GIS-based Water Resource Geospatial Infrastructure for Oil Shale Development Wendy Zhou, Matthew Minnick, Mengistu Geza Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO Kyle Murray University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX Water and Energy in Changing Climate Conference Pittsburgh, PA 09-29-2010
Outline Brief Introduction to the Project Data Collection and Database Design ArcHydro Data Framework SQL Server 2008 Spatial Database Modeling 3D Geological Model Groundwater Model Surface Water Model Dynamic Systems Model Data Dissemination and Model Result Visualization Web-based GIS Summaries
Brief Intro to the Project Funding Agency: NETL/DOE, DE-NT0006554 Duration: October 2008 ~ September 2011 Goal: To develop a water resource geospatial infrastructure that serves as baseline data for creating solutions on water resource management and for making decisions on oil shale resource development Performers: Colorado School of Mines: Wendy Zhou, Matt Minnick, Mengistu Geza, Elif Acikalin, Jerry Boak University of Texas at San Antonio: Kyle Murray, Tuan B Lee Idaho National Laboratory: Earl Mattson, Kara Eby, Carl Palmer Collaborators: USGS Energy Resources Program, Denver, CO 80228 Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545 USGS Colorado Water Science Center, Grand Junction, CO 81506
Global Oil Shale Resource 1. Piceance Basin (GRF) 1,525 billion barrels (modified from Boak, 2009)
Oil shale zone Oil in place (bbs) Top A-groove-top bed 44 189.7 A-groove 6.3 Mahogany zone 191.7 B-groove 7.8 R-6 185.4 L-5 66.1 R-5 198.2 L-4 69.1 R-4 127.1 L-3 22.5 R-3 68.1 L-2 24.2 R-2 66.8 L-1 15.5 R-1 195.4 L-0 8.3 R-0 83.4 Total this assessment: 1,525.2 USGS Resource Estimation 2009 1~3 bbs of Water per bbs of Oil Water Quantity and Quality
Nahcolite: NaHCO3 Dawsonite: NaAl(OH)2CO3 Halite: NaCl Total in-place nahcolite: 43.3 billion tons. Total carbon dioxide in this resource: 11.3 billion tons. USGS, 2010
Geospatial Infrastructure
3D Geological Model Visualization of the Oil content in Gallons per Ton from the Fisher assays measurements in MVS (Mining Visualization System) with the top surface defined by a 10 meter DEM (Digital Elevation Model)
WARMF Model Framework Meteorological data Air Quality Watershed characteristics Land use Catchment areas/slope Soil properties Managed Flow Diversions from streams for energy Pumping ground water Reservoir data Point Sources Build a Watershed Model Calibrate model - Outputs Compare Model Outputs Under Different Oil Shale Production Scenarios Water Quantity-Stream Water level Water Quality Sediment and chemicals Develop a Water resource Management plan based on model prediction Generate information useful to Planners and Regulators
Integrated Geodatabase Piceance-Yellow (14050006) White River The Watershed Analysis Risk Management Framework (WARMF) is capable of simulating surface water hydrology including the impact of water use on stream flow and pollutant transport and reactions. A river basin is divided into a network of land catchments, stream segments, and lakes for hydrologic and water-quality simulations. Stream flow is calculated based on water balance. Parachute-Roan (14010006) Colorado River N 09306255 YELLOW CREEK NEAR WHITE RIVER, CO Rio Blanco Garfield 0 40 80 Kilometers Reach File, V1 DEM 14050006 0-1972 (m) 1973-2158 2159-2340 2341-2520 2521-2988 County Boundarie
Surface and Groundwater Interaction Northern Subbasins: Piceance- Yellow (White River) (CGS, 2001) Southern Subbasins: Parachute- Roan (Colorado River)
Visual MODFLOW Integrated Geodatabase 3D Geologic Model
FORMATION MEMBER OIL SHALE ZONES & MARKER UNITS HYDROGEOLOGIC UNITS GENERAL HYDROGEOLOGIC FUNCTION MODFLOW LAYER AVERAGE THICKNESS (FEET) Surficial Alluvium Surficial Aquifer Layer1 50 Uinta Hydro5 Upper Aquifers Layer2 360 Green River Parachute Creek A groove Hydro4 Layer3 350 Wasatch Garden Gulch Mahogany Hydro3 Aquitard Layer4 141 B groove Hydro2 Lower Aquifers Layer5 174 R-6 L-5 Hydro1 Layer6 435 R-5 L-4 R-4 L-3 R-3 L-2 R-2 L-1 Hydro0 Aquitard Layer7 NA R-1 L-0 R-0 Correlation Chart for Hydrogeologic Units (Taylor, 1982)
Integrated Geodatabase Construction retort dimensions Operation retort properties Reclamation Model inputs Model calculations time module Model outputs Input from GIS Database Input from GIS Database buffer length frz w all w idth Frz w all lgt Modeling Modeling retort w idth frz w all length Frz Area Frz w all surface area retort length depth of frz w all calc frz w all volume Process Models depth to w ater calc area of retort calc vol of retort height of retort Control Technologies Local/Regional Response Models Output to Decision Support Output to Decision Support (Mattson, 2009) 0 0 10 1.584e+005 20 3.168e+005 30 4.752e+005 40 6.336e+005 50 7.92e+005 60 9.504e+005 70 1.1088e+006 80 1.2672e+006 90 1.4256e+006 water usage graph (gal) 100M 10M 1M 100K 0-100K -1M -10M -100M -1G 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Time
Summaries Development of the water resource geospatial infrastructure creates a repository for large volumes of geological, hydro-geological, topological, water resource and oil shale data. This data repository will allow for collaborative regional/basin assessments for future oil shale development. This type of collaboration provides an ideal atmosphere for the development of new, generically useful approaches to the use of new technology, and procedures that promote the best and most widespread use of our enormous data holdings despite their disparate locations and heterogeneous formats. The components in the infrastructure, including data frame, databases customized tools and models, are designed to be interlinked. These interlinks allow for synchronized updating. The final results of this projects shall facilitate answering such questions as, the amount of oil shale resource, water availability, and potential environmental impacts under various development scenarios. The procedures/tools/models developed in this research are designed to be general. These procedures/tools/models are readily adopted to other study areas.
Thank you and Questions?