A multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development

Abstract

This invention relates to the field of geothermal resource development and evaluation technology, and discloses a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development. The method includes the following steps: obtaining multi-dimensional parameters related to geothermal development, including geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters, and environmental benefit parameters; determining the weights of each dimension parameter and jointly solving the multi-dimensional parameters to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result; and comparing the comprehensive evaluation result with a set threshold to determine the applicability of geothermal development. By establishing a parameter weight evaluation system incorporating the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), entropy method, and Delphi method, compared to a single subjective judgment method, this method can analyze parameter weights from different perspectives, comprehensively considering subjective experience and objective data, making the determined weights of each dimension parameter more scientific and reasonable, and more accurately reflecting the degree of influence of each parameter on the applicability of geothermal development.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of geothermal resource development and evaluation technology, specifically a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development. Background Technology

[0002] In existing geothermal development projects, a key challenge in evaluating development suitability is the difficulty in comprehensively and accurately considering numerous influencing factors. Many traditional evaluation methods tend to focus only on certain geological parameters, such as geothermal reservoir parameters, while neglecting the combined impact of stratigraphic lithology, geological structure, and groundwater occurrence parameters on geothermal development. Furthermore, determining the weights of each influencing factor often relies on single, subjective judgment methods, lacking cross-validation across multiple approaches. This results in unscientific and unreasonable weight determinations, failing to accurately reflect the true extent of each factor's role in actual geothermal development. Consequently, the evaluation of geothermal development suitability is biased, making it difficult to provide a reliable basis for development decisions and potentially leading to wasted development resources or insufficient risk assessment. Summary of the Invention

[0003] To address the shortcomings of existing technologies, this invention provides a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development, thus solving the problems mentioned in the background section.

[0004] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides the following technical solution: a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development, comprising the following steps: Obtain multi-dimensional parameters related to geothermal development, including geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters, and environmental benefit parameters; The weights of each dimension parameter are determined, and the multi-dimensional parameters are jointly solved to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result; The comprehensive evaluation results are compared with the set thresholds to determine the applicability of geothermal development.

[0005] Preferably, the geological condition parameters include stratigraphic lithology parameters, geological structural parameters, geothermal reservoir parameters, and groundwater occurrence parameters; The climate characteristic parameters include annual average temperature, precipitation, sunshine duration, and wind speed. The economic parameters include development cost parameters, operating cost parameters, revenue parameters, and investment return period parameters; The environmental benefit parameters include greenhouse gas emission parameters, ecological impact parameters, water resource protection parameters, and soil protection parameters.

[0006] Preferably, the methods for obtaining the geological condition parameters include: extracting stratigraphic lithology parameters and geological structural parameters through geological survey reports, obtaining geothermal reservoir parameters through geothermal drilling data, and collecting groundwater occurrence parameters through hydrological monitoring data; The methods for obtaining the climate characteristic parameters include: extracting annual average temperature parameters, precipitation parameters, and sunshine duration parameters from historical meteorological station records, and collecting wind speed parameters through wind speed monitoring equipment; The methods for obtaining the economic parameters include: extracting development cost parameters and operating cost parameters from engineering budget documents, determining revenue parameters based on market research data, and calculating investment return period parameters by combining cost and revenue parameters; The methods for obtaining the environmental benefit parameters include: extracting greenhouse gas emission parameters and ecological impact parameters from environmental assessment reports, determining water resource protection parameters based on water resource monitoring data, and obtaining soil protection parameters through soil testing data.

[0007] Preferably, determining the weights of each dimension parameter includes: A parameter weighting evaluation system is established, which includes the analytic hierarchy process, the entropy method, and the Delphi method. The subjective weights of each parameter are calculated using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), and the objective weights of each parameter are calculated using the entropy method. The Delphi method is used to comprehensively adjust the subjective and objective weights to obtain the final weights of each dimension parameter.

[0008] Preferably, the calculation process of the analytic hierarchy process is as follows: geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters and environmental benefit parameters are used as elements of the judgment matrix to construct a parameter judgment matrix. The importance of each parameter is assigned using the 1-9 scaling method. The maximum eigenvalue and the corresponding eigenvector of the matrix are calculated, and the matrix consistency is checked. When the consistency ratio is less than 0.1, the eigenvector is used as the subjective weight of the parameter. The calculation process of the entropy method is as follows: standardize the parameter data, calculate the information entropy value of each parameter, calculate the difference coefficient of each parameter based on the information entropy value, and obtain the objective weight of the parameter after normalizing the difference coefficient.

[0009] Preferably, the joint solution of multi-dimensional parameters includes: The parameters of each dimension are standardized. The standardization process includes normalizing the data by using the maximum standardization method for positive indicators and the minimum standardization method for negative indicators, and then performing dimensionless transformation by the standard deviation standardization method to obtain standardized parameters. The standardized parameters are weighted and summed together. Specifically, the standardized parameters of geological conditions are multiplied by the weights of the geological conditions parameters, the standardized parameters of climate characteristics are multiplied by the weights of the climate characteristics parameters, the standardized parameters of economics are multiplied by the weights of the economic parameters, and the standardized parameters of environmental benefits are multiplied by the weights of the environmental benefits parameters. The products of each parameter are then added together to obtain the comprehensive evaluation result.

[0010] Preferably, the process of determining the set threshold includes: Collect historical evaluation data of geothermal development cases in the region, including data on successful cases and data on failed cases; Statistical analysis is performed on historical evaluation data to calculate the minimum value of the comprehensive evaluation result of successful cases and the maximum value of the comprehensive evaluation result of failed cases. Combined with the requirements of regional development planning, the set thresholds for the applicability of geothermal development are determined. The set thresholds include a suitable development threshold, a relatively suitable development threshold, and an unsuitable development threshold. The suitable development threshold is greater than or equal to 0.7, the relatively suitable development threshold is 0.4-0.7, and the unsuitable development threshold is less than 0.4.

[0011] Preferably, the method for comparing the comprehensive evaluation result with the set threshold is as follows: When the comprehensive evaluation result is greater than or equal to the suitable development threshold, it is determined that geothermal development is suitable; When the comprehensive evaluation results are within the range of the more suitable development threshold, geothermal development is deemed more suitable. When the comprehensive evaluation result is less than the unsuitable development threshold, geothermal development is deemed unsuitable.

[0012] Preferably, the statistical analysis includes data distribution characteristic analysis, extreme value analysis, and mean analysis. Data distribution characteristic analysis determines the distribution pattern of historical evaluation data, extreme value analysis determines the maximum and minimum values ​​of historical evaluation data, and mean analysis determines the average level of historical evaluation data. The regional development plan requirements include ecological protection red line requirements, resource development intensity requirements, and economic development target requirements. When determining the thresholds, if the regional development plan requirements are strict, the lower limit of the appropriate development threshold and the relatively appropriate development threshold should be appropriately increased.

[0013] A multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation system for the applicability of geothermal development includes: The parameter acquisition module is used to acquire multi-dimensional parameters related to geothermal development, including geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters, and environmental benefit parameters. The weight determination module is used to determine the weights of parameters in each dimension. The weight determination module includes a hierarchical analysis unit, an entropy calculation unit, and a Delphi correction unit. The hierarchical analysis unit calculates the subjective weights of each parameter using the hierarchical analysis method. The entropy calculation unit calculates the objective weights of each parameter using the entropy method. The Delphi correction unit uses the Delphi method to comprehensively correct the subjective and objective weights to obtain the final weights of each dimension parameter. The joint solution module is used to jointly solve for multi-dimensional parameters. The joint solution module includes a standardization processing unit and a weighted calculation unit. The standardization processing unit standardizes the parameters of each dimension, and the weighted calculation unit sums the standardized parameters with their corresponding weights to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result. The threshold comparison module is used to compare the comprehensive evaluation results with a set threshold to determine the applicability of geothermal development.

[0014] This invention provides a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development. It has the following beneficial effects: 1. This invention, by listing and acquiring detailed parameters covering geological conditions, climate characteristics, economic parameters, and environmental benefits, including specific parameters such as stratigraphic lithology parameters, average annual temperature parameters, development cost parameters, and greenhouse gas emission parameters, changes the traditional evaluation method that only focuses on some factors. It comprehensively and systematically considers various key factors involved in geothermal development, providing a rich and comprehensive data foundation for subsequent accurate evaluation.

[0015] 2. This invention establishes a parameter weighting evaluation system incorporating the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), entropy method, and Delphi method. First, subjective weights are calculated using the AHP, objective weights are calculated using the entropy method, and then the Delphi method is used for comprehensive correction. This multi-method approach, compared to a single subjective judgment method, allows for analysis of parameter weights from different perspectives, comprehensively considering both subjective experience and objective data. This results in more scientific and reasonable determination of parameter weights across all dimensions, more accurately reflecting the degree of influence of each parameter on the applicability of geothermal development.

[0016] 3. In this invention, when jointly solving for multi-dimensional parameters, standardization processes such as data normalization and dimensionless transformation are employed, followed by weighted summation to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result. This allows different types of parameters to be calculated under a unified standard. Simultaneously, threshold ranges are clearly defined, such as suitable development threshold, relatively suitable development threshold, and unsuitable development threshold, with detailed explanations of the comparison methods. This enables precise comparison between the comprehensive evaluation result and the set thresholds, thereby more accurately determining the applicability of geothermal development. This provides a reliable and accurate basis for development decisions, effectively avoiding resource waste and insufficient risk assessment caused by inaccurate evaluations. Attached Figure Description

[0017] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the method steps of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the system framework of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0018] The technical solution of the present invention will now be clearly and completely described with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are merely some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. All other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art based on the embodiments of the present invention without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0019] Example: Please see the appendix Figures 1-2 This invention provides a multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development, comprising the following steps: Obtain multi-dimensional parameters related to geothermal development, including geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters, and environmental benefit parameters; The weights of each dimension parameter are determined, and the multi-dimensional parameters are jointly solved to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result; The comprehensive evaluation results are compared with the set thresholds to determine the applicability of geothermal development.

[0020] Specifically, geothermal development is influenced by multiple factors, and a single-dimensional parameter cannot fully reflect its feasibility. By systematically integrating four core dimensions—geology, climate, economy, and environment—we first comprehensively collect basic data, then quantify the impact of each parameter using scientific methods, and finally calculate a comprehensive evaluation result using multiple parameters collaboratively. This result is then compared with preset threshold standards to achieve an accurate judgment of the development's suitability. In this process, the selection of multi-dimensional parameters is based on key influencing factors throughout the entire lifecycle of geothermal development; weighting reflects the relative importance of the parameters; joint solving achieves comprehensive parameter quantification; and threshold comparison completes the transformation from quantitative results to qualitative conclusions.

[0021] This approach breaks through the limitations of traditional evaluation methods that rely on a single factor, achieving a comprehensive and multi-dimensional evaluation of the applicability of geothermal development. Through the synergistic analysis of multi-dimensional parameters, it effectively avoids decision-making errors caused by neglecting factors such as climate and environment, providing a scientific basis for the planning, approval, and implementation of geothermal development projects, and improving the success rate and sustainability of development.

[0022] Geological condition parameters include stratigraphic lithology parameters, geological structural parameters, geothermal reservoir parameters, and groundwater occurrence parameters; Climate characteristic parameters include annual average temperature, precipitation, sunshine duration, and wind speed. Economic parameters include development cost parameters, operating cost parameters, revenue parameters, and investment return period parameters; Environmental benefit parameters include greenhouse gas emission parameters, ecological impact parameters, water resource protection parameters, and soil protection parameters.

[0023] Specifically, in terms of geological conditions, strata lithology determines drilling difficulty and engineering stability; geological structure controls the formation and distribution of geothermal resources; geothermal reservoir parameters (such as temperature and permeability) directly relate to the exploitable amount of resources; groundwater occurrence parameters affect water resource balance and geological safety during development; climate characteristic parameters play a role by influencing geothermal utilization efficiency (such as heating demand being related to climate) and the development environment (such as the impact of precipitation on construction); economic parameters measure the economic feasibility of development from an input-output perspective; development costs reflect initial investment, operating costs affect long-term benefits, and revenue and investment return cycles directly determine the economic value of the project; environmental benefit parameters focus on the impact of development on the ecosystem; greenhouse gas emissions reflect low-carbon value; and parameters related to ecological impact, water resources, and soil protection are related to the environmental sustainability of development.

[0024] By refining the classification of parameters, the evaluation index system becomes more targeted and operable. Each sub-parameter corresponds to a specific stage or influencing factor in geothermal development, ensuring that no key information is overlooked during the evaluation process. This provides a clear index framework for subsequent data acquisition, weight calculation, and comprehensive evaluation, thereby improving the accuracy of the evaluation.

[0025] Methods for obtaining geological condition parameters include: extracting stratigraphic lithology parameters and geological structure parameters from geological survey reports, obtaining geothermal reservoir parameters from geothermal drilling data, and collecting groundwater occurrence parameters from hydrological monitoring data; Methods for obtaining climate characteristic parameters include: extracting annual average temperature parameters, precipitation parameters, and sunshine duration parameters from historical meteorological station records, and collecting wind speed parameters through wind speed monitoring equipment; The methods for obtaining economic parameters include: extracting development cost parameters and operating cost parameters from engineering budget documents, determining revenue parameters based on market research data, and calculating investment return period parameters by combining cost and revenue parameters; Methods for obtaining environmental benefit parameters include: extracting greenhouse gas emission parameters and ecological impact parameters from environmental assessment reports, determining water resource protection parameters based on water resource monitoring data, and obtaining soil protection parameters through soil testing data.

[0026] Specifically, different types of parameters have different attributes and data sources, and targeted acquisition methods are key to ensuring the authenticity and accuracy of the data. Geological survey reports are authoritative documents formed through professional geological surveys, reliably providing stratigraphic and structural information; geothermal drilling data comes directly from the exploration of underground thermal reservoirs and is first-hand data on reservoir parameters; hydrological monitoring data, accumulated through long-term monitoring, accurately reflects groundwater conditions. Historical meteorological station records, after standardized observation and organization, reflect long-term climate characteristics; wind speed monitoring equipment can obtain accurate wind speed data in real time. Engineering budget documents are prepared based on industry standards and project design, objectively reflecting cost information; market research data, combined with industry trends and local needs, can reasonably predict returns; the investment return cycle is calculated through the quantitative relationship between costs and benefits, with clear economic logic. Environmental assessment reports are prepared by professional institutions, covering various environmental impact assessments of development; water resources and soil monitoring data are obtained through on-site testing, directly reflecting the status of resource protection.

[0027] Standardized data acquisition channels and methods ensured the reliability and objectivity of the data used in the evaluation. This avoided errors caused by non-standard data sources, laying a solid data foundation for subsequent weight calculations and comprehensive evaluations, and making the evaluation results more credible and persuasive.

[0028] Determining the weights of each dimension parameter includes: Establish a parameter weighting evaluation system, which includes the analytic hierarchy process, entropy method, and Delphi method. The subjective weights of each parameter are calculated using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), and the objective weights of each parameter are calculated using the entropy method. The Delphi method is used to comprehensively adjust the subjective and objective weights to obtain the final weights of each dimension parameter.

[0029] Specifically, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) decomposes the complex problem of determining weights into ordered levels by constructing a hierarchical structure. It constructs a judgment matrix by comparing the importance of parameters pairwise (using the 1-9 scale) and then calculates the weights that reflect subjective perception. The entropy method, based on information theory, determines the weights by analyzing the dispersion of parameter data (information entropy). The more discrete the data, the greater its impact on the evaluation results, and the higher the weight, reflecting the objective characteristics of the data. The Delphi method integrates the opinions of different experts through multiple rounds of expert consultation, comprehensively correcting subjective and objective weights. It absorbs the rationality of subjective experience and integrates the regularity of objective data, ultimately obtaining weight values ​​that are more in line with reality.

[0030] The combination of these three methods avoids the limitations of a single weight determination method. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) reflects the expert's professional knowledge, the entropy method reflects the objective laws of the data, and the Delphi method achieves an organic integration of subjective and objective factors, making the final weights more scientific and practical, and ensuring that each parameter receives a reasonable degree of attention in the comprehensive evaluation.

[0031] The calculation process of the analytic hierarchy process is as follows: geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters and environmental benefit parameters are used as elements of the judgment matrix to construct a parameter judgment matrix. The importance of each parameter is assigned using the 1-9 scaling method. The maximum eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvector of the matrix are calculated, and the matrix consistency is checked. When the consistency ratio is less than 0.1, the eigenvector is used as the subjective weight of the parameter. The calculation process of the entropy method is as follows: standardize the parameter data, calculate the information entropy value of each parameter, calculate the difference coefficient of each parameter based on the information entropy value, and obtain the objective weight of the parameter after normalizing the difference coefficient.

[0032] Specifically, in the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), constructing the judgment matrix is ​​a systematic process of comparing the importance of parameters. The 1-9 scaling method quantifies the relative importance of parameters through a clear numerical range (1 represents equal importance, 9 represents extreme importance). The calculation of the maximum eigenvalue and eigenvector is a mathematical process of transforming matrix information into weights. The consistency test judges the logical consistency of expert judgments by calculating the consistency ratio (CR) (CR < 0.1 indicates reasonable judgment), ensuring the reliability of subjective weights. In the entropy method, standardization eliminates differences in the dimensions and orders of magnitude of parameters (e.g., cost in tens of thousands of yuan, temperature in degrees Celsius), allowing direct comparison of different parameters. The information entropy value reflects the degree of disorder of parameters; the smaller the entropy value, the greater the data difference. The objective weights obtained after normalizing the difference coefficients accurately reflect the distinguishing ability of parameter data.

[0033] The detailed calculation steps ensure the repeatability and verifiability of the weight determination process. The consistency check of the analytic hierarchy process avoids the logical confusion of expert judgment, while the standardization and entropy calculation of the entropy method ensure the scientific nature of the objective weights. The refined operation of these two methods improves the accuracy of both subjective and objective weights, providing high-quality basic data for subsequent modifications to the Delphi method.

[0034] The Delphi method is used to comprehensively adjust the subjective and objective weights, resulting in the final weights for each dimension parameter, including: A review panel composed of experts in the field of geothermal development was selected, and subjective and objective weights, as well as relevant parameter information, were submitted to the review panel. The review panel scored the subjective and objective weights based on their professional knowledge and experience, and provided suggestions for improvement. Based on the scores and revisions from the review panel, the weighted average of subjective and objective weights is calculated, with the weighting coefficients for subjective and objective weights determined by expert opinions. The weighted average is used as the final weight for each dimension parameter. The final weight includes the weight of geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters, and environmental benefit parameters.

[0035] Specifically, the review panel consists of experts in geothermal geology, energy economics, and environmental science to ensure the comprehensiveness of the opinions. Experts analyze the rationality of subjective weights (reflecting experience) and objective weights (reflecting data), and score and adjust the parameters based on their actual impact (e.g., environmental benefit parameters should be given higher weights in areas with fragile ecosystems). The weighting coefficients for subjective and objective weights (e.g., subjective weights account for 40%, and objective weights account for 60%) are determined by experts based on the characteristics of the evaluation scenario to make the comprehensive weights more in line with actual needs. Finally, the weights are clearly defined to correspond to the four dimensions to ensure that the impact of each dimension is quantitatively reflected.

[0036] Jointly solving for multi-dimensional parameters includes: The parameters of each dimension are standardized. The standardization process includes using the maximum standardization method for positive indicators and the minimum standardization method for negative indicators to normalize the data. Then, the standard deviation standardization method is used to perform dimensionless transformation to obtain standardized parameters. The standardized parameters are weighted and summed together. Specifically, the standardized parameters of geological conditions are multiplied by the weights of the geological conditions parameters, the standardized parameters of climate characteristics are multiplied by the weights of the climate characteristics parameters, the standardized parameters of economics are multiplied by the weights of the economic parameters, and the standardized parameters of environmental benefits are multiplied by the weights of the environmental benefits parameters. The products of each parameter are then added together to obtain the comprehensive evaluation result.

[0037] Specifically, the higher the value of positive indicators (such as revenue and geothermal reservoir temperature), the more beneficial it is; maximum standardization method. Convert it to a value between 0 and 1, with the maximum value corresponding to 1; for negative indicators (such as cost and greenhouse gas emissions), the smaller the value, the better, using the minimum value standardization method. Convert it to a value between 0 and 1, with the minimum value corresponding to 1; standard deviation standardization method. ( The mean, The data is further transformed into a standard normal distribution with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1, completely eliminating the influence of dimensions. Weighted summation is performed by multiplying the standardized parameters of each dimension by their corresponding weights and then summing the results, so that the comprehensive evaluation result (e.g., 0.65) can reflect both the absolute level of each parameter and its relative importance, thus achieving the organic integration of multi-dimensional information.

[0038] Standardization resolves the incomparability between different parameters, ensuring the mathematical feasibility of joint solutions; the weighted summation method matches the influence of each parameter with its importance (weight), and the comprehensive evaluation results can fully and objectively reflect the overall applicability of geothermal development.

[0039] The process of determining the threshold includes: Collect historical evaluation data of geothermal development cases in the region, including data on successful and unsuccessful cases; Statistical analysis of historical evaluation data was conducted to calculate the minimum value of the comprehensive evaluation result of successful cases and the maximum value of the comprehensive evaluation result of failed cases. In conjunction with the requirements of regional development planning, the set thresholds for the applicability of geothermal development were determined. The set thresholds include a suitable development threshold, a relatively suitable development threshold, and an unsuitable development threshold. The suitable development threshold is greater than or equal to 0.7, the relatively suitable development threshold is 0.4-0.7, and the unsuitable development threshold is less than 0.4.

[0040] Specifically, the minimum comprehensive evaluation result of historical successful cases (e.g., the lowest value of successful cases in a certain region is 0.7) reflects the minimum standard for successful development, while the maximum value of failed cases (e.g., the highest value of failed cases in a certain region is 0.4) reflects the critical value for development failure. Statistical analysis (e.g., frequency distribution) can verify the rationality of these critical values. Regional development planning requirements (e.g., higher standards are required for ecological protection areas) adjust the range of critical values ​​to make the thresholds more closely match the actual situation of the region. The specific threshold division (0.7, 0.4) is determined based on the distribution characteristics of historical data (e.g., successful cases are mostly concentrated above 0.7, while failed cases are mostly concentrated below 0.4), ensuring the distinguishability of the thresholds. The threshold settings based on historical data and regional planning give the evaluation criteria strong practical guiding significance. Clearly defined threshold ranges (suitable, reasonably suitable, unsuitable) provide a clear quantitative benchmark for judging the applicability of development, avoiding ambiguity in evaluation results and improving the efficiency and accuracy of decision-making.

[0041] The method for comparing the comprehensive evaluation results with the set threshold is as follows: When the comprehensive evaluation result is greater than or equal to the suitable development threshold, it is determined that geothermal development is suitable; When the comprehensive evaluation results are within the range of the more suitable development threshold, geothermal development is deemed more suitable. When the comprehensive evaluation result is less than the unsuitable development threshold, geothermal development is deemed unsuitable.

[0042] Specifically, the suitable development threshold corresponds to areas with excellent overall conditions, where development has a high success rate and low risk; the fairly suitable development threshold corresponds to areas with certain limitations (such as slightly higher costs that can be reduced through technological optimization), requiring targeted improvement measures for development; the unsuitable development threshold corresponds to areas with significant obstacles (such as poor geological conditions or high environmental risks), where development may lead to economic losses or environmental damage. The comparison method, through clearly defined numerical range correspondences, enables an intuitive interpretation of the evaluation results.

[0043] The simple and clear comparison method makes the evaluation conclusions easy to understand and apply. Different applicability conclusions (suitable, relatively suitable, unsuitable) can directly guide development decisions. Suitable areas can be prioritized, relatively suitable areas need to optimize the plan, and unsuitable areas should be postponed or abandoned for development, thus improving the scientific and rational nature of geothermal resource development.

[0044] Statistical analysis includes data distribution characteristic analysis, extreme value analysis, and mean analysis. Data distribution characteristic analysis determines the distribution pattern of historical evaluation data, extreme value analysis determines the maximum and minimum values ​​of historical evaluation data, and mean analysis determines the average level of historical evaluation data. Regional development planning requirements include ecological protection red line requirements, resource development intensity requirements, and economic development target requirements. When determining the thresholds, if the regional development planning requirements are strict, the lower limit of the appropriate development threshold and the relatively appropriate development threshold should be appropriately raised.

[0045] Specifically, statistical analysis provides data support for threshold determination; data distribution characteristic analysis (such as normality test) can determine whether historical data shows a central tendency (e.g., most successful cases are concentrated in the 0.7-0.9 range), ensuring that the threshold division conforms to data patterns; extreme value analysis identifies the boundary values ​​of the data (e.g., maximum and minimum values), providing a reference for the upper and lower limits of the threshold; mean analysis reflects the average level of historical cases (e.g., the mean of successful cases is 0.8), helping to verify the rationality of the threshold. In regional development planning requirements, when ecological protection red lines are strictly enforced (e.g., nature reserves), the appropriate development threshold needs to be increased (e.g., from 0.7 to 0.8) to reduce the impact of development on the ecology; when resource development intensity requirements are high (e.g., energy-deficient areas), the threshold can be appropriately lowered to encourage development; economic development goals require balancing the economic and environmental benefits of development.

[0046] Detailed statistical analysis makes the threshold setting more scientific and objective, while combining it with dynamic adjustments to regional planning enhances the flexibility and adaptability of the evaluation method. Targeted adjustments to the thresholds ensure that the evaluation results align with regional development strategies, achieving a coordinated and unified approach to geothermal resource development, ecological protection, and economic development.

[0047] A multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation system for the applicability of geothermal development includes: The parameter acquisition module is used to acquire multi-dimensional parameters related to geothermal development, including geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters, and environmental benefit parameters. The weight determination module is used to determine the weights of parameters in each dimension. The weight determination module includes a hierarchical analysis unit, an entropy calculation unit, and a Delphi correction unit. The hierarchical analysis unit calculates the subjective weights of each parameter using the hierarchical analysis method. The entropy calculation unit calculates the objective weights of each parameter using the entropy method. The Delphi correction unit uses the Delphi method to comprehensively correct the subjective and objective weights to obtain the final weights of each dimension parameter. The joint solution module is used to jointly solve for multi-dimensional parameters. The joint solution module includes a standardization processing unit and a weighted calculation unit. The standardization processing unit standardizes the parameters of each dimension, and the weighted calculation unit sums the standardized parameters with their corresponding weights to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result. The threshold comparison module is used to compare the comprehensive evaluation results with a set threshold to determine the applicability of geothermal development.

[0048] Specifically, the multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation system for geothermal development suitability achieves a systematic evaluation of geothermal development suitability through the collaborative work of four modules.

[0049] The parameter acquisition module obtains multi-dimensional parameters in four categories—geological conditions, climate characteristics, economic benefits, and environmental benefits—from sources such as geological survey reports, geothermal drilling data, and hydrological monitoring data, providing basic data for evaluation.

[0050] In the weight determination module, the hierarchical analysis unit calculates subjective weights using the hierarchical analysis method, the entropy calculation unit calculates objective weights using the entropy method, and the Delphi correction unit combines expert opinions to comprehensively correct the two weights, thus obtaining the final weights of each dimension parameter, taking into account both subjective experience and objective data.

[0051] In the joint solution module, the standardization processing unit normalizes and dimensionlessly processes the parameters to eliminate parameter differences; the weighted calculation unit sums the standardized parameters with their corresponding weights to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result, thus achieving quantitative integration of multiple parameters.

[0052] The threshold comparison module first determines three categories of development thresholds—suitable, relatively suitable, and unsuitable—based on historical development case data and development plans in the region. Then, it compares the comprehensive evaluation results with the thresholds to clarify the applicability of geothermal development and provide a direct basis for decision-making.

[0053] Although embodiments of the invention have been shown and described, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes, modifications, substitutions and alterations can be made to these embodiments without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention, the scope of which is defined by the appended claims and their equivalents.

Claims

1. A multidimensional comprehensive evaluation method for geothermal development suitability, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Obtain multi-dimensional parameters related to geothermal development, including geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters, and environmental benefit parameters; The weights of each dimension parameter are determined, and the multi-dimensional parameters are jointly solved to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result; The comprehensive evaluation results are compared with the set thresholds to determine the applicability of geothermal development.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein, The geological condition parameters include stratigraphic lithology parameters, geological structural parameters, geothermal reservoir parameters, and groundwater occurrence parameters; The climate characteristic parameters include annual average temperature, precipitation, sunshine duration, and wind speed. The economic parameters include development cost parameters, operating cost parameters, revenue parameters, and investment return period parameters; The environmental benefit parameters include greenhouse gas emission parameters, ecological impact parameters, water resource protection parameters, and soil protection parameters.

3. The method according to claim 2, wherein, The methods for obtaining the geological condition parameters include: extracting stratigraphic lithology parameters and geological structure parameters through geological exploration reports, obtaining geothermal reservoir parameters through geothermal drilling data, and collecting groundwater occurrence parameters through hydrological monitoring data; The methods for obtaining the climate characteristic parameters include: extracting annual average temperature parameters, precipitation parameters, and sunshine duration parameters from historical meteorological station records, and collecting wind speed parameters through wind speed monitoring equipment; The methods for obtaining the economic parameters include: extracting development cost parameters and operating cost parameters from engineering budget documents, determining revenue parameters based on market research data, and calculating investment return period parameters by combining cost and revenue parameters; The methods for obtaining the environmental benefit parameters include: extracting greenhouse gas emission parameters and ecological impact parameters from environmental assessment reports, determining water resource protection parameters based on water resource monitoring data, and obtaining soil protection parameters through soil testing data.

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein, Determining the weights of each dimension parameter includes: A parameter weighting evaluation system is established, which includes the analytic hierarchy process, the entropy method, and the Delphi method. The subjective weights of each parameter are calculated using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), and the objective weights of each parameter are calculated using the entropy method. The Delphi method is used to comprehensively adjust the subjective and objective weights to obtain the final weights of each dimension parameter.

5. The multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development according to claim 4, characterized in that, The calculation process of the analytic hierarchy process is as follows: geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters and environmental benefit parameters are used as elements of the judgment matrix to construct a parameter judgment matrix. The importance of each parameter is assigned using the 1-9 scaling method. The maximum eigenvalue and the corresponding eigenvector of the matrix are calculated, and the matrix consistency is checked. When the consistency ratio is less than 0.1, the eigenvector is used as the subjective weight of the parameter. The calculation process of the entropy method is as follows: standardize the parameter data, calculate the information entropy value of each parameter, calculate the difference coefficient of each parameter based on the information entropy value, and obtain the objective weight of the parameter after normalizing the difference coefficient.

6. The multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development according to claim 1, characterized in that, Jointly solving for multi-dimensional parameters includes: The parameters of each dimension are standardized. The standardization process includes normalizing the data by using the maximum standardization method for positive indicators and the minimum standardization method for negative indicators, and then performing dimensionless transformation by the standard deviation standardization method to obtain standardized parameters. The standardized parameters are weighted and summed together. Specifically, the standardized parameters of geological conditions are multiplied by the weights of the geological conditions parameters, the standardized parameters of climate characteristics are multiplied by the weights of the climate characteristics parameters, the standardized parameters of economics are multiplied by the weights of the economic parameters, and the standardized parameters of environmental benefits are multiplied by the weights of the environmental benefits parameters. The products of each parameter are then added together to obtain the comprehensive evaluation result.

7. The multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development according to claim 6, characterized in that, The process of determining the set threshold includes: Collect historical evaluation data of geothermal development cases in the region, including data on successful cases and data on failed cases; Statistical analysis is performed on historical evaluation data to calculate the minimum value of the comprehensive evaluation result of successful cases and the maximum value of the comprehensive evaluation result of failed cases. Combined with the requirements of regional development planning, the set thresholds for the applicability of geothermal development are determined. The set thresholds include a suitable development threshold, a relatively suitable development threshold, and an unsuitable development threshold. The suitable development threshold is greater than or equal to 0.7, the relatively suitable development threshold is 0.4-0.7, and the unsuitable development threshold is less than 0.

4.

8. The multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method for comparing the comprehensive evaluation result with the set threshold is as follows: When the comprehensive evaluation result is greater than or equal to the suitable development threshold, it is determined that geothermal development is suitable; When the comprehensive evaluation results are within the range of the more suitable development threshold, geothermal development is deemed more suitable. When the comprehensive evaluation result is less than the unsuitable development threshold, geothermal development is deemed unsuitable.

9. The multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for the applicability of geothermal development according to claim 7, characterized in that, The statistical analysis includes data distribution characteristic analysis, extreme value analysis, and mean analysis. Data distribution characteristic analysis determines the distribution pattern of historical evaluation data, extreme value analysis determines the maximum and minimum values ​​of historical evaluation data, and mean analysis determines the average level of historical evaluation data. The regional development plan requirements include ecological protection red line requirements, resource development intensity requirements, and economic development target requirements. When determining the thresholds, if the regional development plan requirements are strict, the lower limit of the appropriate development threshold and the relatively appropriate development threshold should be appropriately increased.

10. A multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation system for geothermal development suitability, based on the multi-dimensional comprehensive evaluation method for geothermal development suitability according to any one of claims 1-9, characterized in that, include: The parameter acquisition module is used to acquire multi-dimensional parameters related to geothermal development, including geological condition parameters, climate characteristic parameters, economic parameters, and environmental benefit parameters. The weight determination module is used to determine the weights of parameters in each dimension. The weight determination module includes a hierarchical analysis unit, an entropy calculation unit, and a Delphi correction unit. The hierarchical analysis unit calculates the subjective weights of each parameter using the hierarchical analysis method. The entropy calculation unit calculates the objective weights of each parameter using the entropy method. The Delphi correction unit uses the Delphi method to comprehensively correct the subjective and objective weights to obtain the final weights of each dimension parameter. The joint solution module is used to jointly solve for multi-dimensional parameters. The joint solution module includes a standardization processing unit and a weighted calculation unit. The standardization processing unit standardizes the parameters of each dimension, and the weighted calculation unit sums the standardized parameters with their corresponding weights to obtain a comprehensive evaluation result. The threshold comparison module is used to compare the comprehensive evaluation results with a set threshold to determine the applicability of geothermal development.

Images