This shapefile contains location and attribute data for a Geoprobe temperature survey conducted by Geothermal Technical Partners, Inc. during 2010. The purpose of direct push technology (DPT) probe activity at the McGee Mtn. Project, Nevada was to 1) determine bottom hole temperatures using nominal 1.5 inch probe tooling to place resistance temperature detectors (RTD) and 2) take water samples, if possible, to characterize the geothermometry of the system. A total of 23 holes were probed in five days for a cumulative total of 857.5 ft. at 21 sites at McGee Mountain. The probed holes ranged in depth from a maximum of 75 ft to a minimum of 10 ft and averaged 37.3 ft. The average temperature of the 23 holes was 18.9 degrees C, with a range of 12.0 degrees C at site MMTG#1b to 42.0 degrees C at site MMTG#19. . No water was encountered in any of the probed holes, with the exception of MMTG#10, and no water was collected for sampling. Zip file containing Arcview shapefile in UTM11 NAD83 projection. 5 kb file size.

The McGee Mountain geothermal area was selected to test early-stage shallow temperature survey techniques and drill two slim holes to test the resource. Geothermal Technical Partners, Inc. was able to complete only a small portion of the project before lack of funding prevented further exploration work. This work included a shallow (2-meter) temperature survey, a Geoprobe survey, a close-spaced gravity survey, and several reports on geologic and transmission viability. The 18-page report includes a description of the geothermal geology of the area, geochemistry and geothermometry of nearby springs and wells, and findings from the shallow temperature survey, Geoprobe survey, close-spaced gravity survey, heat-in-place estimate, transmission viability, and an archeological survey. The report makes the following conclusions: Both the shallow 2-meter and the Geoprobe surveys are cost-effective methods to detect subsurface thermal anomalies in early-stage exploration, prior to more expensive temperature gradient drilling. The major advantages of the 2-meter survey are its extreme portability (no roads needed), cost per site measurement, and low environmental impact. The 2-meter survey's disadvantages are its inability to penetrate hard substrates and the noise effects due to solar heating of the ground. The Geoprobe's advantages are its ability to collect temperature and uncontaminated water samples, greater depth of penetration (to 60m), relatively low cost, and low environmental impact. The Geoprobe's disadvantages are its inability to go off-road or to penetrate hard substrates. Costs to perform both types of surveys are low, together less than the cost of one conventional temperature gradient well. Given the potential increase in data that these surveys can provide, this is extreme value for the exploration dollar.

This shapefile contains location and attribute data for a shallow (2 meter) temperature survey conducted by Geothermal Technical Partners, Inc. during late 2008 and early 2009. Temperatures at 2m depth were measured at 192 separate points as outlined by Coolbaugh et al., 2007. The purpose of the survey was to try and detect a shallow thermal anomaly associated with the McGee Mountain geothermal area as discovered by Phillips Petroleum and Earth Power Resources in the late 1970s. Drilling identified ~120 degree C temperatures at ~100m depth. This 2-meter survey delineated what was interpreted as a steam-heated fault zone centered along a range front fault in the vicinity of the drilled holes and fumaroles. Coolbaugh, M.F., Sladek, C., Faulds, J.E., Zehner, R.E., and Oppliger, G.L., 2007, Use of rapid temperature measurements at a 2-meter depth to augment deeper temperature gradient drilling: Proceedings, 32nd Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, Jan. 22-24, 2007, p. 109-116. Zehner, R., Tullar, K., and Rutledge, E., 2012, Effectiveness of 2-Meter and geoprobe shallow temperature surveys in early stage geothermal exploration: Geothermal Resources Council Transactions, v. 36, in press.

This report describes the geothermal resource at McGee Mountain, including: 1. Local geology 2. Thermal features 3. Known boreholes and temperature gradients 4. Geophysical surveys 5. Fluid geochemistry and geothermometry 6. Estimate of the heat-in-place Description of the heat-in-place estimate: The magnitude of the geothermal resource at McGee Mountain (Painted Hills) has been estimated using a Monte Carlo method applied to estimating heat-in-place. The method relies (along with certain other parameters) on estimates of the area, thickness and average temperature of the resource, but among these, only area has some constraint at this time. Therefore, the estimates used for thickness and temperature have been based on the characteristics of other geothermal resources in Nevada. Results yield a 90%-probable ("P90") thermal energy-in-place estimate of 87,300 MWth-years (that is, 90% of estimates are higher). We consider this to be a minimum likely value. At 50% probability ("P50") the estimate is 134,000 MWth-years. The recoverable portion of the preceding estimate of energy-in-place has also been estimated and converted into electrical energy, using values of recovery factor, rejection temperature, utilization factor, plant capacity factor and power plant life that are provided. The minimum (90% probable) estimate for generation potential is about 25 MWe for 30 years (or a total of 750 MWe-years) and at 50% probability the estimate is 52 MWe for 30 years (or a total of 1,560 MWe-years). These estimates are somewhat larger than a public-domain McGee resource estimate made by GeothermEx in 2004, because a 2-m deep temperature survey by Caldera has established continuance of the thermal anomaly about a half mile further north than previously documented. This resource estimate was made without reference to the Caldera property (project area) boundary, but it is likely that the entire magnitude of estimated resource lies within it. The estimate should be regarded with caution because there needs to be subsequent proof of area, thickness, temperature and commercial permeability by means of deep drilling and testing. No heat-in-place estimate of this type should ever be used to determine the final, installed size of a well field and power plant.