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.

Thank you for your attention!Thank you for your attention!