This web service delivers data from an aggregation of sources, including several Geoscience Australia databases (provinces (PROVS), mineral resources (OZMIN), energy systems (AERA, ENERGY_SYSTEMS) and water (HYDROGEOLOGY). Information is grouped based on a modified version of the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2021 Indigenous Regions (IREG). Data covers population centres, top industries, a regional summary, groundwater resources and uses, energy production and potential across six sources and two energy storage options. Mineral production and potential covers 36 commodities that are grouped into 13 groups.

This web service delivers data from an aggregation of sources, including several Geoscience Australia databases (provinces (PROVS), mineral resources (OZMIN), energy systems (AERA, ENERGY_SYSTEMS) and water (HYDROGEOLOGY). Information is grouped based on a modified version of the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2021 Indigenous Regions (IREG). Data covers population centres, top industries, a regional summary, groundwater resources and uses, energy production and potential across six sources and two energy storage options. Mineral production and potential covers 36 commodities that are grouped into 13 groups.

This web service delivers datasets produced by the Critical Minerals Mapping Initiative (CMMI), a collaboration between Geoscience Australia (GA), the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Data in this service includes geochemical analyses of over 7000 samples collected from or near mineral deposits from 60 countries, and mineral prospectivity models for clastic-dominated (Zn, Pb) and Mississippi Valley-type (Zn-Pb) deposits across Canada, the United States, and Australia.

This web map service is a key output from the integrated, basin-scale hydrogeological assessment of South Nicholson-Georgina as part of Geoscience Australia’s National Groundwater Systems project in the Exploring for the Future program. This comprehensive desktop study has integrated numerous geoscience and hydrogeological datasets to develop a new whole-of-basin conceptualisation of groundwater flow systems and recharge and discharge processes within the regional unconfined aquifers of the Georgina Basin.

The Geothermal Resource Portfolio Optimization and Reporting Technique (GeoRePORT) was developed with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office to assist in identifying and pursuing long-term investment strategies through the development of a resource reporting protocol. GeoRePORT provides scientists and nonscientists a comprehensive and quantitative means of reporting: (1) features intrinsic to geothermal sites (project grade) and (2) maturity of the development (project readiness). Because geothermal feasibility is not determined by any single factor (e.g., temperature, permeability, permitting), a site?s project grade and readiness are evaluated on 12 attributes pertaining to geological, technical, or socio-economic feasibility. In this paper, we present case studies showing how GeoRePORT can be used to compare geological, technical, and socio-economic attributes between geothermal systems. The consistent and objective assessment protocols used in GeoRePORT allow for comparison of project attributes across unique locations and geological settings. GeoRePORT case studies presented here outline the geological, socio-economic, and technical features of four individual geothermal sites: Coso, Chena, Dixie Valley, and White Sands Missile Range. The case studies illustrate the usefulness of GeoRePORT in evaluating project risk and return, identifying gaps in reported data, evaluating R&D impact, and gathering insights on successes and failures as applicable to future projects.

The Geothermal Resource Portfolio Optimization and Reporting Technique (GeoRePORT) was developed with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office to assist in identifying and pursuing long-term investment strategies through the development of a resource reporting protocol. GeoRePORT provides scientists and nonscientists a comprehensive and quantitative means of reporting: (1) features intrinsic to geothermal sites (project grade) and (2) maturity of the development (project readiness). Because geothermal feasibility is not determined by any single factor (e.g., temperature, permeability, permitting), a site?s project grade and readiness are evaluated on 12 attributes pertaining to geological, technical, or socio-economic feasibility. In this paper, we present case studies showing how GeoRePORT can be used to compare geological, technical, and socio-economic attributes between geothermal systems. The consistent and objective assessment protocols used in GeoRePORT allow for comparison of project attributes across unique locations and geological settings. GeoRePORT case studies presented here outline the geological, socio-economic, and technical features of four individual geothermal sites: Coso, Chena, Dixie Valley, and White Sands Missile Range. The case studies illustrate the usefulness of GeoRePORT in evaluating project risk and return, identifying gaps in reported data, evaluating R&D impact, and gathering insights on successes and failures as applicable to future projects.