xiangyun Shi a, Federico Lucci b, Christoph Clauser a
a
Institute for Applied Geophysics and Geothermal Energy, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
b
Dipartimento di Scienze, Università Roma Tre, Roma, Italy

A B S T R A C T

Reconstructing the thermal history in active volcanic complexes characterized by multiple magmatic events is challenging due to the limited knowledge of the nature
and extent of the transient heat sources. Although understanding of the geometry and architecture of a magmatic system is of prime importance for accurate
temperature assessments, it is still one of the most uncertain parameters in numerical models. In this work, we presented a methodology for thermal assessment in
active volcanic systems, whereby field-based geological, geochemical and petrological data are integrated to define the transient heat sources of a magma plumbing
system. This time-varying heat source conceptual model is applied in the Los Humeros Volcanic Complex, an active Quaternary caldera complex in the Trans Mexican
Volcanic Belt, for evaluating the thermal footprint related to the major volcanic events. The site is characterized by two caldera-forming eruptions, the Los Humeros
(164 000 years ago) and the Los Potreros (69 000 years ago) and numerous episodes of post-caldera bi-modal volcanism during Holocene period (8 000 – 3 000 years
old). The transient nature of the heat sources is implemented as time-varying temperature boundary conditions and the complete temporal evolution for a period of
182 000 years is simulated in 13 modeling stages. The thermal impact due to the voluminous caldera-forming events and the later short-lived magma pockets of
Holocene ages is simulated by emplacing heat sources in the numerical model distributed heterogeneously in space and active at different instants of time. The depth,
volume and age of the magma pockets are constrained from geochemical, petrological, geochronological and thermo-barometric analysis of erupted material. The
present temperature state obtained from this approach agrees well with the temperature data recorded in the geothermal wells. The thermal footprint of the in­
dividual volcanic events indicates that almost 80 % of the present-day thermal contribution results from the massive caldera-forming events. The post-caldera
Holocene magma pockets had additionally increased temperatures locally by 10 % - 20 % depending on the volumes and ages of the magma pockets. The
present-day thermal regime of the younger Holocene magma pockets suggests existence of super-hot resources at shallow depths in the southern part of the
geothermal field, making it a potential site for future exploration activities.

1. Introduction Miyakejima volcano in Japan (Ushioda et al., 2018), Eyjafjallajökull in

In recent years, progress in geophysical imaging techniques, igneous
petrology, geochemistry and numerical modeling have significantly
advanced the understanding of the morphology of magmatic plumbing
systems. In fact, the classical concept of a melt-dominated, single large
magma chamber in the upper crust is increasingly questioned as it fails
to explain all physical and petrological processes of magma accumula­
tion and differentiation, and its interaction with crustal rocks (Cashman
& Giordano, 2014; Cashman et al., 2017; Magee et al., 2018). The most
recent views of magmatic systems consider the existence of
vertically-extended arrays of magma accumulation zones or reservoirs at
different depths in the crust, periodically connected by feeders of
different magma flow rates (Annen et al., 2006; Caricchi & Blundy,
2015; Cashman et al., 2017; Edmonds et al., 2019). This magma
plumbing system concept has also been suggested in numerous volcanic
complexes such as the Campi Flegrei in Italy (Marianelli et al., 2006),
Iceland (Tarasewicz et al., 2012), and Anak Krakatau volcano in
Indonesia (Dahren et al., 2012) to explain the observed petrological,
geochemical and seismicity data. Caldera-forming eruptions are usually
the result of a depletion of the shallowest level of such a complex
magmatic arrangement (Ushioda et al., 2018). In fact, for some of the
largest eruptions on earth such as the Snake River Plain, US and the
Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand, a spectrum of processes including
the extensive depletion of multiple layers embedded in crystal mushes is
considered to have taken place (Ellis et al., 2010; Brown et al., 1998;
Cashman & Giordano, 2014). Caldera structures are, therefore, in­
dications of shallow crustal heat sources (Gudmundsson, 2008; Bach­
mann & Bergantz, 2008) and hence present an enormous potential for
generating geothermal energy from high-enthalpy resources within
drillable depths.
Large silicic calderas often host smaller nested craters related to post-
caldera activity (e.g. Orsi et al., 2005; Cole et al. 2005; Wohletz &

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: pdeb@eonerc.rwth-aachen.de (P. Deb).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2021.102162
Received 16 January 2021; Received in revised form 25 May 2021; Accepted 30 May 2021
Available online 23 June 2021
0375-6505/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P. Deb et al.
Fig. 1. Relief map of the LHVC showing the caldera rims of Los Humeros (red dashes), Los Potreros (black dash), fault Maztaloya (NW-SE trending yellow dashes)
and fault Las Papas (E-W trending yellow dashes), geothermal wells (black dots), nearby cities (red dots) and model boundary (blue dash).
Heiken, 1992). Active volcanic complexes, subjected to multiple
caldera-forming and post-caldera events, are affected by numerous ep­
isodes of magma regeneration, differentiation, eruption and cooling (e.
g., Claiborne et al., 2015; Lipman, 2007; Selva et al. 2019). For accurate
assessment of available geothermal resources, it is necessary to recon­
struct the thermal history related to each volcanic episode (Di Renzo
et al., 2016). Such a methodology requires a plethora of information
related to the architecture of the magmatic system, age, temperature,
depth and volume of emplacement, in addition to the properties of the
host rock formation (heat production rate, thermal conductivity,
porosity, etc.) (Stimac et al., 2001; Wohletz & Heiken, 1992).
Geochemical and petrological investigations of the erupted lava
samples, combined with thermo-barometric models provide information
on the parental magma composition, depth and initial temperature of
the magma bodies, while geochronological studies of the erupted
products provide insights regarding the age and residence period of the
magma in the crust (Feng and Zhu, 2018; Lucci et al., 2020; Ushioda
et al., 2018; Costa 2008). However, one of the largest uncertainties that
prevails in numerical modeling of volcanic systems is related to the
volume and depth of the magma chamber (Smith and Shaw, 1975).
Geophysical imaging of subsurface can potentially fill this gap by
providing information regarding the geometry and extent of the magma
plumbing system (Magee et al., 2018). Methods such as electromagnetic,
gravity and passive seismicity are widely-used cost-effective mapping
tools in geothermal exploration to constraint subsurface structures, but
their applicability is usually limited to certain investigation depths
beyond which the data resolution and quality are not sufficient for
resolving complex geological structures (Domra Kana et al., 2015). In
addition, the efficiency of any geophysical method depends on
site-specific geology such as temperature, presence of fluid, shallow
magmatic bodies, etc., (Hersir et al., 2020; Domra Kana et al., 2015).
Further discussion about available geophysics data specific to the case
study is presented in Section 2.3.
In this work, we investigate the thermal state of one of the active
Quaternary calderas of the Trans Mexican Volcanic Belt, the Los
2
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
Humeros Volcanic Complex (LHVC), which hosts the third largest
geothermal field of Mexico. Extensive field campaigns and geological
studies during the last decades revealed the nested caldera structure in
the LHVC, formed by two major caldera-forming events – the Los
Humeros and the Los Potreros events and later episodes of post-caldera
bimodal volcanism (Ferriz & Mahood, 1984; Carrasco-Núñez et al.,
2017a; 2017b; 2018; Norini et al., 2015). However, the structure of the
magmatic system under the caldera complex is still a subject of active
research. This work, therefore, represents a first order approach to
improve our understanding of the complex evolution of the magmatic
heat sources in Los Humeros.
Till date, the numerical models of LHVC assume the heat source to be
a single, melt-dominated, chemically stratified magma chamber located
about 5 km under the caldera complex with a volume of up to 1 400 km3
(Verma et al., 1990; 2011; Verma & Andaverde, 2007; Verma &
Gómez-Arias, 2013). However, recent volcanological, geochemical and
petrological studies based on thermo-barometric models (Lucci et al.,
2020), field studies and analogue modeling (Urbani et al., 2020; 2021;
Bonini et al.,2021) do not corroborate the current presence of a large
melt-dominated crustal magma chamber under the Los Humeros
caldera. Some of these studies provide evidence for Holocene mono­
genetic volcanic centers on the caldera floor, with compositions ranging
from olivine-basalts to trachyte and rhyolite. Their source depths range
from deeper than 30 km (basalts) to less than 3 km (trachytes) with
uniquely evolved compositions and complex histories of ascent at
different depths (Lucci et al., 2020). This rise of the different mafic and
felsic magmas to the caldera floor, indicate that at present the Los
Humeros caldera is not underlain by a single melt-dominated magma
chamber volume, but rather a complex magma plumbing system char­
acterized by numerous magma pockets, each evolving in a closed system
and unaffected by recharge and mixing processes (Lucci et al., 2020).
These studies propose an alternative model for the Los Humeros magma
plumbing system, characterized by multi-layered ephemeral magma
pockets rather than a single, large magma chamber (Cashman & Gior­
dano, 2014; Gualda and Ghiorso, 2013).
P. Deb et al.
We integrated the latest 3D geological model (Calcagno et al., 2018;
2020; 2021) and geochemical information (Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2018;
Cavazos & Carrasco-Núñez, 2020; Lucci et al., 2020) to propose a con­
ceptual model for the evolution of the heat sources under the Los
Humeros caldera. This conceptual model is used for evaluating the
contribution of different heat sources to the current thermal state of the
LHVC. Based on the published results of Los Humeros and Los Potreros
and new data from thermo-barometric analysis of Holocene lavas, we
defined time-varying heat sources under the Los Humeros caldera,
which represents the different magma bodies at different instants of
time. These heat sources are implemented in the numerical model as
time-varying boundary conditions using SHEMAT Suite (Clauser, 2003;
Keller et al., 2020) for reconstructing the thermal history of the LHVC.
This numerical model tests the hypothesis of multi-layered, localized
and ephemeral magma pockets under the Los Humeros caldera to
explain the present-day anomalous temperature distribution observed in
different parts of the geothermal field. Temperature data from the
geothermal wells at Los Humeros document a highly variable temper­
ature distribution at short distances within the geothermal field. A dif­
ference of more than 100 K in the bottom hole temperatures (BHTs) is
recorded at similar depths in wells within one kilometer distance. The
influence of localized heat sources in the Los Humeros geothermal field
is also reflected in the productivity characteristics of the geothermal
wells, which drastically changes between the northern and the southern
wells of the geothermal field (Aguilar et al., 2019; Arellano et al., 2015).
The thermal modeling is performed for a period of about 182 000
years representing the different volcanic phases of Los Humeros: pre-
caldera, caldera and post-caldera. The pre-caldera phase is modeled
by performing a steady-state simulation and represents the initial con­
ditions in the model (Section 4.3). The caldera phase, represented by the
Los Humeros and the Los Potreros caldera-forming events, are modelled
separately to evaluate their individual thermal impact on the present
thermal regime of the geothermal field (Sections 5.1 and 5.2). The
localized and short-lived volcanic events of the post-caldera Holocene
resurgent phase is modeled by incorporating shallow magma storage
zones under the caldera complex (Section 5.3). The modeling parame­
ters are constrained using the results of the published studies (Carra­
sco-Núñez et al., 2018; Cavazos & Carrasco-Núñez, 2020; Lucci et al.,
2020). Temperature data from the geothermal wells in this region are
used as a reference for comparing the results of the simulated model
temperatures. It is important to emphasize that we do not intend to
deterministically reproduce the observed temperature distribution in
the LHVC. Rather, the approach is to test whether the modeling of
multi-phase, transient magmatic events using a field-based conceptual
model of the magmatic heat source can capture the most prominent
architectural features of the geothermal reservoir and explain the
anomalous temperature distribution observed in the geothermal wells.
In Section 2, we will present an overview of the volcanological history
of the LHVC and briefly discuss the available information from temper­
ature and geophysical sources. In Section 3, we discuss the latest findings
regarding the volumes and ages of the erupted events from geochemical
and petrographic studies and their applications for constraining the pa­
rameters of the thermal model. In Section 4 we present the methodology
and the numerical constraints for different stages of modeling. Results
and their discussion are presented in Sections 5 and 6, respectively.
2. LHVC background
Located around 260 km east of Mexico City and at an elevation of
around 2 800 m a.s.l. (Fig. 1), the LHVC hosts an active, high-enthalpy
geothermal field with more than 50 geothermal wells and has been
commercially exploited by the Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE)
for the last 30 years (Cedillo-Rodriguez, 2000; Lorenzo-Pulido, 2008).
With an operational capacity of 93.9 MW (IEA, 2018) and production of
3
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
more than 123 million tons of geothermal fluids (Arellano et al., 2015),
it is Mexico’s third largest geothermal field.
2.1. Geology
The heat source of the LHVC hydrothermal system is related to the
young magmatic complex, which is characterized by multiple volcanic
episodes, with eruptive products ranging from olivine-basalts to rhyo­
lites (Ferriz & Mahood, 1984). The regional crystalline basement below
the LHVC consists of Late-Paleozoic to Mesozoic intrusive and meta­
morphic rocks about 250 million years old (Carrasco-Núñez et al.,
2017b). The crystalline basement is partially covered by less than 3 km
thick Triassic-Cretaceous series of limestones and terrigenous sedimen­
tary rocks (Norini et al., 2015; Norini et al., 2019) deformed during the
Late Cretaceous-Palaeocene Laramide orogeny (Campos-Enríquez &
Garduño-Monroy, 1987; Fitz-Díaz et al., 2018; Suter, 1987; Roure et al.,
2009). As a result of 15 million years old Tertiary intrusions of grano­
diorite and syenite (Yañez & García,1982), the Cretaceous limestones
are locally metamorphosed to marble, hornfels and skarn (Carra­
sco-Núñez et al. 2017b; Norini et al. 2015).
The Cretaceous limestone basement is overlain by an andesite
sequence, emplaced during the Miocene - Pleistocene volcanic period
lasting from 11 million years to 1.46 million years ago (Carrasco-Núñez
et al., 2017a, 1997; Gómez-Tuena & Carrasco-Núñez, 2000;
López-Hernández, 1995). This forms the Pre-caldera volcanic group and
is mainly composed of (i) the Miocene Cuyoaco and Alseseca andesites
(Yañez & García,1982) and (ii) the Plio-Pleistocene Teziutlan andesite
(Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017b; Ferriz & Mahood, 1984; Yañez & García,
1982). This naturally fractured andesite sequence varies in thickness
between 900 m to more than 1 500 m, and is the primary geothermal
reservoir of the Los Humeros field (Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017b;
Cedillo-Rodriguez, 2000; Norini et al., 2015).
The next sequence of rocks observed in the wells belongs to the
Xaltipan and Zaragoza ignimbrite erupted during the caldera phase.
These represent the Los Humeros and the Los Potreros caldera-forming
events, respectively. In a recent study, Carrasco-Núñez et al., (2018)
determined much younger ages for both these ignimbrite deposits by
U/Th and 40Ar/39Ar dating of zircon and plagioclase, respectively.
Accordingly, the Xaltipan ignimbrite related to Los Humeros caldera
event is now estimated to be about 164 000 years old, while the Zar­
agoza ignimbrite related to Los Potreros event is of much younger age of
approximately 69 000 years. The Los Humeros event resulted from a
voluminous eruption of 290 km3 (Dense Rock Equivalent) of Xaltipan
ignimbrite, containing rhyolitic magma with more than 70 % silica,
creating a caldera of dimension 21 km × 15 km (Fig. 1) (Cavazos &
Carrasco-Núñez, 2020; Ferriz & Mahood, 1984). The Los Potreros
caldera, on the other hand, which is sized 9 km × 10 km and nested
within the Los Humeros caldera, resulted from the eruption of 10 km3 –
15 km3 of Zaragoza Tuff, a non-welded ignimbrite of rhyodacitic to
andesitic composition (Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2012; Carrasco-Núñez &
Branney, 2005; Ferriz & Mahood, 1984)
The fourth and last stage is dated from about 50 000 years ago up to
the present day, and includes an Upper Pleistocene resurgent phase,
followed by the youngest and still active Holocene ring-fracture and
bimodal phase (Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2018; Norini et al., 2015, 2019).
The latter involves the post-caldera stage of volcanism of the LHVC,
which is characterized by smaller explosive and effusive eruptions, with
products ranging from basaltic to trachytic lava flows, fed by scattered
monogenetic volcanic centers (Norini et al., 2015; Carrasco-Núñez et al.,
2017a). Latest petrographic and field studies on Holocene lava samples
suggest that each magma pocket associated with post-caldera volcanic
events can be related to scattered, small volume, short-lived (less than 1
000 years) heat sources under the Los Humeros caldera (Lucci et al.,
2020; Urbani et al., 2020). Details of the petrographic studies, including
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Table 1
Summary of previous thermal modeling work in the LHVC and comparison of parameters with the present study (V: magma chamber volume; z: depth of magma
chamber top below surface; N: numerical time steps; FD: Finite Difference, FE: Finite Element, CV: Control Volume),* indicates the depth of the model domain where
the heat flow boundary conditions were applied.
Source Model type and objective/ Method Model V z N Mesh size Δx
duration × Δy × Δz
(years) (km3 ) (km) (m × m × m)

Prol Ledesma and 2D heat conduction/ FD - 100 5 100 500 × 500

Gonzalez-Moran, 1982
Campos-Enríquez and 2D steady-state heat conduction/ FE - 100 - - -
Duran, 1986
Verma et al., 1990 2D heat conduction and advection/ FD 500 000 1 500 5 100 500 × 500
Castillo-Roman et al., 1991 2D heat conduction; test of sensitivity of thermal regime to 600 000, 1 500 4,5,6 - -
magma chamber at different depths and different ages/ FD 100 000
Verma and Andaverde, 3D heat conduction and chemical modeling of magma chamber/ 460 000 1 500 5 Emplacement- 40, 250 × 250 ×
2007 CV Cooling- 1 000 250
Verma et al., 2011 3D heat conduction; magma chamber emplacement, test of 30 000 1 000 5– 250 250 × 250 ×
sensitivity of thermal regime to magma chamber volume and –1 400 10 250
position/ CV
Verma & Gómez-Arias, 3D heat conduction and advection/ CV 460 000 1 400 5 10 200 × 200 ×
2013 200
Deb et al., 2019a 3D steady-state heat conduction/advection FD - - 7.5* - 250 × 250 ×
50
Deb et al., 2019b 3D steady-state heat conduction/advection FD - - 6.5* - 50 × 50 × 50
This study 3D heat conduction/ FD 182 000 1 100 5 variable (see 100 × 100 ×
Appendix D.) 50

mineral chemistry and major-element bulk composition, are discussed in
Lucci et al. (2020).
2.2. Temperature data from geothermal wells
The Los Humeros geothermal field has been exploited by more than
50 geothermal wells since the first commercial production began in
1990 (Arellano et al., 2015). Most of the wells in the field produce a
high-enthalpy (more than 2 500 kJ/kg) geothermal fluid with a steam
fraction greater than 90 % at separation conditions (Arellano et al.,
2015). While super-hot conditions were encountered by many wells in
this area, the production is limited to only a few wells due to insufficient
permeability in the other wells (Aguilar et al., 2019; Arellano et al.,
2003). Permeability in Los Humeros is secondary in nature and is,
therefore, localized and restricted to damaged zones surrounding faults
and fractures (Cedillo-Rodriguez, 2000; Lorenzo-Pulido, 2008). In fact,
the low permeability of the field and inadequate natural recharge are the
primary reasons for the pressure depletion, resulting in boiling and
steam gain (Arellano et al., 2015). These processes have also affected the
temperature and pressure data acquired in the geothermal wells of Los
Humeros over time.
To establish the initial temperature conditions from well data, we
analyzed the temperature and pressure data from more than 50
geothermal wells provided by CFE. After reviewing the quality of the
available temperature data, we selected a subset of 32 wells for cor­
recting the transient bottom-hole temperature data series using Horner’s
method (Dowdle & Cobb, 1975) to obtain static temperatures at bottom
hole depth in each well. Details regarding the correction, input data and
corrected temperature are provided in Table A. in Appendix A.
2.3. Geophysical constraints
Within the framework of H2020 project GEMex, different types of
geophysical data have been acquired which include resistivity (magne­
totelluric (MT) and transient electromagnetics (TEM)), passive seis­
micity and gravity (Hersir et al., 2020). Apart from the newly acquired
data, CFE also provided four active 2D seismic lines and additional
passive seismic data. Results of the geophysical surveys, well data,
geochemistry, analogue modeling and surface geological map were
integrated to construct a 3D geological model (Calcagno et al., 2020),
which is utilized in the current study.
In Los Humeros, MT and TEM have been acquired and 3D joint
inversion of the data have been performed for detection of deep re­
sistivity anomalies (Benediktsdóttir et al., 2019; Hersir et al., 2020). MT
data investigates the resistivity of the subsurface and therefore, are
sensitive to magma or hydrothermal fluids. In Los Humeros, however,
the MT data does not provide any conclusive evidence of deep-seated
low resistivity anomalies. This is partly due to the limited resolution
of the MT soundings below 3 km depth (Hersir et al., 2020). Another
reason of the low resolution of MT data is because Los Humeros exhibits
a low-resistivity (smectite) cap at a very shallow depth of around 2 600
m.a.s.l along NNW-SSE, the main tectonic trend in this area (Bene­
diktsdóttir et al., 2019). Such low resistivity caps are formed in locations
characterized by high temperature and permeability and has also been
observed in other high temperature geothermal areas such as Krafla (Lee
et al., 2019). Presence of such conductive caps at a shallow level reflects
a large portion of the energy of the electromagnetic waves, leaving little
energy to penetrate deeper, thereby reducing the efficiency of the MT
data to resolve deeper anomalies (Hersir et al., 2020). Nevertheless, the
orientation of the smectite cap in the direction of NNW-SSE trend sug­
gests presence of heat sources aligned in this direction.
Interestingly, gravity data of Los Humeros indicates areas of high-
density anomalies at different depths, also aligned in the direction of
the main tectonic NNW-SSE trend (Cornejo et al., 2019). The density
distribution map at the depth of the geothermal reservoir (1 800 m
below surface) is characterized by patches of high-density anomalies in
the direction of NW-SE, while low density anomalies orient in the
NE-SW to E-W direction. Further down, at 2 800m and at 3 800 m below
surface, the low-density patches combine to form a single structure
aligned in the NW-SE direction. The location and the depth of the small
patches of high-density anomalies are consistent with the proposed
small, ephemeral magma pockets in the shallow crust, acting as heat
sources for the Los Humeros geothermal system. However, as empha­
sized in Cornejo et al., 2019, the 3D inversion results should be inter­
preted with caution due to coarse measurement points away from the
central area and limited vertical resolution at deeper depths. The density
distribution maps from 3-D inversion of the Los Humeros area by Cor­
nejo et al., 2019 is presented in Fig. B in the Appendix section.

4
P. Deb et al.
3. Development of a conceptual model for heat source under
LHVC
Several numerical studies have been performed over the past three
decades that provide important information regarding the evolution of
the Los Humeros Volcanic Complex (LVHC) (Table 1). Early attempts on
thermal modeling were made in 2D (Prol Ledesma and Gonzalez-Moran,
1982; Campos-Enriquez and Duran, 1987; Verma et al., 1990; Cas­
tillo-Roman et al., 1991), while several later thermal and chemical
models are in 3D (Verma & Andaverde, 2007; Verma et al., 2011; Verma
& Gómez-Arias, 2013). These numerical studies considered the Los
Humeros volcanic event to be approximately 500 000 years old based on
the old K-Ar dating of the Xaltipan ignimbrites (Ferriz & Mahood, 1984).
The magma chamber volume considered in the numerical studies was
approximated from the volume of the erupted ignimbrite. In their early
field work, Del Rio (1982) and Ferriz and Mahood (1984, 1987) esti­
mated the volume of the erupted Xaltipan ignimbrite at 100 km3 to 115
km3, respectively. Simultaneously, Verma (1984) and Verma (1985b),
based on their fractional crystallization models proposed a magma
chamber volume in the order of 1 400 km3 for Los Humeros and around
100 km3 for Los Potreros. These volumes were supported by the con­
ventional 1:10 ratio of erupted to intruded volumes (Smith et al., 1978;
Smith & Shaw, 1975), based on which Verma et al. (2011) and Verma
and Gómez-Arias (2013) conducted their numerical investigations. They
assumed the volume of the magma chamber to be approximately be­
tween 1 000 km3 - 1 500 km3 with an initial emplacement temperature
of 1350 ◦ C in their numerical models. In spite of the unrealistically high
initial emplacement temperature of 1350 ◦ C assumed for a single volu­
minous stratified magma chamber encompassing from basaltic to
rhyolite compositions, the temperature estimates from their simulations
5
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
Fig. 2. Conceptual heat source model used for
reconstructing the thermal history of the LHVC:
(a) Los Humeros magma chamber at about 164
000 years ago before the Los Humeros event (b)
Los Potreros magma chamber at about 69 000
years ago before the Los Potreros event, (c)
Post-caldera Holocene magma pockets with
approximate ages between 8 000 years and 3
000 years (red – 8 000 years, blue – 7 000 years,
green (not visible here) – 3 800 years and yel­
low – 2 800 years). Black vertical lines are the
geothermal wells in the Los Humeros field. The
brown and green surfaces are the interfaces
between the Miocene-Pliocene andesite and the
Cretaceous limestone and between the Creta­
ceous limestones and the granitic basement,
respectively. Vertical depth is relative to mean
sea level (0 m), and the green arrow indicates
the north direction. The magma bodies shown
in figure do not represent separate geological
entities, but rather the volumes of the numeri­
cal model to which the time-varying tempera­
ture boundary conditions are applied.
at geothermal reservoir depth were significantly underestimated
(mismatch of 50 ◦ C and 100 ◦ C) as compared to the temperatures
measured in the wells (Verma & Gómez-Arias, 2013). Similarly,
steady-state 3D conductive/ convective thermal models reported in Deb
et al. (2019a; 2019b) could not reproduce the anomalously high tem­
peratures observed in geothermal wells close to large regional faults. In
these models, heat flow boundary conditions were applied at the bottom
of the model domain, and convective scenarios with different perme­
ability values for faults and rock formations were investigated.
In this study, we integrated the latest geochronological, geochemical
and petrographic findings, proposing an alternative configuration for
the heat source under the Los Humeros caldera. Our conceptual model
hypothesizes a magma plumbing system under the LHVC, characterized
by multiple magma reservoirs or storage zones at different depths in the
crust active at different instants of time (Fig. 2). Despite being exten­
sively studied petrologically and geophysically, the volumes of the
magma chambers responsible for the Los Humeros and the Los Potreros
eruptions remain a subject of critical debate. The available literature
reports a spectrum of possibilities for the Los Humeros magma chamber
volumes, from a study which speculates 2 900 km3 (Cavazos & Carra­
sco-Núñez, 2020, based on the new estimation of 290 km3 Dense-Rock
Equivalent (DRE) for Xaltipan Ignimbrite) to other studies which sug­
gest a range between 1 400 km3 – 1 500 km3 (Carrasco-Núñez et al.,
2018; Verma et al., 1990; Verma et al., 2011) based on the old, erupted
DRE estimates of 115 km3.
To obtain reasonable constraints for the volumes of the magma
chamber, we performed an analysis of magma intrusion rates (km3/ yr)
using the numerical modeling results of Annen (2009) (refer Figure 6 in
Annen, 2009). Annen (2009) specified conditions required for devel­
oping eruptible magma (crystal fraction less than 40 %, Lejeune and
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Table 2
Properties of magma bodies used in this study. V: intrusive volumes; T: temperature of magma reservoirs; c: volumetric heat capacity; h: specific enthalpy of crys­
tallization (Sources: Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017b; 2018; Carrasco-Núñez & Branney, 2005; Cavazos & Carrasco-Núñez, 2020; Lesher & Spera, 2015; Liu & Lowell,
2011; Lucci et al., 2020; Verma, 1985b, Urbani et al., 2020)
Magma Description Age Groups Top V T c h
bodies Depth
(years) (km) (km3 ) (∘ C) (MJ m− 3
K− 1 ) (kJ kg− 1 )

Los Humeros Rhyolitic magma 164 000 - 5 1 000 850 3.28 270
Los Potreros Rhyodacitic to andesitic 69 000 - 5 100 900 2.33 300
LH26 Trachyandesite, intermediate lavas from Los Potreros caldera 8 000 G1 2.5 0.10 1 050 2.40 300
LH27-2 Trachyandesite, Maxtaloya andesites from the rim walls of Xalapasco 8 000 G1 3 1.30 1 050 2.40 300
crater
LH4 Trachyandesite, San Antonio Las Chapas lavas 8 000 G1 3 0.40 1 050 2.40 300
LH13 Trachyandesite, intermediate lavas from Los Potreros caldera 7 000 G2 1 0.01 1 050 2.40 300
LH11 Rhyolite, Obsidian dome, at Los Humeros fault 7 000 G2 1 0.03 800 3.28 270
LH21-2 Trachyandesite free of Orthopyroxene, Sarabia lava flow from extra- 7 000 G2 6 1.30 1 050 2.40 300
caldera
LH15 Trachyandesite free of Orthopyroxene, El Limon lava flow from extra- 7 000 G2 6 1.30 1 050 2.40 300
caldera
LH27-1 Olivine-Basalt, mafic lavas inside the Xalapasco crater 3 800 G3 2.5 0.05 1 100 3.78 420
LH5-2 Olivine-Basalt, mafic lavas from Los Humeros town 3 800 G3 1.5 0.30 1 100 3.78 420
LH5-1 Trachyte, Chocomiapa-Los Parajes felsic lavas 3 800 G3 0.5 0.01 950 2.40 300
LH6-1 Trachyte, Felsic lavas from El Pajaro unit 2 800 G4 3 0.15 950 2.40 300
LH17 Orthopyroxene trachyandesite, Tepeyahualco lava flow from extra-caldera 2 800 G4 3 1.30 1 050 2.40 300

Richet, 1995) in large magma chambers of diameter 10 km and 20 km
(representative of Los Humeros and Los Potreros calderas) for variable
magma intrusion rates. Note that the magma intrusion rate used in this
study is calculated from the ratio of erupted volume to residence time
and is not sensu stricto as it considers only the eruptible magma (Costa,
2008). For the Xaltipan ignimbrite, we obtained a very high volumetric
magma intrusion rate of 0.06 km3/yr corresponding to its very short
residence time of 5 000 years estimated from magmatic zircon U-Th ages
(Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2018) and the recently updated DRE volume of
290 km3 (Cavazos & Carrasco-Núñez, 2020). This intrusion rate is
coherent with the magma flux estimates for large eruptions obtained
from the analysis of Zircon ages (Caricchi et al., 2014), which suggested
that magmatic reservoirs feeding large volcanic eruptions might have
formed over a restricted time with high magma intrusion rates. Thus,
assuming the calculated magma intrusion rate as a proxy for the average
magma flux required to build the Los Humeros magma chamber, the
maximum eruptible portion in the magma chamber could be as high as
65 % (Annen, 2009). This leads to a minimum total volume of 450 km3
for the chamber (including the crystallized part) if the eruption emptied
the entire 65 % fraction of eruptible magma. However, previous esti­
mates of the amount of erupted material have been calculated at about
1/3 to 1/10 of the partly molten magma reservoir below calderas larger
than 10 km (Smith and Shaw, 1975; Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2018). Based
on this reasoning, we assumed conservatively an estimate of 1000 km3
for the Los Humeros magma chamber considering the lower end of the
ratio proposed by Smith and Shaw (1975) i.e., three times the erupted
volume of Xaltipan Ignimbrite. Fig. 2a represents the heat source con­
dition under LHVC, right before the eruption of the Xaltipan Ignimbrites
and collapse of the Los Humeros caldera (164 000 years ago).
The Los Potreros caldera-forming event occurred almost 100 000
years after the Los Humeros episode, resulting in an eruption of almost
10 km3 – 15 km3 of Zaragoza ignimbrite (Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2018;
Ferriz & Mahood, 1984), less than 5 % of the amount released during the
previous eruption. Assuming the residence period of Zaragoza ignim­
brites to be in the same range as Xaltipan (5 000 years), we obtained a
magma intrusion rate of 0.003 km3/ yr. At this rate, the eruptible
portion of magma in a chamber of diameter 10 km is approximately
around 10 % (refer Figure 6 in Annen, 2009). Furthermore, based on the
fractional crystallization model, Verma (1985b) and Verma et al.,
(1990) reported the amount of minerals left behind after Los Potreros
eruption to be around 84 km3. Therefore, the total volume of the Los
Potreros magma storage zone was assumed to be around 100 km3.
Fig. 2b shows the configuration of the Los Potreros magma chamber at
about 69 000 years ago.
In the models, the top of the Los Humeros (Xaltipan) and the Los
Potreros (Zaragoza) magma reservoirs are assumed to be at 5 km. This
assumption is based on geobarometric data provided in Ferriz and
Mahood (1987) and in agreement with the general considerations about
the depth of crustal magma chamber tops in silicic calderas (Bachmann
and Bergantz, 2008; Wohletz & Heiken, 1992; Verma et al., 1990). In
Table 2, we present the list of parameters used for constraining different
heat sources under the Los Humeros caldera.
Fig. 2c shows the conceptual heat source model for the last 8 000
years. During this time, the Los Potreros caldera floor was subjected to
several small magma eruptions, ranging from olivine-basalts to tra­
chytes (Carrasco-Núñez, et al., 2017a), derived from variable depths as
constrained by geobarometric data (Lucci et al., 2020). The eruption of
the denser and increasingly mafic magma during the post-caldera stage
represented the absence of a large magma chamber capable of receiving
and homogenizing recharge magmas (Ferriz and Mahood, 1984, 1987).
Classical thermo-barometric modeling applied to the post-caldera Ho­
locene lava samples by Lucci et al. (2020) (also refer to Appendix C.)
provided estimates of the mean pre-eruptive pressure-temperature
conditions of the magma pockets feeding the Holocene eruptive activity.
In consideration of their smaller erupted volumes, the intrusive volumes
have been assumed to be twice the erupted volume to account for
magmas left within the feeding system. The integration of these results
combined with (i) the updated Los Humeros geological map (Carra­
sco-Núñez, et al., 2017a), (ii) the intra-caldera subsurface geology
(Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017b; Cavazos & Carrasco-Núñez, 2020; Cav­
azos-Alvarez et al., 2020) (iii) the fieldwork and the analogue modeling
by Urbani et al. (2020; 2021), allowed first-order estimates of the top
depths, volumes and temperatures of mafic to felsic magma batches
(Table 2; Table C.1 in Appendix section). The geometry of the magma
batches has been conservatively assumed as axisymmetric and with a
high aspect ratio, resulting in a discoidal shape. This is in agreement
with the existing literature concerning bore-hole stratigraphies and the
viscous rheology of erupted magmas (Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017a), and
with the deformation induced along the caldera floor (Urbani et al.
2020; 2021). These parameters are assumed as a data-supported, first
order scenario for the magmatic configuration of the shallower portion
of the LHVC post-caldera stage magmatic plumbing system.
Again, using a similar approach, as for the Los Humeros and the Los
Potreros magma chambers, we computed the volumetric magma flow
rates required for emplacing the small magma pockets. Following Pyle
(1992), Cathles et al., (1997), and Nabelek et al., (2012), we assumed

6
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Fig. 3. 3D geological model of the LHVC showing the present day main lithostratigraphic units (left) (Calcagno et al., 2020); cross-section showing the present-day
structures and the boundary conditions applied at the top and bottom of the numerical model. Note that the top and bottom boundary conditions remain unchanged
during all the transient simulation stages. The time-varying boundary conditions are applied in the magma bodies shown in Fig. 2.

Table 3
Broad lithostratigraphic groups of the Los Humeros Volcanic Complex (LHVC) and the average petrophysical properties (porosity ϕ, thermal conductivity λ_m,
volumetric heat capacity c and heat production rate H for each group) (Sources: Calcagno et al., 2020; Weydt et al., 2020; Bär & Weydt, 2019; Rybach, 1976; Schön, 2015)
Lithostratigraphic group Dominant rock type ϕ λm c H
% W m− 1
K− 1
MJ m− 3
K− 1
μW m− 3

Post-caldera Andesitic and basaltic lava flows, tuff, pumice 18.59 1.41 1.68 0.31
Caldera Ignimbrites and Tuff 35.04 2.03 1.21 1.48
Pre-caldera Andesites (Teziutlian, Cuyoaco) 6.66 1.02 1.03 1.08
Basement Limestone, Marble 1.76 2.73 2.14 0.62
Granite, Granodiorite 2.00 2.73 1.96 2.45

their residence period in the crust before eruption to be a maximum of 1
000 years. This assumption is reasonable in light of similar volcanic
events (Isaia et al., 2019). For example, magma chambers of the East
Pacific Rise are considered to have residence times of 1 000 – 10 000
years (Pyle, 1992). Another example is the deformation pattern at Campi
Flegrei, which indicate that the inflation before the eruption in the year
1538 began around 150 years earlier and after a long period of subsi­
dence (Di Vito et al., 2016). Considering the above reasonings, we as­
sume that a maximum residence time of 1 000 years for Los Humeros
Holocene magmas is a reasonable assumption for numerical modeling.
Furthermore, longer residence times of such small magma pockets (refer
Table 2 for volumes) would result in cooling of magma below solidus
preventing the eruptions of the lava, which were analysed in Lucci et al.
(2020).
4. Methodology
The numerical simulation is performed using SHEMAT-Suite, an
open-source, finite-difference code for simulating coupled heat transfer
and fluid flow in porous media (Clauser, 2003; Keller et al., 2020). The
area covered in this study is indicated by the model boundary (blue
dash) in Fig. 1. The structural framework and the present day main
lithostratigraphic units is shown in Fig. 3 (Calcagno et al., 2018; 2020).
The model extends 28 km in E-W direction and 22 km in N-S direction
and has a vertical extent of 11 km (7 km below mean sea level). The size
of the numerical cells is 100 m × 100 m × 50 m yielding a total of 14
million model cells.
4.1. Thermal properties
Based on the evolutionary history, the stratigraphy of the LHVC is
broadly classified into four main groups: Basement, Pre-caldera,
Caldera, and Post-Caldera (Calcagno et al., 2018; 2020) (Table 3).The
thermal and petrophysical properties (porosity, matrix thermal
conductivity and volumetric heat capacity) for different lithological
groups are calculated using laboratory measurements on different
outcrop samples from Los Humeros area (Bär & Weydt, 2019; Weydt
et al., 2020). As each lithological group is composed of different rock
types, the properties assigned to each group are weighted averages,
reflecting the contributions of different rock types within each group
(Deb et al., 2019a). The weights used for each rock type are calculated
based on the lithology of the geothermal wells in this area (Calcagno
et al., 2018; 2020). For detailed petrophysical report, please refer (Bär &
Weydt, 2019; Deb et al., 2019a; Weydt et al., 2020). The in situ matrix
thermal conductivity λm (W m− 1 K− 1 ) at temperature T (K) is calculated
according to (Sekiguchi, 1984), which is considered to provide the best
fit for the temperature dependency of thermal conductivity for igneous
and metamorphic rocks (Lee & Deming, 1998). The relationship is
implemented as
( )
( ) 1
λm = 1.8418 + λm,0 − 1.8418 − 0.2485 , (1)
0.002732 T + 0.7463
where λm,0 is a measured matrix conductivity value at room temperature
(Chiozzi et al., 2017; Pasquale et al., 2014; Pasquale et al., 2017). The
effective in situ rock thermal conductivity λ with porosity ϕ filled with
fluid of thermal conductivity λf is then calculated according to the
geometric mean (e.g., Clauser, 2003)
λ = λϕf λ(1−
m
ϕ)
. (2)
It should be noted that no magma-specific thermal properties are
assigned to the cells representing the magma reservoir zones. The
emplacement and eruption of the magma pockets are modelled by
applying specific temperature and heat flow boundary conditions,
respectively. The magma pockets are located within the granite forma­
tion, and hence their petrophysical properties in the model are similar to
that of granite (Table 3).

7
P. Deb et al.
Fig. 4. Temporal chart of simulation stages (top row), the numbers in the bottom of the chart indicate the geologic time duration (in years) of each phase (refer
section 3 for details). The model outputs used to evaluate the temperature contributions of different volcanic events in Section 6 are marked in Italics.
4.2. Heat transport equation
The heat transport is described by the transient heat conduction
equation which calculates the change in heat content dq in a control
volume dV during a time interval dt by
∂q ( )
= ∇⋅ λ ∇T − ρf cf Tv + H, (3)
∂t
where λ (W m− 1 K− 1 ) is the effective thermal conductivity of the rock-
fluid mixture, (ρ c)f is the thermal capacity of the fluid (J m− 3 K− 1 ), v
is the Darcy velocity (ms− 1 ) and H is the radiogenic heat production rate
(Wm− 3 ) (Clauser, 2003; Clauser 2020a). For different lithology groups,
H was assigned based on published values for dominant rock types
(Rybach, 1976; Schön, 2015). However, our simulations consider only
heat conduction and therefore the advective term does not contribute to
the total heat transfer. While it may be argued that heat advection by
fluid flow, in principle, contributes to the total heat transport, it is
neglected here as a first approximation, because of (i) insufficient in­
formation on rock permeability and (ii) lack of information on the dis­
tribution, geometry and aperture of fluid conducting fractures.
The heat released by the magmatic source due to eruption is modeled
according to Newton’s law of cooling (Davidzon, 2012)
( )
q = α Tmag − Te , (4)
where, q is the heat flux (Wm− 2 ), α is the heat transfer coefficient
(Wm− 2 K− 1 ), Tmag and Te are the magma and the external temperatures
(K), respectively.
4.3. Initial conditions
In our multi-stage cascade simulation approach (see 4.5), the output
of each simulation feeds the following by providing the proper initial
conditions that ensure unconditional continuity in the temperature field.
A different approach is used during the first stage (pre-caldera), in which
the lack of previous data is overcome by performing a steady-state
simulation (stage 1, Fig. 4) with boundary conditions defined in 4.4.
4.4. Constant boundary conditions
The upper boundary condition is the temperature of the topographic
surface (Ts, Fig. 3), calculated according to a wet adiabatic air temper­
ature gradient of 0.00491 Km− 1 (Clauser, 1984). The average annual air
temperature of 12◦ C at Los Humeros climate station, located at an
elevation of 2 862 m.a.s.l. is used as a reference temperature. At the
topographic surface, the pressure is assumed to be atmospheric,
8
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
implying that the groundwater level and, therefore, the hydraulic head
coincides with the topographic surface.
At the bottom of the model domain (at about 10 km below ground
surface), a constant specific heat flow of 52 mW m− 2 is applied as a
Neumann boundary condition following Giordano et al., (2019) and
Davies (2013), which report regional heat flow values between
85 mW m− 2 and 35 mW m− 2 in the study area (Fig. 3). It is assumed
that any influence from the previous volcanic activity (Miocene –
Pleistocene andesitic volcanism) has subsided and that the volcanic
complex has returned to the thermal regime prior to the Los Humeros
event.
Additional time-varying Dirichlet and Neumann boundary condi­
tions, applied to the numerical cells representing the magma bodies
during the different stages of the simulation, are discussed in detail in
4.5.
4.5. Time-varying boundary conditions
For modeling the different phases of emplacement, eruption, and
cooling for the two caldera-forming episodes and the following post-
caldera magmatic phase, the simulation was performed in 13 stages.
This multi-stage approach was adopted to reduce the complexity of
computationally intensive simulations and at the same time to overcome
the impossibility of changing the nature of the boundary condition
applied to a specific cell, which is necessary for modeling the
emplacement and eruption. Except for the first stage, in which the
steady-state model is used to represent the pre-caldera thermal regime,
for each magma chamber (i) the emplacement and (ii) the eruption/
cooling are modelled in two separate simulation steps (Fig. 4). The
caldera phase, therefore, requires four stages to simulate the Los
Humeros (stages 2 and 3, Fig. 4) and the Los Potreros events (stages 4
and 5, Fig. 4). The post-caldera stage is similarly simulated by
emplacement, followed by eruption and cooling of the mafic-to-felsic
small-volume magma batches considered as representative for the
pattern of the Holocene LHVC magma storage system. These post-
caldera magma pockets are grouped according to their estimated ages
(Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017a). The first group erupting at about 8 000
years ago, the second one at about 7 000 years ago, and the third and
fourth ones at 3 800 and 2 800 years ago, respectively (Table 2). Thus,
the emplacement of the four post-caldera groups and their subsequent
eruption and cooling requires eight simulation stages (stages 6 – 13 in
Fig. 4). For details regarding time discretization and simulation run
times, refer to Table D.1 in the Appendix section.
The emplacement of the magma chamber in most thermal modeling
studies is instantaneous to avoid the mechanisms related to growth and
emplacement (Di Renzo et al., 2016; Verma, et al., 2011; Fjeldskaar
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Fig. 5. Schematic figure showing the application of time-varying boundary conditions, T0 is the initial temperature of the magma sill, N is the total number of steps
and Δtem is the time discretization between two emplacement steps, Δter is the eruption duration or time during which the heat flow boundary condition is active

Fig. 6. Temperature evolution through the center of Los Humeros magma chamber during a period of 182 000 years: the numbers indicate the different simulation
stages:1a - emplacement of the Los Humeros magma reservoir, 1b- eruption, 1c- cooling, 2a- emplacement of the Los Potreros magma chamber, 2b- eruption, 2c-
cooling; Depth in y axis is relative to sea level (0 m), the top of the magma reservoir is at -2 000 m below sea level, ground surface is at approx. 2800 m.a.s.l.

et al., 2008; Xiao-Yin et al., 2014). However, as shown in Galushkin
(1997), instantaneous emplacement overestimates the thermal influence
of intrusions. In addition, geochronological investigations of large
intrusive complexes have indicated that the formation of such plutons
occurs over thousands of years by amalgamation of many small inter­
acting pulses of magma (Caricchi & Blundy, 2015; Coleman et al., 2004;
Michel et al., 2008. Therefore, we created a numerical workflow to
model the thermal influence due to the progressive magmatic pulses
based on a conceptual approach that more adequately reflects the dy­
namics evidenced by geochronological studies. Instead of instanta­
neously emplacing a large magma chamber with initial temperature T0,
we implemented a workflow, where the magma chamber is formed by
the aggregation of many small magma pulses implemented as
disk-shaped structures or sills (Annen, 2009). The horizontal extent of
the sills is assumed to be approximately equivalent to the dimension of
the caldera collapse on ground surface (Roche & Druitt, 2001), while the
thickness or the vertical extent of the sills is decided according to the
numerical time steps N and total chamber volume V to be emplaced (also
refer Table 1). The time steps or time discretization N for each simula­
tion stage is a choice based on simulation approach and computational
capacity and is presented in Appendix D (Table D.1). The grid cells
representing the magma pulse or sill are assigned an initial temperature
T0 as a Dirichlet temperature boundary condition for a period, corre­
sponding to one third of each sill’s emplacement time, after which the
boundary conditions are turned off (Fig. 5). The magma pulses (or the
thermal boundary conditions) are applied at a rate proportional to the

9
P. Deb et al.
Fig. 7. E-W Temperature cross-sections through the center of the Los Humeros magma chamber: (I) at 164 000 years ago, after emplacement and just before eruption
of the Los Humeros magma reservoir, (II) at 100 000 years ago, after 64 000 years of cooling following Los Humeros eruption, (III) at 69 000 years ago, after the
emplacement of the Los Potreros magma chamber, (IV) at 9 000 years ago, after 60 000 years of cooling following Los Potreros eruption.
magma intrusion rate (discussed in Section 3). While the vertical
stacking continues, the temperature of each emplaced sill decays grad­
ually due to cooling and diffusion of heat into the host rock, until a fresh
pulse of magma arrives. There are two major assumptions at this stage
(i) during the aggregation process, we do not account for heat released
or added due to magma mixing, differentiation, or crystallization and
(ii) the cooling of the magma bodies takes place through heat conduc­
tion only.
Following the emplacement of the magma reservoirs, the next step is
to model the eruption and cooling. Both eruption (removal of heat) and
crystallization is modelled by applying heat flow boundary condition to
the grid cells of the magma chamber. As we do not perform any
geochemical modeling, which is required to account for the latent heat
during the process of crystallization, we supplied an additional heat to
the system equivalent to the specific enthalpy of crystallization of
magma (Table 2, Clauser, 2020b). The latent heat effects are calculated
assuming that all the remnant magma chamber volume (total volume –
erupted volume) is crystallized. This workflow is not a replacement of
fractional crystallization models, but rather an intermediate solution
adopted to replace the instantaneous emplacement of intrusive bodies
with more realistic emplacement steps, implemented in a simplified
manner.
The eruption is modeled by removing heat from the system using the
standard heat transfer Eq. (4) and properties of magma bodies presented
in Table 2. For avoiding numerical instabilities, the heat due to eruption
is not instantaneously removed from the system but distributed over
several months according to a Gaussian profile, where 68 % of the mass
erupts within three months. This duration is not unreasonable consid­
ering the reported data on the duration of a volcanic eruption. In a study
presented in Siebert et al., 2010, 90 % of the 3 929 eruptions studied
ended within three months. Nevertheless, this duration is like an instant
for the simulation period of 182 000 years, and it does not affect the
temperature evolution. Following eruption, the simulated temperature
inside the magma chamber drops below 850 ◦ C at which the heat
transfer is primarily controlled only by heat diffusion through the solid
mass.
As stated before, we neglect any effects of heat advection and
10
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
simulate the post-eruption transient cooling by heat conduction only.
However, heat advection might quicken the process of cooling provided
the magma’s melt fraction exceeds 60 % (Annen, 2009). However, the
emplacement process of our magma reservoirs by incremental accretion
of sills reduces the temperature difference between the magma and the
host rock, due to gradual heating of the host rocks. This reduces the
effectivity of convection to some extent.
5. Results
5.1. Los Humeros caldera volcanism
The time required for accumulation of magma before large caldera
eruptions is an active research area (Cashman & Giordano, 2014 and
references therein). We used the magma intrusion rate of 0.06 km3 /yr
(calculated in Section 3) to approximate an emplacement duration of 18
000 years for a chamber volume of 1 000 km3 (refer Fig. 4). Therefore,
our transient simulation began 18 000 years before the eruption. The
time discretization N used for emplacement of Los Humeros magma
chamber is 159 (Table D.1). Thus, every time step of numerical simu­
lation indicates approximately 113 years in geologic time (Δtem ) in this
phase. Stage 1a in Fig. 6 represents the vertical stacking of sills starting
from the top at 5 km below ground surface down to the last sill at around
10 km below ground surface. The initial sills get emplaced within an
environment which is originally cooler and hence gets solidified faster.
With the upper sills cooling and crystallizing, the temperature at the top
of the magma chamber increases up to 500 ◦ C at the end of the
emplacement stage (Stage 1a, Fig. 6), while the center of the magma
chamber is around 900 ∘ C. Fig. 7(I) shows a vertical E-W temperature
cross-section passing through the center of the Los Humeros magma
reservoir just before the eruption event. The stacking of the sills is
indistinguishable and appears as continuous in Stage 1a in Fig. 6 due to
large number of sills getting emplaced in a very short time. However, it
can be discerned in the emplacement of the Los Potreros magma reser­
voir (Stage 2a in Fig. 6).
Following the emplacement, we modeled the Los Humeros event by
removing 8 × 1020 J of heat from the system corresponding to the
P. Deb et al.
eruption of 290 km3 of rhyolitic magma at a temperature of 850 ∘ C
(Verma et al., 1990). The eruption, simulated as heat removal, is shown
in the temperature profile as a sharp drop in temperature (Stage 1b in
Fig. 6). Following the eruption, we simulated the cooling of the
post-eruption magma chamber until the emplacement of the magma
reservoir of the Los Potreros event (Stage 1c in Fig. 6). Fig. 7-II shows the
temperature state through the magma chamber after 60 000 years of
cooling i.e., 100 000 years ago. At this instant of time, the center of the
magma chamber cooled down to around 700 ◦ C.
5.2. Los Potreros caldera volcanism
A similar approach was followed for emplacement of Los Potreros
magma chamber. Again, a magma volume of 100 km3 (see Section 3)
with a temperature of 1 050 ◦ C (Fig. 7-III) is emplaced step by step in sill
layers at a rate of 0.003 km3 /yr (Ferriz and Mahood, 1987) (Stage 2a in
Fig. 6). It can be noticed from Fig. 6 that despite the fact that the Los
Potreros magma chamber is ten times smaller than that of Los Humeros,
the top of the magma chamber (around 2 km below sea level) is hotter
(around 700 ◦ C) at the end of the emplacement of Los Potreros. This is
because of a higher energy density, that protracts for a longer time in an
already warm surrounding in the case of Los Potreros. This is a result of
the smaller vertical extension of the Los Potreros magma chamber (2.5
times less than the Los Humeros), due to which the latter emplaced sills
in case of Los Potreros are located at a much shallower level (- 4 km)
than in the case of Los Humeros (- 7.5 km). Thus, the heat released in Los
Potreros remains confined in the proximity of the top of the magma
chamber (- 2 km). After the emplacement, which lasted 33 000 years, the
eruption of Zaragoza ignimbrite is modelled by removing 1019 J of heat
from the system corresponding to 15 km3 of andesitic magma at 900 ◦ C
(Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2012) (Stage 2b in Fig. 6). This eruption does not
drastically lower the temperature of the system like in the Los Humeros
event, since the heat removed during the Los Potreros event is two or­
ders of magnitude lower than that of the former. The eruption is fol­
lowed by diffusion of heat into the host rock and cooling of the
11
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
Fig. 8. Location map of the magma pockets: color-coded and
sized according to their top depth relative to sea level and their
approximate radial extent respectively (the ages of the pockets
are shown in Table 2); geothermal wells are shown as triangles,
color-coded according to the bottom depth of the wells; the
outer, cropped outline is the boundary of the Los Humeros
magma chamber, while the inner elliptical outline indicates the
boundary of the Los Potreros magma chamber. Figures 9c and
9d continued in the next page.
post-eruption magma chamber (Stage 2c in Fig. 6) until the emplace­
ment of the post-caldera magma reservoirs began. The thermal state of
the magma chamber before the emplacement of the post-caldera magma
pockets (9 000 years ago) is shown in Fig. 7-IV. The numerical time steps
for different phases of emplacement and eruption/ cooling are shown in
Table D.1 in Appendix D.
5.3. Post-caldera Holocene volcanism
The post-caldera volcanic activity is characterized by multiple
shallow, small volumes of individual magma pockets representing
mafic, intermediate, and acidic magma. It is modeled similarly in two
phases (i) emplacement followed by (ii) eruption and cooling. The
magma pockets are divided into four groups according to their estimated
eruption ages (Table 2). They were emplaced as discoidal bodies at an
influx rate determined from their respective volumes and an assumed
residence period of 1 000 years (Pyle, 1992), wherein each magma pulse
is represented by an initial temperature applied as a Dirichlet temper­
ature boundary condition. This is followed by eruption of almost 50 % of
the pockets (modeled by removing heat from the system corresponding
to half of the pocket volume) and cooling of the magma pockets until the
next magma group is emplaced. The location of the different magma
pockets is shown in Fig. 8.
Fig. 9 (a-d) show the temperature profiles through the center of the
magma pockets for different instants in time for the 4 different groups.
The tops of the first group of magma pockets, which erupted 8 000 years
ago, LH26, LH27-2 and LH4, are at approximately 2.5 km – 3 km from
the surface. The temperature profile for 9 000 years ago shows the
thermal cooling regime after the Los Humeros and Los Potreros events,
but prior to the emplacement of the post-caldera shallow magma
pockets. Following the emplacement of the three trachy-andesitic
magma pockets with corresponding volumes of approximately 0.1
km3, 1.3 km3 and 0.4 km3 the temperature at the center of the magma
reservoirs reaches around 1000 ∘ C just before eruption (indicated by the
temperature profile for 8 000 years ago). But after eruption and cooling,
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

the present-day temperature profiles at the center of all the magma
pockets have almost returned to their undisturbed states except for
LH27-2 (Fig. 9a). At a depth of approximately 2.5 km from the surface
and with volume greater than 1 km3 , LH27-2 cools down to approxi­
mately 470 ∘ C at the centre of the magma pocket after 8 000 years.
However, without the magma replenishment during the post-caldera
period, the temperature at this depth would be less than 320 ∘ C as
indicated by the temperature profile for 9 000 years ago. Therefore, the
post-caldera magma activity of LH27-2 enhanced the temperature at this
depth by at least 150 K, an increase of almost 40 %. However, LH26 and
LH4, due to their considerably smaller volumes, show an increase of
only around 40 K and 45 K, respectively, at the center of the magma
pockets (see Fig. 9a).
Magma pockets of the second group, LH21-2 and LH15, with vol­
umes of around 1.3 km3 and magma reservoir top depth at about 6.5 km
below ground surface, were emplaced at 1050 ◦ C, but cooled down to
538 ◦ C after almost 7 000 years (Fig. 9b). In absence of post-caldera
magma replenishment, the temperature at the center of both the
magma pockets would be less than 410◦ C. Therefore, a temperature
increase of almost 35 % is recorded at this depth after 7 000 years of

Fig. 9. Temperature profiles through the centre of the magma pockets (a) Group 1, (b) Group 2, (c) Group 3 and (d) Group 4, at different instants of time (see
legend); the profile with the temperature peak marked as E in the legend represents the thermal condition in the centre of the magma pocket just before eruption.
Figures 9c and 9d continued in the next page.

12
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Fig. 9. (continued).

13
P. Deb et al.
cooling. LH13 and LH11, however with very small volumes of 0.01 km3
and 0.03 km3, respectively, results in a temperature increase of not more
than 10 K at their centers (see Fig. 9b).
In spite of the relatively small volumes of around 0.05 km3, 0.3km3
and 0.01 km3 for LH27-1, LH5-2 and LH5-1 (Fig. 9c), these magma
pockets, which erupted 3 800 years ago, led to a temperature increase at
the centers of the magma pockets by around 135 K , 126 K and 55 K, an
increase of almost 54 %, 68 % and 70 %, respectively. Similarly, the
fourth and the youngest group of magma pockets, LH6-1 and LH17
(Fig. 9d), with volumes of 0.15 km3 and 1.3 km3, show an increase of
120 K and 382 K respectively. For LH17, with its largest volume and
youngest age, the temperature excess at a depth of 2 000 m below
ground surface is almost 200 %.
In Fig. 10(a), we compare the results of the last simulation stage,
representing the present-day thermal regime, with the corrected static
the bottom-hole temperatures (BHT) in the geothermal wells. These are
the temperatures at the greatest depth of each well obtained from
Horner’s correction (Horner, 1951) applied to the transient temperature
recorded at this depth (see Appendix A. for details). The simulated
temperature at different bottom hole-depths agrees well with the tem­
perature data from the geothermal wells: for more than 50 % of the BHT
(17 out of 32 data points), the simulated temperatures are in error by
less than 10 % (Fig. 10a). The error at the other 40 % of the wells ranges
between 15 % – 20 %, while at the remaining wells (4 out of 32), the
mismatch is greater than 25 %. The error in most of the wells is due to an
underestimation by the simulation compared to measured data. For just
3 out of 32 wells (wells 23, 24 and 25), the error is large (greater than 25
%) and is due to an overestimation by the simulation.
6. Discussion
To isolate the contribution of the different volcanic events on the
measured temperature of the wells, we performed two additional tran­
sient models (Fig. 4), corresponding to the undisturbed cooling of Los
Humeros (Caldera LH) and Los Potreros (Caldera LP), whereas the main
simulation output including the cumulative effect of the post-caldera
magma pockets is indicated as Holocene in Fig. 4. In ‘Caldera LH’,
following the emplacement and eruption of Los Humeros, the system is
allowed to freely evolve until the present day without any thermal
disturbance due to the latter volcanic events. This model, therefore,
shows only the thermal contribution of the Los Humeros event and is,
thus, conceptually comparable to the previous thermal models (Verma
et al., 1990; Verma et al., 2011; Verma & Gómez-Arias, 2013). Similarly,
in ‘Caldera LP’, we simulated emplacement and eruption of Los Potreros,
followed by free cooling until the present day, without including the
Holocene post-caldera shallow magma pockets.
The result of these additional simulations in terms of temperature
contribution due to each volcanic event is presented in Fig. 10(b)
normalized with respect to the static BHT of each geothermal well. The
pre-caldera period contribution is given by the steady-state initial model
(blue) contributing to the extent of 25 % - 35 % to the temperatures
observed in the wells. The voluminous Los Humeros event is responsible
for almost 30 % – 50 % of the excess temperature in the present-day
thermal regime, whereas the smaller Los Potreros event contributes to
an increase of 10 % – 20 % in the wells. The temperature excess due to
the post-caldera magma pockets referred to as Holocene phase is
observed only in few wells due to their localized nature. For example, a
temperature increase of at least 15 % – 20 % is observed in wells 6, 12,
39, 41 and 42, which are in the vicinity of LH 27-2. Well H-1, in the
vicinity of LH 4 and LH 13 (refer to Fig. 8 for locations) with volumes of
0.4 km3 and 0.01 km3, respectively, shows a negligible temperature
increase of less than 10 K due to post-caldera volcanism. In wells 2 and
18, which are located within 1 km from the intrusive body LH 27-2 (
volume greater than 1 km3), a temperature excess of 30 K remains even
after 7 000 years of cooling.
The three wells in which the temperature is overestimated by almost
14
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
25 % - 30 % (Fig. 10b) (wells 23, 24 and 25) are located in the eastern
part of the geothermal field (Fig. 8). In general, all the wells located in
the zone surrounded by Los Potreros fault scarp to the east, Las Papas
fault to the north and Maztaloya fault to the south-southwest (wells 14,
18, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27), have turned out to be non-productive and were
abandoned (Aguilar et al., 2019). Interestingly, these wells also suffered
from high fluid circulation losses, between 6 m3h-1 and 20 m3h-1
(Aguilar et al., 2019). This might explain the overestimation of tem­
perature as this zone might be cooled by the localized infiltration of cold
water through the Los Potreros fault scarp and other faults (Maztaloya
and Las Papas) located in the vicinity of the wells, the effect of which is
not considered in our simulation.
Apart from the few wells in the east, where simulated temperature is
higher than the measured values, the mismatch in 40 % of the wells is
generally due to an underestimation of temperature (Fig. 10a). Please
recall that the volumes of the shallow magma pockets used in this study
are only estimates which are constrained by integration of field studies
and geochemical modeling. The real volumes might vary largely,
resulting in corresponding increase or decrease of the estimated tem­
perature. Also, we cannot rule out the possibility of such shallow and
small magma intrusions at other locations within the Los Humeros
geothermal area. For example, at a depth of 2 300 m, the static tem­
perature in well 8 is around 394 ◦ C, while well 10, only 500 m apart
from well 8, reaches a temperature of just around 174 ◦ C at the same
depth. Similarly, at Loma Blanca, the measured temperature in well 4 at
a depth of about 1 000 m is around 300 ◦ C (Torres-Rodriguez, 1995;
Prol-Ledesma, 1988, 1998; Martı ́nez-Serrano, 2002), while at well 43,
which is less than 1 000 m west from well 4, the measured temperature is
about 170 ◦ C at similar depth (Lorenzo-Pulido, 2008). Such anomalous,
but extremely localized temperature distributions could be caused by
localized intrusions at depths of less than 3 km as suggested in Urbani
et al. (2020, 2021).
As shown in Fig. 10a, the current conceptual model is consistent with
the majority of the recorded well temperatures. The remaining
mismatch in temperature of 15 % ‒ 20 % may be due to several reasons,
such as, advective heat transfer (which is not considered in the simu­
lation) or so-far undetected shallow magma pockets. Fluid flow through
faults and fractures and its interaction with the shallow magma pockets
might create hotspots, increasing the temperature locally. Convective
zones can also quicken the process of cooling of the small magma
pockets due to infiltration of cold water resulting in a lower temperature
than obtained by our present-day temperature simulations (Cathles,
1977). However, as mentioned before the objective of this study was not
to deterministically match all the temperatures observed in the
geothermal wells, but rather to use this information as a guide to test the
applicability of the proposed conceptual heat source model. Including
the effects of fluid flow and heat advection in future simulations will
require more detailed information on several parameters including fault
permeability, thickness of the damaged zone around the fault, fault age
and hierarchy, nature of fault sealing, fracture distribution, geometry
and thickness.
7. Conclusions
In this paper, we presented a comprehensive approach to reconstruct
the thermal history of active volcanic systems characterized by multi-
stage discrete heat sources. This transient modeling approach is
applied in Los Humeros volcanic field to test if the conceptual model of a
poly-phased caldera evolution can better reproduce its geothermal
configuration, and to quantify the relative contribution of deep and
shallow magma heat sources across the lifetime of the magma plumbing
system. The simulation outcome indicates that a very high background
heat flow in Los Humeros is associated with the major caldera-forming
events. However, the small and frequent magma eruptions during the
post-caldera period led to a temperature increase in localized hotspots,
providing a better explanation to the temperature anomalies observed in
P. Deb et al.
Fig. 10. (a) Simulated versus bottom-hole temperature (BHT) from geothermal wells; absolute error (in green) is the difference between BHT and the simulated
temperature (in blue) at bottom hole depths (see Fig. 8 for location and bottom hole depth of wells); (b) Contribution of different volcanic events towards the present-
day temperature observed in (numbered) wells
the wells. The expected present-day temperature of the younger magma
pockets, modeled on the basis of the eruptive history of the last ten
thousand years, suggests the existence of super-hot resources at shallow
depths. In particular, the southern part of the geothermal field indicates
potentially unexplored opportunities, but the presence of many similar
non-erupted intrusive bodies within drillable depths in other parts of the
geothermal field cannot be excluded. Future exploration surveys,
including monitoring of surface deformation, seismic activities and
high-resolution geophysical surveys, may provide hints to their exis­
tence and potentially widen the future exploitation area.
The factors not accounted for in this study, but which might affect
the final predicted temperature, are the processes related to magma
differentiation and mixing, convection inside the magma body, or con­
vection related to hydrothermal circulation within faults or fractures.
The first two would require new petrologic works on Xaltipan and
Zaragoza ignimbrites for performing new fractional crystallization
models in accordance with the modern view of the magma plumbing
system. Such studies can be useful for constraining the volumes, depths,
and temperature of the Los Humeros and Los Potreros reservoirs, which
are still based on older studies. The latter requires more information
regarding the distribution of faults and fractures, density, extent, and
permeability.
The biggest challenge of this approach lies in conceiving, planning
and implementing such a temporally-varying conceptual model for the
evolution of the magma plumbing system, in contrast to the simplified
single heat source/ magma chamber models that instantaneously
emplace the body in the crust at averaged conditions (volume, depth,
temperature). Our approach requires information of the heat sources in
time and space and, although conceptually closer to reality, it carries the
risk of propagating errors and uncertainties associated with the char­
acteristics assigned to each heat source: volume, shape, depth range,
15
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
initial temperature, thermal properties, age of intrusion, intrusion rate,
recharge versus withdrawal, convection. To test the exact geometry of
the magma bodies and the sensitivity of the reconstructed temperature
with respect to variation in a set of parameters, separate sensitivity
studies must be performed in small-scale models. For these reasons, we
must remind the reader that, while the input data used in our modeling
are derived from the best available and published volcanological,
petrologic and age datasets, they are also grounded on a series of as­
sumptions, for which the reconstructed intrusive heat sources should be
considered a viable, data-constrained, first-order scenario rather than an
exact reconstruction. Nevertheless, our results show that adopting first
order approximations for heat generation and transport phenomena, can
provide good results for the regional reconstruction of the caldera-
related geothermal fields while limiting at the same time the numeri­
cal complexity to an acceptable level.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Paromita Deb: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Valida­
tion, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization,
Project administration. Guido Giordano: Conceptualization, Investi­
gation, Writing – review & editing. Xiangyun Shi: Methodology, Soft­
ware, Formal analysis. Federico Lucci: Investigation, Data curtion,
Writing – review & editing. Christoph Clauser: Writing – review &
editing, Project administration, Funding acquisition.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Acknowledgments
We thank the European Commission for funding the project GEMex
through European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation pro­
gram under grant agreement No. 727550. The authors also thank the
Mexican electric company and operator of Los Humeros geothermal
field, the Comision Federal di Electricidad (CFE), and espesially Mr.
Heber Diez and Mr. Miguel Ramirez, for providing data and information
regarding their geothermal wells. We would also like to thank Philippe
Calcagno (BRGM, France) and WP-3 team of GEMex for providing us the
geological models for this study. Additionally, we thank Eva Schill and
Natalia Cornejo from KIT, Germany for allowing us to reprint figures
(Appendix B) from Deliverable 5.6 (Cornejo et al., 2019) of GEMex
project. The grant to the Department of Science, Roma Tre University
(MIUR-Italy Dipartimenti di Eccellenza, ARTICOLO 1, COMMI 314-337
LEGGE 232/2016) is gratefully acknowledged. Last but not the least, we
thank the entire GEMex consortium, comprising Mexican and European
partners, for the cooperation and unpublished inputs on conceptual
ideas which were available for this study.

Appendix A. Correction of transient temperature data

Data for more than 50 geothermal wells were provided by the CFE. The temperature and pressure surveys were recorded using mechanical Kuster
temperature and pressure sensors (Probe, 2020). Unfortunately, no information is available on the type and accuracy of the equipment used for the
measurements. However, an accuracy of ± 0. 25 ∘ C is quoted for the Kuster K10 Geothermal high temperature and pressure recording tool (Sword,
2020). Surveys were performed at different intervals of time (generally between 6 and 30 hours after drilling) or during the heating-up surveys (after
several days, weeks or months after shut-in). The measurements were usually performed with a very coarse sampling intervals varying between 200 m
– 300 m for the first 1 000 m, followed by 50 m – 100 m sampling intervals down to bottom-hole depth. For reliably estimating the stable formation
temperature, measurements performed during the heating-up surveys are better suited than the temperatures recorded immediately after drilling, as
the latter are usually disturbed by different factors, such as, mud circulation, drilling technology, borehole breakouts (Goutorbe et al., 2007; Kutasov &
Eppelbaum, 2005). However, in case of Los Humeros wells, most of the temperature data taken during heating-up surveys suffer additionally due to
boiling and phase separation, and interflow between different feed zones (Arellano et al., 2003; Arellano et al., 2015). Therefore, for estimating the
stable formation temperature from Los Humeros wells, we utilized temperatures measured between 6 and 34 hours after drilling, and did not use the
heating-up surveys (Table A.1). Temperatures from some wells which reached a steady-state within 30 h – 36 h are directly used as stabilized
temperatures (denoted with * in Table A.1)
Methods for estimating static or stable temperatures from measurements after drilling have been investigated in many studies (Andaverde et al.,
2005; Goutorbe et al., 2007). After reviewing the available data quality of the transient temperature series, we selected data from 32 wells and applied
Horner’s method of correction to the measured bottom hole temperatures (Dowdle & Cobb, 1975; Horner, 1951). Static reservoir temperatures for Los
Humeros were previously determined using the spherical radial heat-flow method (García-Gutiérrez et al., 2002; Arellano et al., 2003). This method
considers the thermally perturbed zone around the borehole as a spherical region and calculates the static temperature from the intercept of a plot of T
√̅̅
vs 1/ t , where T is the temperature at different instants of time t (Ascencio et al., 1994). However, later studies comparing different correction
methods suggested that this approach is physically invalid and oversimplified and hence, not recommended for geothermal applications (Andaverde
et al., 2005; Wong-Loya et al., 2015). Horner’s method, therefore, remains a widely used method for correcting bottom-hole temperatures in
geothermal wells. It considers the temperature perturbation due to mud circulation in a well as caused by an infinitely long heat source or sink
(Andaverde et al., 2005) according to
(t + t )
c
Tws = Ti − cln ,
t

where Tws is the shut-in temperature at time t, Ti is the static formation temperature at infinite shut-in time, and tc is the mud circulation time. This
model describes a straight line with slope c and intercept Ti obtained by extrapolation to infinite shut-in time. It has been however, suggested that
Horner’s analysis of temperature build-up always underestimates the static formation temperature and can only be applied in cases of short circulation
times (less than 24 hours) (Dowdle & Cobb, 1975; Kutasov & Eppelbaum, 2005).
One limitation of this method is the input mud circulation time, which is generally not meticulously recorded in most drilling operations

Table A.1
Measured temperature and corrected BHT for different wells: depth, temperature Tws at time t (hours after shut-in), mud circulation times tc, static formation tem­
perature corrected using Horner’s method Ti; * indicates temperature in wells, which stabilized after time t and does not require correction.
Well Depth (m) t (h) Tws (◦ C) tc (h) Ti (◦ C) Well Depth (m) t (h) Tws (◦ C) tc (h) Ti (◦ C)

1 1400 12, 18, 24 195, 199, 202 6 201 19 2250 12, 17, 24 208, 216, 227 6 249
2 2300 15, 19, 23 257, 263, 265 6 282 20 2389 18, 24, 30 227, 250, 271 6 345
3 1660 12, 18, 24 220, 240, 251 6 289 21 2214 12, 18, 24 239, 248, 258 6 278
5 1845 30 - - 212* 22 1539 12, 18, 24 223, 237, 245 6 272
6 2540 12, 24, 27 275, 296, 300 6 323 23 2450 24 - - 198*
7 2281 38, 54, 60 259, 271, 273 6 301 24 3263 18, 24, 36 211, 222, 231 6 255
8 2300 14, 18, 25, 34 241, 253, 266, 274 2 394 25 2283 12, 18, 24 150, 162, 172 6 197
9 2450 6, 12, 18 227, 247, 251 6 269 26 2530 12, 18, 24 323, 330, 341 6 361
11 2376 30 - - 356* 28 2558 24 - - 360*
12 2984 14 - - 362* 30 1900 12, 18, 24 193, 204, 211 6 234
13 2400 6, 18, 24, 36 237, 274, 281, 290 6 303 31 1915 18, 24, 32 281, 291, 298 6 323
14 1373 12, 18, 24 93, 103, 107 6 125 32 2190 6, 12, 24 251, 287, 307 6 332
15 1958 6, 12, 18 178, 200, 211 6 234 38 1390 6, 12, 18 120, 140, 150 6 169
16 2038 6, 12, 18, 24 210, 254, 273, 285 6 319 39 2495 12, 18, 24 208, 220, 232 259
17 2214 12, 19, 24 206, 219, 227 6 251 41 2200 36 290*
18 2885 12, 18, 24 234, 251, 263 6 297 42 2060 12, 18, 24 215, 236, 237 4.15 268

16
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Table A.2
Table showing the impact of unknown mud circulation times on the static formation temperature at bottom-hole depth of a well
corrected using Horner’s method
Mud circulation time Static formation temperature
(hours) (◦ C)

2 299.54
6 300.84
10 302.07
14 303.25
20 304.91

(Andaverde et al., 2005). It is also lacking for most of the wells of Los Humeros. For those wells with this information, it varied between 2 hours to 10
hours (personal communication with CFE, Mexico). For wells, without this information, we considered an average circulation time of 6 hours for
calculating the correction. Table A.1 shows the data used for our Horner corrections and the corrected static formation temperature. Table A.2
provides a rough estimate of the uncertainty of the calculated static formation temperatures due to the uncertainty of the mud circulation times. We
believe that our correction yields one of the best possible estimates of static formation temperature in Los Humeros wells with an uncertainty of
± 10 K .

Appendix B. Density distribution from 3-D inversion of gravity data of the Los Humeros area (Figures reprinted from Cornejo et al., 2019
with permission)

Figure B

Fig. B. Density distribution obtained from 3-D inversion of gravity data of the Los Humeros area at (a) 1000 m a.s.l., (b) at sea level and (c) 1000 m b.s.l. (Cornejo
et al., 2019) Densities are provided as Δρ (g cm− 3) with respect to the Bouguer density of 2670 kg m− 3; the white dots in the center of the gravity maps are gravity
stations measured during GEMex project, additional measurement points used for the 3D inversion is presented in Figure 21c of Cornejo et al., 2019; (d) locations of
the various magma pockets: the circles are color-coded and sized according to their top depth relative to sea level and their approximate radial extent respectively.
17
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

Appendix C. Methodology for the reconstruction of the Holocene shallow intrusive scenario at Los Potreros caldera (Los Humeros
Volcanic Complex, Mexico)

This section presents the workflow for the determination of the temperature, depth and volume input data for the geothermal modeling of the
Holocene magma pockets. The Holocene monogenetic post-caldera volcanism and its wide range of geochemical compositions related to sources
scattered along the entire crust (Lucci et al 2020) indicate that the two main magma chambers associated with the caldera-forming eruptions Xaltipan
(164 000 years) and Zaragoza (69 000 years) have now cooled below solidus. Shallower magma intrusions associated with the Holocene post-caldera
stage (LHPCS) erupted products within the Los Potreros caldera (“Ring-fissure and bimodal phase” in Carrasco-Nunez et al. 2018) are intended to
represent a spectrum of possible scenarios of discrete, short-lived, small and shallow magma heat sources as constrained by the location of the eruption
points of the LHPCS erupted products (Carrasco-Nunez et al. 2017) and related petrologic data published by Lucci et al. (2020).

Table C.1
Temperature and depths selected for the modeling of the LHPCS magma heat sources.
Rock type (a) Sample Temperature(c)(◦ C ± 1σ) Pressure(c)(MPa ± 1σ) Well-log data (d)
Depth (km) from
the surface to the
top

AB LH5-2 (b) 1100 ± 50 50 - 100 ± 100 A ca. 200 m thick basalt layer at 1.5
Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry 1300-1500 m below the surface in
models applied to Cpx3, Cpx4 and Cpx5 models applied to Cpx4 and Cpx5 well H5.
populations. populations.
AB LH27-1 (b) 1100 ± 50 50 -100 ± 100 A ca. <200 m thick mafic lava layer at 2.5
Estimates from thermometry models Minimum estimates from barometry 2300-2500 m below the surface in
applied to Cpx3, Cpx4 and Cpx5 models applied to Cpx4 and Cpx5 well H26.
populations. populations.
TA LH15 (b) 1050 ± 50 140 ± 80 - 6
Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry
models applied to Cpx3 and Cpx4 models applied to Cpx4 cluster.
populations. Absence of Opx.
TA LH21 (b) 1050 ± 50 140 ± 80 - 6
Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry
models applied to Cpx3 and Cpx4 models applied to Cpx4 cluster.
populations. Absence of Opx.
Opx-TA LH4 (b) 1050 ± 50 100 ± 60 - 3
Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry
models applied to Cpx2, Cpx3, Cpx4 and models applied to Cpx4 and Opx
Opx populations. populations.

Opx-TA LH13 (b) 1050 ± 50 100 ± 60 - 3

Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry
models applied to Cpx2, Cpx3, Cpx4 and models applied to Cpx4 and Opx
Opx populations. populations.

Opx-TA LH17 (b) 1050 ± 50 100 ± 60 - 3

Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry
models applied to Cpx2, Cpx3, Cpx4 and models applied to Cpx4 and Opx
Opx populations. populations.

Opx-TA LH26 (b) 1050 ± 50 100 ± 60 A ca. <200 m thick mafic lava layer at 2.5
Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry 2300-2500 m below the surface in
models applied to Cpx2, Cpx3, Cpx4 and models applied to Cpx4 and Opx well H26.
Opx populations. populations.

Opx-TA LH27-2 (b) 1050 ± 50 100 ± 60 - 3

Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry
models applied to Cpx2, Cpx3, Cpx4 and models applied to Cpx4 and Opx
Opx populations. populations.

TR LH5-1 (b) 950 ± 50 100 ± 90 A 50-100 m thick rhyolite layer at 0.5

Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry 500 m below the surface in well H5.
models applied to Ol, Cpx3, Cpx4 and Opx models applied to Cpx4 and Opx A ca. 400 m thick rhyolite layer at
populations. populations. 500 m below the surface in well H20.
TR LH6-1 (b) 950 ± 50 100 ± 90 - 3
Estimates resulting from thermometry Minimum estimates from barometry
models applied to Ol, Cpx3, Cpx4 and Opx models applied to Cpx4 and Opx
populations. populations.

R LH11(e) 800 - A positive thermal anomaly measured <1

Average temperature estimates for rhyolite Analogue modeling from during drilling at ca. 1000 m below
melts from literature. Urbani et al. (2020) the surface in well H4.

(a) Rock types as classified in Lucci et al. (2020), AB: alkali-basalt; TA: Opx-free trachyandesite; Opx-TA: Opx-bearing trachyandesite; TR: trachyte; R: Rhyolite.
(b) Samples investigated for thermobarometry modeling in Lucci et al. (2020).
(c) Temperature, pressure, and their 1σ error values are derived from thermobarometry results presented in Lucci et al. (2020)
(d) Literature data (see Carrasco-Nunez et al. (2018), Urbani et al. (2020, 2021), Cavazos-Alvarez et al. (2020) and references therein).
(e) Sample presented in Urbani et al. (2020, 2021).

18
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

For these intrusions, the workflow is based on the integration of: (i) textural observations, mineral chemistry and thermobaric estimates for each
major LHPCS eruptive product published in Lucci et al. (2020), (ii) Holocene evolution of ground deformation of the Los Potreros caldera floor
(Urbani et al. 2020; 2021), (iii) the most recent Los Humeros geological map (Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017a) and (iv) stratigraphy of intracaldera wells
(Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017b; Cavazos & Carrasco-Núñez, 2020; Cavazos-Álvarez et al., 2020), (v) recent literature focusing on the shallow magma
storage zone feeding the Los Humeros Holocene volcanism (Dávila-Harris and Carrasco-Núñez, 2014; Creon et al., 2018).
The shallowest magma storage zone of the Holocene plumbing system is developed at a pressure of ca. 1-1.5 kbar (100 – 150 MPa) (mean values
from Lucci et al., 2020) corresponding to depths less than 4 - 6 km below the caldera floor. This shallowest portion of the plumbing system has been
interpreted by Lucci et al. (2020) as a heterogeneous plexus made up of “a system of small magma volumes, distributed in locally interconnected pockets and
batches”. Furthermore, Lucci et al., (2020) documented in all the LHPCS studied samples a general absence of lithics, xenocrysts and phenocrysts with
disequilibrium textures and dissolution patterns, which is interpreted as the evidence of magma batches evolving as nearly closed system where the
effects of magma mixing/recharge and assimilation processes are negligible. Moreover, considering the existing literature on magma recharge and
evacuation processes (e.g., DePaolo, 1981; Karlstrom et al., 2010; Hofmann, 2012; O’Neill and Jenner, 2012; Lee et al., 2014; Moghadam et al., 2020),
Lucci et al. (2020) described the Holocene LHPCS activity being compatible with a scenario dominated by (i) a high evacuation rate and/or eruptive
efficiency and (ii) an evacuation rate higher than the recharge. This scenario is also interpreted as capable of shortening the residence time of melts in
the ephemeral magma pockets reducing the effect of crystallization (e.g., Annen, 2009; Lee et al., 2014). The monogenetic and scattered style of the
intracaldera Holocene volcanic activity supports the absence of significant recharge events on pre-stored magma, justifying the absence of evidence for
mixing-mingling processes. In view of the above the maximum residence time for magmas feeding the Holocene volcanic activity has been assumed as
1000 years.
With respect to the modeling proposed in this work, the following constraints are then assumed for the Holocene LHPCS erupted magmas:

• the depth and the temperature of the magma batches are mainly constrained through the thermobaric estimates obtained from rims and unzoned
phenocrysts (clinopyroxene, olivine and orthopyroxene) as presented in Lucci et al. (2020). A summary is given in Table C.1 presented below.
○ In particular, concerning the mean temperatures chosen for the modeling: (i) the T value of 1100 ◦ C for intracaldera Ol-basalts is obtained from

convergence of thermometric estimates calculated for clinopyroxene populations; (ii) the T value of 1050 ◦ C for trachyandesites derives from the
convergence of thermometric estimates calculated for pyroxenes, plagioclase and olivine phenocrysts; and (iii) the temperature 950 ◦ C for
trachytes results from the integration of thermometric estimates obtained for pyroxenes and olivine phenocrysts.
○ The depths of modelled magma batches are derived by convergence of the minimum estimates obtained from clinopyroxene and orthopyroxene

barometry models (Lucci et al. 2020).

○ where available, the depth of the magma intrusions is integrated with information derived from well data. For example- the LH5-1 trachyte

sample and the neighbour H5 geothermal well (Carrasco-Núñez et al., 2017b; Cavazos-Alvarez et al., 2020; Urbani et al., 2020, 2021). Please
note that with this we do not imply that possible intrusive rocks identified in the stratigraphy of well H5 correspond necessarily to the intrusions
related to the eruption of sample LH5-1, but only an indication that the available well information converge with the intrusive scenario
numerically modelled in the present study.
• the intrusive magma volumes are assumed to be twice as the erupted volumes as determined (first order approximation) by the integration of field
observations and published geological maps, and in consideration of their effusive eruptive styles.
○ pre-eruptive intrusion depths for the obsidian domes are constrained by field data and analogue modeling (Urbani et al., 2020, 2021), with a

mean temperature as derived by existing literature on rhyolitic melts (e.g., Shaw, 1963; Magaritz and Hofmann, 1978; Castro et al., 2005;
Hamada et al., 2010; Lucci et al., 2018) –
○ the modelled magma intrusions are arbitrarily assumed to be located at depth, vertically below the equivalent eruptive rocks.

Appendix D. Simulation statistics

The simulations were performed using the High-Performance Computing systems CLAIX (Cluster Aix-la-Chapelle) at RWTH Aachen University and
were completed in 13 stages. The time discretization and the core hours for each stage are provided in Table D.1.

Table D.1
Simulation statistics.
Simulation Description of the stage Simulation duration (in Time steps, N Simulation time
stages years) (min)

1 initial background model steady-state - 138

2 emplacement of LH magma reservoir 18 286 159 1527
3 eruption and cooling of LH until LP emplacement began 61 696.5 297 1774
4 emplacement of LP magma reservoir 33 304 153 970
5 eruption and cooling of LP until Group 1 magma pockets emplacement began 60099.5 297 1711
6 emplacement of Group 1 magma pockets 901 36 452
7 eruption and cooling of Group 1 magma pockets until emplacement of Group 2 99.5 98 504
began
8 emplacement of Group 2 magma pockets 901 36 330
9 eruption and cooling of Group 2 magma pockets until emplacement of Group 3 2 199.5 98 647
began
10 emplacement of Group 3 magma pockets 1 001 20 202
11 eruption and cooling of Group 3 magma pockets until emplacement of Group 4 99.5 98 555
began
12 emplacement of Group 4 magma pockets 901 36 349
13 eruption of group 4 magma pockets and cooling until present day 2 799.5 98 650

19
P. Deb et al. Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162

References Carrasco-Núñez, GerardoG., Branney, M.J., 2005. Progressive assembly of a massive

layer of ignimbrite with a normal-to-reverse compositional zoning: the Zaragoza
ignimbrite of central Mexico. Bull. Volcanol. 68 (1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Aguilar, A.A., Deb, P., Izquierdo, G., 2019. Conceptual analysis of geothermal
s00445-005-0416-8.
neighboring zones characterization with contrasting behavior: applied to a Mexican
Carrasco-Núñez, GerardoG., McCurry, M., Branney, M.J., Norry, M., Willcox, C., 2012.
geothermal field. Int. J. Hydrol. 3 (3), 175–183. https://doi.org/10.15406/
Complex magma mixing, mingling, and withdrawal associated with an intra-Plinian
ijh.2019.03.00178.
ignimbrite eruption at a large silicic caldera volcano: Los Humeros of central Mexico.
Andaverde, J., Verma, S.P., Santoyo, E., 2005. Uncertainty estimates of static formation
Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 124 (11–12), 1793–1809. https://doi.org/10.1130/B30501.1.
temperatures in boreholes and evaluation of regression models. Geophys. J. Int. 160
Cashman, K.V., Giordano, G., 2014. Calderas and magma reservoirs. J. Volcanol.
(3), 1112–1122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2005.02543.x.
Geotherm. Res. 288, 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.09.007.
Annen, C., 2009. From plutons to magma chambers: thermal constraints on the
Cashman, K.V., Sparks, R.S.J., Blundy, J.D., 2017. Vertically extensive and unstable
accumulation of eruptible silicic magma in the upper crust. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.
magmatic systems: a unified view of igneous processes. Science 355, 6331. https://
284 (3–4), 409–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2009.05.006.
doi.org/10.1126/science.aag3055.
Annen, CatherineC., Blundy, J.D., Sparks, R.S.J., 2006. The genesis of intermediate and
Castillo-Roman, J., Verma, S.P., Andaverde, J., 1991. Modelacion de temperaturas bajo
silicic magmas in deep crustal hot zones. J. Petrol. 47 (3), 505–539. https://doi.org/
la Caldera de Los Humeros, Puebla, Mexico, en termicos de profundidad de la
10.1093/petrology/egi084.
camara magmatica. Geofisica Int. 30 (3), 149–172.
Arellano, V.M., García, A., Barragán, R.M., Izquierdo, G., Aragón, A., Nieva, D., 2003. An
Castro, J.M., Dingwell, D.B., Nichols, A.R., Gardner, J.E., 2005. New insights on the
updated conceptual model of the Los Humeros geothermal reservoir (Mexico).
origin of flow bands in obsidian. Spec. Pap.-Geol. Soc. Am. 396, 55. https://doi.org/
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 124 (1–2), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273
10.1130/0-8137-2396-5.55.
(03)00045-3.
Cathles, L.M., 1977. An analysis of the cooling of intrusives by ground-water convection
Arellano, V.M., Barragán, R.M., Ramírez, M., López, S., Paredes, A., Aragon, A.,
which includes boiling. Econ. Geol. 72 (5), 804–826. https://doi.org/10.2113/
Tovar, R., 2015. The Response to Exploitation of the Los Humeros (México)
gsecongeo.72.5.804.
Geothermal Reservoir. In: Horne, R., Boyd, T. (Eds.), Proceedings World Geothermal
Cathles, L.M., Erendi, A.H.J., Barrie, T., 1997. How long can a hydrothermal system be
Congress 2015, 20 Apr 2015 - 24 Apr 2015. Melbourne, Australia.
sustained by a single intrusive event? Econ. Geol. 92, 766–771. https://doi.org/
Ascencio, F., García, A., Rivera, J., Arellano, V., 1994. Estimation of undisturbed
10.2113/gsecongeo.92.7-8.766.
formation temperatures under spherical-radial heat flow conditions. Geothermics 23
Cavazos, J.A., Carrasco-Núñez, G., 2020. Anatomy of the Xáltipan ignimbrite at Los
(4), 317–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-6505(94)90027-2.
Humeros Volcanic Complex; the largest eruption of the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt.
Bachmann, O., Bergantz, G., 2008. The magma reservoirs that feed supereruptions.
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 392, 106755 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Elements 4 (1), 17–21. https://doi.org/10.2113/GSELEMENTS.4.1.17.
jvolgeores.2019.106755.
Bär, K., & Weydt, L.M., 2019. Final Report on rock and fluid samples and their physical
Cavazos-Álvarez, J.A., Carrasco-Núñez, G., Dávila-Harris, P., Peña, D., Jáquez, A.,
properties in the Acoculco and Los Humeros regions Comprehensive report on the
Arteaga, D., 2020. Facies variations and permeability of ignimbrites in active
rock and fluid samples and their physical properties in the Acoculco and Los
geothermal systems; case study of the Xáltipan ignimbrite at Los Humeros Volcanic
Humeros regions. H2020 project GEMex Scientific Deliverable D6.1. GEMex Report.
Complex. J. South Amer. Earth Sci. 104, 102810 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://data.d4science.net/zVLc. Last accessed –09 January 2021.
jsames.2020.102810.
Benediktsdóttir, A., Hersir, G.P., Vilhjalmsson, A.M., et al., 2019. Report on resistivity
Cedillo-Rodriguez, F., 2000. Hydrogeologic model of the geothermal reservoir from Los
modelling and comparison with other SHGS. H2020 project GEMex Scientific
Humeros, Puebla, Mexico. Geotherm. Resour. Council Trans. 24, 381–409.
Deliverable D5.2. GEMex Report.
Chiozzi, P., Barkaoui, A., Rimi, A., Verdoya, M., Zarhloule, Y., 2017. A review of surface
Bonini, M., Maestrelli, D., Corti, G., et al., 2021. Modelling intra-caldera resurgence
heat-flow data of the northern Middle Atlas (Morocco). J. Geodyn. 112, 58–71.
settings: laboratory experiments with application to the Los Humeros Volcanic
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jog.2017.10.003 (November).
Complex (Mexico). J. Geophys. Res. 126, e2020JB020438 https://doi.org/10.1029/
Claiborne, L.L., Miller, C.F., Flanagan, D.M., Clynne, M.A., Wooden, J.L., 2015. Zircon
2020JB020438.
reveals protracted magma storage and recycling beneath Mount St. Helens. Geology
Brown, S.J.A., Burt, R.M., Cole, J.W., Krippner, S.J.P., Price, R.C., Cartwright, I., 1998.
38 (11), 1011–1014. https://doi.org/10.1130/G31285.1.
Plutonic lithics in ignimbrites of Taupo Volcanic Zone, NewZealand; sources and
Clauser, C., 1984. A climatic correction on temperature gradients using surface
conditions of crystallisation. Chem. Geol. 148 (1–2), 21–41. https://doi.org/
temperature series of various periods. Tectonophysics 103, 33–46. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0009-2541(98)00026-6.
10.1016/0040-1951(84)90072-6.
Calcagno, P., Evanno, G., Trumpy, E., C. Gutiérrez-Negrín, L., MacIás, J. L., Carrasco-
Clauser, C., 2003. Numerical Simulation of Reactive Flow in Hot Aquifers. Springer,
Núñez, G., & Liotta, D. (2018). Preliminary 3-D geological models of Los Humeros
Berlin-Heidelberg https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55684-5.
and Acoculco geothermal fields (Mexico)-H2020 GEMex Project. Adv. Geosci., 45,
Clauser, C., 2020a. Radiogenic heat production of rocks. In: Gupta, H. (Ed.),
321–333. https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-45-321-2018.
Encyclopedia of Solid Earth Geophysics. Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series.
Calcagno, P., Trumpy, E., Carlos Gutiérrez-Negrín, L., et al., 2020. Report on the
Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10475-7_74-1.
integrated geomodels of Los Humeros and Acoculco. H2020 project GEMex Scientific
Clauser, C., 2020b. Thermal storage and transport properties of rocks, I: heat capacity
Deliverable D3.1. 1. https://data.d4science.net/wT4V.
and latent heat. In: Gupta, H. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Solid Earth Geophysics.
Calcagno, P., Trumpy, E., Carlos Gutiérrez-Negrín, L., Norini, G., Macías, J.L., Carrasco-
Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Núñez, G., Liotta, D., Garduño-Monroy, V.H., Páll Hersir, G., Vaessen, L., Evanno, G.,
978-3-030-10475-7_238-2.
Galván, C.A., 2021. Updating the 3D Geomodels of Los Humeros and Acoculco
Cole, J.W., Milner, D.M., Spinks, K.D., 2005. Calderas and caldera structures: a review.
Geothermal Systems (Mexico)-H2020 GEMex Project (accepted). In: Proceedings
Earth Sci. Rev. 69 (1–2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2004.06.004.
World Geothermal Congress 2020, 21 May 2021 - 26 May 2021. Reykjavik, Iceland.
Cornejo, N., Schill, E., Perez, M., Carrillo-Lopez, J., 2019. Gravity Modelling. H2020
Campos-Enríquez, J.O., Duran, M.F., 1986. Determinación preliminar del campo de
project GEMex Scientific Deliverable D5.6 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/
temperaturas en Los Humeros, Puebla. Geotermia, Revista Mexicana de Geoenergía
727550/results.
2, 141–152.
Costa, F. (2008). Residence times of silicic magmas associated with calderas. In J.
Campos-Enríquez, J.O., Garduño-Monroy, V.H., 1987. The shallow structure of Los
Gottsmann & J. Marti (Eds.), Caldera Volcanism Analysis, Modelling and Response
Humeros and Las Derrumbadas geothermal fields, Mexico. In: Geothermics, 16,
Developments in Volcanology (Vol. 10, pp. 1-55). Elsevier, Amsterdam.
pp. 539–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-6505(87)90038-1.
Coleman, D.S., Gray, W., Glazner, A.F., 2004. Rethinking the emplacement and evolution
Caricchi, L., Blundy, J., 2015. The temporal evolution of chemical and physical
of zoned plutons: geochronologic evidence for incremental assembly of the
properties of magmatic systems. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 422 (1), 1–15. https://doi.
Tuolumne Intrusive Suite, California. Geology 32 (5), 433–436. https://doi.org/
org/10.1144/SP422.11.
10.1130/G20220.1.
Caricchi, L., Simpson, G., Schaltegger, U., 2014. Zircons reveal magma fluxes in the
Créon, L., Levresse, G., Carrasco-Nuñez, G., Remusat, L., 2018. Evidence of a shallow
Earth’s crust. Nature 511, 457–461. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13532 htttps://
magma reservoir below Los Humeros volcanic complex: Insights from the
doi.org/10.1038/nature13532.
geochemistry of silicate melt inclusions. J. South Amer. Earth Sci. 88, 446–458.
Carrasco-Núñez, G. Hernández, J., De León, L., Dávila, P., Norini, G., Bernal, J.P., Jicha,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2018.09.017.
B., Navarro, M., & López, P. (2017a). Geologic Map of Los Humeros volcanic
Dahren, B., Troll, V.R., Andersson, U.B., Chadwick, J.P., Gardner, M.F., Jaxybulatov, K.,
complex and geothermal field, eastern Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt /Mapa geológico
Koulakov, I., 2012. Magma plumbing beneath Anak Krakatau volcano, Indonesia:
del complejo volcánico Los Humeros y campo geotérmico, sector oriental del
Evidence for multiple magma storage regions. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 163 (4),
Cinturón Volcánico Trans-Mexicano. In Terra Digitalis. 10.22201/igg.
631–651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-011-0690-8.
terradigitalis.2017.2.24.76.
Davidzon, M.I., 2012. Newton’s law of cooling and its interpretation. Int. J. of Heat and
Carrasco-Núñez, G., Bernal, J.P., Dávila, P., Jicha, B., Giordano, G., Hernández, J., 2018.
Mass Transfer 55, 5397–5402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Reappraisal of Los Humeros Volcanic Complex by New U/Th Zircon and 40Ar/39Ar
ijheatmasstransfer.2012.03.035.
Dating: Implications for Greater Geothermal Potential. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst.
Davies, J.H., 2013. Global map of solid Earth surface heat flow. Geochem. Geophys.
19 (1), 132–149. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GC007044.
Geosyst. 14 (10) https://doi.org/10.1002/ggge.20271.
Carrasco-Núñez, G., Gómez-Tuena, A., Lozano, V.L., 1997. Geologic map of Cerro Grande
Dávila-Harris, P., Carrasco-Núñez, G., 2014. An unusual syn-eruptive bimodal eruption:
volcano and surrounding area, central Mexico. Geological Society of America.
the Holocene Cuicuiltic Member at Los Humeros caldera, Mexico. J. Volcanol.
Geological Society of America, Boulder, Colo.
Geotherm. Res. 271, 24–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2013.11.020.
Carrasco-Núñez, G, López-Martínez, M., Hernández, J., Vargas, V., 2017b. Subsurface
Deb, P., Knapp, D., Marquart, G., Clauser, C., 2019a. Thermal model of the Los Humeros
stratigraphy and its correlation with the surficial geology at Los Humeros
super-hot geothermal system, Mexico. H2020 project GEMex Scientific Report-
geothermal field, eastern Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt. Geothermics 67, 1–17.
Deliverable D6.3. Zenodo Repository. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3719193.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2017.01.001.

20
P. Deb et al.
Deb, P., Knapp, D., Marquart, G., Montegrossi, G., 2019b. Report on the calibrated
reservoir model for the super-hot reservoir at Los Humeros and its calibration against
available field data. H2020 project GEMex Scientific Report- Deliverable D6.6.
Zenodo Repository. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3719193.
Del Rio, L., L., 1982. Busqueda de zonas con tectonismo extremo, Teoria Y una
Aplicacion a la Geotermia: Caldera Los Humeros. Geofisica Internacional 21 (3),
265–294.
DePaolo, D.J., 1981. Trace element and isotopic effects of combined wallrock
assimilation and fractional crystallization. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 53 (2), 189–202.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-821X(81)90153-9.
Di Renzo, V., Wohletz, K., Civetta, L., Moretti, R., Orsi, G., Gasparini, P., 2016. The
thermal regime of the Campi Flegrei magmatic system reconstructed through 3D
numerical simulations. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 328, 210–221. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2016.11.004.
Di Vito, M.A., Acocella, V., Aiello, G., Barra, D., Battaglia, M., Carandente, A., Del
Gaudio, C., de Vita, S., Ricciardi, G.P., Ricco, C., Scandone, R., Terrasi, F., 2016.
Magma transfer at Campi Flegrei caldera (Italy) before the 1538 AD eruption. Sci.
Rep. 6 (1), 32245. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep32245.
Domra Kana, J., Djongyang, N., Raïdandi, D., Nouck, P.N., Dadjé, A., 2015. A review of
geophysical methods for geothermal exploration. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 44,
87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.026.
Dowdle, W.L., Cobb, W.M., 1975. Static Formation temperature From Well Logs - an
Empirical Method. J. Petroleum Technol. 27, 1326–1330. https://doi.org/10.2118/
5036-PA.
Edmonds, M., Cashman, K.V., Holness, M., Jackson, M., 2019. Architecture and dynamics
of magma reservoirs. Philos. Trans. R. Soc., A 377 (2139). https://doi.org/10.1098/
rsta.2018.0298.
Ellis, B.S., Barry, T., Branney, M.J., Wolff, J.A., Bindeman, I., Wilson, R., Bonnichsen, B.,
2010. Petrologic constraints on the development of a large-volume, high
temperature, silicic magma system: the Twin Falls eruptive centre, central Snake
River Plain. Lithos 120 (3–4), 475–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
lithos.2010.09.008.
Feng, W., Zhu, Y., 2018. Decoding magma storage and pre-eruptive processes in the
plumbing system beneath early Carboniferous arc volcanoes of southwestern
Tianshan, Northwest China. Lithos 322, 362–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
lithos.2018.09.030.
Ferriz, H., Mahood, G.A., 1984. Eruption rates and compositional trends at Los Humeros
volcanic center, Puebla, Mexico. J. Geophys. Res. 89 (B10), 8511–8524. https://doi.
org/10.1029/JB089iB10p08511 https://doi.org/10.1029/JB089iB10p08511.
Ferriz, H., Mahood, G., 1987. Strong Compositional Zonation in a Silicic Magmatic
System: Los Humeros, Mexican Neovolcanic Belt. J. Petrol. 28 (1), 171–209. https://
doi.org/10.1093/petrology/28.1.171.
Fitz-Díaz, E., Lawton, T.F., Juárez-Arriaga, E., Chávez-Cabello, G., 2018. The Cretaceous-
Paleogene Mexican orogen: structure, basin development, magmatism and tectonics.
Earth-Sci. Rev. 183, 56–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2017.03.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2017.03.002.
Fjeldskaar, W., Helset, H.M., Johansen, H., Grunnaleite, I., Horstad, I., 2008. Thermal
modelling of magmatic intrusions in the Gjallar Ridge, Norwegian Sea: implications
for vitrinite reflectance and hydrocarbon maturation. Basin Res. 20 (1), 143–159.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2007.00347.x.
Galushkin, Y.I., 1997. Thermal effects of igneous intrusions on maturity of organic
matter: A possible mechanism of intrusion. Org. Geochem. 26 (11–12), 645–658.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-6380(97)00030-2.
García-Gutiérrez, A., Arellano, V., Barragán, R.M., Espinosa-Paredes, G., 2002. Initial
temperature field in the Los Humeros geothermal reservoir. Geofisica Internacional
41 (3).
Giordano, G., Lucci, F., Calzolari, G., 2019. Report on the volcanological conceptual
models of Los Humeros and Acoculco. H2020 project GEMex Scientific Deliverable
D3.2. https://data.d4science.net/tem2. Last accessed –09- January 2021.
Gómez-Tuena, A., Carrasco-Núñez, G., 2000. Cerro Grande volcano: the evolution of a
Miocene stratocone in the early Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt. Tectonophysics 318
(1), 249–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1951(99)00314-5.
Gudmundsson, A. (2008). Chapter 8- magma-chamber geometry, fluid transport, local
stresses and rock behaviour during collapse caldera formation. In J. Gottsmann & J.
Marti (Eds.), Caldera Volcanism Analysis, Modelling and Response Developments in
Volcanology (Vol. 10, pp. 314-346). Elsevier, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S1871-644X(07)00008-3.
Goutorbe, B., Lucazeau, F., Bonneville, A., 2007. Comparison of several BHT correction
methods: a case study on an Australian data set. Geophys. J. Int. 170 (2), 913–922.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03403.x https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1365-246X.2007.03403.x.
Gualda, G.A., Ghiorso, M.S., 2013. The Bishop Tuff giant magma body: an alternative to
the Standard Model. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 166, 755–775. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00410-013-0901-6 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00410-013-0901-6.
Hamada, M., Laporte, D., Cluzel, N., Koga, K.T., Kawamoto, T., 2010. Simulating bubble
number density of rhyolitic pumices from Plinian eruptions: constraints from fast
decompression experiments. Bull. Volcanol. 72 (6), 735–746. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00445-010-0353-z.
Hersir, G.P., Benediktsdóttir, A., Árnason, K., et al., 2020. Report on the integrated
geophysical model of Los Humeros and Acoculco. H2020 project GEMex Scientific
Deliverable D5.10. https://data.d4science.net/qNfH 10. Last Accessed- 09 June
2021.
Hofmann, A.W., 2012. Magma chambers on a slow burner. Nature 491 (7426), 677–678.
https://doi.org/10.1038/491677a.
Horner, D.R., 1951. Pressure Build-up in Wells. In: Brill, E.J. (Ed.), Proceedings 3rd
World Petroleum Congress 28 May-6 June. The Hague, the Netherlands.
21
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
IEA (2018). 2017 Annual Report IEA Geothermal. July. Internatuonal Energy Agency
(IEA), Paris. http://iea-gia.org/publications-2/annual-reports/Last accessed –09
January 2021.
Isaia, R., Vitale, S., Marturano, A., Aiello, G., Barra, D., Ciarcia, S., Iannuzzi, E.,
Tramparulo, F.D., 2019. High-resolution geological investigations to reconstruct the
long-term ground movements in the last 15 kyr at Campi Flegrei caldera (southern
Italy). J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 385, 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jvolgeores.2019.07.012.
Karlstrom, L., Dufek, J., Manga, M., 2010. Magma chamber stability in arc and
continental crust. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 190 (3–4), 249–270. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.10.003.
Keller, J., Rath, V., Bruckmann, J., Mottaghy, D., Clauser, C., Wolf, A., Seidler, R.,
Bücker, H.M., Klitzsch, N., 2020. SHEMAT-Suite: An open-source code for simulating
flow, heat and species transport in porous media. SoftwareX 12. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.softx.2020.100533.
Kutasov, I.M., Eppelbaum, L.V., 2005. Determination of formation temperature from
bottom-hole temperature logs—a generalized Horner method. J. Geophys. Eng. 2
(2), 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-2132/2/2/002.
Lee, Y., Deming, D., 1998. Evaluation of thermal conductivity temperature corrections
applied in terrestrial heat flow studies. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 2447–2454. https://
doi.org/10.1029/97JB03104.
Lee, C.T.A., Lee, T.C., Wu, C.T., 2014. Modeling the compositional evolution of
recharging, evacuating, and fractionating (REFC) magma chambers: Implications for
differentiation of arc magmas. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 143, 8–22. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.gca.2013.08.009.
Lee, B., Unsworth, M., Árnason, K, Cordell, D., 2019. Imaging the magmatic system
beneath the Krafla geothermal field, Iceland: A new 3-D electrical resistivity model
from inversion of magnetotelluric data. Geophys. J. Int. 220 (1), 541–567. https://
doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggz427.
Lejeune, A., Richet, P., 1995. Rheology of crystal-bearing silicate melts: an experimental
study at high viscosity. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 4215–4229. https://doi.org/10.1029/
94JB02985.
Lesher, C.E., Spera, F.J., 2015. Chapter 5 - thermodynamic and transport properties of
silicate melts and magma. In: Sigurdsson, E. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Volcanoes.
Academic Press, pp. 113–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385938-
9.00005-5.
Lipman, P.W., 2007. Incremental assembly and prolonged consolidation of Cordilleran
magma chambers: evidence from the Southern Rocky Mountain volcanic field.
Geosphere 3 (1), 42–70. https://doi.org/10.1130/GES00061.1.
Liu, L., Lowell, R.P., 2011. Modeling heat transfer from a convecting, crystallizing,
replenished silicic magma chamber at an oceanic spreading center. Geochem.
Geophys. Geosyst. 12 (9) https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GC003612.
López-Hernández, A., 1995. Estudio Regional Volcánico y Estructural del Campo
Geotérmico de Los Humeros, Puebla, México. Geotermia, Revista Mexicana de
Geoenergía 11 (1), 17–36.
Lorenzo-Pulido, C.D., 2008. Borehole Geophysics and Geology of Well H43, Los Humeros
Geothermal Field, 23. United Nations University, Puebla, Mexico, pp. 387–425.
Geothermal Training Programme Report.
Lucci, F., Carrasco-Núñez, G., Rossetti, F., Theye, T., Charles White, J., Urbani, S.,
Azizi, H., Asahara, Y., Giordano, G., 2020. Anatomy of the magmatic plumbing
system of Los Humeros Caldera (Mexico): Implications for geothermal systems. Solid
Earth 11 (1), 125–159. https://doi.org/10.5194/se-11-125-2020.
Lucci, F., Rossetti, F., Becchio, R., Theye, T., Gerdes, A., Opitz, J., Giordano, G., 2018.
Magmatic Mn-rich garnets in volcanic settings: Age and longevity of the magmatic
plumbing system of the Miocene Ramadas volcanism (NW Argentina). Lithos 322,
238–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2018.10.016.
Magaritz, M., Hofmann, A.W., 1978. Diffusion of Sr, Ba and Na in obsidian. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta 42 (6), 595–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7037(78)90004-
2.
Magee, C., Stevenson, C.T.E., Ebmeier, S.K., et al., 2018. Magma plumbing systems: a
geophysical perspective. J. Petrol. 59 (6), 1217–1251. https://doi.org/10.1093/
petrology/egy064.
Marianelli, P., Sbrana, A., Proto, M., 2006. Magma chamber of the Campi Flegrei
supervolcano at the time of eruption of the Campanian Ignimbrite. Geology 34 (11),
937–940. https://doi.org/10.1130/G22807A.1.
Martı ́nez-Serrano, R.G., 2002. Chemical variations in hydrothermal minerals of the
LosHumeros geothermal system. Mexico. Geothermics 31 (5), 579–612. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0375-6505(02)00015-9.
Michel, J., Baumgartner, L., Putlitz, B., Schaltegger, U., Ovtcharova, M., 2008.
Incremental growth of the Patagonian Torres del Paine laccolith over 90 k.y.
Geology 36 (6), 459–462. https://doi.org/10.1130/G24546A.1.
... Moghadam, H.S., Li, Q.L., Griffin, W.L., Stern, R.J., Ishizuka, O., Henry, H.,
Ghorbani, G., 2020. Repeated magmatic buildup and deep “hot zones” in continental
evolution: the Cadomian crust of Iran Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 531, 115989 https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2019.115989.
Nabelek, P.I., Hofmeister, A.M., Whittington, A.G., 2012. The influence of temperature-
dependent thermal diffusivity on the conductive cooling rates of plutons and
temperature-time paths in contact aureoles. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 317, 157–164.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2011.11.009.
Norini, G., Carrasco-Núñez, G., Corbo-Camargo, F., Lermo, J., Rojas, J.H., Castro, C.,
Bonini, M., Montanari, D., Corti, G., Moratti, G., Piccardi, L., Chavez, G., Zuluaga, M.
C., Ramirez, M., Cedillo, F., 2019. The structural architecture of the Los Humeros
volcanic complex and geothermal field. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 381, 312–329.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2019.06.010.
Norini, G., Groppelli, G., Sulpizio, R., Carrasco-Núñez, G., Dávila-Harris, P., Pellicioli, C.,
Zucca, F., De Franco, R., 2015. Structural analysis and thermal remote sensing of the
P. Deb et al.
Los Humeros Volcanic Complex: Implications for volcano structure and geothermal
exploration. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 301, 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jvolgeores.2015.05.014.
O’Neill, H.S.C., Jenner, F.E., 2012. The global pattern of trace-element distributions in
ocean floor basalts. Nature 491 (7426), 698–704. https://doi.org/10.1038/
nature11678.
Orsi, G., De Vita, S., Di Vito, M.A., Isaia, R., 2005. The Campi Flegrei nested caldera
(Italy): a restless, resurgent structure in a densely populated area. In: Balmuth, M.S.,
Chester, D.K., Johnston, P.A. (Eds.), Cultural Responses to the Volcanic Landscape:
The Mediterranean and Beyond. Archaeological Institute of America, Boston,
pp. 71–90.
Pasquale, V, Verdoya, M., & Chiozzi, P. (2014). Heat flow and geothermal resources in
northern Italy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 36, 277–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2014.04.075.
Pasquale, VincenzoV., Verdoya, M., Chiozzi, P., 2017. Heat conduction and
thermophysical parameters. In: Pasquale, V., Verdoya, M., Chiozzi, P. (Eds.),
Geothermics Heat Flow in the Lithosphere. SpringerBriefs in Earth Sciences.
Springer, Cham, pp. 17–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52084-1_2, 2nd ed.
Probe, 2020. Kuster geothermal and ultra-high temperature products. Probe (Adelaide).
https://www.probe1.com/product-category/kuster Last accessed –09 January 2021.
Prol Ledesma, R.M., Gonzalez-Moran, T., 1982. Modelo Preliminar del Regimen Termico
Conductivo en la Caldera de Los Humeros, Puebla. Geofisica Internacional 21 (3),
295–3047.
Prol-Ledesma, R.M., 1988. Reporte de los estudios petrograficos y de inclusiones fluidas
en nucleos de pozos de exploracion en el campo geotermico de Los Humeros, 86.
Comunicaciones Tecnicas, Instituto de Geofısica, UNAM, Puebla, Mexico, pp. 1–75.
Prol-Ledesma, R.M., 1998. Pre-and post-exploitation variations in hydrothermal activity
in Los Humeros geothermal field, Mexico. J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res. 83, 313–333.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0273(98)00024-9.
Pyle M., D., 1992. The volume and residence times of magma beneath active volcanoes
determined by decay-series disequilibria methods. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 112,
61–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-821X(92)90007-I.
Roche, O., Druitt, T.H., 2001. Onset of caldera collapse during ignimbrite eruptions.
Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 191 (3–4), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-821X
(01)00428-9.
Roure, F., Alzaga-Ruiz, H., Callot, J.P., Ferket, H., Granjeon, D., Gonzalez-Mercado, G.E.,
Guilhaumou, N., Lopez, M., Mougin, P., Ortuno-Arzate, S., Séranne, M., 2009. Long
lasting interactions between tectonic loading, unroofing, post-rift thermal
subsidence and sedimentary transfers along the western margin of the Gulf of
Mexico: Some insights from integrated quantitative studies. Tectonophysics 475 (1),
169–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2009.04.012.
Rybach, L., 1976. Radioactive heat production: a physical property determined by the
chemistry of rocks. In: Strens, R.G.J. (Ed.), The Physics and Chemistry of Minerals
and Rocks. Wiley & Sons, pp. 309–318.
Schön, J. (2015). Physical Properties of Rocks: Fundamentals and Principles of
Petrophysics (J. Schön (ed.); 1st ed.). Elsevier.
Sekiguchi, K., 1984. A method for determining terrestrial heat flow in oil basinal areas.
In: Tectonophysics, 103, pp. 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(84)90075-
1.
Selva, J., Acocella, V., Bisson, M., et al., 2019. Multiple natural hazards at volcanic
islands: a review for the Ischia volcano (Italy). J. Appl. Volcanol. 8 (1), 1–43.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13617-019-0086-4.
Shaw, H.R., 1963. Obsidian-H2O viscosities at 1000 and 2000 bars in the temperature
range 700◦ C to 900◦ C. J. Geophys. Res. 68 (23), 6337–6343. https://doi.org/
10.1029/JZ068i023p06337.
Siebert, L., Simkin, T., Kimberley, P., 2010. Volcanoes of the World, 3rd ed. University of
California Press, London, England, p. 24.
Smith, R.L., & Shaw, H.R. (1975). Assessment of Geothermal Resources of the United
States - 1975. In D.E. White & D.L. Williams (Eds.), Geological Survey Circular
(United States) (Issue 726, pp. 58–83).
Smith, R.L., Shaw, H.R., & Muffler, L.J.P. (1978). Igneous-related geothermal systems:
assessment of Geothermal Resources of the United States - 1978. In L.J.P. Muffler
(Ed.), Geological Survey Circular (United States) (Issue 790).
Stimac, J.A., Goff, F., Wohletz, K., 2001. Thermal modeling of the Clear Lake magmatic-
hydrothermal system, California, USA. Geothermics 30 (2–3), 349–390. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0375-6505(00)00062-6.
22
Geothermics 96 (2021) 102162
Sword, 2020. Kuster downhol gauges –K10 Geothermal. http://swordtek.com/yahoo_si
te_admin/assets/docs/K10_Geothermal.314195737.pdf. Last accessed –09 January
2020.
Suter, M., 1987. Structural traverse across the Sierra Madre Oriental fold-thrust belt in
east-central Mexico. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 98, 249–264. https://doi.org/10.1130/
0016-7606(1987)98<249:STATSM>2.0.CO;2.
Tarasewicz, J., White, R.S., Woods, A.W., Brandsdóttir, B., Gudmundsson, M.T., 2012.
Magma mobilization by downward-propagating decompression of the Eyjafjallajkull
volcanic plumbing system. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39 (19), 1–5. https://doi.org/
10.1029/2012GL053518.
Torres-Rodriguez, M.A., 1995. Characterization of the Reservoir of the Los Humeros,
México, Geothermal Field. In: Proceedings of the World Geothermal Congress 1995,
Florence, Italy, May 18-31, 3, pp. 1561–1567.
Urbani, S., Giordano, G., Lucci, F., Rossetti, F., Acocella, V., Carrasco-Núñez, G., 2020.
Estimating the depth and evolution of intrusions at resurgent calderas: Los Humeros
(Mexico). Solid Earth 11 (2), 527–545. https://doi.org/10.5194/se-11-527-2020.
Urbani, S., Giordano, G., Lucci, F., Rossetti, F., Acocella, V., Carrasco-Núñez, G., 2021.
Structural studies in active caldera geothermal systems. Reply to Comment on
“Estimating the depth and evolution of intrusions at resurgent calderas: Los Humeros
(Mexico) by Norini and Groppelli (2020). Solid Earth Discussions 1–21. https://doi.
org/10.5194/se-2020-218.
Ushioda, M., Takahashi, E., Hamada, M., Suzuki, T., Niihori, K., 2018. Evolution of
Magma Plumbing System in Miyakejima Volcano: constraints From Melting
Experiments. J. Geophys. Res. 123 (10), 8615–8636. https://doi.org/10.1029/
2018JB015910.
Verma, M.P., Verma, S.P., & Sanvicente, H. (1990). Temperature field simulation with
stratification model of magma chamber under los humeros caldera, Puebla, Mexico.
Geothermics, 19(2), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-6505(90)90015-4.
Verma, S.P., 1984. Alkali and alkaline earth element geochemistry of Los Humeros
Caldera, Puebla, Mexico. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 20 (1–2), 21–40. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0377-0273(84)90064-7.
Verma, S.P., 1985b. On the magma chamber characteristics as inferred from surface
geology and geochemistry: examples from Mexican geothermal areas. Phys. Earth
Planet. Inter. 41, 207–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9201(85)90035-4.
Verma, Surendra S.P., Gómez-Arias, E., 2013. Three-dimensional temperature field
simulation of magma chamber in the Los Humeros geothermal field, Puebla, Mexico.
Appl. Therm. Eng. 52 (2), 512–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2012.12.018.
Verma, Surendra S.P., Gómez-Arias, E., Andaverde, J., 2011. Thermal sensitivity analysis
of emplacement of the magma chamber in Los Humeros caldera, Puebla, Mexico. Int.
Geol. Rev. 53 (8), 905–925. https://doi.org/10.1080/00206810903234296.
Verma, S.P., & Andaverde, J. (2007). Coupling of thermal and chemical simulations in a
3-D integrated magma chamber-reservoir model: a new geothermal energy research
frontier. In H.I. Ueckermann (Ed.), Geothermal Energy Research Trends (Issue
January 2007, pp. 149–188). Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Weydt, L.M., Ramírez-Guzmán, Á.A., Pola, A., Lepillier, B., Kummerow, J.,
Mandrone, G., Comina, C., Deb, P., Norini, G., Gonzalez-Partida, E., Avellán, D.R.,
Macías, J.L., Bär, K., Sass, I., 2020. Petrophysical and mechanical rock property
database of the Los Humeros and Acoculco geothermal fields (Mexico). Earth Syst.
Sci. Data Discuss. 2020, 1–39. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-571-2021.
Wohletz, K., Heiken, G., 1992. Calderas and their Geothermal Systems. K. Wohletz & G.
Heiken Volcanology and Geothermal Energy. University of California Press,
pp. 142–177. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft6v19p151/.
Wong-Loya, J.A., Andaverde, J.A., del Rio, J.A., 2015. Improved method for estimating
static formation temperatures in geothermal and petroleum wells. Geothermics 57,
73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2015.06.002.
Xiao-Yin, T., Gong-Cheng, Z., Jian-She, L., Shu-Chun, Y., Song, R., Sheng-Biao, H., 2014.
Modelling of Thermal Effects of Igneous Intrusions on the Temperature Field and
Organic Maturity in the Changchang Sag, Qiongdongnan Basin, South China Sea.
Chin. J. Geophys. 57, 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjg2.20098.
Yañez García, C., García Durán, S., 1982. Exploración de la región geotérmica de Los
Humeros–Las Derrumbadas, estados de Puebla y Veracruz: México. Comisión Federal
de Electricidad, pp. 1–96. Technical Report.