Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Effective Field Geological Mapping Techniques for Sumatran Geothermal Fields, Indonesia
Lucas D. Setijadji
Department of Geological Engineering, Gadjah Mada University, 2 Grafika Bulaksumur, Yogyakarta 55281 Indonesia
E-mail address: lucasdonny@ugm.ac.id; lucas_donny@yahoo.com
Setijadji
Subduction formed a convergent tectonic margin between the Indian-Australian plates and the Sundaland (Hamilton, 1979).
Subduction takes place along the Java/Sunda trench that reaches the maximum depth of 6.75 km. The oceanic crust is being
subducted northward, more or less perpendicular, to the Sunda volcanic arc at a rate of 6 to 7 cm/yr (Hamilton, 1979; Simandjuntak
and Barber, 1996). The Benioff seismic zone, representation of the subducted slab, extends to the depth of more than 600 km in
Java but only 200 km in the case of Sumatra (Figure 1). However, tomographic imaging studies suggest that the lithospheric slab
penetrates to a depth of at least 1500 kilometers in all sections (Widiyantoro and Van der Hilst, 1996).
Sumatra is now a part of the Sunda-Banda volcanic arc that extends approximately 3,700 km long, from the northern tip of Sumatra
island through Java to east of Damar island (Hamilton, 1979). This long arc is divided into the Sunda arc (Sumatra-Java-BaliLombok-Sumbawa) and Banda arc for the islands east of Sumbawa. (Fig.1). The basement crust thins eastward, from
approximately 30 km beneath Sumatra to 15 km beneath the Flores Sea (Ben Avraham and Emery, 1973).
Figure 1: Tectonic setting of Sunda Arc, Indonesia (modified after Setijadji, 2005).
Setijadji
Figure 2: Regional geological-structural setting of Sumatra island, including the great Sumatran Fault Zone (SFZ) and the
rate of plate movement along its subduction boundary (Natawidjaja and Triyoso, 2007).
Setijadji
Figure 3: Location of geothermal prospects in Sumatra, based on the map by Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources
2004.
Working in Sumatra geothermal fields must include the anticipation of the presence of several volcanic eruption centers, rather than
a single center, as the influence of faults is very intense. Preliminary information on such different volcanic centers are difficult to
be found from published geological maps since such maps typically have a scale at 1:250,000 in which all Quaternary volcanics are
mapped as single unit. In several cases, the intensive geological mapping program using a volcanic stratigraphy mapping approach
revealed many young volcanic edifices. Different styles of volcanoes are present, such as, monogenic, stratovolcano, caldera, and
composite volcanoes. In general, there are two main styles of Sumatran volcanoes based on their setting relative to the Sumatra
Fault Zone: stratovolcanoes (similar to the Java case) and complex of monogenic volcanoes. Stratovolcanoes are typically located
at a distance of around 10 km to 20 km from the Sumatra Fault Zone, while the monogenic volcanic complexes are typically found
at pull-apart tectonic-volcanic depression settings, located at the proximity of the Sumatra Fault Zone.
Magmatic eruption centers can be present in many ways: from central eruption crater, caldera, to lava dome and dike. For Sumatran
lava domes and dikes, many of them represent themselves as glassy obsidian and its derivative products rather than porphyritic
textures, probably due to the rapid movement of magma extrusion related to the active Sumatra Fault Zone. Acid volcanic rocks
produced by explosive eruptions, especially welded ignimbrite, are also more common in the Sumatran compared to the Java case.
These rocks can cover the majority of survey areas and restrict the observation of underlying rock units.
Hydrothermal systems are believed to be composed of multiple stages rather than a single event. Recognizing how many
hydrothermal systems are present in the survey area is truly challenging. It is the regulation by the Indonesian government that each
geothermal concession area or WKP must be composed of a single geothermal field only. This regulation has forced companies, as
operators of certain geothermal prospect areas, to determine the nature of geothermal system, such as the boundary of reservoir,
from the early stages of exploration. This is very difficult to determine. Companies typically apply MT survey to determine the
boundary of geothermal fields, compared with information on the geochemistry of hot springs. However, they may not be properly
matched with geological information on styles of alteration and thermal manifestations. Several geothermal fields in Sumatra are
located at the proximity with active epithermal gold mines that indicate the presence of overlapping fossil geothermal systems that
are now producing epithermal gold deposits and an active system that is being targeted for geothermal exploration. Even in the
active thermal manifestations, especially those of neutral pH hot springs, it is common to find quartz veins already formed. This
phenomenon should be carefully examined, either active hot spring discharge and quartz veining are coexistent or they come from
4
Setijadji
two overlapping events (i.e. active versus fossil system). Detailed mapping of hydrothermal alteration zones can help in elucidating
the problem. Fossil systems are typically already eroded that may be well represented by the presence of high temperature
secondary minerals. However, since the Sumatra Fault Zone is a very active fault, it is also anticipated that high temperature
secondary minerals can be exposed locally due to faults movement, while the whole alteration system is still an active and largely
not eroded. Detailed and careful field observations, combined with proper laboratory analysis, are required to make solid
conclusion.
Structural geology data, such as joints and faults, are more commonly found in Sumatra geothermal fields compared with the case
of Java. The logical reason is that the Sumatra Fault System is very active such that most of volcanic units, even the historical ones,
may be affected by such structures. The geological mapping program at the initial stage of geothermal exploration surveys should
consider structural geology as important geological data to make preliminary interpretations on the zones of permeability related to
extensional joints and faults. In this case, it is not enough to make structural geology interpretations based on the regional setting of
the Sumatra Fault Zone, as this regional strike-slip fault is in fact highly segmented with at least 20 segments. Most of the principal
segment boundaries are dilational in nature (Sieh and Natawidjaja, 2000) and become the sites of a series of grabens with volcanic
edifices situated within some of them. The slip rates along the fault segments are also different in the south and north. In general it
is interpreted that dextral slip rates increase northward, but not uniformly.
5.3 Complexity in Geohazards Risk
Because of the complexity of volcanic geology, geothermal fields in Sumatra also hold more complex geohazards potential for
future development, compared with Javas case. For example, recent eruptions of the Sinabung volcano, after its dormancy for
more than 400 years, affected the development plan of the nearby Sibayak geothermal field. Ideal geothermal fields to be developed
in Indonesia are considered to be the ones that are located within young volcanoes but do not show historical eruptions. Information
of historical eruptions of Sumatran volcanoes are far from adequate, each geothermal project should collect their own evidence to
evaluate the history of volcanic eruptions in the proximity of the survey area. Some major hydrothermal eruptions are recorded in
the literature, such as the eruption in the Suoh valley, south Sumatra, in the 1930s and 1990s. However, much more are to be found
by direct field surveys. Tephra deposits must be carefully examined, especially if they buried human artifacts, which is an
indication of a historical event. Deposits surrounding the lakes must be examined to clarify the nature of lakes to determine whether
they are sites of recent volcanic eruptions or not.
6. PLAN FOR EFFECTIVE GEOLOGICAL MAPPING
Considering the complexity of the volcanic geology of Sumatran geothermal fields and the requirement to collect precise geological
data to enable proper interpretation from the early stage of geothermal surveys, here are some suggestions that may help improve
the planning and execution of geological field mapping programs. Effective field geological mapping programs, especially at the
early stage of a geothermal survey program, should focus on several main targets. These targets include the distribution of surface
rocks, understanding volcanism history, location of young volcanic eruptive centers, geological structures (faults and fractures), and
the distribution and nature of hydrothermal alterations and thermal manifestations. These data are critical in making proper
geological contributions for early assessments of the potential of the studied geothermal prospect.
Well-designed geological mapping typically consists of three stages of activities: prefield, field work, and postfield work stage that
consists of laboratory analysis and reporting (Figure 4).
Remote Sensing
Pre-Work
Geological Map,
Reports
Landsat/ASTER
DEM/DTM
VNIR
Tentative
Lineament map
Tentative
Geological Map
Tentative
Volcanic Units
Map
SWIR
Tentative Alteration
(Mineralogical) Map
TIR
Tentative Thermal
Anomaly Map
Fieldworks
Structural
mapping
Geological
mapping
Volcanic Facies
mapping
Alteration
mapping
Thermal Manifestation
mapping
Rock
samples
Lab. Analysis
Petrography
XRD
Geological
Structure Map
Data Analysis
and Reporting
Geological Map
Evolution of
Geology
Alteration Map
Geochemical,
Geophysical data
GIS
Database
Conceptual Model of
Geothermal System
Figure 4: Typical workflow of geological mapping program and its contribution for geothermal exploration.
5
Setijadji
6.1 Prefield Stage
The prefield stage is aimed to generate tentative lithological, structural, alteration and thermal anomaly maps that can be used for
efficient field work campaigns. This stage consists of the collection and integration of previous works in the survey area, combined
with the interpretation of remote sensing images. Moreover, this stage must generate more detailed tentative geological maps,
typically at a scale of 1:40,000 to 1:50,000, based on the reinterpretation of the published regional 1:250,000 geological maps.
Additionally, the prefield stage must generate a plan map for the planned field survey tracks and observation points. Since many of
Sumatran geothermal fields are located in remote areas and protected forests, effective field data collection can only be achieved
from good planning on proposed survey tracks and locations of critical observation sites.
Recently, high-resolution digital elevation model (DEM) data have become one of the best sources for prefield studies because they
can be digitally and manually processed and interpreted with regard to lithology and structural geology information. Unfortunately,
in the Indonesian case, for public-domain DEM data, such as topography maps on the scale of 1:50,000, raster ASTER DEM, and
SRTM DEM are not adequate for this purpose. High-resolution DEM data at several meters ground resolution (typically radar) are
needed to construct a base map for appropriate desk studies on lithological units and structural aspects of the study area. For
example, the identification of monogenic volcanic centres (many of them are only several hundreds of meters in diameter) is
needed, as volcanism in Sumatra is not only present as stratovolcanoes but also many monogenic volcanic centres controlled by
structures. An example of the benefit of using high resolution DEM image is shown in Figure 5. Recently, Lidar has been
introduced in Indonesias geothermal projects and this technology seems to have a high potential of being used in geothermal
applications.
Crater lake
Central crater
Figure 5: Comparison of accuracy on volcanic features recognition between high resolution DEM data (left, 5m resolution)
and public-domain SRTM data (right, 30m resolution) at one Sumatran active volcano.
Typically, one can apply several methods of digital processing on original DEM data using GIS software, such as ArcGIS spatial
analysis tools. The purposes of DEM analysis are to identify two main targets: lithological unit interpretation (delineation) and
structural geology analysis through lineament interpretation. Lineaments are an important aspect in interpreting geological
structures using remote sensing digital images. The lineament is the aligned and elongated geometry of an object which is oriented
systematically in a specific direction. Usually, the lineament is interpreted by following river or valley alignments which are
controlled by strong erosion. For this purpose, several derivative thematic images can be generated from the original DEM map
through some spatial analysis, such as:
1. Hillshade analysis, from this process one generates 3D-like images that enhance morphology, especially around steep slopes.
2. Lithological units interpretation, done manually (free hand), which considers the texture, shape and spatial association of
features observable from the hillshade images.
3. Manual lineaments interpretation by free hand delineation following valleys or rivers which have relatively straight patterns
at specific lengths. Tectonic lineaments typically have distinguished features, including a systematic interval and
repetitiveness.
4. If available, a digital lineaments extraction can also be done using some specific software programs. This method of
extraction is good for statistical analysis but it cannot be used for distinguishing tectonic versus nontectonic structures. Hence,
a careful interpretation of the results is required.
5. On the large lineaments dataset generated by the DEM image, statistical analyses can be applied to generate conclusions on the
dominant force (maxima) in the structural data cluster and its spatial direction. It is achieved by making a rose diagram for
strike or bearing data.
The use of multispectral thematic remote sensing images such as Landsat TM, SPOT and ASTER should be treated carefully, as
there are several fundamental restrictions attached. Firstly, there is the fact that the majority of geothermal fields in Sumatra are
located within dense tropical forest that limit the spectral information collected directly from the ground. Secondly, sensors from
several of the most commonly available images, especially Landsat and ASTER, are currently not working properly, so that one
6
Setijadji
needs to carefully select the scenes that are free of sensor errors. With several precautions, thematic mapping sensors can still
provide important information on the studied geothermal fields. It is already proven in some cases, that some remote sensing data
can be utilized to detect the distribution of clay and oxide minerals by a combination of the VNIR and SWIR bands of Landsat TM,
SPOT, and ASTER. Surface thermal anomalies are mainly detected using the night thermal IR ASTER image (Figure 6). On
processing remote sensing images, one typically starts with the initial processing that includes geometric and radiometric
corrections, radiance calibration, dark pixel correction, cloud masking, and land cover classification. Then, mineral groups (i.e. iron
oxide and clay groups) mapping can be done based on suitable band ratios. The resulting mineral group maps, such as kaolin, silicaillite and hematite groups can then displayed as RGB map. After this, surface temperatures are calculated using the digital number
(DN) of TIR bands analyzed with a certain algorithm. Such analysis can be applied on Landsat TIR bands, but in the authors
experience, it is better to derive it from the night TIR ASTER bands.
Figure 6: Hydrothermal alteration map (left, derived from Landsat TM) and surface thermal anomaly map (right, derived
from night TIR band ASTER) at one Sumatran active volcano.
In summary, on the prefield stage, the analysis methods consist of following major steps:
1. Rectification of many images, such as remote sensing images and geological map;
2. Digitizing of geological maps that consist of lithological and structural features;
3. Image processing of satellite images (Landsat, SPOT, and/or ASTER) for thermal and alteration manifestations utilizing
VNIR, SWIR, and TIR bands;
4. DEM/DTM image processing for lithological and geological structures interpretation;
5. Integration of data in GIS for a final interpretation on the lithology, structural geology, hydrothermal alterations, and thermal
manifestations;
6. Generating tentative maps on lithological units, geological structures, hydrothermal alteration zones, thermal anomalies, and
proposed tracts for the field investigation.
6.2 Field Work Stage
During the field work stage, efficient field work should follow the planned tracks and observation points derived from the prefield
stage. On all the observation sites, observations should focus on the different facies of volcanic deposits (coherent versus
fragmental), volcanic stratigraphy of different volcanic units, structural geology, and alteration aspects of different units. Volcanic
rock facies classification can follow the schema by McPhie et al., 1993 (Figure 7).
In each observation point, the appropriate data are collected, which consist of locational information, lithology, structural geology,
and alteration-thermal manifestation aspects. If necessary, certain checklist forms can be prepared to make a standardized input data
list from all observation points.
In selected observation points, rock samples of enough quantities should be collected for further analysis with different purposes.
Fresh rock samples are typically collected for petrography analysis. For lithological unit classification, XRD for analysis on
secondary minerals detection, and selected samples for radiometric dating are used. Meanwhile, hydrothermally altered rocks are
sampled for petrography and XRD analysis for defining hydrothermal alteration styles. Travertine, silica sinter, and silica veins are
also collected for petrography and XRD analysis for the interpretation of the environment of deposition. Charcoal fragments can
also be collected for carbon dating.
As there are many Holocene ash fall deposits in Sumatra that covers the majority of Pleistocene volcanic units, one must observe
the underlying rocks to check if the surface is covered by tephra. In addition, the youngest ash and other volcanic products need to
be mapped to evaluate the current activity of the volcano.
7
Setijadji
Hydrothermal alteration zones in Sumatra are not always related with currently active geothermal systems. Thus, the identification
and study of the nature of alteration zones, including the observation of quartz vein-floats, is required to elucidate which alteration
zones are directly related with an active geothermal system. The results of field checking on altered grounds suggest that, in several
geothermal prospect areas, one can differentiate zones of altered grounds despite the fact that most areas are covered by rain forests.
Furthermore, one can differentiate acid alterations (kaolin-rich), neutral (quartz-illite), and intermediate (iron-oxide) using the
Landsat TM images. ASTER images also has a potential of achieving this, but it is difficult to find free images. Surface temperature
values extracted from the TIR band of Landsat have different distributions from that of ASTER, especially from the night data. It is
evaluated, based on the conceptual model and ground checking of results that, night TIR image of ASTER is more accurate. The
results suggest that remote sensing interpretation can contribute significantly in the early stage of geothermal exploration, despite
the presence of large vegetation coverages in Indonesia.
Structural geology data is typically difficult to interpret at the initial exploration program, but observations on the distribution of
thermal manifestations, dykes and epithermal veins may serve as a good indication of the existence of extensional structures. Field
geological structure data typically consist of field measurements on shear joints, extensional joints, faults planes, and striations.
These data can then be analyzed to determine the styles of geological structures, direction of the compressive field, and the
geological structure history in combination with secondary data derived from DTM interpretation.
Setijadji
3. Integration of all geological data to generate lithological units, structural geology features, interpretation on volcanic history,
and alteration-thermal manifestation styles
4. Integration of geological, geochemical, and geophysical data to develop early an conceptual model of the potential geothermal
system
5. Generating digital GIS database from all data
7. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Sumatran geothermal fields are considered to be more difficult to be explored compared with the Java cases. Thus, good planning
and effective execution of field geological mapping are important for generating a good initial evaluation on the geothermal
development potential at the early stage of exploration. With such complexity, it is considered that the integration of geological,
geochemical, and geophysical data are required to fully understand Sumatran geothermal fields.
Effective field geological mapping program can only be achieved after intensive prefield work to provide tentative lithological,
structural, alteration, thermal anomaly, and planned survey tracks and observation points maps. Field work observation should
focus on the different facies of volcanic deposits, volcanic stratigraphy of different volcanic units, structural geology, alteration and
thermal manifestation aspects of the different units. Hydrothermal alteration zones in Sumatra are not always related with currently
active geothermal system, so that the field identification and laboratory study of the nature of alteration zones is required to
determine which alteration zones are directly related to the active geothermal system. Observations on the distribution of thermal
manifestations, dykes and epithermal veins may serve as a good indication of the existence of extensional and permeable structures.
Ideally, reliable geological information should then be incorporated in the integration with geochemical and geophysical data in
order to better define the system and target the sites of exploration drilling.
REFERENCES
Gasparon, M.: Quaternary Volcanicity, in A. J. Barber, M. J. Crow, and J. M. (eds) Sumatra: Geology, Resources and Tectonic
Evolution, Geological Society London, Memoirs 31, (2005), 120-130.
Gozzard, J.R.: Image Processing of ASTER Multispectral Data, Department of Industry and Resources, Geological Survey of
Western Australia, (2006).
Hamilton, W.B.: Tectonics of the Indonesian Region, Professional Paper 1078, U.S. Geol. Surv., Washington, DC, (1979), 345 p.
Hochstein, M. P. and Sudarman, S.: Geothermal Resources of Sumatra. Geothermics, 22, (1993), 181-200.
Ibrahim, R. F., Fauzi, A., and Suryadarma: The Progress of Geothermal Energy Resources Activities in Indonesia. Proceedings,
World Geothermal Congress 2005, Antalya, Turkey, (2005).
Katili, J. A.: Volcanism and plate tectonics in the Indonesian island arcs, Tectonophysics, 26, (1975), 165-188.
McPhie, J., Doyle, M., and Allen, R.: Volcanic textures : a guide to the interpretation of textures in volcanic rocks. University of
Tasmania, Centre for Ore Deposit and Exploration Studies, (1993), 198 p.
Natawidjaja, D. H. and Triyoso, W.: The Sumatran Fault Zone- From Source to Hazard. Journal of Earthquake and Tsunami, 1,
(2007), 2147.
Neumann van Padang, M.: Indonesia. Catalog of Active Volcanoes of the World and Solfatara Fields, IAVCEI, Rome, 1, (1951), 1271.
Puspito, N. T. and Shimazaki, K.: Mantle Structure and Seismotectonics of the Sunda and Banda Arcs, Tectonophysics, 251,
(1995), 215-228.
Siebert, L. and Simkin, T.: Volcanoes of the World: an Illustrated Catalog of Holocene Volcanoes and their Eruptions. Smithsonian
Institution, Global Volcanism Program Digital Information Series, GVP-3, (http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/), (2002).
Simandjuntak, T.O. and Barber, A.J.: Contrasting Tectonic Styles in the Neogene Orogenic Belts of Indonesia. In Hall, R. and
Blundell, D.J. (Eds.), Tectonic Evolution of Southeast Asia, Geological Society Special Publication, 106, (1996), 185-201.
Tatsumi, Y. and Eggins, S.: Subduction zone magmatism. Blackwell Science, Ann Arbor, (1995), 211 p.
Van Bemellen, R. W.: The Geology of Indonesia, vol. 1A. Martinus Nijhoff, the Hague, (1949), 732 p.
Widiyantoro, S. and van der Hilst, R.: Structure and Evolution of Lithospheric Slab Beneath the Sunda Arc, Indonesia, Science,
271, (1996), 1566-1570.