PERSONAL PROJECT
GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
No. 2 SEAM
SPRINGHILL, NOVA SCOTIA
By
Brian Herteis, P.Eng.
GIS Applications
GIIG 1251 (GIS2151)
GIS TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL TECHNOLOGY
NEW BRUNSWICK COMMUNITY COLLEGE
Mr. Darren Llewellyn, P.Eng., Instructor
May 2, 2006
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The project goal was to conduct a limited assessment of the geothermal resource associated with the
flooded No. 2 Seam located under and adjacent to the Town of Springhill, Nova Scotia. The
assessment consisted of locating the No. 2 Seam workings in relation to the Town surface features and
the geothermal boreholes that have been drilled to date. Limited analysis was also conducted on the
No. 2 Seam workings to estimate potential water storage volumes and mine water temperatures. The
resultant maps and information database could then be utilized by the Town of Springhill to assist with
the marketing and further development of this valuable geothermal resource.
The coal resource at Springhill that were mined extensively consisted of five overlying seams that
outcropped at surface and dipped to the west. These seams were named the No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, No. 6
and No. 7. The No. 2 Mine was opened in 1873 to mine the No. 2 Seam. Access was by a main slope
from a surface outcrop and between 1873 and 1958 when the mine closed, the No. 2 Seam was the
most extensively mined seam in the area.
Following the closure of the No. 2 Mine in 1858, underground coal mining activities ceased in Springhill.
Over time the abandoned workings flooded and this warm, mine water now offers a potential valuable
geothermal resource to the Town.
To date, 25 geothermal wells have been reportedly drilled, some of which are currently utilized by a
number of businesses in Springhill for building heating and cooling purposes. The Town would like to
expand this resource and as part of that initiative, this limited assessment and data compilation of the
No. 2 Seam, the overlying Town facilities and infrastructure and the geothermal boreholes drilled to
date, has been compiled.
Data for the preparation of the project maps was provided in four separate formats:
 AutoCad drawing files for both surface and the underground mine workings.
 Georeferenced TIF format raster images of the No. 2 Seam mine workings.
 ESRI shapefiles incorporating Town of Springhill municipal data.
 Hardcopy maps showing geothermal borehole locations and Town surface infrastructure.
The map entitled Surface Features in Relation to No. 2 Seam Underground Workings (Appendix D)
shows the relationship between the underground workings and the Town infrastructure and geothermal
borehole locations. As shown in this plan, the western portion of the town boundary overlies the
eastern portion of No. 2 Seam. The seam dips to the west, increasing in depth as it extends to the
west, until it reaches an ultimate depth of about 1,300 m below MSL, approximately 4,400 m west of the
surface outcrop line.
Comparing the borehole lengths with the projected depth of No. 2 Seam, showed a relatively good
correlation. However, since no borehole intersections are available for a seam depth below about 0 m
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page i
elevation (MSL) an estimate of accuracy for the projected depth of cover to the top of the No. 2 Seam
along the dip of the seam cannot be made.
The No. 2 Seam was categorized into six separate types of workings for the purposes of volume
estimation since each type of working has a different extraction ratio. These include:






Main Slope (Surface to –500 M Depth)
Main Slope (-500 M to –700 M Depth)
Room and Pillar Workings
Room and Pillar Recovery Workings
Long Wall Development
Long Wall Mining
To calculate the estimated water storage capacity of No. 2 Seam, the overall volume of the mine
openings were calculated. To this volume was applied the extraction ratio and an estimated collapse
factor and void ratio for the collapsed material. The estimated storage volume was calculated at
5,583,000 m3.
Factors that could impact the water storage volume include.
 Seam Interconnections (Tunnels and Boreholes)
 Overlying Seam Collapse
 Geological Conditions (Faults, Jointing and Rock Porosity)
 Natural or Man Made Barriers
Mine water temperature is of key concern with regard to developing the geothermal resource. Limited
information is available to provide some estimate and assessment of the No. 2 Seam mine water
temperatures. Mine water temperature from the No. 2 Seam were reported for a number of the
geothermal wells both during drilling and as part of pumping tests conducted after the holes were
drilled. There was also some limited information available that reported the change in water
temperature with depth (Temperature Gradient), when the borehole was inactive.
The limited results and lack of reported procedures and methods for both the pump tests and the
temperature gradient test, make interpretation of the results difficult. There is some indication however,
that mine water temperatures increased in one pump test and that the mine water generally increases
in temperature with depth.
Based on the project results and conclusions a number of recommendations were proposed as listed
below.


Include the remaining Springhill coal seams into the analysis to better quantify the water storage
capacity.
Obtain the missing geothermal borehole information to complete the database.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page ii



Have a hydrogeologist review and assess the mine water storage and temperature data.
Conduct a geological review of the overlying host rocks to better determine the Collapse Factor
and Void Ratio values used in the water storage volume.
Retain a Mine Engineer to review the mine plans and records to better identify the location and
extent of rock and man made pillars or barriers that may impede water circulation and flow.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The following individuals and organizations are to be thanked for there assistance and support in
completing this project.
Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources
Dr. Don Jones, P.Eng., Ph.D. and Mr. Dan Khan, P.Eng. for their direction and support and assistance
in supplying the mine plans and layouts necessary for the completion of the project.
Town of Springhill
Darleen Chute, Energy Resource Coordinator and John Kelly, P.Eng, Town Engineer, for their direction
and support and provision of municipal and geothermal borehole information for the completion of the
project.
NBCC Moncton
Mr. Darren Llewellyn P.Eng. and Mr. Sam Rideout, P.Eng., Instructors, are to be thanked for their
guidance and assistance in the project.
Various
Thanks are given to the authors and originators of the various sources of information listed in the
Reference section of the report.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page iv
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as a personal project to fulfill the requirements for course GIS 1251 – GIS
Applications II for the GIS Technology Program at NBCC Moncton, New Brunswick. The project results
are intended for the sole use by the Town of Springhill, Nova Scotia and any third party use without
written approval by the Town of Springhill is not permitted. Unauthorized use of the report by third
parties is conducted at their own risk. A copy of the report will be retained at NBCC for course
requirement purposes.
Sources of information used are listed in the Reference section of the report.
While every effort was made to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information contained
within or forming part of this report, the author makes to guarantees or warranties as to the
completeness or accuracy. As no payment or reimbursement was received by the author to complete
this project and report, the author assumes no liabilities for any errors or omissions.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. viii
1.1
Project Objective .......................................................................................................... viii
1.2
Project Description........................................................................................................ viii
1.3
Project Background ...................................................................................................... viii
1.3.1 Mining History ................................................................................................... viii
1.3.2 Geothermal Resource ......................................................................................... ix
2.0
DELIVERABLES ........................................................................................................................ x
3.0
PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS .................................................................................................... x
3.1
Software Utilized ..............................................................................................................x
3.2
ArcMap Program Files Save Procedure .......................................................................... xi
3.3
File Management ............................................................................................................ xi
4.0
MAP PREPARATION ................................................................................................................. xi
4.1
Source Data.................................................................................................................... xi
4.2
Map Projection............................................................................................................... xii
4.3
No. 2 Seam Workings .................................................................................................... xii
4.4
Springhill Surface Features and Infrastructure .............................................................. xiii
4.4.1 Surface Features and Infrastructure .................................................................. xiii
4.4.2 Geothermal Boreholes ...................................................................................... xiii
4.5
No. 2 Seam and Surface Features Overlay ................................................................... xv
5.0
DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................... xviii
5.1
No. 2 Seam Water Storage Capacity .......................................................................... xviii
5.1.1 Identification of Workings Types ........................................................................ xix
5.1.2 Determination of Mine Workings Areas ............................................................. xxi
5.1.3 Determination of Mine Workings Recovery Factors .......................................... xxv
5.1.4 Determination of Mine Workings Volume ......................................................... xxv
5.2
Estimated Water Storage Capacity .............................................................................xxvii
5.2.1 Additional Conditions Impacting Water Storage Volume................................. xxviii
6.0
MINE WATER TEMPERATURE............................................................................................. xxix
6.1
Drilling and Pump Test Water Temperatures ............................................................... xxx
6.2
Water Gradient Temperatures ...................................................................................xxxiv
7.0
PROJECT RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................xxxvii
8.0
RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................xxxvii
9.0
REFERENCES.................................................................................................................... xxxviii
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page vi
List of Tables
Table No. 1:
Table No. 2:
Table No. 3:
Table No. 4:
Table No. 5:
Geothermal Borehole Summary Table
Borehole Length and No. 2 Seam Depth Comparison
Estimated No. 2 Seam Water Storage Volume
Pump Test and Drill Record Water Temperatures
Water Gradient Temperatures
List of Figures
Figure No. 1:
Figure No. 2:
Figure No. 3:
Figure No. 4:
Figure No. 5:
Figure No. 6:
Surface Features in Relation to No. 2 Seam
Geothermal Borehole Locations
Section Through the Various Coal Seams
Enlarged Section Through the Various Coal Seams
No. 2 Seam Workings
Section Showing Seam Dip Angles
Appendices
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E:
Project Contract
Excel Spreadsheets
Project Metadata
Maps
Project CD
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page vii
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Project Objective
The project goal was to conduct a limited assessment of the geothermal resource associated with the
flooded No. 2 Seam located under and adjacent to the Town of Springhill, Nova Scotia. The
assessment would consist of spatially locating the No. 2 Seam workings in relation to the Town surface
features and the locations of the geothermal boreholes that have been drilled to date. Limited analysis
would also be conducted on the No. 2 Seam workings to estimate potential water storage volumes and
water temperatures. The resultant maps and information database could then be utilized by the Town
of Springhill to assist with the marketing and further development of this valuable geothermal resource.
As a personal project, the project provided the opportunity to utilize my knowledge and experience as a
Mining Engineer with the requirements to learn and apply both GIS map making and spatial analysis
skills within an area and topic of personal interest.
1.2
Project Description
The project incorporated the assembly of maps and plans of the former No. 2 Seam at Springhill, in
both electronic or hardcopy format that could be incorporated into ArcGIS and onto which, the Town
infrastructure and other surface features could be overlain. The surface features would include the
location of all geothermal boreholes that have been drilled to date and for which location coordinates
could be determined. In conjunction with the assembly and preparation of the maps, a database would
also be prepared that would detail and summarize the geothermal borehole information, water
temperature data, and an assessment of the various types of underground workings and openings.
Initially, the assessment would focus on the estimated water storage volumes and water temperatures
associated with the No. 2 Seam and where these workings are in relation to the Town boundaries and
infrastructure.
Once completed, the project results would be passed onto the Town of Springhill for their use in the
further study and development and this geothermal resource.
As detailed within the report, all of the project objectives were achieved.
1.3
Project Background
1.3.1
Mining History
The coal resources at Springhill Nova Scotia, like coal districts in other districts of Nova Scotia were
originally leased to the General Mining Association by the Duke of York in 1825. By 1857, the General
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page viii
Mining Association (GMA) had been granted rights of ownership of four square miles of coal reserves in
Springhill.
Other than the recovery of coal from surface outcrops by local residents, the Springhill coal resource
remained undeveloped due to lack of transportation facilities. By 1870, however, with the prospect of
railway transportation in the area, the Springhill Mining Company was formed. This company initiated
limited mining activities outside of the General Mining Association reserves. By 1878, mining activities
had reached the boundary of the GMA reserves, and soon after, the GMA reserves were incorporated
into the Springhill Mining Company. A few years later, a second company, the Parrsboro Coal and
Railway Company also began mining activities in Springhill. The two companies merged in 1884,
under the title of The Cumberland Railway and Coal Company, which then began mining Springhill coal
on a large scale. In 1910, the Dominion Coal Company Limited absorbed the Cumberland Railway and
Coal Company.
The coal resource at Springhill that were mined extensively consisted of five overlying seams that
outcropped at surface and dipped to the west. These seams were named the No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, No. 6
and No. 7.
The No. 2 Mine was opened in 1873 to mine the No. 2 Seam. Access was by a main slope from a
surface outcrop and between 1873 and 1958 when the mine closed, the No. 2 Seam was the most
extensively mined seam in the area. A second slope (Aberdeen Slope) was sunk in 1887
approximately 2 km north of the main No. 2 seam slope and was used primarily for ventilation
purposes. This slope was closed and sealed along with a large portion of room and pillar development
area in 1912, to control and extinguish a fire.
The seam maintained a consistent thickness of 2.7 m (9 feet) with strong shale forming both the roof
and floor of the mine openings. The seam dipped at an angle of about 30 degrees near the surface,
reducing to about 17 degrees at a slope distance of about 2,200 m and to about 11 degrees a slope
distance of 3,300 m from the surface. When the mine closed in 1958, as a result of a major rock burst,
mining had advanced a distance of 4,400 m along the seam and reached a vertical depth of 1,320 m.
Until 1925, room and pillar mining was used to recover the coal resource. Due to the increasing
thickness of cover and the occurrence of rock bursts (Bumps), the mining method was changed to a
retreat Long Wall system. This mining method was used until the mine closed in October 1958, as a
result of the rock burst.
1.3.2
Geothermal Resource
Following the closure of the No. 2 Mine in 1858, underground coal mining activities ceased in Springhill.
Over time the abandoned workings flooded and this warm, mine water now offers a potential valuable
geothermal resource to the Town.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page ix
To date, 25 geothermal wells have been reportedly drilled, some of which are currently utilized by a
number of businesses in Springhill for building heating and cooling purposes. The Town would like to
expand this resource and as part of that initiative, this limited assessment and data compilation of the
No. 2 Seam, the overlying Town facilities and infrastructure and the geothermal boreholes drilled to
date, has been compiled.
2.0
DELIVERABLES
As part of the project goals and requirements a summary of the specified project deliverables is
provided below. Any deficiencies are provided in the Summary and Conclusions section of the report.
The project deliverables, based on the original requirements was a series of maps prepared in ArcGIS
and an Excel databases that incorporated the project requirements detailed in Section 1.2. In addition
to the report, all ArcGIS and other associated electronic files were to be provided on a CD and a
presentation made at NBCC Moncton following completion of the project.
A presentation of the findings to representatives of the Town of Springhill, was also requested during
the course of the project.
3.0
PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS
To meet the project requirements as specified in the Project Contract (Appendix A), the following
specifications were followed and utilized. Exceptions are noted.





3.1
ArcGIS 9.1 (ArcMap) was used to digitize the mine workings raster (TIF) images and for the
preparation of the project maps.
AutoCAD was used to modify and edit some of the mine workings drawings prior to
importing the files into ArcGIS.
Microsoft Excel was utilized for the database.
Microsoft Word, Visio and PowerPoint were used for the preparation of the report and
presentation.
Project data was backed up on a regular basis.
Software Utilized
The following computer software was utilized in the development of the maps, database and report.
 ArcGIS 9.1 ArcMap (including ArcEditor and ArcCatalogue)
 Microsoft Office (Word, Visio and Excel)
 Jasc Paint Shop Pro 7
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page x
3.2
ArcMap Program Files Save Procedure
As the maps were constructed by adding individual layers of features, the ArcMap program file called
Springhill.mxd, was saved on a frequent bases. Typically, as layers were added or major changes
made in symbology, a new version number was added to the file name when the file was saved. This
practice ensured the previous file was still available should a major problem develop resulting in the
loss of the map version being worked on when it was being saved, or if an internal software problem
developed with ArcMap when the file was open.
The ArcGIS program files were saved in the MDX Folder (Appendix C, Project Metadata). New
versions were renamed by increasing the version number at the end of the file name (i.e.
Springhill_03). Once it was certain that previous versions are not required they were deleted to assist
with file management and reduce computer memory requirements.
Once the final version was completed, it was renamed Springhill.mxd.
3.3
File Management
Prior to assembling and downloading any project data, a project file management/directory system was
prepared. This allowed the logical and methodical placement of the various project files in appropriate
folders and subfolders. Good file management at the onset of the project assisted with overall project
management and organization. Once established, the file structure was maintained for proper
operation of ArcMap.
The file structure utilized is provided in Appendix C, Project Metadata
4.0
MAP PREPARATION
4.1
Source Data
Data for the preparation of the project maps was provided in four separate formats:
1.
2.
3.
4.
AutoCad dwg (drawing) files for both surface and the underground mine workings detail.
Georeferenced TIF format raster images of the No. 2 Seam mine workings.
ESRI shapefiles incorporating Town of Springhill municipal data.
Hardcopy maps showing geothermal borehole locations and Town surface infrastructure.
Data for the preparation of the Excel database was obtained from material provided from the Town of
Springhill, The Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, other published and internet sources
and from analysis of the map information (i.e. Extraction Ratio)
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xi
4.2
Map Projection
All maps produced as part of the project were assigned the following projection:








Projected Coordinate System:
Geographic Coordinate System:
Map Projection Name:
Scale Factor at Central Meridian:
Longitude of Central Meridian:
Latitude of Projection Origin:
False Easting:
False Northing:
NAD 1983 CSRS98 UTM Zone 20N
GCS North American 1983 CSRS98
Transverse Mercator
0.999600
-63.000000
0.000000
500000.000000
0.000000
In some cases it was necessary to transform the data projections from ATS 77, NS MTM Zone 5M to
NAD83 (CSRS) UTM Zone 20N. This was done using either GeoNova (Projection Transformation
service provided by Service Nova Scotia) or the projection transformation utility incorporated into the
ArcMAP ArcToolbox:
(ArcToolbox > Data management Tools > Projections and Transformations > Feature > Project)
The dialog box for this function is shown in the following image.
Files associated with coordinate transformations using GeoNova are included on the project CD.
4.3
No. 2 Seam Workings
Information relating to the No. 2 Seam was provided by The Nova Scotia Department of Natural
Resources. The electronic files were provided in AutoCAD or scanned TIF raster images. The list of
drawings used is provided in Appendix C, Project Metadata.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xii
The No. 2 Seam workings were compiled from five georeferenced TIF raster images, which had been
scanned from the original mine plans. These images were used to digitize the various mine workings
used in the analysis.
Digitizing was conducted within an ArcMAP edit session using a combination of ArcScan and the editor
functions within the Editor Toolbar. Polygon shape files were created and utilized to store the digitized
spatial data from the selected features.
4.4
Springhill Surface Features and Infrastructure
Surface features and infrastructure data relating to the Town, was obtained from both the Town of
Springhill and the Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources as electronic AutoCAD drawings or
ESRI Format shape files. The files are listed in Appendix C, Project Metadata.
4.4.1
Surface Features and Infrastructure
The surface features utilized to create the Surface Features in Relation to No. 2 Seam map included:
 Town buildings
 Town streets and roads
 Town municipal boundary
 Surface contours
 Surface coordinate grid
4.4.2
Geothermal Boreholes
Information for the geothermal boreholes was obtained both from the Town of Springhill and the Nova
Scotia Department of Natural Resources (References). Where borehole coordinates were available,
these coordinates were re-projected as necessary and subsequently added to the Surface Features in
Relation to No. 2 Seam Underground Workings map (Appendix D).
In the case of four recently drilled geothermal boreholes located near the Community Center, only a
hardcopy drawing was available showing the borehole locations. This drawing was scanned and saved
as a TIF image and georeferenced to the appropriate projection using the georeferencing function in
ArcMap. Once georeferenced, the borehole locations were subsequently digitized. All geothermal
borehole attribute data is saved in the Boreholes.shp shapefile.
Based on the RMS results from the drawing georeferencing the accuracy of the four recent geothermal
boreholes is within 3.6 m based on three times the RMS value of 1.199 as shown in the image below.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xiii
Table No. 1 summarizes the available information on the Geothermal Boreholes
Table No. 1: Geothermal Borehole Summary Table
Easting
Northing
Coal Seam Target
Hole Depth (m)
GTW-1
GTW-2
GTW-3
GTW-4
GTW-5
GTW-6
GTW-7
GTW-8
GTW-9
GTW-10
GTW-11
GTW-12
GTW-13
GTW-14
GTW-15
GTW-16
GTW-New Ropak
GTW-Thermocell
GTW-?
GWT-17
GTW-18
GTW-19
GTW-20
GTW-21
Well-1
Well-2
Well-3
Borehole Name
416888.83
417123.30
416890.54
417070.75
417054.14
416751.77
416705.02
417031.10
417018.68
417015.82
417338.45
417345.28
416860.49
416888.81
416876.04
416922.86
416700.34
417177.17
416735.68
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
417030.74
416903.42
416861.43
5055153.44
5055777.64
5055188.67
5055819.55
5055851.40
5055266.39
5055284.67
5056072.77
5056064.63
5056092.78
5055632.68
5055635.42
5055107.86
5055094.36
5055065.41
5054947.95
5055287.01
5056262.45
5055276.82
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
5055464.01
5055307.94
5055372.74
N/A Target Missed
2
2
2,1
2
2
3
1
2
2
7
6
2
4
4
4
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
2
1
1
82.3
50.9
44.2
79.9
Unknown
137.5
Unknown
63.4
103.9
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
34.7
32
64
Well-4
416819.45
5055454.43
Unclear
68.6
Notes:
1. Projected Coordinate System: NAD 1983 (CSRS98) UTM Zone20N
2. Highlighted GTW Wells likely are actually three boreholes identified as GTW-17 through 21
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xiv
4.5
No. 2 Seam and Surface Features Overlay
The map entitled Surface Features in Relation to No. 2 Seam Underground Workings (Appendix D)
shows the relationship between the underground workings and the Town infrastructure and geothermal
borehole locations. As shown in this plan, Figure No. 1 below, the western portion of the town
boundary overlies the eastern portion of No. 2 Seam. Since the seam dips to the west, the town
overlays the upper portion of the workings, from where the coal seam outcropped at surface, as
indicated by the outcrop line, and extending to where the seam reaches a depth of about mean sea
level (MSL) as indicated by the seam contour lines (0 M seam contour).
Figure No. 1: Surface Features in Relation to No. 2 Seam
An enlarged view of the area in which the geothermal boreholes are located is shown on Figure No. 2.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xv
Figure No. 2: Geothermal Borehole Locations
Although still somewhat difficult to see and interpret, the geothermal boreholes for which location
information is known are shown on Figure No. 2. The boreholes that were drilled to intersect No. 2
Seam are all located within or just beyond the first 100 m depth of No. 2 Seam. The 100 m seam
contour elevation line is the second curved line that is parallel to and located to the left (west) of the
green seam outcrop line. The first parallel line to the west of the green outcrop line that forms the
border of the yellow shaded area is the 0 m seam contour elevation.
Boreholes GTW-11, 12, 14, 15 and 16 were drilled to intersect Seams 4, 6 and 7. These coal seams
are located stratigraphically below No. 2 Seam and therefore outcrop further to the east. To intersect
the upper portions of these seams, the boreholes were drilled further to the east of the No. 2 seam
outcrop line.
The surface contour lines provide surface elevation information. If reference is made to the hardcopy
map, the collar elevations for the northern grouping of boreholes ranged between 130 to 140 m above
MSL. For the southern grouping of boreholes, the collar elevations ranged between 145 to 155 m
above MSL. The difference between the No. 2 seam elevation and the surface elevation at any given
point provides the depth of cover over No. 2 Seam at that location.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xvi
A section showing how the various coal seams overly each other is provided in Figure No. 3. This
section was created looking south; therefore the section extends from east to west across the page. It
does illustrate the general geometry of the various seams and how they outcrop on surface and dip to
the west, in basically parallel configuration. When the seams were formed, they were lying flat. Uplift
and other tectonic activities have tilted the seams and as the overlying cover was removed by erosion,
the seams were exposed at surface.
Figure No. 3: Section Through the Various Coal Seams
An enlarged localized view of the various seams is provided in Figure No. 4. This section more clearly
shows the separation distances between the seams and how the seams were easily interconnected by
tunnels and boreholes. Again, this section was created looking south and extends across the page
from east to west.
Figure No. 4: Enlarged Section Through the Various Coal Seams
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xvii
Table No. 2, compares the borehole lengths reported from drill reports to the borehole lengths
calculated from the difference between the surface contour elevations and/or the surveyed collar
elevations (NSDNR) and the No. 2 seam contour elevations.
Table No. 2: Borehole Length and No. 2 Seam Depth Comparison
Borehole
Reported
Length
Surface
Contour
Elevation
Reported
Collar
Elevation
No. 2
Seam
Contour
Elevation
GTW-2
GTW-3
GTW-4
GTW-6
GTW-9
(m)
40.2
44.2
79.9
137.5
97
(m)
141.5
150.2
139.5
153
133
(m)
142.3
N/A
139.5
N/A
N/A
(m)
100
100
71.4
16.7
43.3
Well-1
34.7
139
140.3 (1)
100
Bore Hole Length
Based On:
Surface
Reported
Contour
Collar
Elevation Elevation
(m)
(m)
41.5
42.3
50.2
68.1
68.1
136.3
89.7
39
40.3
Difference Between
Reported Length And:
Surface
Reported
Contour
Collar
Elevation Elevation
(m)
(m)
-1.3
-2.1
-6
11.8
11.8
1.2
7.3
-4.3
-5.6
As indicated on Table No. 2, the range of differences in reported borehole length, which is in fact the
depth from surface to the top of No. 2 Seam, varies between -4.3 m and 11.8 m using the surface
contours and -5.6 m to 11.8 m using reported survey collar elevations. These relatively small
differences indicate that the reported information and the overlays and plotting of the No. 2 Seam,
surface features and geothermal boreholes is relatively accurate and a level of confidence can be
placed on the projected elevation of the top of No. 2 Seam for future boreholes.
Since no borehole intersections are available for the remainder of No. 2 Seam, an estimate of accuracy
for the projected depth of cover to the top of the No. 2 Seam along the dip of the seam cannot be
made. The section shown in Figure No. 1, which shows the relative depth of No. 2 seam and the other
coal seams from surface as they dip to the west, can be used to estimate the depth. For borehole
drilling purposes however, elevation data off the No. 2 Seam mine drawing should also be referenced.
5.0
DATA ANALYSIS
Limited analysis was carried out on the compiled data and information to provide estimates on the
potential water storage capacity of the No. 2 Seam and to review and compile the water temperature
information based on both the geothermal temperature gradient and results of pumping tests.
5.1
No. 2 Seam Water Storage Capacity
To be able to obtain an estimated water storage capacity for the No. 2 Seam workings, it was first
necessary to determine the mining extraction ratio for the various types of workings and the extent of
each type of working. Once this information was obtained, multiplying the workings extent (area) by the
average seam thickness and then by the extraction ratio for that particular type of working, would
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xviii
provide a volume of underground opening as the result of mining. The extraction ratio is simply the
percent of coal removed from a defined area reported as a percent. As an example if 25 m 3 was
removed from a mining block consisting of 100 m3 of coal, the extraction ratio would be 25 divided by
100 or 25 percent.
Summing the openings volume for each of the various types of mine workings would provide a volume
measure for the entire No. 2 Seam workings. The following sections detail the steps in this analysis.
5.1.1
Identification of Workings Types
The No. 2 Seam was categorized into six separate types of workings for the purposes of volume
estimation since each type of working has a different extraction ratio. These include:






Main Slope (Surface to –500 M Depth)
Main Slope (-500 M to –700 M Depth
Room and Pillar Workings
Room and Pillar Recovery Workings
Long Wall Development
Long Wall Mining
An example of each of these workings types are provided below.
Typical Main Slope (100 m To –500 m)
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xix
Typical Main Slope (-500 m To -800 m)
Typical Room and Pillar Workings
Typical Room and Pillar Recovery Workings
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xx
Typical Long Wall Development Workings
Long Wall Mining Area Workings
Each of these types of workings were subsequently identified and outlined on a paper copy of the
No. 2 Seam image.
5.1.2
Determination of Mine Workings Areas
To be able to calculate the volume of underground openings, it was first necessary to determine the
area or extent of each of the various types of workings. In addition, since there was interest expressed
in being able to estimate water temperatures and volumes within the workings at incremental depths as
No.2 seam dips to the west, the areas for each type of working were determined at 100 m vertical depth
increments.
To determine the areas of the various types of mine workings at 100 m depth increments, the following
procedure was followed.
1. The No. 2 Seam TIF images were added to and ArcMap session.
2. The AutoCAD drawing (Seam2.dwg), which included the seam elevation contours in 100 m
intervals, was added to the ArcMap session.
3. Using ArcCatalog a new polygon shapefile was created and assigned the appropriate projection
as detailed in Section 4.2).
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxi
4. The new polygon shapefile was added to the ArcMap session and a new field created so name
could be assigned for each digitized area.
5. The ArcMap Editor was started and the ArcScan extension activated.
6. The polygon shapefile was selected as the active layer in the editor and using both the Editor
editing features and ArcScan, the outlines of the various types of mine workings were digitized
within each 100 m depth interval. The contour lines were used as boundaries to obtain the
elevation increment. The hard copy map with the various workings outlined was used as a
guide while digitizing.
7. As each workings polygon was digitized and saved, it was assigned a name in the Attribute
Table.
8. Digitizing continued until all the various workings for the No. 2 Seam were outlined and saved
as a polygon.
9. Once digitizing was complete the Editor was stopped and the edits saved.
10. The shapefile was then exported into a personal Geodatabase to facilitate the calculation of the
area for each individual polygon
To facilitate digitizing, the Editor snapping features were utilized, however, not all common boundaries
between the various workings polygons exactly coincided. To remove any gaps and overlaps between
adjacent polygons a Topology was created after the shapefile had been exported as a Feature Class to
the Personal Geodatabase.
Once all the overlaps and gaps were corrected the Feature Class file with all the individual mine
workings polygons was added to the ArcMap session.
The No. 2 Seam plan as provided as a TIFF image, represented a horizontal projection of the dipping
seam. As a result, the true width of the workings along the dip of the seam had to be determined.
Simply using the area of the polygons as calculated when the shapefile was exported into the Personal
Geodatabase would be incorrect.
No. 2 Seam with the various different workings types colour coded is shown in Figure No. 4. Reference
should be made to No.2 Seam Underground Workings Classifications for the map legend.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxii
Figure No. 5: No. 2 Seam Workings
5.1.2.1
Calculate True Width
To be able to calculate the true width of the workings along the seam, it was necessary to determine
the dip angle of the No. 2 Seam. Documentation indicated that the No. 2 Seam had a dip angle that
varied from 30 degrees near the surface to 11 degrees at depth and the western extent of the No. 2
Seam workings. The dip angle can be defines as the angle the seam makes as measured down from
horizontal. Figure No. 5, shows the varying No. 2 Seam dip with depth.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxiii
Figure No. 6: Section Showing Seam Dip Angles
To obtain a more accurate representation of the dip angle at various locations of No. 2 Seam, the
following procedure was followed.
1. The mine workings and contour layers were turned on in an ArcMap session.
2. A new polyline shapefile was created (Contour_Distance.shp) in ArcCatalog and assigned the
correct projection.
3. The shapefile was added to the ArcMap session.
4. The Editor was started and Contour_Distance.shp made the active layer
5. At numerous locations, lines were drawn at right angles to and connecting adjacent contour
lines (i.e. a line was drawn from the -300 contour to the -400 contour).
6. Each of these line segments were saved as separate polylines in the shapefile Attribute Table
7. Once sufficient lines had been drawn to get a good distribution across the seam extend and
over most of the various mine workings polygons, the edits were saved and the Editor stopped.
8. The shapefile was exported into the Personal geodatabase and then added to the map session.
By exporting the Contour_Distance.shp shapefile into the Personal Geodatabase, the lengths of all the
polylines were calculated. This provided the horizontal distance between the 100 m vertical depth
contour lines. Knowing the vertical distance (100 m) and the horizontal distance between the contour
lines at this location, the horizontal angle (dip angle) was calculated. This provided numerous dip
angles over the extent of the No. 2 Seam that could be applied to the various workings polygons.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxiv
5.1.2.2
Polygon Area Adjustment For True Width
The calculated dip angles for the No. 2 Seam were now applied to all of the individual mine workings
polygons to adjust the calculated area of the polygons for the new true seam width. These calculations
are provided in the Excel spreadsheet (Appendix B).
5.1.3
Determination of Mine Workings Recovery Factors
Extraction ratios were calculated for the Main Slopes, Room and Pillar workings and the Long Wall
Development workings. In theory, the Room and Pillar Recovery workings and the Long Wall workings,
by their design achieved 100 percent recovery, so calculation of a Recovery Factor was not required.
To obtain representative extraction ratios for the Main Slopes, Room and Pillar and Long Wall
Development workings, a total of eight representative areas were selected. Two areas were selected
for the Main Slopes, four areas for the Room and Pillar mining areas and two areas for Long Wall
Development. The location of these areas is shown on map No. 2 Seam Underground Workings
Classification. Once determined, the calculated Recovery Factors were assigned to the remaining
workings of a similar nature.
The extraction ratios were determined by first creating eight new polygon shapefiles in ArcCatalog. In
an Editor session, all of the pillars (solid unmined areas) within each selected area were digitized as
polygons. Then the boundary of the selected area was digitized to create a polygon for the entire area.
The shapefile was then exported to a Personal Geodatabase, which resulted in the area calculation for
each individual pillar polygon and the total selected area polygon. Subtracting the sum of each pillar
polygon area from the total polygon area provided the area opened by mining. Assuming a constant
seam thickness, the extraction ratio was calculated by dividing the mined opening volume by the total
area volume as illustrated previously. This procedure was repeated for each of the remaining selected
areas.
The calculated extraction ratios (given as a percentage) for each of the representative areas are
provided below.






5.1.4
Main Slope (100 to -500 m Depth):
Main Slope (-500 to -800 m Depth):
Room and Pillar (100 to -700 m Depth):
Room and Pillar Recovery:
Long Wall Develop.:
Long Wall:
38.7%
25.3%
26.0 to 37.5%
90%
7.7 to 12.8%
100%
Determination of Mine Workings Volume
The total volume of mine openings in No. 2 Seam were calculated by multiplying the corrected area of
each mine working polygon by the representative extraction ratio and the average seam thickness.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxv
For the Room and Pillar Recovery area workings and the Long Wall workings an extraction ratio of 90%
and 100% respectively were assigned. An extraction ratio of 90% was selected for the Room and Pillar
recovery areas to compensate for the typical inability to fully recover all of the pillars to achieve
complete coal extraction. Theses calculations are provided in the Excel spreadsheet located in
Appendix B.
5.1.4.1
Collapse Factor
The extraction ratio provides a volume based on the mined openings. Over time, underground
openings tend to collapse, especially in sedimentary formations. The magnitude of the collapse
depends upon many factors, including but not limited to:








The depth of the opening and the resulting weight of the overlying strata.
The width or span of the opening.
The provision and type of roof support (natural rock pillar, timber, steel arches, etc.)
The age of the opening.
Geological conditions in the roof (back) and walls (jointing, faults, etc.).
Method of excavation (blasting, mechanical cutting).
Mining method (pillar recovery, total extraction, etc.).
Overlying seam collapse.
A collapse factor has been assigned to each of the five mining techniques utilized for coal extraction in
the No. 2 Seam. The values range from 0 to 1, where 0 indicates the mine opening is stable and has
not collapsed, while 1 indicates total or 100 percent collapse of the mine opening.
Main Slopes:
Room and Pillar:
Room and Pillar Recovery:
Long Wall Development:
Long Wall:
0.3
0.5
0.9
0.5
1.0
These collapse factors were then utilized in the water volume storage estimate calculation spreadsheet
(Water Storage Volume Estimate) in Appendix B.
5.1.4.2
Void Ratio
Although it is assumed the No. 2 Seam workings have collapsed to some extent as estimated in the
previous section, even within the collapsed material there will remain voids and openings that can
contain water. An estimate has been made as to the extent of these voids and these estimates
included in the water volume storage calculation.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxvi
In the case of the Room and Pillar Recovery and Long Wall mining areas, where 90 and 100 percent
collapse factors have been applied respectively, there would still remain some voids within the
collapsed material in which water could be retained. Without actually obtaining samples of this
collapsed material from these mining areas or conducting other in-situ tests, this value can only be
estimated. For purposes of this study, the following Void Ratios have been applied to the various No. 2
Seam workings.





Main Slopes:
Room and Pillar:
Room and Pillar Recovery:
Long Wall:
Long Wall Development:
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.25
These Void Ratio values have been utilized in the Water Storage Volume Estimate spreadsheet in
Appendix B.
5.2
Estimated Water Storage Capacity
The water storage capacity in the No. 2 Seam is estimated at 5,583,000 m3. A summary of the
calculations and values utilized to obtain this estimate are provided in Table No. 3.
Table No. 3: Estimated No. 2 Seam Water Storage Volume
Springhill Geothermal Assessment
Estimated Underground Workings Voids and Water Storage Volume
Workings
Designation
Main Slopes (MS)
Average:
Totals:
Room and Pillar (RP)
Average:
Totals:
Workings Seam Ave. Seam Width Average
Area
Angle
Along Slope
Thickness
(m 2)
(Deg)
(m)
(m)
26.4
2.7
30.1
106.0
2.7
1,063,993
R and P With Pillar Recovery (RPR)
Average:
Totals:
2,586,888
30.2
Long Wall (LW)
Average:
Totals:
17.6
136.3
313.5
2.7
2.7
2,264,160
Long Wall Development (LWD)
Average:
Totals:
1,780,384
Grand Total: Average:
Grand Total: Sum
85.3
167,229
7,862,655
15.6
381.4
24.0
204.5
2.7
Solid
Volume
(m 3)
50,171
501,710
No. 2 Seam
Extraction
Ratio
(%)
32.0
168,337
1,071,398
34
312,450
8,123,708
85.0
638,863
6,388,630
10.7
710,823
4,975,762
100.0
1,996,232
21,061,207
Workings Collapse Void
Volume
Factor Ratio
(m 3)
14,927
149,272
0.3
53,570
1,071,398
0.5
265,583
6,905,152
0.9
63,301
633,005
710,823
4,975,762
1
0.5
Water
Volume
(m 3)
0.30
135,838
135,838
696,409
696,409
828,618
828,618
189,902
189,902
3,731,821
3,731,821
5,582,588
5,582,588
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.25
13,734,589
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Void
Volume
(m 3)
Page xxvii
This volume is based on the calculation methods and assumptions detailed in Section 5.1, and subject
to revision and correction as additional information is obtained and the accuracy of the estimate can be
improved.
5.2.1
Additional Conditions Impacting Water Storage Volume
Physical conditions associated with the No. 2 Seam that may impact this estimate must also be
considered that may have an impact on the availability of the total water volume contained within the
No. 2 Seam or result in the accessibility to additional sources of mine water from the No. 2 Seam.
The scope of this project does not permit a detailed review or investigation of these conditions, which
are included for completeness only.
5.2.1.1
Seam Interconnections
Interconnections made between the No. 2 Seam and other coal seams that overly or underlie the No. 2
Seam at an elevation above the point of interconnection could result in flow and transfer of water
between the seams. This would in affect result in a larger water storage volume than estimated.
During the course of the project, seven locations were identified where the No. 2 Seam was connected
to other coal seams. There were 5 tunnel connections to No. 1 Seam, which overlies the No. 2 Seam,
and two borehole connections identified from No. 2 Seam that connected to No. 3 and No. 4 Seams.
It is expected that there are more connections, which were either not identified on the No. 2 Seam TIFF
image or not noticed during the course of the work. The potential for more connections exists and
should be investigated as part of a more detailed study of the mine water volume.
A number of documented interconnections were located in The Louis Frost Notes some or all of which
might represent the seven identified interconnections:




From 1896 to 1916 an number of short cross measure (interconnecting) tunnels from No. 2
Seam and from the Aberdeen Slope to mine a portion of the No. 1 Seam.
Final workings of the No. 1 Seam were accessed and worked from interconnecting tunnels from
the “5700 foot level” of the No. 2 Seam.
An unexpected interconnection occurred between the No. 2 and No. 3 Seams on the south side
of the No. 2 Seam in the area of Long wall development.
A drain line was drilled from the “4700 foot level” of the No. 2 Seam to the No. 3 Seam in 1928
but was plugged and abandoned in 1936. In 1936 a second borehole was drilled from the 5400
foot level of the No. 2 Seam.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxviii
5.2.1.2
Overlying Seam Collapse
Significant interconnections may exist if areas of overlying seams have collapsed into the No. 2 Seam.
The collapse could have resulted from subsidence of mine workings over time or rock bursts as such
that closed the mine in 1958. A review of available mine records may give some indication of potential
collapse areas.
5.2.1.3
Geological Conditions
Natural geological conditions such as faults, jointing and rock porosity may provide a hydraulic
connection between the various coal seams, resulting in higher water storage volumes for No. 2 Seam
than calculated. This potential water source may be better quantified by reviewing mine pumping and
water inflow records, and geological plans.
The Louis Frost Notes (Springhill No. 2 Mine Document) reported that the No. 2 Seam made 415,000
gallons of water per day, however, the time period over which this quantity occurred was not reported,
but is probably representative of the pumping rate prior to mine closure. It is also not known if these
are US or Imperial gallons so a metric conversion has not been made.
Rock fracturing as a result of mining and subsidence may also permit water storage within the rock
mass that is not included in the water volume estimate.
5.2.1.4
Natural and Man Made Barriers
Barriers that exist throughout the No. 2 Seam workings may limit water circulation and flow and
therefore reduce the total amount of accessible mine water from a given location. These barriers could
include rock support pillars for mining purposes and both rock pillars and man made barriers left or
constructed to isolate and seal areas to extinguish underground fires, isolate gassy areas or close off
areas made dangerous because of rock bursts or other underground conditions.
All of these factors should be considered if a more accurate estimate of the potential water storage
volume for No. 2 Seam is required. These factors may have an impact on water circulation caused by
mine water pumping and return activities to access the geothermal resource, which could impact the
mine water temperature over the long term.
6.0
MINE WATER TEMPERATURE
Mine water temperature is of key concern with regard to developing the geothermal resource. Limited
information is available to provide some estimate and assessment of the No. 2 Seam mine water
temperatures. Mine water temperature from the No. 2 Seam were reported for a number of the
geothermal wells both during drilling and as part of pumping tests conducted after the holes were
drilled. There was also some limited information available that reported the change in water
temperature with depth (Temperature Gradient), when the borehole was inactive.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxix
The following two tables provide temperature information for the geothermal boreholes for which water
temperature information was available. This information is summarized from the Well_Records.xls
Excel spread sheet (Temp Worksheet tab), included on the project CD.
6.1
Drilling and Pump Test Water Temperatures
Temperature results from three drill reports and one pump test at increasing depths are provided in
Table No. 4. The numbers in italics are interpolated from the values before and after to facilitate
graphing the values. The average, maximum and minimum temperature value for each borehole is
provided at the bottom of the table. A graph of the values follows
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxx
Table No. 4: Pump Test and Drill Record Water Temperatures
Depth
(m)
30.4
33.4
36.5
39.5
42.6
45.6
48.6
51.7
54.7
57.8
60.8
63.8
66.9
69.9
72.9
76.0
79.0
82.1
85.1
88.1
91.2
94.2
97.3
100.3
103.3
106.4
109.4
113.4
115.5
118.2
121.6
127.7
130.7
132.2
133.7
136.8
Average:
Maximum:
Minimum:
GTW-6
Seam No. 2
GTW-6A
Seam No. 2
Drilling Report
Pumping Test
14.2
14.2
14.5
14.7
14.8
15.4
15.8
14.7
15.0
15.2
16.1
16.9
15.1
16.9
14.2
13.6
13.78
13.91
14.0
14.04
14.04
14.0
14.05
14.1
14.61
15.2
15.04
14.92
14.8
15.11
15.44
15.8
15.74
15.7
15.74
15.8
15.71
15.64
15.6
15.77
15.95
16.1
16.24
16.3
16.7
17.3
18.07
18.8
15.4
18.8
15.4
GTW-8
Seam No. 1
Drilling
Report
GTW-9
Seam No. 2
GTW-10
Seam No. 2
15.4
16.6
16.9
16.9
18.4
15.5
16.7
16.7
16.9
11.8
11.83
11.8
16.3
16.7
16.9
16.9
16.7
17.1
16.7
16.7
16.3
16.3
16.9
16.3
18.2
18.2
11.9
12.3
12.3
12.5
13.7
13.7
13.4
13.4
13.9
13.9
13.9
13.6
13.7
13.8
13.8
13.9
13.6
13.3
13.3
13.4
13.4
13.4
13.6
14.1
14.1
14.1
14.2
13.6
11.6
12.3
12.7
12.7
12.6
12.5
15.5
18.4
15.5
15.3
18.2
15.3
13.4
14.2
13.4
Drilling Report
Discussion of these results is beyond the scope of this report and requires detailed analysis of the drill
reports and pump test records.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxi
The limited results do however, indicate for the pump test results for GTW-6A (Same borehole as
GTW-6), that the water temperature increased with depth over the duration of the pump test. These
results should however, be reviewed and evaluated by a hydrogeologist to obtain a better assessment
and evaluation of the results.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxii
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxiii
Temperature (OC)
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
5
15
25
30
36
43
49
55
67
73
79
85
Meters Below Surface
61
91
97
103 109 116 122 131 134
Geothermal Boreholes Drilling and Pump Test Temperature
GTW-10
GTW-9
GTW-8
GTW-6A
GTW-6
6.2
Water Gradient Temperatures
Gradient temperature results were available for Temperature results from eight boreholes as provided
in Table No. No. 5. The numbers in italics are interpolated from the values before and after to facilitate
graphing the values. The average, maximum and minimum value for each borehole is provided at the
bottom of the table. A graph of the values follows.
Table No. 5: Water Gradient Temperatures
Depth
(m)
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
30.4
33.4
35.0
36.5
39.5
42.6
45.6
48.6
50.0
51.7
54.7
57.8
60.0
60.8
63.8
65.0
66.9
69.9
72.9
75.0
76.0
79.0
80.0
82.1
85.1
88.1
91.2
94.2
97.3
GTW-1
Seam
No. 1 or 2
GTW-2
Seam
No. 2
17.55
17.10
14.75
14.02
13.81
13.81
12.91
12.02
11.12
11.23
11.34
11.40
11.46
11.52
11.58
11.62
11.65
11.68
11.71
11.72
11.74
11.75
11.73
11.71
11.67
11.62
11.60
11.57
11.55
11.48
16.82
14.66
14.21
12.67
8.95
8.92
8.93
8.94
8.95
8.98
9.00
9.01
9.02
9.18
9.34
GTW-3
Seam
No. 1
18.96
18.09
17.46
16.23
15.27
14.31
13.35
13.35
13.35
GTW-8
Seam
No. 1
GTW-9
Seam
No. 2
GTW-10
Seam
No. 2
GTW-11
Seam
No. 7
GTW-12
Seam
No. 6
15.39
16.61
16.75
16.89
16.89
18.44
15.50
16.72
16.72
16.72
16.89
11.83
11.83
11.83
11.83
8.44
8.67
8.81
8.94
9.17
9.44
10.00
10.00
10.04
10.08
10.11
10.39
10.39
10.39
10.39
10.53
10.67
11.34
12.11
12.36
12.60
12.89
13.03
13.17
13.26
13.36
13.46
13.56
13.56
9.91
10.00
10.06
10.11
10.21
10.24
10.29
10.33
10.33
10.33
10.36
10.39
10.41
10.43
10.01
10.31
10.62
10.78
10.88
10.93
10.97
11.25
11.40
11.55
12.02
12.50
12.58
12.69
13.53
8.33
8.48
8.63
8.78
8.86
8.94
9.07
9.20
9.31
9.41
9.52
9.54
9.56
9.58
9.81
10.03
10.25
10.47
10.69
10.85
11.01
11.17
11.36
11.55
11.74
11.74
11.74
11.74
11.75
9.40
9.19
8.99
8.78
9.10
9.42
9.76
10.11
10.19
10.26
10.33
10.34
10.35
10.36
10.37
10.38
10.39
10.50
10.62
10.67
10.73
10.78
10.84
10.89
10.94
11.03
11.12
11.13
11.14
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxiv
Depth
GTW-9
Seam
No. 2
GTW-10
Seam
No. 2
GTW-11
Seam
No. 7
GTW-12
Seam
No. 6
100.3
13.46
13.53
11.76
11.29
103.3
106.4
109.4
113.4
115.5
118.2
120.4
127.7
133.7
139.8
145.9
147.7
149.8
Average:
Maximum:
Minimum:
13.07
13.07
11.44
11.76
12.08
12.72
13.31
13.31
13.38
10.97
13.53
9.91
11.78
11.86
11.95
12.73
13.25
13.28
13.31
13.22
13.23
13.22
13.20
13.28
13.28
10.99
13.31
8.33
(m)
GTW-1
Seam
No. 1 or 2
12.35
17.55
11.12
GTW-2
Seam
No. 2
10.50
16.82
8.92
GTW-3
Seam
No. 1
15.60
18.96
13.35
GTW-8
Seam
No. 1
15.39
18.44
11.83
11.27
13.56
8.44
10.74
13.38
8.78
As in the previous section, discussion of these results is beyond the scope of this report and requires
detailed analysis of the temperature gradient testing reports. In many cases in the provided data, it is
unclear how the tests were conducted and how the temperatures were obtained.
The following graph does indicate however, a general trend of increasing water temperature for
boreholes GTW-8, 9, 10 and 12, beginning at a depth of about 30 m. Starting at this depth the water
temperatures tend to increase from about 8 to 11 oC to between 12 and 14 oC at a depth of about 100
to 115 m. This corresponds to about 1 oC per 20 to 25 m depth. After about 115 m depth the
temperature lines began to level off. Borehole GTW-2 also started to show a similar trend but only
extended to a depth of 50 m.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxv
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxvi
Temperature (OC)
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
5
73 76 80 85 91 97 103 109 116 120 134 146 150
Meters Below Surface
15 25 30 35 40 46 50 55 60 64 67
Geothermal Boreholes Temperature Gradient
GTW-12
GTW-11
GTW-10
GTW-9
GTW-8
GTW-3
GTW-2
GTW-1
The lack of any water temperature results at greater depths makes it difficult to accurately interpolate
what the water temperatures may be at deeper along No. 2 Seam. The reader is advised to refer to a
qualified hydrogeologist to obtain a more comprehensive evaluation of the water gradient temperatures
reported for the geothermal boreholes.
7.0
PROJECT RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
The project goals and objectives as stated in the Personal Project Contract (Appendix A) were
achieved. The results and conclusions are listed below.









8.0
A map of the mine workings (No. 2 Seam) with Town features and geothermal boreholes
overlain was prepared. The overlay clearly shows that No. 2 Seam underlies the western
portion of the Town.
The geothermal boreholes with known collar coordinates were plotted on the mine workings and
town features overlay map. The boreholes are located within the upper portion of the No. 2
between a seam elevation of 0 m (MSL) and +100 m.
The geothermal borehole lengths between surface and the intersection with the No. 2 Seam
correlated within -5.6 m to 11.8 m of the projected depth of cover for the seam.
A map of the No. 2 Seam with mine workings categorized by type and elevation was prepared.
Seven connections between the No. 2 Seam with other coal seams were identified.
The average Extraction Ratios was calculated for the Main Slopes, Room and Pillar and Long
Wall Development Workings and used to calculate the water volume storage estimate.
The estimated water storage volume for No. 2 Seam was calculated at 5,583,000 m3.
The geothermal borehole drilling history was reviewed and compiled into a Excel spreadsheet.
A limited review and assessment was completed of the mine water temperatures. Limited data
and lack of procedures used to obtain the water temperatures, made an assessment difficult
and incomplete.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the project results and conclusions, the following recommendations are proposed.





Include the remaining Springhill coal seams into the analysis to better quantify the water storage
capacity.
Obtain the missing geothermal borehole information to complete the database.
Have a hydrogeologist review and assess the mine water storage and temperature data.
Conduct a geological review of the overlying host rocks to better determine the Collapse Factor
and Void Ratio values used in the water storage volume.
Retain a Mine Engineer to review the mine plans and records to better identify the location and
extent of rock and man made pillars or barriers that may impede water circulation and flow.
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxvii
9.0
REFERENCES
Geothermal Well Reports, Data Binder, Provided by Darleen Chute, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, Survey Locations in Springhill, Internal E-Mail, May 9,
2000.
Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, Mine Workings Volume Estimates, Internal Memo, April
14, 1993
Louis Frost, History of Coal Mining in Nova Scotia, Louis Frost Notes 1865 to 1962.
R. Ross and C. Kavanaugh, Development and Application of Geothermal Mine Water Energy From the
Abandoned Coal Mines in the Springhill Coal Fields, Springhill, Nova Scotia, Canada, Proceedings of
the 106th Annual Meeting, The Mining Society of Nova Scotia, Keltic Lodge, Ingonish, NS, June 23-25,
1993
Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, One of the Greatest treasures – The Geology and
History of Coal in Nova Scotia, Information Circular ME 25, 1993
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxviii
APPENDIX A
PERSONAL CONTRACT
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xxxix
APPENDIX B
EXCEL SPREADSHEETS
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xl
APPENDIX C
PROJECT METADATA
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xli
A detailed listing of the project file structure is provided below:
Project Folder: X:\Springhill
Sub Folders:
ArcGIS\
Georeferencing\
MXD\
Shapes\
AutoCAD\
Geodatabase\ Topology\
Images
Community_Center\
GIF\
PDF\
Rectified_Plans_Grayscale\
Metadata\
PDF_Files\
Reorts\
Contract\
Coordinate_Transformations\
Excel\
Images\
Metadata\
Presentation\
Report\
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xlii
AOI.mdb
AOI
Personal Geodatabase
Personal Geodatabase Feature Class
New_Brunswick_Railways_01.mxd
New_Brunswick_Railways_02.mxd
New_Brunswick_Railways_02.mxd
New_Brunswick_Railways_04.mxd
Rail_Plot.mxd
Rail_Plot_01.mxd
Map Document
Map Document
Map Document
Map Document
Map Document
Map Document
Province_shp
Provincial Shapefile
north_america.img
NoGeometry
1863_clip.tif (1863 to 1992_clip.tif)
1863_Tics.txt (1863 to 1992_Ticks.txt
RectifyNB_Railway_1897.tif
RectifyNB_Railway_1917.tif
RectifyNB_Railway_1992.tif
NB_Image.lyr
FME Feature Dataset
FME Feature Class
Raster Dataset
Text File
Raster Dataset
Raster Dataset
Raster Dataset
Layer
Canada.bmp
mapofnewbrunswick.gif
rail_1.shp
Raster Dataset
Raster Dataset
Shapefile
MXD\
Shapes\
Image\
Maps\
Pictures\
1863_1882\
Companies\
Construction\
*.jpeg
*.jpeg
*.vis
Raster Dataset (Images)
Raster Dataset (Images)
Visio Documents
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xliii
APPENDIX D
MAPS
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xliv
APPENDIX C
PROJECT CD
Personal Project  Geothermal Resource Assessment No. 2 Seam, Springhill NS
GIS-1251- GIS Applications II
May 2, 2006
Page xlv