An Investigation of Thermal Springs throughout Arizona: Geochemical, Isotopic, and Geological Characterization, Arizona Basin and Range Province
Issue Date
2014-08-18Keywords
Arizona Geological Survey Open File ReportsArizona
energy
isotopic
hot springs
geothermal
Indian Hot Springs
Buena Vista Hot Springs
Cactus Flat
SaffordWillcoxYumaCofer Hot SpringKaiser Hot springCastle Hot SpringTonopahHooker's Hot SpringPinaleno MountainsTucson BasinAgua Calientehydrologygroundwatergeothermometrychemical geothermometry
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Love, D.S., Gootee, B.F., Cook, J.P., Mahan, M.K. and Spencer, J.E., An Investigation of Thermal Springs throughout Arizona: Geochemical, Isotopic, and Geological Characterization, Arizona Basin and Range Province, 2014, Arizona Geological Survey Open-File Report -14-06, 129 p.Publisher
Arizona Geological Survey (Tucson, AZ)Description
Under the Department of Energy (DOE) National Geothermal Data System (NGDS) (Contract DE-EE0002850) Supplemental Data project to discover new geothermal data, the Arizona Geological Survey (AZGS) investigated the geochemical makeup of groundwater from select thermal springs and wells during late 2012 through 2013. In addition, the related geological context was investigated to evaluate potential groundwater transport mechanism(s) and heat source(s) relevant to geothermal energy production. Chemical analysis of thermal groundwater may be used to estimate subsurface temperatures by applying chemical geothermometry techniques, thus attempting to specify reservoir temperatures and to model possible sources of heat. An exploration program that integrates geochemical indicators of aquifer geometry and temperature with geology, geophysics, well targeting and well testing is likely to lower the cost of building sufficient confidence in resource conceptual models capable to commit to a generation capacity and plan well targets for development (Powell and Cumming, 2010). This report is intended to discuss the geochemistry and geology in relation to the select hot springs and wells sampled throughout Southern Arizona. This report presents the data and our interpretation to the extent of our limited understanding of geochemistry and complex factors that contribute to the geothermometry. It is meant to provide data for geothermal experts and others interested in pursuing additional interpretation. The geothermometry model devised by Tom Powell and William Cumming (Powell and Cumming, 2010) supports many of the common graphic analyses of water chemistry used to interpret hot spring and thermal well groundwater in geothermal exploration and development. The model provides geochemistry interpretative tools with proven value in exploring and characterizing the properties of both volcanic and forced-convection geothermal reservoirs. Cross-plots and ternary diagrams are generated from measured concentrations of chemical species using formulas based on equilibrium reactions and empirical relationships.Additional Links
http://repository.azgs.az.gov/uri_gin/azgs/dlio/1579Language
enSeries/Report no.
OFR-14-06Rights
Arizona Geological Survey. All rights reserved.Collection Information
Documents in the AZGS Document Repository collection are made available by the Arizona Geological Survey (AZGS) and the University Libraries at the University of Arizona. For more information about items in this collection, please contact azgs-info@email.arizona.edu.North Bounding Coordinate
37.0472South Bounding Coordinate
31.4202West Bounding Coordinate
-114.631East Bounding Coordinate
-108.962Collections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Influence of Spring, Fall, and Spring-Fall Grazing on Crested Wheatgrass RangeGrazing crested wheatgrass during spring only, fall only, and spring and fall to a 1-inch stubble height for 10 years had little effect on vegetative characteristics of the seeded stands. Invasion of the stands by other species was greater with spring or spring-fall use than with fall use. Litter decreased with all seasonal treatments, but decreased most under spring-fall use. Drought and growing-season moisture were the critical factors in determining forage yields. The spring-fall pastures produced more forage, provided more days of grazing, and gave the highest average beef production, 177 lb/season. Spring grazing was next and fall grazing the least productive for animal weight gains.
