Application of Material and Energy Balances
to Geothermal Steam Production
Robert L. Whiting, SPE-AIME, Texas A&M U.
Henry J. Ramey, Jr., SPE-AIME, Stanford U.
Introduction
The basic study from which this paper was prepared
was started as the result of the growing need through-
out the world for increasing quantities of energy in
all forms. Quite obviously, natural forms of energy
that are readily available at low development cost are
those in greatest demand. The underdeveloped coun-
tries - and particularly those having little or no
petroleum resources - are the countries in which the
most interest is being shown in the newer energy
sources. One of the least expensive energy sources is
natural geothermal steam. 1 - 4 Although this form of
energy has been recognized for centuries, it has been
only during the past 20 years that serious efforts have
been made to harness it. Natural geothermal steam
energy in Italy, New Zealand, Mexico, Japan, and
California is now being produced through wells to
drive turbines and generate electricity. Further, active
exploration for natural geothermal steam is being
conducted in Hawaii, Fiji, Taiwan, Chile, Russia,
Greece, and Katanga.
It is surprising to find that most geothermal steam
exploration is in the "steam seep" stage. That is,
surface studies are made and exploratory wells are
drilled in the general area of steam seeps. However,
in the larger geothermal steam areas, there have been
efforts to apply the most modern geological and res-
ervoir engineering principles in order to define the
reservoir parameters, particularly those relating to
estimates of reserves and future productivity. This
The material-energy balance developed in this study has been used successfully to
match performance and to forecast production for the W airakei geothermal field of
New Zealand. The equations should be applicable to other geothermal fluid reservoirs,
provided the assumptions used are realistic.
JULY, 1969
paper is concerned with the development of appro-
priate equations and techniques to facilitate these
estimates.
Production of natural steam or hot water presents
problems different from those experienced in the pro-
duction of oil and gas. For example, steam or hot
water systems may be essentially single-component
systems, while hydrocarbon systems are most fre-
quently multicomponent fluid systems. Heat effects
are much larger for water than for hydrocarbon sys-
tems; and the natural steam production may or may
not be isothermal, while production of petroleum
reservoirs is considered normally to be isothermal.
Petroleum reservoir engineering principles may be
applied to natural steam or hot water reservoirs if the
inherent differences in the systems are considered.
The basic considerations involved in geothermal
steam reservoir engineering are: thermodynamics,
physical and thermal properties of water, materials
and energy balances, fluid influx, and performance
matching and predicting.
Thermodynamics
Fig. 1 is a pressure-temperature diagram for the
liquid-vapor region for pure water, showing the criti-
cal point and five other points representing possible
initial conditions for a geothermal steam reservoir.
To generate a physical appreciation for the mechanics
of natural steam production, it is helpful to consider
893
 events subsequent to producing the reservoir at each 5000

of the assumed initial conditions. For the purposes E D

of this discussion, the possibility of water influx (re- • •
charge) will be neglected. 4000
First, consider that a reservoir was found that CRITICAL POINT
initially existed at state "A", entirely within the vapor ~
(J) 3206.2 PSI A., 705.4°F
0..
region. Assume that the reservoir was produced by
expansion of the fluid contained in the pore space.
w
a::
3000

=>
The thermodynamic system comprises the geothermal (J)
(J)

reservoir, the natural steam, and the associated rock w

a::
c.. 2000
that is the porous medium. From Gibbs' phase rule
it is known that two intensive properties completely
determine the thermodynamic state of this system
because there are two components and two phases. 1000
Because two intensive properties, pressure and tem-
perature, are shown on Fig. 1, Point A can be located
on any other thermodynamic diagram. For example, 0 ~----~~~--~----~------~----~
Point A is also shown on Fig. 2, a pressure-enthalpy 0 200 400 600 800 1000
plot for pure water in the superheated steam region. TEMPERATURE, °F
The heavy arrow from Point A shows the path of
isothermal production of a geothermal steam reser- Fig. !--Pressure-temperature diagram for water.
voir initially at condition "A".* It may be seen that
the enthalpy of the steam in the reservoir would in-
crease significantly as pressure declines.** This fol-
lows from the first law of thermodynamics. The hot 3000
rock matrix would not affect this case because the
process is nearly isothermal. 2000

Suppose, however, that the reservoir could be pro-

duced in such a way that the enthalpy of the steam in ::! 1000
the reservoir remains constant. It may be seen from (/)
a_ BOO

Fig. 2 that the reservoir temperature would have to w

0:: 600
:::J
decline as pressure declines. Because of the large (/)
(/)
LLl 400
quantity of sensible heat in the rock matrix, the rock 0::
a_
00
would affect this process in an important way. Ther-
mal energy would be available from the rock matrix.
I
200

(This process would result in an essentially isother- TEMP~RATU,RE' ·:

mal path.) 100
800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,400 'F

Now consider Point B on Fig. 1. Point B lies on

the vapor pressure curve. From Gibbs' phase rule, 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 I,BOO

one intensive property determines this system. There ENTHALPY, BTU /LB
are two components and three phases. Production of
a geothermal reservoir initially at condition "B" can Fig. 2--Pressure-enthalpy diagram for superheated steam.
best be illustrated on Fig. 3, a pressure-enthalpy
diagram for pure water. Although the thermodynamic
condition is specified as solid, liquid, and vapor in
equilibrium by one intensive variable, the relative 3,000

amounts of liquid, solid, and gas cannot be stated

2,000
unless some other thermodynamic property (enthalpy
of the mixture, steam quality, etc.) is known. This
fact is shown on Fig. 3 by the heavy arrow at 1,000 1,000
900
psia, indicated as Point B. This condition has an <[
u; BO')
a_ 700
analog in petroleum reservoir engineering: the gas- w 600
cap reservoir, for which it is necessary to specify the 0::
:::J
(/)
500

size of the gas cap. (/)

w
0::
400

If a geothermal steam reservoir initially existed at a_

300

1,000 psia and contained a mixture of steam and hot

200
water of 800 Btu/lb mixture enthalpy, the reservoir

*The actual path for production of such a reservoir would not

be truly isothermal, but temperature decline should be too small 0 200 400 600 BOO 1,000 1,200
to measure with normal field instruments.
**Information presented in Ref. 5 shows that enthalpy of steam ENTHALPY, BTU /LB
produced at Larderello, Italy, has increased significantly during 50
years of production. Fig. 3--Pressure-enthalpy diagram for water.

894 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 could be produced in a large variety of ways. For
example, production could be saturated liquid at an
enthalpy of 542.4 Btu/lb, or gas-cap saturated steam
at an enthalpy of 1191.8 Btu/lb, or any mixture of
steam and liquid with mixture enthalpies ranging
from that of the liquid to that of gas.
Clearly, both the mass and enthalpy of produced
fluid, and the thermodynamic path of the production
must be specified. If saturated hot water was pro-
duced isothermally, there could be no reservoir pres-
sure decline until all the fluid in the reservoir had
vaporized. If the reservoir was produced such that the
fluid in the reservoir followed an isoenthalpic path}
both pressure and temperature would tend to de-
crease. There would then be transfer of heat from the
rock to the fluids in the pore space. But one important
fact is clear. As long as both liquid and gas exist ini
the reservoir, the enthalpy of the steam in the reser-
voir could not exceed the maximum two-phase en-
velope enthalpy shown in Fig. 3: 1204.6 Btu/lb.
Furthermore, the reservoir steam enthalpy should
decrease slightly as reservoir pressure declines below
700 psia. This represents a distinct departure from
postulated behavior for the initial reservoir condition
discussed as Point A previously - a gas reservoir.
Thus measured enthalpy of the produced geothermal
fluids may well provide important information re-
garding reservoir conditions.
If a geothermal steam reservoir initially existed in
the compressed liquid state, the condition might be
represented by Point C on Fig. 1 (also shown on Fig.
3). Like the vapor case Point A discussed previ-
ously, both initial temperature and initial pressure are
needed to set the initial condition. Point C is different
from the Point A case in that production of this reser-
voir by any reasonable means will eventually lead to
the reservoir fluids' reaching the condition indicated
by the vapor-pressure curve. Thereafter, production
should be similar to that at the initial condition in
Case B. However, analysis indicates that the actual
path while reservoir fluid is in the compressed liquid
phase would be essentially isothermal and isoenthalpic
(see Figs. 1 and 3).
Fig. 1 also shows two other initial conditions:
Points D and E. Both points represent pressures
higher than the critical. Point D also represents a
temperature higher than the critical. Both Points D
and E reflect possible initial conditions. A geothermal
reservoir similar to that indicated by Point D would
eventually become similar to a reservoir initially
at condition "A". That is, reasonable production
schemes would likely never reach the state repre-
sented by the vapor pressure curve. An initial reser-
voir condition like Point E would eventually become
similar to Points C and B upon production and re-
sultant pressure decline.
From the preceding, it is clear that mathematical
modeling of geothermal steam reservoirs requires
knowledge of mass withdrawals and the enthalpy of
the fluid withdrawn. It is also clear that the reservoir
rock can be important in that it serves as a storage
of tremendous quantities of sensible heat.
Some qualification should be made at this point.
The preceding discussion employed thermodynamic
JULY, 1969
charts developed for pure water with a fiat liquid-gas
interface (no capillary forces) . It is well known that
the presence of salts in solution depresses the vapor
pressure curve. (See Ref. 6, page 144.) Although it
would be expected that there would be salt in solution,
there is no important evidence of this phenomenon at
any of the current large production areas (Larderello,
Italy; The Geysers, Calif.; and Wairakei, New Zea-
land). On the other hand, high-pressure hot water
produced near the Salton Sea, Calif., contains in ex-
cess of 300,000 ppm salt, and there has been a lower-
ing of the vapor pressure curve.
Another well known phenomenon occurring in
porous media is vapor pressure lowering due to
capillary pressure. 7 This effect appears to be far more
significant than effects due to salts in solution. It could
lead to very complicated phase equilibria and might
mean that liquid in small pores could not vaporize.
However, there appears to be no experimental data
at high temperatures to check extrapolations based
upon low-temperature data and theoretical analysis.
Both the effect of salts in solution, and the lowering
of vapor pressure could have modifying influences
upon quantitative calculations, but would not alter
general principles discussed previously.
Material and Energy Balances
One of the most important and basic approaches to
petroleum reservoir engineering is· the materials bal-
ance. In the case of geothermal steam reservoirs, it is
necessary to add an energy balance to the materials
balance. The reservoir system (Fig. 4) has a bulk
volume V and contains steam, water and rock. It is
assumed that there is a cumulative production, WP lb
of fluid, with a corresponding cumulative heat pro-
duction of QP Btu. Some net heat loss from the for-
mation QL Btu, is also assumed. This last term would
normally contain terms for heat conduction to and
from the reservoir, and for convective heat losses
caused by steam fumaroles, springs, wild wells, etc.
The term does not include the heat brought to the
reservoir by high-pressure influx of water from an
aquifer. The cumulative water influx, We lb, is con-
sidered separately. Water influx may result from
steady- or unsteady-state fluid flow from an aquifer
of any appropriate geometry. For the purposes of this
study, the specific enthalpy of the influx is assumed
to be contant at he Btu/lb. As long as influx occurs at
depth, it is likely that it would be liquid, and the
WL LB LOSS CUMULATIVE FLUID PRODUCED, Wp LB
QL BTU NET HEAT LOSS CUMULATIVE HEAT PRODUCED, Op BTU
Q BTU CONDUCTIVE HEAT LOSS RESERVOIR SYSTEM:
STEAM, WATER, AND ROCK
BULK VOLUME • V
POROSITY • ¢
WATER INFLUX OF We LB
CUMULATIVE ENTHALPY he BTU /LB
Fig. 4-Schematic diagram of reservoir model.
895
 enthalpy of the liquid phase does not depend greatly
upon pressure.
The derivation of the material-energy balance for
geothermal fluid reservoirs is presented in the Ap-
pendix. The result (analogous to the petroleum res-
ervoir material balance) is:
B .
+ (he - E c ) - ~ Qn (tn) b.pn (1)
Vfe
This equation may be used for performance matching
and forecasting in the usual fashion. More will be said
of this later.
The derivation of Eq. 1 presented in the Appendix
deserves discussion. One important assumption is
complete thermodynamic equilibrium. Although this
is a reasonable assumption within local pore space, it
might not be reasonable for the entire reservoir. For
example, consider a thick, low-permeability forma-
tion containing a large steam cap and a steam-liquid
interface. Production of steam from partially pene-
trating wells would cause a pressure gradient from
the boiling liquid interface toward the top of the for-
mation. Local boiling at the interface could eventually
lead to pressure decline and consequent temperature
decline at the interface - the latent heat being sup-
plied by local cooling of the rock. On the other hand,
movement of steam through the gas cap would be
essentially isothermal. Thus, temperature differences
could occur within the reservoir, which would lead
to very slow heat conduction effects. Performance
matching with Eq. 1 under this condition would lead
to erroneous estimates of V ¢, since Eq. 1 assumes a
uniform distribution of gas and liquid throughout the
reservoir. If the gas and liquid were to separate rap-
idly and form a gas cap, it would probably be more
realistic to assume that the gas-cap volume exists at a
higher temperature than the liquid zone, and to neglect
heat conduction from the gas cap to the liquid zone.
This would lead to modification of the term represent-
ing energy content of the rock and fluids. This would
result in a time-dependent temperature-depth profile
in the reservoir, which would be a function of the
specific reservoir geometry. This complication did not
appear justified in this initial study.
Another important observation is that the net con-
ductive heat loss term, Q, in Eq. 1 should almost
always be negligible. Geothermal fluid systems should
exist at thermal and hydraulic equilibrium. The heat
conduction to the bottom of the reservoir should
essentially equal the heat loss by conduction from the
top of the reservoir. This balance could be upset only
if production resulted in significant reservoir tempera-
ture change. Even in this event, terrestrial heat con-
duction takes place at such a slow rate that reservoir
performance should not be affected over time periods
involved in normal forecasting (50 years).
896
Other pertinent comments regarding Eq. 1 are as
follows. It is likely that the enthalpy of produced and
lost fluids would be the same, i.e., hp X hL. For solids
(rock) the specific heat at constant volume is essen-
tially the same as the specific heat at constant pres-
sure. Finally, it is likely that the enthalpy of the water
influx, he, would remain constant.
Fluid Influx
Before the materials-energy balance equation may be
used, it is necessary to specify the nature of the cumu-
lative dimensionless influx term, QnCtn). This quan-
tity has also been called the aquifer response function.
In general, this function depends upon the aquifer
flow geometry, rock and fluid properties, and time.
Although it is possible to determine arbitrary response
functions to fit any specific field performance, the
aquifer response functions for three potentially useful
flow geometries - hemispherical, linear, and radial
- are presented in Table 1. In all three cases, flow is
assumed to be isothermal liquid water of constant
viscosity, compressibility, and enthalpy. Viscous flow,
such that Darcy's law applies, is also assumed.
Performance Matching and Predicting
The basic solution method proposed in this paper is
as follows. Eq. 1 presents a relationship between
energy and mass produced, and the reservoir size
and initial conditions (pressure, temperature, and
phase condition or reservoir steam quality). This
equation includes a term for hot water influx, We.
Although three aquifer geometries are considered in
Table 1, the general procedure is valid for any flow
geometry, whether steady or unsteady. If the initial
condition and size of the geothermal steam reservoir
and the aquifer physical properties are known, these
equations would furnish the basis for a logical pro-
duction forecasting method under almost any sort of
practical production scheme. Usually, some produc-
tion history is available. In this case, Eq. 1 would
often be used to determine the system constants. For
example, if two corresponding geothemal steam res-
ervoir pressures at two corresponding production
(mass and enthalpy) points were available, then, in
theory, two system constants could be determined.
Usually, this would include initial size W, and per-
haps the influx constant B. If three sets of data were
available, three system constants could be determined.
In the usual case, a very large number of sets of data
are available (monthly or quarterly production data)
to determine, at most, five or six system constants
(aquifer size and type, initial reservoir size, tempera-
ture, pressure, aquifer dimensionless time constant,
etc.). This usually demands least-squares fitting tech-
niques. Operations involve matching past perform-
ance data to determine system constants, then using
the system constants determined from performance
matching to forecast system performance under a
variety of production schedules.
Application to the Wairakei
Geothermal Reservoir
The foregoing principles were employed in making a
reservoir engineering study of the Wairakei geother-
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
 mal steam reservoir, located on the North Island of
New Zealand. Field and laboratory data were assem-
bled, organized and analyzed in much the same man-
ner as they would be in petroleum reservoir engi-
neering. However, detailed studies were required for
temperature and pressure variations with depth; and
production data included both mass and enthalpy.
After the evaluation of the reservoir rock property
data, reservoir fluid property data, pressure and tem-
perature data, and fluid production data, the next step
was to identify the production mechanism of the geo-
thermal steam reservoir. From a theoretical stand-
point, the initial condition of the reservoir fluid could
have been either compressed liquid, or liquid and
vapor in equilibrium. With this in mind, it was possi-
ble to visualize a number of different models. The
component parts of each model could be identified
as ( 1) the reservoir, containing essentially steam
and/ or hot water; (2) the aquifer, intimately asso-
ciated with the reservoir and considered filled with
liquid; and (3) the porous rock, common to both
the reservoir and the aquifer. Quite obviously, the
reservoir and the aquifer could possess many differ-
ent geometrical configurations. However, in the ab-
sence of specific field data as to aquifer geometry, it
was decided that three ideal geometrical configura-
tions (linear, radial, and hemispherical) would be
assumed so that a range of possibilities could be in-
vestigated~ Models possessing all of the possible res-
ervoir characteristics were tested. It was assumed that
the fluid initially was in the saturated liquid-vapor
region, or at the vapor pressure of liquid at the initial
temperature. All pressure data were referred to a
subsea depth. Eq. 1 was used to produce pressure-
production histories. It was found that for the res-
TABLE I-SUMMARY EQUATIONS FOR WATER INFLUX AND AQUIFER RESPONSE FUNCTIONS
FOR AQUIFERS OF INFINITE EXTENT
5 _~15 ¢ Crw ~
3
W. (in reserv0ir bbl) = Qv(tv) APn
= 1.119 ¢ Crw 3 ~ Qv(tv) APn
W. (in reservoir bbl) =
5 _~ 15 A¢ C ~ Qv(tv) A.pn
= 0.1781 A¢ C ~ Qv(tv) APn
W. (in reservoir bbl) = 1.119 ¢ Cr,v 2 h ~ Qv(tv) APn
Qv(tv) is defined as follows:
Qv(tv) =tv ( 1 + V! tv) = tv+ 2
Qv(tv) = 2 ..,. / tv ; tn = 0.00632 kt
" 1T ILC¢
..../ tn
Qv(tn) = 2 "----;- , tn < 0.01
Qv(tn) =
1.12838 y'tn + 1.19328 tn + 0.269872 tn y'tn + 0.00855294 tv
--------'------------=::-:-------'---------
1 + 0.616599 y'tn + 0.0413008 tv
(0.01 < tv < 200); tn = 0.00~ 2 ~t
Qv(tn) -= -4.29881 + 2.02566 (tv)
In tn
JULY, 1969
ervoir models, the range of reservoir parameters
assumed, and the fluid production data and pres-
sure history employed, there should have been a
negligible reservoir pressure drop for the period of
time over which the study was conducted. Since there
had been a significant decline in measured pressure
in the field operation over the time period, it was con-
cluded that the initial fluid condition should be as-
sumed to be that of a compressed liquid.
Eq. 2 (see Appendix for derivation) expressing the
reservoir performance for a model containing fluid
initially existing as a compressed liquid was then used
in the analysis. When pressure declined to the vapor
pressure at reservoir temperature, calculations were
then made with Eq. 1.
(Wp + WL) Vt = w (Vt- Vti)
+ B 2: Qn(tn) l:.pn (2)
A digital computer program was written and all
subsequent calculations were made on an IBM 7094.
Least-mean-squares techniques were used to deter-
mine the initial water in place ( W lb), and the water
influx constant (B bbl/psi).
The geometry of the geothermal steam system
aquifer was first assumed to be linear. Calculations
were made to determine the initial water in place and
the water influx constant by least-mean-squares fitting
for various values of dimensionless time constants.
Similar calculations were made assuming the aquifer
geometry to be radial, and then hemispherical. In all
cases, the water influx constant B was eliminated on
the basis of least significant T-value. This meant that
thus far in the history of the field, the fluid production
performance was that of a volumetric model contain-
hemispherical flow geometry
linear flow geometry
radial flow geometry
~ ~; ; tn =
0
·~~6~~}t hemispherical flow geometry
linear flow geometry
radial flow geometry<sJ
2
radial flow geometry
¢ !L r,v
, tv ;?: 200 radial flow geom,etry
897
ing compressed liquid initially. There may be reser-
voir and aquifer components of this model, but to date
the production performance has been such that these
components are indistinguishable. Hence, it was as-
sumed that the reservoir and aquifer are performing
as a single unit and that in the usual context there is
no measurable fluid influx from the aquifer to the
reservoir. The initial temperature and enthalpy were
estimated, and a least-mean-squares fit to the pro-
duction history from 1956 through 1961 was made
to obtain the initial water in place and the initial pres-
sure. Optimum estimates were achieved by searching
for the minimum standard deviation in each desired
system constant as follows: ( 1 ) The optimum initial
temperature was obtained using the estimated initial
water in place. Calculations were made over a range
of temperatures at intervals of 0.5°F. The standard
deviation for each temperature was calculated and
the optimum initial temperature was found. (2) Once
the optimum initial temperature was obtained, the
optimum value for the initial water in place was
obtained assuming an estimated initial pressure. Cal-
culations were made for a wide range of values of
initial water in place. The standard deviation for each
assumed value of initial water in place was calculated
and the optimum initial water in place was estimated.
(3) Using the optimum initial temperature and the
optimum initial water in place, the optimum initial
pressure was calculated. Calculations were necessary
for only a limited range of assumed pressures since
the initial pressure had been fairly well established in
previous calculations. The standard deviation for each
assumed value of initial pressure was calculated and
the optimum initial pressure was estimated. Sharp
800.------------------------------------------------------------------------.
700
~
en
a..
w
0:
::::>
~ 600
w
0:
a..
0:
0
>
0:
w
en
~ 500
400 PRESSURE AT DATUM OF -500
1957 1958 1959 1960
Fig. 5-Prediction of geothermal reservoir performance.
minimums in standard deviation were obtained for
all of the system constants. Calculations were made
at three reference subsea depths to obtain optimum
parameters. Even though the model was assumed to
contain compressed liquid initially, with continued
production the pressure ultimately would decline to
that corresponding to the saturated liquid-vapor re-
gion. Hence, the computer program was written in-
corporating both Eqs. 1 and 2. Using this program,
the analysis of past and future model performance
would be expedited. In the program the computer
was instructed to write the statement "now the system
is following the vapor pressure curve" when the pres-
sure declined to a level corresponding to the saturated
liquid-vapor region.
The field production data were matched for the
period 1956 through 1961, and the system constants
obtained were used to predict the performance
through 1965. The results of these calculations,
plotted in Fig. 5, indicate excellent agreement between
measured and calculated values.
The future performance was then predicted from
Jan. 1, 1966, to the year 2000, assuming various
annual production rates. It was· observed that even
with the highest production rate assumed, the pres-
sure and temperature would decrease very little over
the time period. This is to be expected once the reser-·
voir is following the vapor pressure curve.
Summary
This paper has presented some basic thermodynamic
principles that are applicable to geothermal fluid res-
ervoir engineering. The equations that result are use-
ful for estimating the initial reservoir conditions and
---<>--- MEASURED PRESSURE, PSIA
---6--- CALCULATED PRESSURE, PSIA
SYSTEM FOLLOWING
VAPOR PRESSURE CURVE
+
MATCHED PREDICTED
FEET SUBSEA
1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966
TIME
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
for matching the past performance and predicting the
future performance of reservoirs for which the as-
sumptions involved are realistic. Further, it has been
demonstrated that this approach can be applied to a
field case with what appears to be excellent accuracy.
It is likely that many other common reservoir engi-
neering tools can be modified for application to geo-
thermal fluid reservoirs.
Nomenclature.
A = area, sq ft
B = water-influx constant, bbl/psi
C = compressibility, psi-1
Cvr = specific heat at constant volume of res-
ervoir rock and contained fluids,
Btu/lb op
Ec = internal energy of total system (rock
and fluid) at initial condition, Btu/lb
Ei = internal energy of total system (rock
and fluid) at current condition, Btu/
lb
E. = total system internal energy, Btu
E' = internal energy of fluid produced at sur-
rounding conditions, Btu/lb
h = enthalpy, Btu/lb
hL = enthalpy of fluids lost, Btu/lb
he = enthalpy of total fluid in place currently,
Btu/lb
hp = enthalpy of produced fluids, Btu/lb
he = enthalpy of influx fluid, Btu/lb
h 1 = enthalpy of saturated liquid, Btu/lb
h 9 = enthalpy of saturated steam, Btu/lb
h 19 = latent heat of vaporization, Btu/lb
hi = enthalpy of initial fluid, Btu/lb
J = mechanical energy heat equivalent, 77 8
ft-lb/Btu
k = permeability, md
m =mass
n = any time period
p = pressure, psi
Pi = initial pressure, psi
ilPn = pressure difference at any time n, psi
Q = net heat conducted to reservoir, Btu
Q' = heat transferred from surroundings to
system, Btu
Qn(tn) = dimensionless cumulative influx for
proper aquifer geometry at dimen-
sionless time, tn (see Table 1)
QL = cumulative heat loss, Btu
QP = cumulative heat produced, Btu
rw = reservoir radius, ft
Ti = initial temperature, op
Tc = current temperature, °F
t = time, days
tn = dimensionless time (see Table 1)
V = reservoir bulk volume, cu ft
v1 = specific volume of saturated liquid
water, cu ft/lb
v9 = specific volume of saturated steam, cu
ft/lb
v fi = initial specific volume of saturated liq-
uid water, cu ft/lb
v 9 i = initial specific volume of saturated
steam, cu ft/lb
JULY, 1969
W = initial mass (hot water and steam) in
reservoir volume V, lb
W c = current mass water (steam and liquid)
in place, lb
We = influx mass (assumed liquid) , lb
W L = total mass (hot water and steam) loss,
lb
WP = total mass (hot water and steam) pro-
duced, lb
x = steam quality, or mass fraction which
is steam, fraction
Xc = quality of fluid currently in place,
fraction
fL = viscosity, cp
cp = reservoir porosity, fraction
Pr = density of reservoir rock and contained
fluids, lb I cu ft
Acknowledgment
The assistance of undergraduate and graduate petro-
leum engineering students at Texas,0&M U. in the
over-all study from which this paper was prepared
is gratefully acknowledged- particularly, the able
computer assistance of Rafi Al-Hussainy and Ram
G. Agarwal.
References
1. McNitt, J. R.: "Exploration and Development of Geo-
thermal Power in California", Special Report 75, Cali-
fornia Div. of Mines and Geology (1963).
2. "New Sources of Energy", Proc., of the Conference, Rome
(Aug. 21-31, 1961) 2; United Nations Publication No. 63,
New York (1964) I, 36.
3. White, D. E.: "Geothermal Energy", Geol. Survey Circular
519, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Washington, D. C. (1965).
4. Grindley, G. W.: "The Geology, Structure, and Exploita-
tion of the Wairakei Geothermal Field, Taupo, New Zea-
land", Bulletin 75, New Zealand Geological Survey (1965).
5. Terrestrial Heat Flow, W. K. Lee, ed. AGU Monograph
No. 8 (1966) 219.
6. Dodge, B. F.: Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York (1944).
7. Calhoun, J. C., Jr., Lewis, M. and Newman, R. C.: "Ex-
periments on the Capillary Properties of Porous Solids",
Trans., AIME (1949) 186, 189-196.
8. Edwardson, M. J., Girner, H. M., Parkison, H. R., Wil-
liams, C. D. and Matthews, C. S.: "Calculation of Forma-
tion Temperature Disturbances Caused by Mud Circula-
tion", J. Pet. Tech. (April, 1962) 416-426.
APPENDIX
Material and Energy Balances
for Geothermal Steam Reservoirs
The system is taken to be a reservoir of total volume
V, and porosity cp, containing steam and/or water.
An energy balance may be written from the first law
of thermodynamics:
dE= dQ'- dw' + E' dm (A-1)
- J
where
E = total system (rock and fluids) energy,
Btu,
Q' = net heat transferred from surroundings
to system, Btu,
w' = work produced in surroundings, ft-lb,
J = mechanical energy- heat equivalent,
778 ft-lb/Btu,
899
 E' =
internal energy of fluid produced at sur- Expansion of Eq. A-6 for the geothermal fluid
rounding conditions, Btu/lb, and reservoir yields:
m = mass fluid in system, lb.
WEi- WeEc + V (1- cp)prCvr(Ti- Te) =
The work done in the surroundings will be:
Q- We he+ Wphp + WLhL . (A-7)
dw' = - p' v' dm . (A-2) Eq. A-7 is the total energy balance in a useful form.
Substituting Eq. A-2 in Eq. A-1: Note that Q represents the net heat loss from the for-
mation due to conduction, while W L hL represents
1
d~ = dQ' +T p' v' dm + E' dm (A-3) energy loss due to fluid leakage.
A mass balance yields
From the definition of enthalpy, We= W + We - Wp - WL (A-8)
h' = E' + p' v' (A-4) The volumetric balance is
J
V cp = We [Xc Vge + (1 - Xc) Vte] , (A-9)
Thus Eq. A-3 becomes
V¢ = W[xi Vui + (1- xi)vtd, (A-10)
d§_ = dQ' + h' dm (A-5)
where x is the steam quality in the formation.
Eq. A-5 states that the change in total energy in the
system will be the sum of the heat transferred to the The water influx term, We, can be expressed in the
system plus the enthalpy change due to a change of usual superposition form:
mass of fluid in the system. The change of mass of B
We=-~ QD(tD) b..pn . (A-ll)
fluid would include fluid produced from wells influx Vre
and losses due to various leaks from the syst~m. '
In petroleum engineering, the material balance Eqs. A-7 through A-ll make up the material-
usually is written and used in integral form. The inte- energy balance for a geothermal fluid reservoir. Eqs.
gration is performed from the initial condition (sub- A-8 through A-ll may be substituted in Eq. A-7, and
script i) to a later time (subscript c). The total energy the result may be solved to provide a performance
balance given by Eq. A-5 can also be integrated in equation similar to the material balance for petroleum
this fashion to provide: reservoirs:

mi Ei -me Ec = Q'i - Q'c + h' (mi -me) Wp(hp- Ee) + WL (hL- Ee) +Q=
(A-6) w{ Ei- Ec +( 1 ~ cp )[xi Vgi +(1- xdvri]
Note that h' has been taken to be a constant in this
integration. This is, of course, not necessary, but will • Pr Cvr(Ti - Te)} + (he - Ec)
facilitate the following presentation. Remember that
h' is actually an average enthalpy that accounts for B
the enthalpy change due to the net mass change in • -~ QD(tD) b..pn (A-12)
Vre
the reservoir. The nature of this term will become
clear when specific substitutions are made below. If the reservoir contains only compressed liquid, and
We now change symbolism somewhat. Rather than net heat conduction to the reservoir is neglected, the
m, we shall employ W to represent a mass of fluid thermodynamic path will be isothermal and Eqs. A-7
(both liquid and vapor). through A-ll lead to a mass-volumetric balance
similar to that employed for petroleum production
above the bubble-point:
'?riginal manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers
office Nov. 15, 1968. Revised manuscript received May 2 1969
Pape~ (SPE 1949) was presented at SPE 42nd Annual Fall Meeting (Wp + WL) Vt = W(vf- Vfi) + B ~ QD(tD)b..pn
held m Houston, Tex., Oct. 1-4, 1967. © Copyright 1969 American
Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc. (A-13)
This paper will be printed in Transactions volume 246 which
will cover 1969. ' JPT

900 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY