Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016

10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia

Conceptual Model Assessment of a Vapor Core Geothermal System for Exploration; Mt.
Bromo Case Study
Rizal Abiyudo1, Julfi Hadi1, William Cumming2, Luigi Marini3
1
Hitay Energy Holdings, The Plaza Office Tower 41st Floor 10350 Jakarta, Indonesia
2
Cumming Geoscience 4728 Shade Tree Lane Santa Rosa, CA, 95405, USA
3
Consultant in Applied Geochemistry, Via A. Fratti 253, I-55049 Viareggio (LU), Italy
Rizal.Abiyudo@Hitay.sg

Keywords: Vapor Core, Resistivity, MT, Magnetotelluric,
Magmatic, Volcanic Geothermal System, Geothermal
Exploration pitfalls,
ABSTRACT
The next phase of geothermal exploration in Indonesia will
include an increasing focus on exploration targets
associated with relatively young volcanic systems that
commonly have a non-commercial vapor core that
complicates the interpretation of potential commercial
geothermal reservoirs that may be associated with them.
Understanding the conceptual model elements of such
systems is critical to developing commercially successful
exploration and development strategies. Geology, thermal
manifestation geochemistry and magnetotelluric (MT)
surveys conducted by Hitay as part of its geothermal
exploration program at Mt. Bromo suggest that it hosts a
vapor core system. This interpretation is supported by the
gas geochemistry of a summit crater solfatara emitting
gases including magmatic HCl and SO2. The acidic
chloride-sulfate water from the condensation of magmatic
gases mixes with shallow meteoric aquifers perched above
the flanks of the volcano and flows down-dip, creating clay
alteration detected by MT as a relatively shallow
conductive layer following the topography. Because the
clay cap may be unrelated to a conventional convective
geothermal reservoir, and no neutral chloride hot springs
provide definitive evidence for its existence, the exploration
strategy of Mt. Bromo should consider key exploration
pitfall in vapor core conceptual model. Although
geothermal prospects associated with a vapor core will have
different uncertainties for targeting wells or assessing
capacity at the exploration stage than has been the case for
the previously developed geothermal fields in Indonesia,
the conventional conceptual model approach can be
extended to mitigate these risks.
1. INTRODUCTION
Geothermal prospects have been explored for power
development in Indonesia for over 80 years and inventories
of prospects have been prioritized by public and private
entities using geology and fumarole and hot spring
geochemistry for over 30 years. For example, on Java, the
most thoroughly explored island, almost all prospects that
have conventional geochemistry and MT resistivity
indications of a large neutral geothermal reservoir with
temperature over 230C have been drilled. As those targets
that best fit the current geothermal exploration paradigm are
drilled, higher risk geothermal prospects are being explored
to meet the Government of Indonesia target for geothermal
electricity generation. These higher risk targets include
geothermal systems that lack indicative thermal
manifestation geochemistry or geothermal systems
associated with active volcanoes likely to host a vapor core
(Reyes et al., 1993) such as Tangkuban Perahu, Kawah
Ijen, Mt. Bromo, Mt. Galunggung, Arjuno-Welirang and
Mt. Slamet.
The term vapor core was introduced by Reyes et al.
(1993), to describe the Alto Peak system, consisting of a
chimney-like acidic vapor dominated zone with a diameter
of about 1 km and height of 2-3 km, linking deep,
magmatic high-temperature zones to the floor of the crater.
Ramos-Candelaria (1995) has proposed the presence of a
vapor core in the conceptual models of several more
Philippines geothermal fields. As described by these
authors, a system with a vapor core can be identified from
the surface by the presence of HCl and SO2 in fumarolic
gases, 18O shifts in fumarolic steam condensates indicating
mixing with arc-type magmatic water, and presence of
acidic fluids rich in Cl and SO4 and with significant
concentrations of F, Mg, Ca, Al and Fe above the water
table. Although the presence of HCl or SO2 in fumarole
gases is considered to be a reliable indication of a vapor
core system, the absence of these gases in a summit
fumarole does not necessarily guarantee that there is no
underlying vapor core system (Reyes et al., 1993).
Although some commercial geothermal reservoirs are
associated with vapor core systems, like Mt. Apo in the
Philippines and Miravalles in Costa Rica, the initial
geothermal development in Indonesia avoided such
prospects. For example, fumaroles associated with the
developed reservoirs in Indonesia have lacked the HCl and
SO2 gas associated with vapor core systems. For some
geothermal fields like Awibengkok, where the water table
reaches the surface near the field, neutral chloride springs
from the reservoir outflow confirm the existence of a
neutral reservoir with suitable geothermometry (Stimac et
al., 2008). Hochstein and Sudarman (2015) point out that
the chloride-sulfate hot springs on the flanks of volcanoes
hosting vapor-core geothermal systems in Indonesia are
most likely the result of shallow downflows of acidic mixed
condensate and meteoric water that is progressively
neutralized by rock interactions and dilution with
groundwater.
Following a review of typical exploration characteristics of
previously developed geothermal fields in Indonesia, the
challenges of exploring for new geothermal resources
associated with active volcanoes and vapor core systems are
illustrated using the conceptual model developed for the
exploration at the Mt. Bromo prospect in Indonesia (Figure
6). A case history comparison to conceptual models of
vapor core systems in Indonesia and the Philippines
highlights the risks and potential mitigation strategies in the
exploration of these geothermal prospects.

1
Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016
10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia
2. KEY ASPECTS OF CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR
EXPLORATION
Cumming (2016) illustrates the conventional geothermal
exploration process for volcano-hosted geothermal
reservoirs directed at developing a range of resource
conceptual models to support assessments of resource
capacity and well targeting risk. The construction of
conceptual models like Figure 1 for geothermal fields that
have been previously explored and developed in Indonesia
usually initially emphasizes the gas geochemistry of
fumaroles and, if the water table reaches the surface near
the prospect, the gas and water geochemistry of neutral
chloride springs. MT resistivity surveys are then used to
constrain the geometry of the clay cap that, together with
the geochemistry, supports the construction of the isotherm
model used to characterize the buoyant flow of high-
temperature water from upflow to outflow in a manner
consistent with expected resource permeability associated
with fractured reservoir rocks.
Geothermal fields in Indonesia were among the first to be
explored worldwide using conceptual models developed
with constraints provided by gas geochemistry of fumaroles
and MT resistivity to guide the targeting of the high-
temperature upflow and outflow zones. The water table is
likely to be below the surface of the flanks of the arc
volcanoes that host >230C geothermal upflows in
Indonesia (Stelling et al., 2016) and so fumaroles are more
likely to be found close to such upflows than hot springs
are. This has led to an emphasis on the use of fumarole
gases in developing geothermal resource conceptual models
in Indonesia despite the greater interpretation ambiguity
associated with alteration of gases on their path to the
surface, in comparison to cation and anion interpretations of
neutral chloride hot springs.
Fumaroles
In exploitable geothermal prospects hosting neutral-pH
hydrothermal fluids, the gas detected in fumarole samples
indicates benign reservoir conditions with total NCG
below 2 Wt%, CO2 content typically 90-95% of the total
gas, sulfur species virtually only H2S with no SO2 gas, and
no HCl gas. Fumaroles with these characteristics are
commonly found above reservoir boiling zones, with the
pattern of gas geothermometers and relative solubility of
gases providing a rough guide to whether the fumarole is
located over an upflow or outflow.
In contrast, fumaroles associated with vapor core
(magmatic) systems release gases of composition different
from neutral (sometimes called mature or equilibrated)
hydrothermal systems. Total gas content in vapor core
reservoirs is typically higher (often >10%) with significant
concentrations of SO2 and HCl. In Indonesia, sulfur-
depositing solfataras are associated with the crater areas of
active magmatic conduits within likely vapor core zones. In
some cases (e.g., Kawah Ijen, Kawah Putih), acidic crater
lakes are present.
Chloride Hot Springs
Neutral chloride springs are found in Indonesian high-
temperature geothermal systems where an outflow from the
reservoir meets the water table at the surface. The chloride
springs can be used to help constrain not only the reservoir
temperature and chemistry but also the depth of the top of
the liquid reservoir (Cumming, 2016). The lack of chloride
springs in a geothermal system could imply just a deep
water table that emerges a large distance from the resource
or possibly that that the reservoir cap is perfect, allowing no
water leakage. Of course, steam-dominated geothermal
reservoirs like those at Kamojang and Darajat leak only gas
and steam and no chloride water (Grant and Bixley, 2011).
Chloride hot springs are found both over and adjacent to
vapor core systems, but their chemistry significant differs
from the chloride leakage from neutral geothermal
reservoirs. In a vapor core system, the acid-chloride-sulfate
reservoir water is formed by condensation of HCl, H2S and
SO2 in the high gas, low pH environment of the narrow,
sometimes superheated, vapor chimney above the magmatic
intrusion (Reyes et al, 1993). The vapor chimney is isolated
from surrounding aquifers by a low permeability shell
consisting of clay and minerals like anhydrite that
precipitate where the acid-chloride-sulfate water in the
upflow meets surrounding chemically incompatible
formation water types. The shell typically prevents deep
convective circulation of low pH fluid into an extensive
outflow area, but leakage from the cooler top of the system
does support shallow chloride-sulfate outflow to
surrounding springs.
Figure 1: Conceptual Model in liquid dominated system
where the updip clay cap shows buoyancy flow of the hot
water from upflow to outflow under the clay cap
(Cumming, 2016)
Vapor Core vs Neutral Geothermal System
The differences between the typical conceptual elements of
a neutral and a vapor core geothermal system illustrate the
differences in the expected surface manifestations that
affect exploration. In the upflow zone of the generic
distributed-permeability geothermal reservoir shown in
Figure 1, the high-temperature water flows almost vertically
upward by buoyancy. Where the upflow encounters the
impermeable clay cap, it is directed laterally into an outflow
zone where buoyant flow continues updip beneath the clay
cap. In a vapor core system, a low resistivity clay cap also
typically extends over the upflow, although it consists of
clays consistent with acidic conditions such as kaolinite as
well as typical sulfate minerals such as gypsum, jarosite,
and alunite. The clay may also cap a buoyant laterally
neutralizing outflow. A type of clay cap more commonly
and extensively observed at vapor core systems than over
neutral reservoirs is a low-resistivity zone that extends from
far above the water table downdip following the topography
of the volcano flanks (Figure 11). In most cases it is
associated with the advective downflow of sub-boiling
acidic condensates. In some cases they are associated with
2
Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016
10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia
leakage from a summit acidic lake. The vertical column of
magmatic gases released from the degassing magma that
forms the vapor core is commonly located below a summit
crater. Near the surface, steam condensation occurs due to
both conductive heat losses and mixing with cold meteoric
water, absorbing and oxidizing the gases from the vapor
core. The strongly acidic water dissolves local rock and
salinity can be very high. The acid water at <100C can
outflow the flank of the volcano at shallow depth and, as it
is neutralized through interaction with rocks, it forms an
acid alteration zone characterized by the presence of
alunite, kaolinite, and other indicative minerals, primarily
sulfur, opal, and pyrite (Reyes, 1990), whereas smectite
forms upon neutralization of acidity through water-rock
interaction and/or dilution. The resulting clay-rich alteration
zone is usually imaged by MT surveys as a conductive layer
following the local topography. This low-resistivity layer is
often mistaken for a clay cap covering a neutral geothermal
reservoir. On the other hand, it sometimes merges with the
cap over a neutral reservoir, introducing interpretation
ambiguity.
Figure 2: Advection flow (acidic outflows) of Kawah Ijen
and Tangkuban Perahu geothermal prospects interpreted by
Hochstein and Sudarman (2015) that is associated with a
low resistivity layer on the flanks of the volcanic edifice.
Based on the conceptual model supported by the
geochemistry, this low-resistivity layer is unlikely to be
associated with a conventional clay cap over a neutral
geothermal reservoir. (Figure modified from Hochstein and
Sudarman, 2015)
3. VAPOR CORE CONCEPTUAL MODEL MT.
BROMO
The Mt. Bromo geothermal prospect is one of the Java
prospects investigated by Hitay Energy Holdings (through
Hitay Renewable Energy) for geothermal power
development. The Mt. Bromo geothermal prospect is
situated within Bromo-Tengger Caldera about 75 km south-
east of Surabaya, the capital city of East Java Province
(Figure 3).
Figure 3: Location map of Mt. Bromo prospect area
3
The caldera forming eruptions of Bromo-Tengger occurred
0.5-0.45 Ma ago whereas more than half of the edifice
volume was erupted between 0.35-0.2 Ma. Based on
stratigraphy, the last extensive caldera activity is interpreted
by Toshida et al. (2013) to be younger than 0.05 Ma. The
occurrence of the active Bromo edifice, in the center of the
Bromo-Tengger Caldera, implies the presence of a liquid
magma body sustaining this volcanic activity.
An MT survey comprising 352 MT stations was conducted
in 2013-2014 in Bromo-Tengger Caldera (Figure 5) to
constrain the conceptual model of the known magmatic
system and a potential neutral geothermal system
(Christopherson and Cumming, 2014; Daud, 2015).
Because of large gaps in the survey and problems with
cultural noise, the 3D MT inversion is not presented here.
However, 2D inversion tests supported the use of 1D
inversions of the MT TE-mode that were truncated at
depths where they were no longer valid (Cumming and
Mackie, 2010). Although TEM was also acquired at most of
the MT stations, only a minority of the stations acquired
using Phoenix equipment were suitable for constraining MT
static distortion. In any case, static distortion was generally
small enough that an assumed average static shift resulted
in interpretable profiles. Although the resulting MT
resistivity profiles are limited in their depth of resolution,
they adequately constrain the geometry of low resistivity
clay alteration across the Bromo-Tengger edifice.
The geochemistry conceptual model of the Mt. Bromo
geothermal prospect is presented in the schematic West-
East cross section of Figure 4. The high-temperature
magmatic gases released by a magma batch positioned
below the Bromo edifice flow upward along the eruptive
conduits and are discharged though the Bromo crater. This
magmatic gas mixture contains H2O, CO2, SO2, H2S, HCl
and HF, in order of decreasing abundance. The presences of
magmatic gases (i.e., HCl, HF, and SO2) are indicative of a
vapor core and, therefore, indicate the likely presence of
acidic fluids in the underlying system.
Heat loss at the margin and top of the ascending magmatic
gas column causes steam condensation at shallow depth
and, with addition of meteoric water, gases dissolve in the
cooled fluid to form a very acidic water containing H2SO4,
HCl, and HF. The acid chloride-sulfate water flows down in
perched aquifers on a clay alteration zone and contributes to
the generally meteoric recharge of the shallow aquifer
within the Tengger-Bromo caldera. Leakage of mixed acid
chloride-sulfate and meteoric water flows down the flanks
of the Bromo-Tengger edifice.
At Bromo, the acid condensate outflow from the vapor core
is likely to generate a low resistivity clay alteration zone
similar to the smectite-clay cap over a neutral reservoir but
with a different geometry that may be diagnostic. Because
the low resistivity layer at Mt. Bromo follows topography
from high elevation near the summit solfatara down to low
elevation where sulfate springs occur, the current preferred
interpretation is that the clay is more likely to be related to a
vapor core outflow. The presence of sulfate springs at the
edge of the conductive layer on both west and east flanks of
Bromo suggests that the MT low resistivity layer originates
through rock alteration associated with the shallow flow of
acid-sulfate water from the caldera and summit area down
the flanks of the volcano where it is neutralized by rock
interaction and dilution by meteoric water. If these sulfate
springs contained a significant amount of chloride above
the water table (precluding an origin as a liquid outflow
from a neutral chloride reservoir), that would make the
Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016
10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia
vapor core outflow model more definitive. However,
without some positive indication of the existence of a
neutral chloride reservoir, like a neutral chloride spring at
or below the water table, the high likelihood that the main
features of Bromo could be explained by a vapor core
model with a surrounding sulfate outflow.
Conceptual model characteristics similar to those at Bromo
have been detailed at Mt. Alto Peak (Figure 10) and
Tangkuban Perahu (Figure 2) where (1) magmatic gas
absorption into groundwater occurs at high elevations; (2)
water-rock interaction along the flanks of the volcanic
edifice generates a low-temperature (<100 0C) acid
alteration zone characterized by the presence of typical
secondary minerals such as kaolinite, sulfur, natroalunite,
alunite, jarosite, opal, and pyrite; and (3) acid sulfate-
chloride and/or acid-sulfate springs are associated with
advective downward flow. The extension of the analogy
between Alto Peak and Tangkuban Perahu to Mt. Bromo
suggests that the conductive layer of clay alteration on the
flanks of Mt. Bromo is not related to a neutral geothermal
reservoir.
The primary indicators of the existence of a neutral
geothermal system would be fumaroles and hot springs with
indicative geochemistry. The clay cap over a neutral
geothermal reservoir is commonly detected by MT
resistivity on the lower flank of a volcano below the
reservoir water table unless boiling at some point in time
has released gas and increased clay alteration at higher
elevation in the vadose zone. However, if such boiling
occurs, it is very likely that steam and gas-related thermal
manifestations such as fumaroles and altered ground would
indicate its presence. Fumarole gases would lack the SO2
and HCl indications of a vapor core.
Figure 4: SW-NE geochemistry model cross-sections
through the Tengger and Ngadisari calderas showing the
shallow aquifer hosted in the Tengger caldera, the relevant
faults (red lines) and volcanic conduits (brown lines). The
flowpaths of ascending magmatic gases, descending
condensed steam, and groundwater leakages from the
Tengger caldera shallow aquifer are also shown (Marini,
2014)
Another key thermal feature for geothermal conceptual
model construction is the presence and absence of chloride
springs. Chloride springs usually indicate convective lateral
outflow to the margin of a geothermal system below the
flank of an arc volcano. For geothermal development, the
high temperature outflow (productive outflow) is explored
to maximize the geothermal capacity, as at the
Awibengkok, Ulubelu, and Tiwi geothermal fields. The
lack of neutral chloride springs at Mt. Bromo is consistent
with a vapor core geothermal system (Figure 6), although
some models of a neutral reservoir below the flanks of
Bromo, like a steam-dominated system, a tightly sealed
reservoir or a deep water table would also be consistent, but
less likely given the lack of neutral manifestations.
Therefore, the high temperature pattern at Bromo will more
4
likely indicate conductive heating of the low permeability
zone sealing the vapor core within the volcano edifice.
Some models predict that such a system could evolve,
perhaps within 100,000 years (Geothermex, 2016), so that a
commercial geothermal system could be targeted within
Bromos vapor core zone, albeit with caution to avoid relict
acid zones.
The uncertainty of drilling target developed in Mt. Bromo
must effectively weigh this challenge based on a realistic
range of conceptual models. Another acidity uncertainty for
exploration drilling could be posed by the acid condensate
layer of shallow groundwater overlying the reservoir, which
could seriously shorten the life of casing.
4. VAPOR CORE EXPLORATION: CASE STUDIES
IN INDONESIA AND PHILIPPINES
After reviewing vapor core conceptual model case studies
in Indonesia and Philippines, three exploration cases have
been emphasized in the design of the exploration strategy at
Bromo and elsewhere. The vapor core conceptual model
is likely to be assessed mainly using the general geology of
the volcano including its recent eruption history, the
geochemistry and geometry of thermal manifestations, and
the geometry of the MT low resistivity indications of clay
alteration relative to the other characteristics. Three
variations on the conceptual models have been given
particular attention.
Conceptual Model 1: Paired Liquid and Vapor Core
Systems (Mt. Apo)
Mt. Apo geothermal field or known as The Mindanao
Geothermal Production Field (MGPF) is situated in south-
eastern part of the Mindanao Island, Philippines. The field
is associated with Quaternary volcanoes trending N-S in
Central Coldillera (Emoricha et al, 2010). To date, Mt. Apo
geothermal field is supplying a steam capacity of 150
MWe.
This vapor core system is characterized by the occurrence
of the acid vapor core chimney which is isolated from the
neutral mature liquid system by a tight, low permeability
shell of anhydrite alteration that encloses the magmatic
intrusion (Figure 8). The acid magmatic vapor core is
associated with Mt. Apo Solfatara at higher elevation, while
the neutralization system is located at lower elevation
associated with Sandawa, Marbel corridor and Matingao
sectors. Another possible interpretation is that another heat
source is present in the Sandawa collapse sector which
feeds the neutral liquid geothermal system. The occurrence
of benign geothermal system is indicated by the presence of
neutral chloride springs with Cl content 1600-3000 ppm
(Ramos-Candelaria et al, 1995). The occurrence of neutral
chloride springs (as opposed to acid-chloride-sulfate
springs) is a relatively decisive indicator of the presence of
a convective high temperature system. The exploration
strategy for this model is to drill the neutral liquid system
offset from the acid vapor chimney.
Conceptual Model 2: Paired Vapor Dominated and
Vapor Core Systems (Patuha or Karaha-Bodas)
The Patuha and Karaha-Bodas geothermal fields are
situated in West Java, Indonesia, in the same geological
setting as the vapor dominated reservoirs, Kamojang and
and Darajat. Currently, Patuha geothermal field is
generating 55 MWe, while Karaha-Bodas has construction
in progress for a 30 MWe power plant.
Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016
10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia
An aerially large system like Patuha and Karaha-Bodas has
characteristics similar to the paired neutral liquid system
and acid magmatic system at Mt. Apo. The difference is
that the acid magmatic system is paired with a vapor
dominated system with no occurrence of chloride springs.
In this model, Kawah Putih (Patuha) and Kawah Saat
(Telaga Bodas) act as magmatic vapor chimneys which are
separated by a tight, low permeability shell of anhydrite
alteration that encloses the magmatic intrusion from the
deeper benign vapor dominated system that extend along
the reservoir axis (Figure 9). Possibly more than one heat
source, separated by low permeability zone, supports each
of these vapor core systems. The characteristics of these
fields are the occurrence of Cl-SO4 fumarole condensate
water which flows from the acid vapor core downslope
through shallow aquifers to create Cl-SO4 hot springs. High
H2 gas is considered to be characteristic of this type of large
steam dominated system.
The exploration strategy for this model is to drill the neutral
vapor system at a sufficiently large distance from the
magmatic vapor chimney. The acid zone associated with
the acid magmatic vapor chimney could be tested by step
out exploration drilling to figure out the reservoir limit of
the adjacent neural vapor system. As before, the gas and
water geochemistry and the MT imaging of the conductive
cap are very important to build conceptual models and
determine the resource size from the conceptual model.
Based on case studies in Patuha and Karaha-Bodas, the
reservoir margins of these neutral vapor systems are marked
by fumaroles with gas geochemistry indicative of outflow.
Conceptual Model 3: Single Vapor Core Systems (Mt.
Alto Peak)
Alto Peak geothermal field is situated in Leyte Province,
Philippines, parallel to the strike-slip Philippines Fault.
From June 1991 to April 1992, three exploration wells were
drilled to test the conceptual model. The exploration wells
have penetrated a 250-350 0C reservoir with high potential
for acid production. Based on isotopic data, the reservoir
contains 50% of magmatic water (Reyes et al, 1993).
A vapor core system similar to Alto Peak would be
characterized by detecting the occurrence of a single zone
of ascending magmatic vapor. The solfatara and acid
springs in the system would be consistent with ascending
gas from a magma-volcanic system and the hot springs
would be an immature mixture of meteoric water and
chloride-sulfate fumarole condensate (Figure 10).
In this model, exploratory drilling may find neutral water at
lower temperature but, at higher temperature, acid fluids
predominate. Most explored vapor core systems like Alto
Peak have proven to be challenging due to corrosive
reservoir fluid that is not currently commercially producible
(despite experimental production at pH below 4). Because
gas from fumaroles will be ambiguous, the indication of
neutral chloride without the occurrence of neutral chloride
springs, it would be difficult to identify any associated
neutral reservoir and exploration drilling will require step
by step approach to test.
5. CONCLUSION
In arc volcanoes, vapor core systems are distinguished by
the presence of solfatara or the detection of magmatic gases
(i.e., HCl, HF, and SO2) from degassing magma in a
fumarole and a low resistivity layer roughly paralleling
topography that connects the magmatic summit fumarole to
5
springs on the lower flank that typically have a residual
sulfate or sulfate-chloride chemistry from the vapor core.
The strongest indication of an adjacent paired neutral
commercial reservoir would be the emergence of a hot
spring at or just below the water table with mature neutral
chloride chemistry.
Mt. Bromo geothermal prospect is characterized by the
presence of solfatara at high elevation and sulfate springs in
lower flank, with no evidence of neutral chloride springs
near the water table. Based on the occurrence of a solfatara
on the summit of Mt. Bromo and the MT low resistivity
zone that connects the solfatara to the sulfate spring, the
conceptual model at the Mt. Bromo prospect has been
classified as a typical Single vapor core geothermal
system similar to Mt. Alto Peak (Philippines) or Tangkuban
Perahu (Indonesia). If a neutral reservoir is assumed for the
prospect, exploration pitfalls for the conceptual model
include the poor constraints of resource size and targeting
given the risks of acid production too close to the acid
vapor core, low permeability in the anhydrite-dominated
seal and low temperature at the potential reservoir margin.
A strategy to effectively explore for a commercial neutral
geothermal reservoir adjacent to a vapor core system must
mitigate a variety of exploration pitfalls. A low resistivity
clay zone on the flank of a volcano is commonly interpreted
as a potential cap of a neutral geothermal reservoir but, if it
is relatively shallow and extends from a summit solfatara
following topography downhill, it is more likely to be
associated with outflow of acid chloride-sulfate water from
a vapor core system. Acid chloride-sulfate springs on the
lower flank of a recently active volcano are ambiguous;
they could overlie an acid system or they could be shallow
outflow from a vapor core, an issue that the MT resistivity
pattern might clarify. Case histories indicate that a neutral
chloride reservoir adjacent to a vapor core may be capped
by or intermingled with a sulfate-chloride aquifer,
complicating the interpretation of hot springs, many of
which may show an affinity to the sulfate-chloride aquifer,
while crucial information may come from a smaller subset
of springs associated with the neutral chloride reservoir.
Based on cases in Indonesia and Philippines, analogs for
three types of conceptual models for vapor core
geothermal systems have been identified: Paired Neutral
Liquid System and Acid Magmatic Systems (Mt. Apo),
Paired Vapor Dominated and Acid Magmatic Systems
(Patuha and Karaha-Bodas), and Single Vapor Core
Systems (Mt. Alto Peak).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank the management of PT Hitay
Energy Holdings for the permission to publish this paper.
We would also like to acknowledge the contribution of our
colleagues at PT Hitay Energy Holdings in this project.
REFERENCES
Allis, R., Moore, J.N., McCulloch, J., Petty, S., DeRocher,
T.: Karaha-Telaga Bodas, Indonesia: A Partially
Vapor-Dominated Geothermal System, Geothermal
Resources Council 2000, USA. (2000).
Cumming W.: Resource conceptual models of volcano-
hosted geothermal reservoirs for exploration well
targeting and resource capacity assessment:
construction, pitfalls and new challenges.
Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016
10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia

Proceedings Geothermal Resources Council Annual and favorability worldwide. Journal of Volcanology
Meeting 2016. USA. (2016). and Geothermal Research 324, 5772 (2016)

Cumming, W. and Mackie, R.: Resistivity Imaging of
Geothermal Resources Using 1D, 2D and 3D MT
Inversion and TDEM Static Shift Correction
Illustrated by a Glass Mountain Case History,
Proceedings, World Geothermal Congress, (2010).
Christopherson, K., and Cumming, W. Tengger Caldera 1D
MT review, unpublished report for Hitay Energy
Holdings (2014)
Daud, Y., Preliminary Survey Assignment of Mt. Bromo,
Unpublished report for Hitay Energy Holdings (2015)
Emoricha, E.B., Omagbon, J.B., Malate, R.C.M., Three
dimensional numerical modeling of Mindanao
Geothermal Production Field, Philippines, Workshop
on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Stanford
University 1995, California, USA. (1995).
Stimac, J., Nordquist, G., Suminar, A., Sirad-Azwar, L.: An
overview of the Awibengkok geothermal system,
Indonesia. Geothermics 37, pp. 300-331 (2008)
Toshida, K., Takeuchi, S., Furukawa, R., Takada, A.,
Andreastuti, S., Kartadinata, N., Heriwaseso, A.,
Mulyana, R., Nursalim, A., Prambada, O., Wahyudi,
Y., Long-term volcanism around active calderas in
Bali and Tengger-Bromo region, East Java, Sunda arc
International Association of Volcanology and
Chemistry of the Earth's Interior (2013)
Wohletz K., and Heiken, G., 1992, Volcanology and
Geothermal Energy, Berkeley, University of
California Press, ISBN : 0-520- 07914-0

Geothermex Internal Report for Hitay Energy Holdings

(2016), unpublished report for PT Hitay Energy
Holdings

Grant, M.A., and Bixley, P.F., 2011: Geothermal

reservoir engineering Second edition. Academic
Press, Burlington, USA, 359 pp.

Hochstein, M., Sudarman, S.: Indonesian volcanic

geothermal system. Proc. World Geothermal
Congress 2015, Melbourne, Australia. (2015).

Hochstein, M.: Exploration of strato-volcanic geothermal

systems (paradigms). Proceedings 37th New Zealand
Geothermal Workshop, Taupo, New Zealand. (2015).

Hitay Energy Holdings Internal Report, Mt. Bromo

Geothermal Prospect Assessment, unpublished report
for PT. Hitay Energy Holdings (2015).

Layman, E.B., Sumarinda, S.: The Patuha Vapor-

Dominated Resource West Java. Workshop on
Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Stanford
University 2003, California, USA. (2003).

Marini, L., Bromo-Tengger-Semeru Geothermal Prospect,

unpublished report for PT Hitay Energy Holdings
(2014).

Ramos-Candelaria, M., Sanchez, D.R., Salonga, N.D.:

Magmatic contribution to Philippine hydrothermal
systems. Proc. World Geothermal Congress 1995,
Firenze, Italy. (1995).

Reyes, A.,G, Giggenbach, W.F., Saleras, J.R.M., Salonga,

N.D., Vergara, M.C.: Petrology and geochemistry of
Alto Peak, a vapor-cored hydrothermal system, Leyte
province, Philippines, Geochermics 22 (1993)

Reyes, A.,G.: Petrology of Philippine geothermal systems

and the application of alteration mineralogy to their
assessment, Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal
Research 43 (1990)

Stelling, P., Shevenell, L., Hinz, N., Coolbaugh, N.,

Melosh, G., and Cumming, W.: Geothermal systems
in volcanic arcs: Volcanic characteristics and surface
manifestations as indicators of geothermal potential

6
Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016
10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia

Figure 5: MT station distribution and thermal manifestation distribution in Mt. Bromo to identify the reservoir geometry from
resistivity characteristic.

Figure 6: Cross section west to east with 1D MT resistivity inversions of Mt. Bromo geothermal prospect which shows the
advection flow forming conductive layer-like reservoir cap rock from convection system on the volcanic flank. From the case study
in Indonesia and Philippines Mt. Bromo geothermal prospect is classified as conceptual model 3 (single vapor core system)

Figure 7: Cross section north to south with 1D MT resistivity inversions of Mt. Bromo geothermal prospect which shows the
advection flow forming conductive layer-like reservoir cap rock from convection system on the northern volcanic flank of Tengger
caldera and sedimentary deposit in the southern area.
Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016
10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia

Figure 8: Conceptual Model 1, paired liquid and vapor core systems of Mt. Apo, Philippines, the acid vapor core chimney is
isolated from neutral but lower mature liquid system due to tight, low permeability shell of alteration which enclose magmatic
intrusion (modified from Ramos-Candelaria et al, 1995)

Figure 9: Conceptual Model 2, large vapor system of Patuha and Karaha-Bodas, the acid vapor core chimney is isolated from
neutral vapor dominated system due to tight, low permeability shell of alteration which enclose magmatic intrusion (modified from
Allis et al, 1995 and Layman & Sumarinda, 2003)

8
Proceedings The 4th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition 2016
10 - 12 August 2016, Cendrawasih Hall - Jakarta Convention Center, Indonesia

Figure 10: Conceptual Model 3, Single vapor core conceptual model of Mt. Alto Peak Philippines which shows the acid-gas rich
fluid in the core (upflow) zone with neutralization shelf to the margin, the lack of chloride springs in Mt. Alto Peak geothermal
field suggest limited lateral convective outflow (Reyes et al, 1993).

Figure 11: Conductive layer characteristic of vapor core conceptual model where low-resistivity zone that extends from far above
the water table downdip following the topography of the volcano flanks.