PTR management have not been at all very helpful with their...

PTR management have not been at all very helpful with their scant information on the flow test. Perhaps they think that if they keep shareholders ignorant they will buy more shares in the SPP? I do suspect that a follow up statement will be forthcoming when the test results have been fully analysed.

The fact that the flow rates ranged between 1 to 6 litres/sec has no commercial relevance. This figure depends on the orifice diameter through which the flow occurred and how far they turned on the valve. The flow was deliberately increased slowly to prevent sudden thermal shock. With the GDY Hab 3 situation we calculated that over that very large casing length the unrestrained thermal expansion would be about four metres. This produces rather large strains. It was one of the contributing factors to the GDY Big Bang. PTR have learned by their experience and are doing things gently.

Even when the flow reached 6 l/s, this was only under the ambient overpressures that existed in the reservoir at the time. In a fully completed circulating two well system the pressure differences and flow rates will be determined by the surface pumps as well as a bonus thermo siphon effect. If the flow rate per well pair has to be increased significantly then additional fractures (alternate fluid paths) have to be stimulated. That will be a later stage project. GDY had a high powered technical committee working on this and came up with a number of solutions. (I discussed these on the GDY board some time ago.)

It is not quite clear to me why they would deplete the reservoir by 1.28M litres unless it is to measure the rate of replenishment by monitoring the pressure build up back towards 'normal' over time. This would give some indication of more distant flows and fractures towards the well neighbourhood.

Marmaduke. In your estimates of power you need to be careful to distinguish between MWthermal and MWelectric. The latter may be only a small fraction (~20%) of the former. It depends on temperature differences and conversion efficiency of heat to electron flow.

Ozwire. You have many very good facts and figures from GDY announcements but you might be a bit premature in proclaiming EGS dead. Multiple fractures is the way to go. Geothermex's independent positive evaluation was spot on and carefully stated for understandable legal liability reasons. No real worries there.

Dicko. I've only just read your last post which is excellent but I'll post this one anyway. All your posts have been superb but I haven't had time to comment. It really is great to hear good sense with hands on.

Juke