0375-6505/92 $5.00 + 0.

00
Pergamon Press Ltd
1993 CNR.

Geothermics, Vol. 21, No. 5/6, pp. 869-880, 1992.

Printed in Great Britain.

GEOTHERMAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

HALLDOR/(d~dVIANNSSON and HREFNA KRISTMANNSDOTI'IR

Orkustofnun, Grensdsvegur 9, IS-108 Reykjavfk, Iceland
Abstract-Geothermal utilization can cause surface disturbances, physical effects
due to fluid withdrawal, noise, thermal effects and emission of chemicals as well
as affect the communities concerned socially and economically. The
environmental impact can be minimized by multiple use of the energy source and
the reinjection of spent fluids. The emission of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere
can be substantially reduced by substituting geothermal energy for fossil fuels as
an industrial energy source wherever possible.

INTRODUCTION
In recent years concern about industrial prospects has shifted somewhat from an
overwhelming emphasis on economic viability to a considerable emphasis on environmental
viability.
One of the consequences is a thorough re-appraisal of the energy sources. In comparison
with most other usable energy sources geothermal energy is favourably placed, although it
is by no means free from causing environmental impact. The most important environmental
changes brought about by geothermal utilization are: surface disturbances, physical effects
due to fluid withdrawal, noise, thermal effects and emission of chemicals. The general effects
have been reviewed by Ellis (1975) and the situation in Iceland by Gudmundsson (1980).
The aim of this paper is to update these reviews, and to consider ways in which
geothermal energy can be used to reduce the harmful impacts of industry upon the
environment.

SURFACE DISTURBANCES
Boreholes and pipelines are probably the most specific signs of geothermal energy
production. The area of activity is relatively small. A drillsite is usually between 200-2500
m 2 in area. In some instances it has been found convenient to drill several wells directionally
from one site, reducing greatly the total surface area needed. The source is normally
exploited near the drillsite and therefore pipelines are short. There are however, exceptions
in cases of space heating and industrial uses where a different exploitation site may be
required and long pipelines needed. Drill rigs and ponds may be prominent features during
869

870

H. Armannsson and H. Kristmannsd6ttir

drilling but disappear after the start of production.

The danger of landslides may place constraints on the placement of wells and other
constructions. The scenery needs attention, since due to their very nature geothermal
manifestations are frequently situated in areas of outstanding natural beauty, maybe of
historical interest and are tourist attractions. Fluid withdrawal may also cause changes in
surface manifestations. Hot springs may disappear, change into fumaroles or the site of
activity move.
All possible surface disturbances should be treated in an environmental impact report prior
to exploitation and optimum solutions devised in co-operation with all concerned i.e. the
local council, landowners, environmental protection agencies, government bodies and the
public.
Untidiness in the vicinity of boreholes, and other constructions can cause unacceptable
eyesores, and inspection of sites should be a feature of a monitoring programme supervised
by an outside agency (the local council, the environment ministry, or some other government
agency).

Distance from plant, km

-5
~0

4
i

3
,

-2
,

1
i

0
1

1
i

4
l

5
i

6
1

7
1

9
I

E
E
-10
-

cO

-20
.m

>
'o

-30

t"

._.1
-40

50

Figure 1.

Land elevation change in the vicinity of the Svartsengi

production area.

PHYSICAL CHANGES DUE TO FLUID WITHDRAWAL

Fluid withdrawal may cause subsidence, lowering of groundwater table, and there are

871

Geothermal Environmental Impact

reports that it or the complementary process of reinjection may induce seismicity.

2000
SELTJARNARNES
Chloride (CI) in piped hot water
~ Well 3
O Well 4
Well 5

I
t
1500

Seawater
mixture

1000

CD

500

...........t...........I...........I...........I...........r...........I...........I...........I...........r...........l...........I...........I...........r........."i
70

7I

Figure 2.

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

8t

82
Year

83

84

Changes in the chloride concentration of water from the

Seltjamames district service.

Subsidence takes place as the fluid mass withdrawn exceeds the natural inflow. Then loose
formations on top of the withdrawal site, especially clays and sediments become compacted.
Examples are found in Wairakei, New Zealand (Thain and Stacey, 1984); Larderello, Italy
(Aust and Sustrac, 1992) and Svartsengi, Iceland. (Eysteinsson et al., 1991, Fig. 1). These
effects are local, but care has to be taken with constructions such as pipelines, and also to
alleviate the formation of ponds or even cracks in the ground. The lowering of the
groundwater table may cause the mixing of fluids between aquifers, and cause difficulties
such as the deterioration of piped water, a danger that has needed watching in the
Seltjarnames area, near Reykjavik (Kristmannsd6ttir, 1983, Fig. 2).
It has been shown in oilfield studies that re-injection of water into active faults may
initiate earthquakes, but that the effect of fluid withdrawal is smaller (Evans, 1966, Raleigh
et al., 1976). Similar observations have been reported for the Geyser geothermal area,
California (Eberhardt-Philips and Oppenheimer, 1984). Such occurrences can mostly be
avoided by a sensible choice of reinjection site.
Thus the effects of fluid withdrawal can to a large extent be overcome by the re-injection
of spent fluids or, in cases where re-injection is unsuitable, injection of different fluids into
the geothermal system as is done in Svartsengi, Iceland (Bj6rnsson and Steingrimsson, 1991).

H. .,~rmannsson and H. Kristmannsd6ttir

872

NOISE
Noise that is specific to geothermal development is drilling noise which rarely exceeds 90
dB and the noise from the discharge of boreholes which may exceed 120 dB, the pain
threshold at 2-4000 Hz. Using cylindrical type silencers the noise can be brought down to
about 85 dB, the noise acceptable to the Icelandic occupational safety authorities for people
working at a 10 m distance from the source. Boreholes discharging dry steam tend to be
more difficult to silence and several designs such as gravel-filled cylinders, have been tried.
Furthermore low frequency sounds that have a soporific effect predominate in the discharge
noise and this is a further reason for recommending ear protection when working near
discharging boreholes.
Thus, even with good designs for noise reduction workers have to be recommended to use
ear protectors both during drilling and discharge tests. Once the plant has started operation
noise mufflers can be made effective enough to keep the environmental noise even below
the 65 dB limit set by the U.S. Geological Survey (D'Alessio and Hartley, 1978).

HEAT
In general the heat efficiency of geothermal utilization is poor, especially in power

TemperotureC
220 ,,,

200 "
STEAM

180 "
POWER PRODUCTION
160 -

1
GENERAL INDUSTRY
(e.g. drying)

140 "
120 "

too 80

"

WATER

6o -

l
'

GREENHOUSES

I'

SPACE
HEATING
~

F'SiFARM'NG

40

SOIL HEATING
"
I
SNOW MELTING

20

"

~'

Figure 3. The utilization of geothermal heat at different temperatures (After Lindal, 1973).

873

Geothermal Environmental Impact

production. A considerable part of the waste heat may be saved by reinjection of the spent
fluids and the evaporation of water is the most economic means of dissipating the spent heat
to the environment. Several methods for optimizing the latter process have been tested, but
sofar without much success.
If excess heat enters the environment via geothermal steam it may affect cloud formation
and even cause changes in the local weather. Where waste water is piped into a stream, a
fiver, a lake or even local ground water it may seriously affect the biology of the local
environment and eventually the whole ecological system.
Such heating has occasionally been put to beneficial use for fish farming.

~[

,>

GASseparation- - -

Energy
production I
Condenser ~

Spaceheating I

Sulphur(icacid)
production /t_~ O

I Car0n0'x'
production

>

>

Steamdrying

~k~__J

~Heat exchanger~ Spaceheating

~'1'

-] Produc~tionof

[ C.emica,s [

. ~ H e a t

[] Water+ steam
O Water
./~ Steam
~GAS

Healj('lbaths
exchanger~-~ Fishfarming[

Re-injectionI

Figure 4. A multi-purpose geothermal plant (After J6nsson, 1988).

One way of reducing heat wastage is the multiple use of the resource. As shown by the
Lfndal diagram (L/ndal, 1973, Fig. 3.) geothermal heat can be used for different processes
at different temperatures. If electricity is being produced down to a temperature of 170C it
is pure waste to throw away steam and water at this temperature. Multiple use can be further
optimized ff saleable products are made by processes designed for the purification of
pollutants. A possible design for an environmentally desirable multi-purpose plant is shown
in Fig. 4 based on a design by J6nsson (1988). Thus with good designs heat waste can be
kept to a minimum either by hot reinjection and water evaporation or by designing multipurpose plants.

874

H. A r m a n n s s o n

and H. Kristmannsd6ttir

CHEMICAL D I S C H A R G E
Chemicals are discharged to the atmosphere via steam and into groundwater systems via
the liquid portion.
Hydrogen sulphide is the major gas that causes the greatest concern due to its unpleasant
smell and toxicity at moderate concentrations. In the U.S.A. the removal of hydrogen
sulphide from geothermal steam is mandatory. Several processes have been employed, and
until recently the Stretford process where the product is pure sulphur has been the most
common. Recently burning resulting in the formation of SO 2 which can be solubilized as
H2SO3 and made into a saleable product as H2SO4, has been found to be a more economic
method (Rogers, 1990). This latter method has been suggested as a stage in the multipurpose plant design (Fig. 4).
Carbon dioxide, which is usually the major constituent of geothermal gas, and methane
have been causing concern because of their role as greenhouse gases. However the carbon
dioxide emission from geothermal plants is small compared to that of fossil fuel plants
(Table 1) and therefore any energy production by fossil fuels that can be replaced by
geothermal energy is environmentally desirable. Geothermal gas is a negligible source

Table 1. Carbon dioxide and sulphur emissions from some power plant types

Plant type

Fossil fuel

Geothermal

Solar

CO2 g/kWh

S g/kWh

Coal

1000

11

Oil

850

11

Gas

550

0.005

Steam (Krafla)

96

Hot dry rock

11

140

<1

"SEGS ''4)
Battery

Hydropower
Nuclear

Reference
I)
1)
1)

2)
3)

1)
3)

1) Electricity International (1991). 2) .~uTnarmsson et al. (1991). 3) Wester et al. (1989). 4) Solar Energy
Generating Systems, based on "Rankine cycle steam turbine system" which employs gas for top loading. 5)
Ministry of Environment (1992)

Geothermal Environmental Impact

875

of methane emission. Minor gases that cause concern, i.e. Hg, Rn, NH3, and B have not been
found in dangerous concentrations in geothermal gas, but need be watched. Atmospheric
separators (silencers) are often inefficient and large quantities of water may be ejected from
them over large areas as spray containing substances such as boron that are deleterious to
plant life and arsenic, and also a high concentration of silica that will be deposited on the
ground.
The main potential pollutants in the liquid effluent are: hydrogen sulphide, arsenic, boron,
mercury and other trace metals (e.g. lead and cadmium). The direct disposal of such water
may be quite hazardous and has been known to cause damage (Axtman, 1975). Furthermore
substances such as As and Hg have accumulated in sediments and organisms.
Although there are some effluent treatment processes in existence these have not been
considered economic for geothermal waste water. Ponding may help, but by far the most
effective method of combatting water pollution is the reinjection of spent fluids.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC EFFECTS

Due to its nature geothermal energy is frequently exploited in remote, sometimes relatively
undisturbed places. A temporary increase in employment and the import of an outside
workforce calling for various services, may put a strain on the traditional way of life and
leave a scar when the construction work is finished. The building of roads will "open up"
the area and most probably make it attractive to tourists thus creating a new industry. All
such effects and solutions to possible problems should be considered in an environmetal
impact report prepared prior to exploitation after discussions with all involved.

PRELIMINARY ACTION AND MONITORING

A fair amount of information on environmental factors in geothermal areas should be
available prior to exploitation. Surface manifestation may change significantly even though
there is no exploitation, as has been observed in the Theistareykir area in N-Iceland
(Torfason, 1992). The biology of the area has to be studied, the ecological situation
established as well as the concenlration of possibly hazardous chemicals in atmosphere and
groundwater. A thorough monitoring programme has to be devised and supervised by an
outside authority. Orkustofnun (The National Energy Authority, Iceland) is now involved in
a co-operative project with the major geothermal energy exploiters in Iceland where detailed
information on the geothermal areas prior to exploitation is collected and compared to the
present situation. At the same time their monitoring programmes are being correlated.
Orkustofnun also monitors some unexploited fields to obtain information on natural changes
in different types of fields.

GEOTHERMAL ALTERNATIVES
Having established that geothermal energy is comparatively harmless, its exploitation can
be considered environmentally viable. The next step is to review its possibilities as an

H. Armannsson and H. Kristmannsd6ttir

876

alternative to existing sources.

One of the most serions threats to the environment at present is the emission of gas to the
atmosphere, both greenhouse and sulphur gases, especially sulphur dioxide that causes soil
acidification. In Table 1 it is demonstrated that CO 2 emission is significantly less from
geothermal than fossil fuel energy plants, and sulphur emission somewhat less than from coal
and oil fired plants. The sulphur gas emitted from geothermal plants is H2S but SO 2 from
fossil fuel plants and the former is not as directly harmful as the latter. Although HzS may
be oxidized to SO 2 there is evidence that H2S is not immediately converted and geothermal
plants can thus be considered as an improvement on fossil fuel plants. In many cases H2S
is removed from the steam effluent at 98-99% efficiency making sulphur emission extremely
small.
Table 2. Carbon dioxide emission to the atmosphere in Iceland 1989 (BJu'nason, pers. comm. , 1991)
Source

Industry type

Specific industry

Fossil fuels

Production

Cement
Aluminium

Ferrosilicon
Other (mainly fish meal)
Total
Transport

Shipping (incl. fishing)

Motoring
Aviation
Total

Domestic and other Space heating

uses
Power production
Other uses
Total

Total
Geothermal

Total

Natural emission
Production
Domestic and other
uses
Total

Salt, diatomite
Power, space heating

CO2 emission CO2 emission

tons]year
% of total
127.233
174.900
281.600
250.433
834.166

4.6
6.4
10.2
9.1
30.3

784.667
545.233
214.133
1.544.033

28.5
19.8
7.8
56.1

77.000
3.667
145.200
225.867

2.8
0.1
5.3
8.2

2.604.065

94.6

93.790
4.100
49.707

3.4
0.2
1.8

147.597

5.4

2.751.662

100.0

An estimate of the carbon dioxide emission to the atmosphere in Iceland in the year 1989
is shown in Table 2. It is apparent that transport is the largest contributor but other industries
are significant too. Of those cement, aluminium, and ferrosilicon production are based on
processes that cannot economically be converted to geothermal heat based ones. The heading
"Other production industries" refers mainly to fishmeal production (--200.000 tons COJyear),

877

Geothermal Environmental Impact

and it has been shown that the process employed can be economically converted from fossil
fuel to geothermal energy (Stef,fmsson, 1983). He found for the Reykjanes area in southwest
Iceland that replacing the existing oil-fired fishmeal factories by a geothermal plant would
be significantly economical and that both oil and geothermal energy were much more
economical for this purpose than hydropower. Vilhj~ilm.~son (1983) found that oil prices
would have to rise significantly if the use of electrode boilers were to become economical.
Steffmsson (1983) found that 60 kg crude oil were required per ton of raw material but the
process has since been improved and the requirement is now 42 kg/ton (S. Arason, pers.
comm. 1992). Using this information and Stef~nsson's assumptions regarding geothermal
steam requirements the respective carbon dioxide and sulphur emissions from fishmeal
factories using oil and geothermal heat as energy sources have been calculated and are
presented in Table 3. The results show that the use of geothermal energy involves
significantly less emission of carbon dioxide and sulphur gases to the atmosphere than the
use of oil, and therefore geothermal energy is in this case environmentally as well as
economically viable.
The main obstacle to industrial exploitation of geothermal energy is that the factories need
be close to harbours. In Iceland there are probably 5 proven areas that are close enough to
harbours to be exploitable in this sense, i.e. Reykjanes, Svartsengi, Krisuvik, Hengill, and
Theistareykir. Three of them are already being otherwise exploited, but Krisuvik with
Straumsvik and Theistareykir with Htisasvik harbours, are worth considering as prospects.
The Hengill and Reykjanes areas are not yet fully exploited and might well be worth
Table 3. Calculated carbon dioxide and sulphur emissions from a trtshmeal factory using information from
S. Arason (pets. comm., 1992) and Stef~tnsson(1983) on energy requirements of different energy sources.
Energy source kg/ton raw
material

CO2 emission
kg/kg energy
source

S emission
kg/kg energy
source

CO2 emission
kg/ton raw
material

S emission
kg/ton raw
material

Crude oil

42

3.1

0.003

130

1.3

Steam

600

0.01

0.0007

0.4

considering too. The main economical and environmental problem is the construction of long
pipelines, and their possible impacts would need be studied very carefully. Their economic
viability would be greatly enchanced if the pipes carded steam for other enterprises as well.
Leifsson (1992) has argued the economic viability of alumina production at Hdsav~
employing steam from the Theistareykir area. A fishmeal factory at Hfisavik only needs a
fraction of that steam making it extremely economical.
It is not the purpose of this paper to forecast the catch of various fish species, but the
estimate of 1 million tons of raw material for fishmeal production referred to in Table 4 are
based on statistics for 1985 -1990. The mean capelin catch for these years was 830.00 tons
(The National Economy Institute, 1991) and reports on the fishmeal production for the same
period show that a little over 20% of the production was from other raw material (01afsson,
1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992) making the total raw material well over 1 million tons.

878

H. Armannsson and H. Kristmannsd6ttir

Table 4. CO2 from alumina and fishmeal plants and reduction following reduced cod catch (B. Lindal, S.H,
Hjartarson, pers. comms., Stefhnsson, 1983).
Cause of emission or reduction

Energy source

CO2 tons/year

Alumina factory (Production 1 million tons/year)

Alumina factory (Production 1 million tons/year)
Reduction due to reduced cod catch (28%, 13% oil)
Fishmeal production (ca. 1 million tons raw material)
Fishrneal production (ca. 1 million tons raw material)

Coal
Geothermal
Oil
Oil
Geothermal

1.200.000
200.000
100.000
130.000
6.000

It can be inferred from Table 4 that a geothermal alumina plant replacing a coal fired one
would significantly improve global CO 2 emission, and that the combined use of geothermal
steam for fishmeal and alumina production in Iceland replacing the planned 28% reduction
in cod catch as a source of income would actually involve a reduction in carbon dioxide
emission.

CONCLUSIONS
Geothermal energy is a relatively clean energy source. The possible environmental impacts
from its exploitation are related to surface disturbances, physical effects due to fluid
withdrawal, heat effects and emission of chemicals. All these can be foreseen to a large
extent, measures taken to minimize their effects prior to exploitation, and unforeseen impacts
can be kept at bay by monitoring programmes.
It is often possible to replace the burning of fossil fuels by the use of geothermal energy
which is environmentally desirable due to reduced gas emissions to the atmosphere. Thus if
geothermal energy were to replace the burning of oil in fishmeal production, an important
reduction in CO2 and S emission would be obtained.
The most important ways of minimizing the environmental impact is effective usage of
the energy, e.g. by constructing multi-purpose plants, and by the reinjection of effluent.

REFERENCES
Armannsson, H., Eliasson, E.T and Th6rhallsson, S. (1991) The most important environmental effects of
geothermal exploitation (in Icelandic). Orkustofnun. Annual General Meeting Report, pp. 15-43.
Aust, H. and Sustrac, G. (1992) Impact of development on the geological environment. Chapter 5 in
Lumsden, G.I. (Chief editor) Geology and the environment in Western Europe. Oxford University Press,
Oxford, pp. 202-280.
Axtman, R.C. (1975). Environmental impact of a geothermal power plant. Science, 187, pp. 795-803.
Bjtimsson, G. and Steingrimsson, B. (1991) Temperature and pressure in the Svartsengi geothermal system.
Initial state and changes due to production (in Icelandic). Orkustofnun, OS-91016/JHD-04, 69 p.

Geothermal Environmental Impact

879

D'Alessio, G.J. and Hartley, R (1978) EPA pollution control guidance for the geothermal industry.
Geothermal Res. Council Trans. 2, pp. 133-136.
Eberhardt-Philips, D. and Oppenheimer, D.H (1984) Induced seismicity in the Geysers geothermal area,
California. J. Geophys. Res. 89, pp. 191-207.
Electricity International (1991) Power generation. Solar power success. Electricity Int., 3 , pp. 42-44.

Ellis, A.J. (1975) Environmental impact of geothermal utilization. Report prepared for the United Nations
Environment Programme. UNEP, 62 p.
Evans, D. (1966) The Denver area earthquakes and the Rocky Mountain Arsenal disposal well. Mountain
Geologist, pp. 23-26.
Eysteinsson, H., Thorbergsson, G. and F16venz, 6.G. (1991) Levelling and gravity measurements in
Svartsengi and Reykjanes. Orkastofiaun. Report HE-GTh-OGF-91/O1, 10 p.
Gudmundsson, J.S. (1980) Environmental aspects of geothermal energy production and
utilization (In Icelandic with English summary). Ndttdrufrcedingurinn, 50, pp. 294-308.
J6nsson, V.K. (1988) The multiple use of geothermal heat (in Icelandic). In Innovations in the utilization
of geothermal energy. University of Iceland, Institute for continuing education, Workshop; Gudmundsson
J.S. & J6nsson, V.K. (Editors). Orkustofnun Report OS-88066/JHD-13, pp. 77-104.
Krisunannsd6ttir, H. (1983) Changes in the chemical composition of geothermal water in Seltjamames over
the period 1970-1983 (in Icelandic). Orkustofnun Report OS-83106/JHD-19, 27 p.
Leifsson, /~. (1992) The industrial use of the high temperature geothermal field at Theistareykir.
Theistareykir. Geothermics, 21 (this issue).
Lindal, B. (1973) In Industrial and other applicants of geothermal energy, H.C.H. Armstead (Editor).
UNESCO, Paris, pp. 135-148.
Ministry of Environment (1991) The emission of greenhouse gases in Iceland in 1990. Report of the ministry
of Environment's Committee of Experts, 95 p.
61afsson, J. (1987) The fishmeal production 1986 (in Icelandic)./Egir, 80, 200-201.
61afsson, J. (1988) The flshrneal production 1987 (in Icelandic)./Egir, 81, pp. 129-131.
61afsson, J. (1989) The fishmeal production 1988 (in Icelandic)./Egir, 82, pp. 118-119.
61afsson, J. (1990) The fishmeal and fish oil production and 1989 (in Icelandic)./Egir, 83, pp. 120-122.
61afsson, J. (1991) The fishmeal and fish oil production 1990 (in Icelandic)./Egir, 84, pp. 124-126.
61afsson, J. (1992) The fishmeal and fish oil production 1991 (in Icelandic). digit, 85, pp. 124-125.
Raleigh, C.B., Healey, J.H. & Broedehoeft, J.D. (1976). An experiment in earthquake control at Rangeley,
Colorado. Science, 191, pp. 1230-1237.

880

H. A r m a n n s s o n and H. Kr&tmannsd6ttir

Rogers, M. (1990). Operating and maintenance experience with dry steam power plants. Presymposium
course No. 1. Geothermal energy conversion technology and power plant experience. Geoth. Resou. C,
Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, 10 p.
Stef~asson, S.0. (1983) The use of geothermal heat in a fmb_mealfactory (in Icelandic). In Proc. Conf. on
Energy use and energy saving in the fishmeal industry. 28-2911 1983, pp. 75-90.
Thain, I.A. and Stacey, R.E. (1984) Wairakei geothermal power stations. 25 years' operation. Electricity
Division, Ministry of Energy, New Zealand, Report, 14 p.
The National Economy Institute (1991) Thefishing industry 1988 - 1989. The National Economy Institute
Report on Industrial Statitics No. 42, 207 p.
Torfason, H. (1992) The nature of high temperature geothermal areas: observations at Theistareykir 1991
(In Icelandic). Orkustofnun Report HeTo-92/02, 2 p.
Vilhjflrnsson, J. (1983) The use of electrode boilers in fishmeal factories (in Icelandic). In Proc. Conf. on
Energy use and energy saving in the fishmeal industry. 28-29/1 1983, pp. 91-102.
Wester, J.W., Brown, D.W. & Potter, R.M. (1989) Hot dry rock geothermal energy: A new energy agenda
for the 21. century. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos.