Geology of the Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous geothermal aquifers in the West Netherlands Basin – an overview

Abstract

In the past 10 years the mature hydrocarbon province the West Netherlands Basin has hosted rapidly expanding geothermal development. Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous strata from which gas and oil had been produced since the 1950s became targets for geothermal exploitation. The extensive publicly available subsurface data including seismic surveys, several cores and logs from hundreds of hydrocarbon wells, combined with understanding of the geology after decades of hydrocarbon exploitation, facilitated the offtake of geothermal exploitation. Whilst the first geothermal projects proved the suitability of the permeable Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sandstones for geothermal heat production, they also made clear that much detail of the aquifer geology is not yet fully understood. The aquifer architecture varies significantly across the basin because of the syn-tectonic sedimentation. The graben fault blocks that contain the geothermal targets experienced a different tectonic history compared to the horst and pop-up structures that host the hydrocarbon fields from which most subsurface data are derived. Accurate prediction of the continuity and thickness of aquifers is a prerequisite for efficient geothermal well deployment that aims at increasing heat recovery while avoiding the risk of early cold-water breakthrough. The potential recoverable heat and the current challenges to enhance further expansion of heat exploitation from this basin are evident. This paper presents an overview of the current understanding and uncertainties of the aquifer geology of the Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous strata and discusses new sequence-stratigraphic updates of the regional sedimentary aquifer architecture.

Thermo-hydro-mechanical simulation of cooling-induced fault reactivation in Dutch geothermal reservoirs

“…Thermophysical properties of the Delft sandstone layer were based on the Slochteren sandstone model and adapted based on Willems et al (2020). Rodenrijs properties were based on the claystone properties from the Slochteren model and Alblasserdam properties were based on a mix between sandstone and claystone properties with specific information taken from Willems et al (2020). For the Delft sandstone model, the same fault properties as in the Slochteren sandstone model were used.…”

Comparison of hydrocarbon and geothermal energy production in the Netherlands: reservoir characteristics, pressure and temperature changes, and implications for fault reactivation

“…The structural elements are divided in three types; highs, where Permian and/or Carboniferous rocks have not been deposited or have been eroded, platforms, which are characterised by the absence of the Jurassic formations due to erosion, and (inverted) basins, where the Jurassic has been preserved (Kombrink et al, 2012). In the following, we briefly summarise the main hydrocarbon and geothermal plays in the Netherlands; for an extensive overview see for example, Wong et al (2007), Mijnlieff (2020), van Wees et al, (2020) and Willems et al (2020), as well as for production licences and geological information of hydrocarbon fields.…”

“…The main producing reservoir units were the Rijswijk, Berkel, IJsselmonde and De Lier Members of the Lower Cretaceous Vlieland Sandstone Formation, host to for example, the Berkel, De Lier and Rotterdam fields. The reservoir rocks are mostly shallow marine sandstones with significant variability in thickness due to syn-tectonic sedimentation, and variability in facies and hence transmissivity (Willems et al, 2020). The main caprock of these reservoirs is the Vlieland Claystone Formation.…”

“…The Jurassic/Cretaceous play is currently the largest geothermal play, with most operational doublets targeting the Delft Sandstone Member of the Schieland Group (Willems et al, 2020, Ministry of Economic Affairs & Climate, 2021). The Delft Sandstone is of fluvial origin and has a high net-to-gross ratio.…”

Analogue modelling of basin inversion: a review and future perspectives

“…Pb-Z mineralizations and Fe-Cu-Au deposits, Sibson and Scott, 1998;Groves and Bierlein, 2007;Hageman et al, 2016;Gibson et al, 2017;Gibson and Edwards, 2020;Liang et al, 2021). Finally, a thorough understanding of basin evolution, including basin inversion, is also of great interest for geothermal energy projects since tectonic displacements can strongly affect the thermal profile of the subsurface (Sandiford, 1999;Edwards et al, 2015;Vidal and Genter, 2018;Doornenbal et al, 2019;Békési et al, 2020;Weibel et al, 2020;Willems et al, 2020). Possible future applications, including exploration for natural hydrogen, are presented in Sect.…”