Important Note about Large File
Downloading
Please note
that some datasets available are large and may be slow to retrieve, and/or are
so voluminous that they might crash your web browser. This does not necessarily indicate a server
failure. The “Full File as CSV” links
below indicate if a file is particularly large.
The CSV files are compressed, however.
Usually,
large datasets are better retrieved using web clients (e.g. GNU Wget, cURL, etc.), or by using a
tool to retrieve and display the data (e.g. Geothermal Prospector, or ArcGIS).
If you have a tool which you wish to use, you may test its ability to consume
the data by downloading the first 50 records within the dataset by using our
"Sample 50" links in the table below before attempting to download
the entire dataset.
About the Data available for Download
The project
participants each submitted thousands of records of data into the SMU Node of
the NGDS (SMU operates one of several NGDS
‘nodes’). These data collections were aggregated to populate ten of the
different data delivery ‘content
models’. Content models are a
standardized means of exchanging a particular type of data across the NGDS, such
as information about heat flow or borehole temperature values. Information on the NGDS formats, including
descriptions of the specific file layouts for all of the 30+ different possible
content models, may be found at http://schemas.usgin.org/models/. Because the content models require certain
fields to be populated, records without that type of information contain ‘nil:missing’ or ‘-99999’, which
account for some of the very large file sizes.
Additionally,
the un-aggregated data contribution files are available for download through
links below. Unlike the content model
formatted data, most of the data submission files are not in a standard format,
and are in the units of measure and columnar layouts as the original
contributor submitted them. Because some
of these datasets contain additional data/information that may be of interest
to project developers or researchers that were not used in populating the
content models, the decision was made to make them available as discrete
datasets.
In all, 20
datasets are available for download:
·
The
“Aggregated Well Data” file lists all locations included within the other
collections, along with some temperature, depth, heat flow and thermal
conductivity information;
·
The
next 10 files are delivered in a ‘content model’ format specified for data
exchange via the National Geothermal Data System (NGDS) containing data from
across the project team;
·
The
next 9 are submitted data contribution files.
Because most of these are not in a content model format, we have
provided documentation of the column order and content for each file in a
Column Heading Description PDF file.
NOTE: The full MLKay
Technologies Texas Oil and Gas data submission of over 800,000 wells is not
available for download as a discrete dataset.
However, it was incorporated into the Well Header Observation content
model, the Fluid Flux Injection and Disposal content model, the Borehole
Temperature Observation content model, the Well Test content model, and the
Aggregated Well Data file. Additional
data from MLKay Technologies are available for
download/export from within the interactive application reachable by selecting
‘login’ from the main welcome screen.
Selecting a Download File Format
Most Files
are downloaded using a protocol called Web Feature Services (WFS) and/or Web
Map Services (WMS). If you would like to
view and manipulate the data in a spreadsheet program such as Microsoft®
Excel®, select the option to download a ‘zipped’ version of the dataset as a
CSV (Comma Separated Value) file. (These
CSV files are refreshed periodically, and every attempt is made to keep them
current, but they are not ‘instantly’ updated with each new data submission.) The column headings order and meaning are
described in either the ‘about the dataset’ PDF document or through the content
model explanation links. The XML format
is not designed to be ‘human intelligible’; rather it assumes you have a web
client program designed to understand XML format. The XML Schema describes the
layout of the XML files to the web client.
The Web Map Service (WMS) returns an image of the data points usable as
a layer upon a map. The links provided return the capabilities of the service
for use in programs such as Esri’s® ArcGIS and
others.
Notices
There are no warranties
expressed or implied. Decisions based on
the information available should be made after a thorough due diligence by the
user.
Microsoft and Excel are registered
trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other
countries. Esri
and ArcGIS are registered trademarks of Environmental Systems Research
Institute, Inc. (Esri) in the United States and/or
other countries.
Description of Files Available for Download |
File Download Links |
File Format Explanation |
File Download Links using Web Map Service (WMS) |
Aggregated
Well Data A listing of all sites with point location
coordinates from SMU and all of the partner organizations. Bottom Hole Temperature (BHT), depth, heat
flow and thermal conductivity values provided; see additional datasets below
for more detailed heat flow and temperature data deliveries. Note: some sites are outcroppings, rather
than ‘wells’. |
|
|
|
Content Model Files Available for Download |
|||
Borehole
Temperature Observation in Content Model Format A nationwide aggregation of multiple data
submissions containing temperature and depth data. Contains both equilibrium logged
measurements and BHT values. Includes
geothermal wells, oil and gas wells, water wells, test wells, etc. |
|
||
Fluid
Flux Injection and Disposal in Content Model Format Primarily data on Texas Oil and Gas wells
provided by MLKay Technologies gathered from Texas
Rail Road Commission information.
WARNING: The complete file
contains nearly 10 M records. |
|
||
Geologic
Reservoir in Content Model Format Data on temperature, depth, net sand
thickness, porosity, and other key geothermal reservoirs characteristics in
Texas. Based on BEG analysis. |
|
||
Heat
Flow Observation in Content Model Format An aggregation of all heat flow values
provided in the different submission files. Combines values based on
equilibrium logged measurements from multiple depth intervals, values based
on BHT data, and values from published data sources. Also includes sites without a heat flow
value, but that have other important data useful in determining heat flow,
such as ‘corrected’ temperature values, radiogenic heat production
information, and thermal conductivity values. |
|
||
Radiogenic
Heat Production in Content Model Format An aggregation of radiogenic heat values
provided in the different submission files.
Includes data from gamma ray spectrometry measurements conducted by
UND in their lab as well as in the field.
Also includes any heat generation values from the heat flow
determinations by SMU, Cornell, or UND. |
|
||
Thermal
Conductivity Observation in Content Model Format An aggregation of all thermal conductivity
values provided in the different submission files, including values based on
lab measurements, estimates derived from COSUNA and lithology models, and
those from published data sources. |
|
||
Well
Fluid Production Observation in Content Model Format Texas oil and gas industry fluid production
data assembled by the BEG. Pulled from
the BEG Consolidated Wells Contribution file, in the next section of files. |
|
||
Well
Header Observation in Content Model Format An aggregation of all well locations,
owner/operator, status, and date information represented in the various
submission files. Note: Duplicate well
entries were removed when possible. The same well may appear more than once
with a different unique identifier if there was insufficient information to
confirm an identical well from different submitting institutions. |
|
||
Well
Log Observation in Content Model Format An aggregation of links to images of SMU Heat
Flow database ‘field notes’, temperature depth curves, and other log
types. Also contains links to images
of thousands off-shore geophysical well logs assembled by Texas Tech
University. |
|
||
Well
Test Observation in Content Model Format Texas oil and gas industry G10 injection well
test data provided by MLKay Technologies gathered
from Texas Rail Road Commission information.
|
|
||
Contribution/Submission Files Available
for Download (‘Tier 2’ Structured Data; not in
Content Model Format) |
|||
SMU
Heat Flow Database of Equilibrium Log Data and Geothermal Wells (note: includes
sites from the Global Heat Flow Database from the University of North Dakota) Over 12,000 locations are included in this
dataset. Site Heat Flow values are
calculated based on temperatures at multiple depth intervals, site thermal
conductivity determinations and corrections (such as topographic
effects). Some values are from
literature sources whereas others are based on field logged equilibrium
temperature measurements by the contributors. Links to thousands of
temperature depth curves and associated field notes are available through
either interactive use of the SMU NGDS Node or the Well Log Content Model. 2021 update are for many items within the
database. In the program the uploaded
dates convert to January regardless of month, if important, they are corrected
in the csv version here. |
XML
Schema (DescribeFeatureType) |
||
SMU
Heat Flow Database from BHT Data Used to update the
Geothermal Map of North America for Google.org, the dataset of over 31,000
records contains ‘interval’ and ‘site’ heat flow calculations based on
‘corrected’ bottom hole temperature data from the oil and gas industry. 2021
upload includes many new sites in Texas. |
|
||
BEG
at University of Texas Consolidated Well Database Contains raw and corrected BHT,
depth, location, fluid production, pressure, etc. from ~40,000 wells
throughout Texas. URLs to BEG’s
extensive core log library are expected to be accessible as a related
resource through the SMU Node after further integration. |
|
||
BEG
at University of Texas Reservoir Analysis From 55 different Texas
geologic reservoirs, most with multiple depth ‘slices’. The analysis contains net sand volume and
thickness calculations, which can be used by geothermal reservoir
engineers. The submission file closely
matches the content model layout for Geologic Reservoir. |
|
||
Cornell
University Heat Flow Database (NY and PA) The analysis includes over 8,900
BHT and depth points from throughout Pennsylvania and New York, including
predicted temperatures at various depth and the estimated depths to various
temperature levels for several thousand locations. Links to regional maps developed by Cornell
will be accessible as related information through interactive use of the SMU
Node of the NGDS. |
|
||
Texas
Tech University Off Shore Wells and BHT Database The collection includes raw and
corrected BHT, depth, well status, location, ownership, etc. from 8,200
different wells in the Gulf of Mexico.
The collection contains a rich quantity of data from multiple depths
and dates, with over 25,000 rows of data entries. In addition, thousands of scanned
geophysical logs were provided by Texas Tech, which are available through
interactive use of the SMU Node or from the Well Log Content Model. The CSV
version here has corrected many of the depths (wrong decimal place) and BHT
errors. |
|
||
University
of North Dakota Radiogenic Heat Generation Database The collection contains data
from over 350 specimens analyzed for heat generated by the Thorium,
Potassium, or Uranium contents of the rocks.
The submission file closely matches the content model layout for
Radiogenic Heat Generation. |
|
||
University
of North Dakota Thermal Conductivity Database
217 samples were measured for
thermal conductivity, which can be used to improve the accuracy of the heat
flow calculations for the locations from which they were gathered. The submission file closely matches the
content model layout for Thermal Conductivity Observations. |
|||
University
of North Dakota Temperature at Depth Database Equilibrium Temperature-Depth log measurements of 245 wells in
Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, N. Dakota, and S. Dakota. |
|