Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Puna Geothermal Venture : Review and response to the Element I report : Independent technical investigation of the Puna Geothermal Venture unplanned steam release, June 12 and 13, 1991, Puna, Hawaii|
|Authors:||Puna Geothermal Venture|
|Publisher:||Puna Geothermal Venture|
|Citation:||Puna Geothermal Venture. 1991. Puna Geothermal Venture: Review and response to the Element I report: Independent technical investigation of the Puna Geothermal Venture unplanned steam release, June 12 and 13, 1991, Puna, Hawaii. Puna (HI): Puna Geothermal Venture.|
|Abstract:||Puna Geothermal Venture (PGV) agrees with the Element I Report conclusion that the geothermal resource encountered in the KS-8 well, although quite hot, is manageable through the use of modem well drilling and production technology. However, PGV does not agree that the KS-8 well uncontrolled flow event occurred because of inadequacies in PGV's drilling plan and procedures. PGV believes that it occurred because the drilling encountered a high temperature and high pressure geothermal resource at a depth that was more shallow than anticipated. PGV's previous experiences with the KS-7 well caused PGV to make significant changes to the drilling program implemented for KS-8, and the KS-8 well drilling program was prepared to handle any resource of similar characteristics (see PGV Response G).|
However, the temperatures and pressures of the geothermal resource encountered by the KS-8 well were substantially higher than those encountered in the KS-7 well.
|Appears in Collections:||The Geothermal Collection|
Items in ScholarSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.