4.5 Article

Simulation of water-rock interaction in the Yellowstone geothermal system using TOUGHREACT

Journal

GEOTHERMICS
Volume 33, Issue 4, Pages 493-502

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.geothermics.2003.10.002

Keywords

water-rock interaction; hydrothermal alteration; reactive transport modeling; Yellowstone; USA

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Yellowstone geothermal system provides an ideal opportunity to test the ability of reactive transport models to simulate the chemical and hydrological effects of water-rock interaction. Previous studies of the Yellowstone geothermal system have characterized water-rock interaction through analysis of rocks and fluids obtained from both surface and downhole samples. Fluid chemistry, rock mineralogy, permeability, porosity, and thermal data obtained from the Y-8 borehole in Upper Geyser Basin were used to constrain a series of reactive transport simulations of the Yellowstone geothermal system using TOUGHREACT. Three distinct stratigraphic units were encountered in the 153.4 m deep Y-8 drill core: volcaniclastic sandstone, perlitic rhyolitic lava, and nonwelded pumiceous tuff. The main alteration phases identified in the Y-8 core samples include clay minerals, zeolites, silica polymorphs, adularia, and calcite. Temperatures observed in the Y-8 borehole increase with depth from sub-boiling conditions at the surface to a maximum of 169.8degreesC at a depth of 104.1 m, with near-isothermal conditions persisting down to the well bottom. I-D models of the Y-8 core hole were constructed to simulate the observed alteration mineral assemblage given the initial rock mineralogy and observed fluid chemistry and temperatures. Preliminary simulations involving the perlitic rhyolitic lava unit are consistent with the observed alteration of rhyolitic glass to form celadonite. (C) 2004 CNR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available