You are on page 1of 11

IMPROVED NATURAL STATE SIMULATION OF

ARJUNO-WELIRANG GEOTHERMAL FIELD, EAST JAVA, INDONESIA

Rio Pradana Manggala Putra1, Sutopo2, Heru Berian Pratama3

1, 2
Petroleum Engineering Department, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia
2, 3
Geothermal Engineering Department, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia
riopradanamp@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT Poernomo, Chairman of INAGA (Indonesia


Geothermal Association) in his speech at Institut
Arjuno-Welirang Geothermal Field is a green field Teknologi Bandung in 2016, East Java has 1,012
located across Mojokerto Regency, Malang MW of total possible geothermal reserve. Arjuno-
Regency, Pasuruan Regency and Batu City in East Welirang is an integrated investigation area located
Java Province, Indonesia. Geothermal system in across Mojokerto Regency, Malang Regency,
Arjuno-Welirang Geothermal Field is estimated to Pasuruan Regency and Batu City in East Java
be liquid dominated and has a reservoir Province, Indonesia (Figure 1). This working area
temperature of about 260oC based on CO2 gas was handed by government of Indonesia over Geo
geothermometry method (Hadi et al., 2010). Dipa Energi in early 2017 to be developed further.
Several manifestations are found at the surface; This working area is now still in the preliminary
consist of hot springs, fumaroles and alterations. survey phase and has not been entered exploration
The field is now managed by Geo Dipa Energi. phase.
Geological, geophysical, geochemical and
geothermometrical study has been conducted in the Geological, geophysical, and geochemical
field but exploration drilling has not been carried investigation have been carried out in this area,
out yet until recently. For reservoir characterization which produce result of hypothetical resource
and resource estimation purposes, several estimation around 265 MWe (Hadi et al., 2010). A
conceptual models have been developed based on natural state modelling attempt has been done by
geoscience data available. Previously, a natural Wardana et al. in 2016 based on an improved
state modelling attempt which matched to existing conceptual model, which is developed by
conceptual models has been carried out by synthesizing and enhancing the existing conceptual
Wardana et al. (2016). An entirely new natural state models. Three scenarios were simulated based on
numerical model is made in this study to improve the model. The maximum steam production is 100
the result from previous model by using smaller kg/s, or 50 MWe, which is significantly lower than
grid blocks (40% finer). In return, the result shows the hypothetical resource estimation.
more accurate temperature matching of surface
manifestations than the previous model. The
numerical model is developed using TOUGH2
simulator to obtain natural state condition. The
objectives of this study are to develop an improved
natural state numerical model; to validate
temperature of the manifestations in the model with
measured manifestation data; to characterize
geothermal reservoir including area, thickness,
pressure, temperature and permeability distribution;
and to determine resource potential using
probabilistic method. All data used in this paper is
based on published papers.

Keywords: Arjuno-Welirang Field, natural state,


TOUGH2
East Java
INTRODUCTION Province

Southern part of East Java is passed by the volcanic Figure 1: Location of Arjuno-Welirang Geothermal
route, which is known as the ring of fire which Working Area
consists of active volcanoes. According to Abadi
1
Numerical reservoir simulation is used to imitate Arjuno-Welirang complex, side eruption of Mount
flow process with real parameter of reservoir Bulak and Pundak, young body of Arjuno-
condition using Darcy’s law and heat-mass Welirang, Peak of Arjuno-Welirang Mountain, and
balance. Natural state matching is the first step in feet of Mount Penanggungan (Hadi et al., 2010).
calibrating the model (Grant et al., 2011). It is
matched with relevant data such as the natural Geothermal geology mapping is done using
temperatures and pressures and the amount of volcanostratigraphy method which can delineate
surface discharge as both heat and mass. The the heat source movement. At least there are 5
reservoir model is constructed with mass and heat centers of eruption: Mount Welirang, Mount
input at the bottom, infiltration from the surface, Arjuno, Mount Kembar I, Mount Kembar II, Mount
and leaks at sites of surface or subsurface Bakal, and side eruption in Mount Bulak, Mount
discharge. The structure of the model should be as
Pundak on the north, and Mount Tunggangan on
simple as possible but still having the mechanisms
the west. All those volcano products are classified
that affect reservoir processes. The model later can
be used to predict the performance of the real as magmatic eruptions which deliver lava and
reservoir over time. This simulation study pyroclastic products.
particularly incorporates finer grid blocks than the
Geology structure in Arjuno-Welirang is grouped
previous study (Wardana et al., 2016) with some
improvements in temperature matching of surface according to fault directions: north – south (Cangar,
manifestations. Puncung, and Claket Faults), northwest – southeast
(Padusan, Kemiri, and Bakal Faults), southwest –
northeast (Welirang, Kembar, and Bulak Faults)
OBJECTIVES AND LIMITATIONS and west – east (Ledug and Ringit Faults).
The objectives of this study are:
Geochemistry
1. To develop natural state numerical model of
Arjuno-Welirang Geothermal Field based on Manifestations in Arjuno-Welirang are distributed
conceptual model generated from geological, over 5 locations. Three of them are hot water
geophysical, and geochemical data using springs (Padusan, Coban, and Cangar), while the
TOUGH2 simulator. others are fumaroles and alteration located at the
2. To improve the result of previous numerical peak of the mountain. These manifestation data
model by Wardana et al. (2016). below were collected by Hadi et al. (2010).
3. To validate temperature of the manifestations 1. Padusan Hot Spring
in the model with measured manifestation Hot water emerges from pyroclastic lava
data of hot springs and fumaroles. stones and andesite lava chunks from Mount
4. To characterize geothermal reservoir Welirang. The water is tasteless, colorless,
including area, thickness, pressure, and it contains iron oxide. Sample 1 was taken
temperature, and permeability distribution at coordinates UTM 671,172 mT; 9,149,741
from the model. mS; and elevation 893 masl, with a
5. To determine geothermal energy resource of temperature of 55oC and a pH of 6.3. Sample
Arjuno-Welirang Geothermal Field numerical 2 was taken at coordinates UTM 670,793 mT;
model using probabilistic method. 9,150,137 mS; and elevation 901 masl. It has
This study also has several limitations: a temperature of 50oC and a pH of 5.87.

1. Exploration wells are not yet to be drilled. 2. Coban Hot Spring


2. Heat loss and discharge rate of manifestations Small flow rate of hot water appears at
data is unavailable. elevation 1,348 m, at coordinates UTM
3. The usage of EOS1 to model heat and mass 669,198 mT; 9,146,104 mS; from the gap
flow in the model which only covers pressure, between andesite lava produced from Arjuno-
temperature, and gas saturation. Welirang Tua volcanic activity. It has great
quantities of iron oxide, temperature of 39.4 oC
and a pH of 6.44. It is odorless and tasteless.
ARJUNO-WELIRANG
3. Cangar Hot Spring
Geoscience data This hot spring is located in two separated
coordinates. Sample 1 was taken at
Geology coordinates UTM 669,200 mT; 9,143,910 mS;
and elevation 1,611 masl. It has a temperature
Geomorphology of Arjuno-Welirang is categorized
of 54oC and a pH of 5.9. Sample 2 was taken
into seven units: Mount Anjasmoro, old body of
at coordinates UTM 669,111 mT; 9,143,892
2
mS; elevation 1,604 masl. It has a temperature Welirang geothermal prospect area by
of 48.3oC and a pH of 6.0. The water is clear, incorporating the MT data with geological and
tasteless and odorless. It also contains weak geochemical data.
iron oxide and has a thin layer of
carbonaceous sinter, which is rare in the Arjuno-Welirang geothermal system is situated in
Arjuno-Welirang area. the geological complex area which increases the
possibility of 3-D effect on the MT data. A 3-D
4. Fumaroles inversion of the MT data should be carried out to
Several fumaroles are spread on each of the overcome this problem. Moreover, 3-D inversion
top of the cone of Mount Arjuno-Welirang is able to resolve the 3-D effect by applying a 3-D
complex. Such as Mount Arjuno crater, earth model in the inversion process, such that all
Mount Kembar I, Mount Kembar II and of the data stations can be run simultaneously in
Mount Welirang crater (Plupuh and Jero). their real positions without projection.
Temperature measurement was carried out in The 3-D inversion process indicated the presence
Plupuh Crater, which produces results of 94.1 of geothermal system in this area according to the
– 137.5oC. Fumarole of Mount Welirang is subsurface resistivity structure. One of the
located at elevation 3,050 – 3,150 masl. characteristics of a geothermal system found in the
As written above, all of the hot springs are situated resistivity model was the presence of conductive
at lower elevations and have lower temperature layer which can be seen in the cross-section A-B
than the fumaroles. These hot springs are classified and C-D. This conductive layer has a resistivity of
as bicarbonate water based on Cl-SO4-HCO3 1 to 15 ohm-m with various thickness values of 1 to
diagram. They are also classified as immature 2 km. The slightly higher resistivity layer below the
water zone based on Na-K-Mg diagram. The conductive layer has a resistivity of 20 – 60 ohm-
classification indicates an influence of surface m. The lower part of the resistivity structure has the
water to the hot liquid from geothermal system highest resistivity value (> 80 ohm-m). The
resulting hot springs at the surface. The hot springs geometry of the resistivity structure has an updome
are also estimated to be the outflow of the structure for the base of conductive layer (BOC)
geothermal system (Hadi et al., 2010). Based on centered below Mount Welirang. The resistivity
those evidences the geothermal system is estimated contrast in the cross section indicates the geological
to be a one-phase liquid. structures in this area, such as faults.

Reservoir temperature of the Arjuno-Welirang


geothermal system is determined using three
geothermometry calculations method: SiO2, Na/K,
and CO2, which result 176oC, 313oC, and 260oC
respectively. CO2 method shows the most
reasonable result. The high concentration of SiO2 at
Padusan Hot Spring indicates a correlation between
the fumaroles and the hot springs, hence CO 2 gas Figure 2: Cross section A-B of conceptual model of
geothermometry is the most suitable choice which Arjuno Welirang (Wardana et al., 2016)
gives a temperature of 260oC (Hadi et al., 2010).
Conceptual Models
Geophysics
Conceptual model is the first guide to the numerical
In 2010, the Center for Geological Resources of the model. It is a comprehensive analysis from
Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources of geological, geophysical, and geochemical data.
Indonesia has carried out magnetotelluric (MT) Geological data gives the raw structure of the
data acquisition in the Arjuno-Welirang prospect model. Geophysical data provides the reservoir
area using 34 stations arranged in a grid with a boundary estimation, from geophysical anomaly.
station spacing of about 1 to 2 km. Only the north While geochemistry data estimates upflow and
and northwest vicinities of Mount Welirang were outflow zones across the area.
covered due to the limited budget and time in the
first step of the MT survey. The 3-D inversion of The latest model was made by Wardana et al.
the MT data was then performed to delineate the (2016) by synthesizing and enhancing the existing
subsurface resistivity distribution of the Arjuno- conceptual models by Hadi et al. (2010), Utama et
Welirang geothermal prospect area (Daud et al., al. (2012), and Daud et al. (2015). Two cross
2015). The objectives of the 3-D inversion of MT section of the conceptual model were made to show
data were to delineate the resistivity structures the outflow to the west and northwest of Mount
associated with the geothermal system and to Welirang. Figure 2 depicts the A-B cross section
construct the conceptual model of the Arjuno-

3
showing estimated clay cap and reservoir position
and isotemperature curves. START

The upflow zone lies beneath the summit of Mount


Welirang Due to the absence of thermal
Conceptual Model
manifestations in the east and south of Mount
Welirang, it is estimated that there are no outflows
towards those directions. The possible reason is the
influence of the low permeability lava body from Create Computer Model
Mount Arjuno and the elevation of Mount  Choose EOS
Welirang which is higher than Mount Welirang.  Define geometry model
 Create mesh type and grid system
As described above, reservoir and clay cap of
Arjuno-Welirang geothermal system is interpreted
from the MT 3D inversion data and the magnetic
interpretation. The temperature profile is based on Input Data
manifestation temperatures and a reservoir  Material properties
temperature of 2600C, which is estimated from CO2  P & T for initial condition
gas thermometry method. Unfortunately, drilling  Boundary condition
data is not available to confirm the temperature
profile.
METHODOLOGY Run Simulation
The method in developing this natural state
reservoir model consists of several steps. It starts
with collecting geoscience data (geological, Matching and Calibration
geophysical, geothermometrical, and geochemical  Isotemperature with
data). Then conceptual model is built according to conceptual model
these data. A computer numerical model based on  Model P & T ≈ wells P & T
the conceptual model is made using TOUGH2  Heat and mass flow
simulator to simulate fluid and heat flow process of
the reservoir. This numerical model consists of grid
blocks; each is assigned with material properties.
Top, bottom and boundary conditions of the model No Calibration
is set based on the conceptual model. Run the
model iteratively to know the result of the model. Reached?
The material properties, top, bottom, and boundary
conditions are calibrated iteratively to obtain the
Yes
most matched result with the conceptual model
which indicates that the model successfully Natural state model
represents the natural state condition of the
reservoir. The workflow of this simulation study is
shown in Figure 3. Reservoir characterization

NUMERICAL MODEL DESCRIPTION


Topography Resource estimation

Area covered in this numerical model is shown in


Figure 4, which is smaller than the previous model
made by Wardana et al. (2016), in order to END
emphasize more on the upflow and manifestations
area. This three-dimensional model covers total Figure 3: Flow chart of this study
area of 10.8 km × 14.4 km which equals to 155.52
km2. The lowest elevation of this model is -1,500 limited to the required area which covers upflow
masl and as described above the surface elevation and outflow area of the conceptual model. Then the
varies from 636 masl to 3,208 masl, which makes coordinates are exported onto .xyz format using a
the total thickness is within range of 2,136 m to GIS (geographic information system) software. The
4,708 m. coordinates are tilted by 25o counterclockwise to
match the lateral direction of Padusan Fault, the
The surface topography of this model is excerpted main fault bringing outflow to the surface, which is
from Geotiff model built by Jarvis A. et al., 2006 25o toward northwest. The x and y coordinate of
4
Figure 4: X-Y gridding and the map of Arjuno-Welirang Field
each point is transformed using Equations 1 and 2 topography of Arjuno-Welirang Mountain. Number
below, while Equations 3 and 4 are used to of layers in this numerical model is 20. Thus, in
calculate transformation angle and diagonal length. total, this numerical model consists of 21,060 grid
Figure 5 shows the smooth surface of the model. blocks (27 × 29 × 20).
𝑥 ′ = 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 × 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒) ……(1)
𝑦 ′ = 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 × 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒) ……(2)
𝑥− 𝑥𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜋
𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 = 𝑎𝑟𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑠 ( ) − 25° × ….. (3)
𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 180°

𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 = √(𝑥 − 𝑥𝑚𝑖𝑛 )2 + (𝑦 − 𝑦𝑚𝑖𝑛 )2 …..(4) Figure 5: Smooth surface contour of this numerical
Grid Model model (left) compared to ladder surface grid block
of the previous model by Wardana et al. (2016)
In order to simulate flow in reservoir better, the (right).
grid system around the reservoir area is made finer
than the other area (200 m × 200 m). Grid sizes in
other areas are 200 m × 800 m and 800 m × 800 m.
Figure 4 shows the upper view of the model. It can
be seen that the total lateral grid blocks in x-axis
direction is 27 and 29 in y-axis direction. These
lateral grid sizes are smaller than the one in the
previous model (Wardana et al., 2016) which is
very coarse (1 km × 1 km). A detailed information
of lateral gridding system of this numerical model
is described in Table 1.
Table 1: X-Y grid blocks system

Direction Grid blocks Size (m)


Figure 6: Position of dummy wells in the numerical
X 6 800
model overlapped with the conceptual model map
X 18 200
of Wardana et al. (2016)
X 3 800
Wells
Y 3 800 Five dummy wells are added in the model to match
Y 28 200 the reservoir temperature from model to
Y 8 800 geothermometrical estimation (around 260 oC) and
match the temperature slope to the isotemperature
line in the conceptual model made by Wardana et
Grid blocks in z-axis are varied in thickness. The al. (2016).
thicknesses of the top 3 layers are varied to

5
Dummy well ARW-1 is located right at the center mD) to ensure no flow of heat and mass coming
of upflow area. Dummy wells ARW-2 and ARW-3 into or going out of the system during natural state
are embedded at the west of upflow area following condition.
the cross section A-B of the conceptual model. The
other dummy wells, ARW-4 and ARW-5 are The bottom boundary is embedded with a heat
installed at the northwest outside the upflow area source with volume factor of 1×1020, pressure
following the direction of Padusan Fault. 3.5×107 Pa and 3.1×107 Pa at the lowest and the
Coordinates of the dummy wells are presented in second lowest layer respectively, and temperature
Figure 6. of 300oC. The constant flux of heat-in of 80
mW/m2 and injection with enthalpy of 1.4×10 6 J/kg
Material Properties are also applied at the heat source (Wardana et al.,
2016). It is also assumed that the heat source has a
Materials are used to represent rock properties in constant flux of water rate injection of 2.5×10 -5
each zone. The properties are porosity, kg/s-m2 which is assumed based on PetraSim User
permeability to x, y and z direction, density, wet Manual (2007).
heat conductivity and specific heat. Every single
change in property will affect the simulation result,
but permeability has the greatest influence. These
properties later should be calibrated to meet the NATURAL STATE SIMULATION RESULTS
best simulation result. Pressure and Temperature
Initial and Boundary Conditions After some calibrations, the numerical model
Initial condition is used to define the initial state finally matches the conceptual model. The
(pressure and temperature) of every grid block in numerical model was run until it reaches steady
the numerical model. The pressure and temperature state condition with simulation time of 5.24×10 15
are defined by equations (5) and (6) which are seconds (166,175,799 years). As described above,
functions of elevation (masl). In developing these due to the absence of well data, the matching
equations, the top of the model is assumed as flat at process is only feasible for these parameters:
the elevation of 3,337.58 masl, which is the highest 1. Temperatures in manifestations at the surface
point of Arjuno-Welirang working area. This of the model to the real measured data.
method is used to simplify the initial condition 2. Reservoir temperature in the model to the
input. Otherwise, pressure and temperature of the estimation of reservoir temperature using CO 2
model should be assigned manually for every gas geothermometry method.
individual block. 3. Isotemperature lines in the model to the ones
Pressure at the top of the model is set constant with from the conceptual model of Wardana et al.
101,325 Pa (1 atm). Pressure gradient of Pa/m (2016).
(Equation 5) and intercept of 2.1093×107 Pa are 4. Heat and mass flow in the model to the
used to obtain the pressure of 3.0527×10 7 Pa at the conceptual model.
bottom of the reservoir model (-1,500 masl). There is no measured pressure data, thus pressure
Surface temperature is also set constant (25oC). The matching cannot be done.
temperature increases linearly under the surface by
gradient of 30oC/km. An intercept of 125.1274oC is In the reservoir, the heat spreads from the center of
used to calculate the temperature of 170.1274oC at upflow zone beneath the peak of Mount Welirang
towards northwest and west direction. The heat is
the elevation of -1,500 masl using Equation 6.
channeled through Padusan Fault to the northwest
P = 2.1093 × 107 – 6,289.47z (5) and Ledug Fault to the west.

T = 125.1274 – 0.03z (6) The well is right above the heat source (area with
temperature of 300oC). Dummy well ARW-1 is
The top boundary is defined by ambient located exactly at the center of the upflow zone,
atmosphere temperature of 25oC and pressure of which is also the location of fumaroles. As seen in
101,325 Pa. This condition is kept constant during Figure 7, surface temperature of dummy well
the simulation time by applying volume factor of ARW-1 is 160.65oC which is 23oC higher than
1×1020. Annual rain fall of 2,000 mm/year (BMKG, measured fumaroles temperature data (94.1 –
2010) and an infiltration rate of 10% are 137.5oC). Reservoir under dummy well ARW-1 is
represented by water injection into the top of the ranging within 1300 masl until -900 masl. The
model. temperature is around 240 – 260oC, matched to
result of CO2 geothermometrical estimation
The side boundary is assumed to be far from the (260oC).
model. Its permeability is set low (0.001 to 0.01
6
estimated temperature due to the location of the
ARW-1 well which is at the outside of upflow zone, where
Pressure (bar) the temperature has decreased.
0 100 200 300
3000 ARW-3
2400 Pressure (bar)
0 100 200 300
Elevation (masl)

1800 3000
1200 2400
600

Elevation (masl)
1800
0
1200
-600
600
-1200
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
-600
Temperature (°C)
Temperature -1200
Geothermometry temperature (260 oC) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Temperature (°C)
Pressure
Temperature
Figure 7: Temperature and pressure profile of Geothermometry temperature (260 oC)
dummy well ARW-1 compared to CO2 Pressure
geothermometrical estimation of reservoir
temperature
Figure 9: Temperature and pressure profile of
ARW-2 dummy well ARW-3 compared to CO2
geothermometrical estimation of reservoir
Pressure (bar) temperature
0 100 200 300
3000 Dummy well ARW-3 is located right near Cangar
Hot Spring at the west of outflow area. The
2400
temperature profile (Figure 9) shows the hot spring
temperature at the surface (50oC) which is close to
Elevation (masl)

1800
the survey temperature (54oC & 48.3oC). The
1200 subsurface temperature is much lower than the one
600 in dummy well ARW-2 due to the further distance
to the reservoir at the upflow zone.
0
Dummy well ARW-4 is located outside the upflow
-600 area, thus the temperature must be lower than the
-1200 reservoir temperature. Simulation shows that
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 temperature beneath ARW-4 does not exceed
Temperature (°C) 200oC. The temperature rises from the surface
Temperature down to the elevation of 0 masl due to the presence
of Padusan Fault which channels heat from
Geothermometry temperature (260 oC)
reservoir. Then the temperature drops again at
Pressure elevation below the fault.

Figure 8: Temperature and pressure profile of Padusan Hot Spring is located at northwest outside
dummy well ARW-2 compared to CO2 of upflow area. Dummy well ARW-5 is located
geothermometrical estimation of reservoir right at the hot spring. Simulation result shows that
temperature surface temperature in ARW-5 which is also
Padusan Hot Spring temperature is 46.70 oC.
The temperature profile in reservoir layer under
dummy well ARW-2 (Figure 8) is lower than the
7
Padusan Hot Spring

Coban Hot Spring

Figure 11: Temperature distribution of cross-


section A-B through the numerical model
Cangar
Hot Fumaroles
Spring

Figure 10: Surface temperature of this numerical


model

Table 2: Comparison of manifestation Figure 12: Temperature distribution and heat flow
temperatures from numerical model and direct sliced at Y = 6800
measurement
Presence of gas
Model Measured
Manifestation temperature temperature
(oC) (oC)
Padusan Hot
47.33 & 46.70 55 & 50
Spring
Coban Hot
42.33 39.4
Spring
Cangar Hot
50.53 54 & 48.3
Spring
Fumaroles 150.37 94.1 – 137.5 Figure 13: Gas saturation distribution of the
numerical model

Surface temperature distribution is presented in higher permeability conduit. As fluid with high
Figure 10, also showing manifestation temperature flow through the conduit, it meets the
temperatures. Table 2 compares manifestation lower pressure near the peak of Mount Welirang,
temperatures from the model and measured data. thus gas is formed. Gas saturation distribution of
the model is shown in Figure 13.
Isotemperature line from the numerical model is
matched to conceptual model of Wardana et al. Simulation result shows that heat and mass of
(2016). Figure 11 shows that the heat source Cangar Hot Spring are originated from Ledug Fault
temperature at the bottom of the geothermal system which connects the reservoir to the western part of
is around 300oC. Reservoir temperature is ranging the field. Coban and Padusan Hot Spring are the
within 200 – 300oC. The 100oC isotemperature line products of Cangar and Padusan Faults
approaches the surface at the peak of Mount respectively.
Welirang producing outflow of fumaroles.
Simulation result is able to show the high
permeability of Padusan Fault which channels the
Heat and Mass Flow heat and mass from the reservoir to northwest
Sliced numerical model is used to observe the heat direction. It also shows that that the high
and mass flow at several places. Figure 12 temperature area decreases respectively from heat
describes that the heat and gas flow vertically from source, reservoir, up to cap rock. In the heat source
the heat source to the fumarole at the peak of and reservoir layer, there are channeling heat from
Mount Welirang. The heat and mass successfully the upflow zone to the northwest and west direction
move through the cap rock by the support of a through the high permeability fault.

8
Table 3: Comparison of manifestation temperatures of the previous model by Wardana et al., (2016), this
numerical model, and measured data

Wardana et al. Improved numerical Measured


Manifestations (2016) (oC) model (oC) temperature (oC)
Padusan Hot
40 47.33 & 46.70 55 & 50
Spring
Coban Hot
30 42.33 39.4
Spring
Cangar Hot
30 50.53 54 & 48.3
Spring
Fumaroles 25 150.37 94.1 – 137.5

Table 4: Inputs for Monte Carlo simulation

Parameter Minimum Maximum Most Remarks


2
Area (km ) 11.4 14 12 Area with temperatures of 200 – 260oC
Thickness (m) 1,930 2,100 2,000 Layers with temperatures of 200 – 260oC
Porosity (%) 3.7 7.5 - Mahsa et al., 2017
3
Rock density (kg/m ) 2,500 2,700 2,600 Mahsa et al., 2017
o
Rock heat capacity (kJ/kg- C) 1 1.1 1.05 Schon, J.H., 2011
Article by Lawless, J. for The Geothermal
Initial water saturation 0.8 1.0 0.9
Code Committee
Final water saturation 0.3 0.7 0.5 Common assumption
o
Initial temperature ( C) 200 260 - From model temperature distribution
Final temperature (oC) 180 - - Common assumption
Recovery factor (%) 9 17 - Muffler (1978)
Electricity conversion factor Nathenson (1975) and Bodvarsson (1974)
9 12 -
(%)
Lifetime (years) 30 - - Common assumption
Random number 60,000

Characterization of Reservoir liquid, thus the geothermal system is one phase


reservoir where fluid temperature is less than the
Temperatures of the reservoir from the numerical boiling point, except at the peak of Mount
model vary within 200 – 260oC which are well Welirang where gas is flowing out to the fumaroles
matched to CO2 gas geothermometrical temperature as seen in Figure 13.
estimation of 260oC. Top of the reservoir is
estimated at 1,100 masl. Model Sensitivity
The reservoir is passed by Padusan (southeast to Monte Carlo simulation is simple probabilistic
northwest) and Ledug Faults (east to west) which method used to calculate the production ability of a
bring the heat from the reservoir to the outflows in reservoir during. It utilizes heat stored method to
Padusan and Cangar Hot Springs respectively as determine generated electricity, which requires
temperatures decrease along the path of the faults. several parameters: area, thickness, porosity, rock
There is also Cangar Fault (southwest to northeast) density, rock heat capacity, initial and final water
which also connects Ledug Fault to Coban Hot saturation, initial and final temperature, recovery
Spring. Permeability range of the reservoir is 20 to factor, electricity conversion factor, and the
80 mD. contract lifetime.

The reservoir is assumed as single porosity system These data shown in Table 4 are collected from
to simplify the model. It only contains one phase of reservoir characterization and assumptions. Monte
9
Carlo uses random numbers within the parameter 2. This model covers smaller area than the
range. This simulation uses 60,000 random previous one to emphasize more on the
numbers. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis is also upflow and surface manifestations area.
carried out using deterministic method. 3. As described in Grid Model section above, the
surface topography is modelled smoothly in
Rock porosity and density ranges are taken from this numerical model while Wardana et al.
geophysical study of Mahsa, A. et al. (2017). only use ladder gridding in his model.
Reference from Schon, J.H. (2011) is used in 4. This numerical model also successfully
determining rock heat capacity (1 – 1.1 kJ/kg-oC). matches the actual manifestation temperature
Initial water saturation is based on article of and gas saturation of fumaroles at the peak of
Lawless, J. which stated that liquid- Mount Welirang while the previous model by
dominatedgeothermal system possessed water Wardana et al. (2016) was unable to do such
saturation of approximately 1.0, while the final work. To be noted, the temperature values
water saturation range is based on common from Wardana et al. (2016) are not stated
assumption. Maximum and minimum initial explicitly in the publication. The comparison
temperatures are based on the reservoir temperature is shown in Table 3.
range from three synthetic wells in the model. The 5. Temperature profile result of this numerical
final temperature is based on common model is more reliable than the previous
abandonment temperature, which is 180oC. model. Temperature near the surface in the
Recovery factor is a linear function of porosity previous model barely rises as the depth
based on Muffler correlation (1978). Electrical increases up to 1,000 m.
conversion factor is based on Nathenson (1975) .
and Bodvarsson (1974) correlations which are
functions of fluid temperature. The contract CONCLUSIONS
lifetime is assumed to be 30 years. Based on
resource calculation using Monte Carlo simulation 1. This numerical model result has improved from
with 60,000 random numbers (Figure 14), the the previous one from Wardana et al. (2016).
results of P10, P50, and P90 are 45 MWe, 72 2. The reservoir has an upflow to the peak of
MWe, and 98 MWe respectively. The P10 result is Mount Welirang and outflow to Padusan,
slightly less than resource calculation done by Coban, and Cangar Hot Springs.
Wardana et al. (2016) which is 50 MWe. 3. This model is successfully matched to actual
anifestation temperatures in Padusan, Coban,
and Cangar Hot Springs. It is also able to match
the actual fumaroles temperature of which the
previous model was unable to match. This
model is matched to reservoir temperature
estimation from CO2 gas geothermometry
method (around 260oC).
4. According to the result of Monte Carlo
simulation, the reservoir has resource of 45
MWe during 30 years of production based on
P10 probability, 72 MWe (P50), and 98 MWe
(P90).
RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 14: Distribution of Monte Carlo simulation
result 1. Other data measurements such as discharge
flow rate at manifestations should be carried
out to improve the matching of this numerical
RESULT IMPROVEMENT FROM THE model.
PREVIOUS MODEL 2. Exploration wells should be drilled in order to
obtain more data such as pressure,
This numerical model has some significant temperature, and production rate to update
improvement from the previous model by Wardana this numerical model.
et al. (2016): 3. Simulate production scenario using this
updated numerical model.
1. The previous model used 1 km × 1 km size of 4. Uncertainty study can be done to obtain other
grid blocks. This new numerical model approaches to the model.
utilizes finer grid (200 m × 200 m, 200 m × 5. Production wells can be drilled near the hot
800 m, and 800 m × 800 m) which produce springs due to the high permeability.
more detail result.
10
REFERENCES
1. Daud, Y.; Fahmi, F.; Nuqramadha, W.A.;
Heditama, D.M.; Pratama, S.A.; Suhanto, E.:
“3-Dimensional Inversion of MT Data over the
Arjuno-Welirang Volcanic Geothermal System,
East Java (Indonesia)”, Proceedings World
Geothermal Congress: 2015.
2. Grant, M.A.; Bixley, P.F.: “Geothermal
Reservoir Engineering: Second Edition”, New
York: Academic Press, 2011.
3. Hadi, M.N.; Kusnadi, D.; Rezky, Y.:
“Penyelidikan Terpadu Geologi dan Geokimia
Daerah Panasbumi Arjuno-Welirang,
Kabupaten Mojokerto dan Malang, Provinsi
Jawa Timur”, Prosiding Hasil Kegiatan Pusat
Sumber Daya Geologi: 2010.
4. Jarvis A., H.I. Reuter, A. Nelson, E. Guevara,
2006, Hole-filled seamless SRTM data V3,
International Centre for Tropical Agriculture
(CIAT), available from http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org.
5. Mahsa, A., Malihati, N., Purwaningtyas, I.,
Banuboro, A., Parapat, J.: “Study of
Geothermal Reservoir Rocks Based on Physical
Properties of Arjuno-Welirang, East Java”, ITB
International Geothermal Workshop: 2017.
6. Thunderhead Engineering, “PetraSim User
Manual”, Manhattan, KS: June 2007.
7. Utama, A. P., Diwanto, A., Situmorang, J.,
Hikmi, M. & Irsamukhti, R.: Green Field
Geothermal System in Java, Indonesia. Proc. 1st
ITB Geothermal Workshop, Bandung,
Indonesia (2012).
8. Wardana, A.; O’Sullivan, J.; O’Sullivan, M.:
“Natural State and Future Production Modelling
of Arjuno-Welirang Geothermal Field,
Indonesia”, Proceedings 38th New Zealand
Geothermal Workshop: 2016.

11