Induced seismicity in geothermal reservoirs: A review of forecasting approaches. (December 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gaucher, Emmanuel; Schoenball, Martin; Heidbach, Oliver; Zang, Arno; Fokker, Peter A.; van Wees, Jan-Diederik; Kohl, Thomas
• Is Part Of: Renewable & sustainable energy reviews. Volume 52(2015:Dec.)
• Page Start: 1473
• Page End: 1490
• Publication Date: 2015-12
• Subjects: DFN discrete fracture network -- EGS enhanced geothermal system -- ETAS epidemic type aftershock sequence -- FISHA forward induced seismic hazard assessment -- GNM geomechanical-numerical model -- ML local magnitude -- Mw moment magnitude -- PISHA probabilistic induced seismic hazard assessment -- PSHA probabilistic seismic hazard assessment -- THM(C) thermo-hydro-mechanical(-chemical); Geothermal -- Forecasting -- Micro-earthquake -- Stimulation -- Numerical modelling -- Geomechanics; Renewable energy sources -- Periodicals; Power resources -- Periodicals; Énergies renouvelables -- Périodiques; Ressources énergétiques -- Périodiques; 333.794
• DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.08.026
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1364-0321

Abstract

Abstract: In order to reach Europe׳s 2020 and 2050 targets in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, geothermal resources will have to contribute substantially to meeting carbon-free energy needs. However, public opinion may prevent future large-scale application of deep geothermal power plants, because induced seismicity is often perceived as an unsolicited and uncontrollable side effect of geothermal development. In the last decade, significant advances were made in the development of models to forecast induced seismicity, which are either based on catalogues of induced seismicity, on the underlying physical processes, or on a hybrid philosophy. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive overview of the existing approaches applied to geothermal contexts. This overview will outline the advantages and drawbacks of the different approaches, identify the gaps in our understanding, and describe the needs for geothermal observations. Most of the forecasting approaches focus on the stimulation phase of enhanced geothermal systems which are most prone to generate seismic events. Besides the statistical models suited for real-time applications during reservoir stimulation, the physics-based models have the advantage of considering sub-surface characteristics and estimating the impact of fluid circulation on the reservoir. Hence, to mitigate induced seismicity during major hydraulic stimulations, application of hybrid methods in a decision support system seems the best available solution. So far, however, little attention has been paid to geochemical effects on the failure process and to production periods. Quantitative modelling of induced seismicity still is a challenging and complex matter. Appropriate resources remain to be invested for the scientific community to continue its research and development efforts to successfully forecast induced seismicity in geothermal fields. This is a prerequisite for making this renewable energy resource sustainable and accessible worldwide.