from scientific results to management policies teodóra szőcs joerg prestor, györgy tóth,...
Post on 14-Dec-2015
221 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
From scientific results to management policies
Teodóra SzőcsJoerg Prestor, György Tóth, Annamária Nádor, Andrej Lapanje
and the TRANSENERGY team
Final Event of project TRANSENERGY – Transboundary geothermal energy resources of Slovenia, Austria, Hungary and Slovakia
Vienna, 24th of June 2013
From scientific results …From scientific results …
Temperature map of basement
Modelled depressions in the Pannonian aquifers
Geological 3D models
http://transenergy-eu.geologie.ac.at
80 60 40 20 20 40 60 80
20
40
60
80
20
40
60
80
20
40
60
80
20
40
60
80
Ca Na+K HCO3+CO3 Cl
Mg SO4
<=Ca + M
g
Cl +
SO
4=>
BadRadHod_UpperP. upper
BadRadHod_UpperP. lower
BadRadHod_mixed Miocene
BadRadHod_Mesozoic carb.
DanubeB_UpperP. upper
DanubeB_UpperP. lower
DanubeB_mixed Miocene
KomStu_Triasic carbonate
KomStu_Mesozoic carbonate
LutzZs_UpperP. upper
LutzZs_Miocene carbonate
LutzZs_Devonian dol.
ViennaB_Pz-Mesozoic carbonate
BadRadHod_UpperP. upper
BadRadHod_UpperP. lower
BadRadHod_mixed Miocene
BadRadHod_Mesozoic carb.
DanubeB_UpperP. upper
DanubeB_UpperP. lower
DanubeB_mixed Miocene
KomStu_Triasic carbonate
KomStu_Mesozoic carbonate
LutzZs_UpperP. upper
LutzZs_Miocene carbonate
LutzZs_Devonian dol.
ViennaB_Pz-Mesozoic carbonate
Reservoir delineation
Hydrogeochemistry
Consequences of regional flow systemsConsequences of regional flow systems
Main aquifers/geothermal reservoirs:Multilayered porous intergranular sediments;Lime stones, dolomites.
TransEnergy Project
ICPDR, 2009
Governance of transboundary aquifers and resources is needed !Governance of transboundary aquifers and resources is needed !
SLOVSLOV
SKSKAA
HUHU
Pannonian Basin - hot sedimentary aquifer: utilization of geothermal energy
≈ thermal groundwater / fluid abstraction
Water policy (2000/60/EC) Energy policy (2009/28/EC)
• Groundwater within aquifer and groundwater body
Environmental objectives:• Constant level / no intrusions protection of thermal water
– RBMPs : A, HU, SK, SI• 2009 – 2015 – 2021 –
• Geothermal energy stored beneath the surface
Energy objectives:• Significant specific increments
increased utilization of thermal water– NREAPs: A, HU, SK, SI
• 2010 – 2020 – 2030
Division of management of geothermal resources between two sectors is still seen as an obstacle to integration!
Integrated resource management of hydrogeothermal Integrated resource management of hydrogeothermal systems – two main policy aspectssystems – two main policy aspects
Strengths and weaknessesStrengths and weaknesses
Water policy (2000/60/EC) Energy policy (2009/28/EC)
• Programmes of measures (RBMPs)• Common Implementation Strategy
Guidance– Groundwater body delineation,
Status assessment, Monitoring– Just guidance!
• Programes of actions and Incentives– Regulatory– Financial
2009 – 2015 – 2021 – 2027 – 2010 – 2020 – 2030 – 2040 –
EU EU Danube Region StrategyDanube Region Strategy (EUSDR) (EUSDR)
4 pillars, 11 priority areas
Renewable energy Geothermal energy Groundwater Long term sustainable management is needed
Water quality Groundwater quality- Coordination through the ICPDR (WFD- DRBMP)
Common basis for closer cooperation and governance at state Common basis for closer cooperation and governance at state levelslevels
Groundwater poorly, while geothermal energy better represented Groundwater poorly, while geothermal energy better represented in EUSDRin EUSDR
Constraints for ranking in use of thermal waterConstraints for ranking in use of thermal water
WFD:Priority of groundwater dependent ecosystems Priority of drinking water utilizationOverall importance of public participationPriority of existing utilizations
National specific priorities:According to the existing acts and laws Economic pressures (CH productions)Environmental pressuresPressures from environmentalist, public, etc.Pressures of rising groundwater, „flood” protectionPressures of local, regional interest (development plans, lobbies)
Neighbouring country’s specific priorities, other than the home-country’s ones
1. drinking water and public health2. medicinal purposes (balneology)3. agriculture, livestock, and fish-farming4. nature conservation5. economic → energy use6. otherVienna Basin
Hun utca, egyedi panelház Amsterdam centre
Hun utca, házsor
SK
N Bakony-mountains
Vértes-hills
Gerecse-hills
Pilis-hills
Main karstic recharge zones
Tata spring group
Tata spring group
Patince-spa, Csokonai-, Lilla spring ecosystems under rehabilitation
Patince-spa, Csokonai-, Lilla spring ecosystems under rehabilitation
Esztergom, Šturovo wells and springs
Esztergom, Šturovo wells and springs
Potential geothermal
plant
Ecosystems versus thermal water extractionsEcosystems versus thermal water extractions
HU
Long term sustainable management of Long term sustainable management of geothermal resourcesgeothermal resources
Sustainability is reached when: • there is a favourable efficiency of resource exploitation,• the real expenses are not carried over to the next generation.
What is local weakness (bad) and what is strength (good)?
New potential tool for management: Benchmarking
ĪBAT
BATDescriptive Points [%]
0 Very good Wellhead, Mat. Installed, Abstr
cont. follow water demand,
Cascade
0 - 1 Good1 - 2 Medium2 - 3 Bad> 3 Very bad
TE [%]Thermal efficiency
Descriptive Points [%]> 70 Very good Used/
available annual heat
energyReinj. 100%
60 - 70 Good40 - 60 Medium30 - 40 Bad
< 30 Very bad
Fu [%]Utilization efficiency
Descriptive Points [%]> 30 Very good Capacity
factor; anual abstr/
installed capacity
25 - 30 Good20 - 25 Medium15 - 20 Bad
< 15 Very bad
BenchmarkingBenchmarking10 main indicators to support long term sustainable transboundary thermal water management
IMON Monitoring
Descriptive Points [%]> 8 Very good
Cont meas.Yearly report
Reg. meas.Temp. sampl.
6 - 8 Good4 - 6 Medium2 - 4 Bad< 2 Very bad
RIQ [%]Reinjection (w. for heat)
Descriptive Points [%]> 60 Very good
Reinj. volume/
abstr. volume
40 - 60 Good 20 - 40 Medium 0 - 20 Bad
=0 Very bad
I wba [%]Water balance (Recharge)
Descriptive Points [%]> 95 Very good Critical
level point,Cr. abstr. p., Renewable
&av. volume of
water
75 - 95 Good50 - 75 Medium25 - 50 Bad
< 25 Very bad
ĪOE
OverexploitationDescriptive Points [%]
0 Very good DecreasePiezo. LevelW. qual./TGr.w. avail.
Ecosys.; Subs
1 Good2 Medium3 Bad
> 3 Very bad
IQual_disc [%]
Discharged waste water
Descriptive Points [%]> 95 Very good Indicator of
positive samples*
annual discharge v.
90 - 95 Good80 - 90 Medium70 - 80 Bad
< 70 Very bad
Iinf Public awareness
Descriptive Points [%]> 8 Very good Monitoring
BATQuant. statusQual. status
En. efficiency
6 - 8 Good4 - 6 Medium2 - 4 Bad< 2 Very bad
Balneological efficiency (10 m3/pers/day)
TTGWB „Mura – Zala“ in SI
Very bad Bad Medium
TTGWB „Mura – Zala“ in HU
BenchmarkingBenchmarking
?
??
Summary of Benchmarking in the TTGWB „Mura – Zala“Summary of Benchmarking in the TTGWB „Mura – Zala“
• Management efforts are not promoted adequately from user to user.
• The 3 most significant issues to be promoted: 1) yearly reports of monitoring results - submitted by user and
approved by granting authority,2) critical level points of the abstracted wells - defined at least
from other available data or locations,3) public should get free accessible information, at least of
quality status of waste water.
ConclusionConclusionss
1. Joint cross borders models (geological, heat flow, groundwater flow and transport, hydro- and isotope geochemistry) enable us to understand the responses of natural systems to thermal water/energy extractions.
2. Geological Surveys are the organizations of choice.3. Priorities have to be defined. 4. Benchmarking criteria should be applied and ranked in
order to achieve a better evaluation of the use of the geothermal resource. It facilitates the management of priorities.
top related