ARTICLE IN PRESS

G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9

Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geothermics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geothermics

Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld

Suryadarma a , Tavip Dwikorianto a , Agus A. Zuhro b, , A. Yani b
a
PT Pertamina Geothermal Energy, Jakarta, Indonesia
b
PT Pertamina Geothermal Energy, Kamojang, Indonesia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Geothermal electricity production in Indonesia began with the operation of a 0.25 MWe pilot project in
Received 20 September 2009 Kamojang geothermal eld, in 1978. Commercial operation started in 1983, with the commissioning of
Accepted 10 September 2010 the 30 MWe Unit-1 power plant. In 1987, an additional capacity of 110 MWe was provided by the Unit-2
Available online xxx
and Unit-3 power plants. The addition of the 60 MWe Unit-4 power plant in 2008 increased the total gen-
erating capacity to 200 MWe . The 27 years of commercial operation have led to a slight decline in reservoir
Keywords:
pressure and temperature within the active production sector. The most recent signicant change in the
Geothermal
eld conditions and performance occurred following the 2008 increase in generating capacity from 140
Kamojang
Sustainable development
to 200 MWe. The production decline of individual wells has been relatively low, at an average of 3%/yr.
Reservoir modeling However, the increased rate of steam withdrawal might negatively affect long-term sustainability of
Injection energy production at Kamojang unless suitable eld management strategies are implemented. In order
to stabilize the steam ow, it has been necessary to drill about three make-up wells every 23 years. The
unbalanced mass extraction, where less than 30% of the produced steam mass can be injected, is a seri-
ous concern for long-term reservoir management in Kamojang. The eld operator (Pertamina) plans to
increase the Kamojang generating capacity from 200 to 230 MWe (Unit 5) and optimize the long-term per-
formance of the Kamojang geothermal resource. The response of the reservoir during the previous three
decades is being used to guide reservoir development for the planned increase in production capacity.
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The Kamojang geothermal eld is one of only a few dry steam
reservoirs in the world which have been developed for energy pro-
duction. It is located in the volcanic terrain of west Java (Indonesia),
1500 m above sea level (m a.s.l.) and about 40 km southeast of Ban-
dung (Fig. 1).
The exploration in Kamojang began under a New Zealand gov-
ernment aid program in 1974. At that time, ve exploration wells
were drilled to 700 m depth in the Kamojang area. Pertamina con-
tinued well drilling from 1975 onwards and installed the 30 MWe
Unit-1 power plant utilizing steam from six wells.
Commercial operations in Kamojang expanded from 30 to
140 MWe generating capacity in 1987, with steam supplied by 26
wells. To date, 81 wells have been drilled in the Kamojang geother-
mal area (Fig. 2). The steam eld is operated by the state-owned oil
company, PT. Pertamina Geothermal Energy (PGE), and the Units
1, 2, and 3 power plants belong to PT. Indonesia Powers (IP). Cur-
rently, the Kamojang generating capacity is 200 MWe, which is a
Corresponding author. Tel.: +62 22 7806882; fax: +62 22 7806379.
E-mail addresses: aazuhro@pgeindonesia.com,
aazuhro@pertamina.com (A.A. Zuhro).
result of the addition in 2008 of the Unit-4 60 MWe capacity power
plant owned by PT.PGE.
This paper presents the main lessons learned from 27 years of
operation of the Kamojang steam eld. It discusses the integra-
tion of all aspects of reservoir performance and future plans for
continued sustainable development.
2. Geological background and potential reserves
2.1. Structural elements
The Kamojang geothermal eld is associated with a Quaternary
andesitic stratovolcano. The geological structures, which have been
identied through eld studies include a volcanic collapse structure
which formed a crater with manifest horsts and grabens associated
with normal faults. Some of the faults, such as those associated with
the caldera rim control the permeability in the reservoir (Kamah et
al., 2005).
Fractures associated with normal faulting are the main contrib-
utor to the permeability of the Kamojang geothermal reservoir.
Based on mineralogical studies, a part of the structure has been
sealed by secondary mineral deposition, which was later sub-
jected to reopening events driven by either steam pressure or
tectonic activity that induced secondary vertical permeability. Min-

0375-6505/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006

Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9
2 Suryadarma et al. / Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx
Fig. 1. Map showing the location of the Kamojang geothermal eld, West Java,
Indonesia. Map prepared by Peter Loud.
Fig. 2. Map of the Kamojang eld showing the 14 km2 proven reserves area, 21 km2
probable reserves area, and the development area for Unit 5 (an additional 7 km2 ).
eralogical studies also indicate the possibility that the system has
evolved from a liquid- to a vapour-dominated state. Sudarman et
al. (2000) and Suryadarma et al. (2005) have presented the Kamo-
jang reservoir permeability (k) distribution shown in Fig. 3. The
permeability can be grouped into three categories; a high k-zone
Fig. 3. Permeability structure of the Kamojang reservoir constructed from surface
geo-electrical data, borehole data, and production data.
Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
(3080 Dm), a moderate k-zone (1030 Dm), and a low k-zone
(210 Dm).
Steam production in Kamojang is obtained from fractured
andesites, with its top at +900 m above sea level (m a.s.l.) in the
northeast part of the proven area, sloping gently to the west and
south, and dropping sharply in the extreme south to about +200 m
a.s.l. (Sanyal et al., 2000).
2.2. Potential reserves
According to several previous studies on Kamojang, the most
likely power potential is between 180 and 250 MWe for 25 years of
operation (Suryadarma et al., 2005). This is supported by the results
of drilling wells and operational data extending over a period of
27 years. Currently the eld generates 200 MWe . The most recent
reservoir simulation studies (Enjinering Kamojang and ITB, 2009)
predict that Kamojang has probable potential reserves of about
230 MWe for the next 25 years (starting in 2012). The probable
potential reserves have been delineated on the basis of recent geo-
physical surveys which include gravity (in 1999) and MT (in 2009).
This forecast is to be further substantiated by drilling of some wells
in the NE area of the eld.
The area of the proven reserves is about 14 km2 (Fig. 2),
which was originally estimated from DC Schlumberger soundings
(Hochstein, 1975). This area has been intensively drilled, mostly
heavily in the central part of the eld. The well output is directly
correlated with the distribution of permeability (Fig. 3). At 14.7 bar
(15 kg/cm2 ) wellhead pressure, well output can be divided into
three categories: low output with <30 t/h, moderate output with
3055 t/h, and high output with 60 to >85 t/h. All Kamojang wells
are completed with 7-in. (178 mm) slotted liner.
The estimated area of the Kamojang reservoir was increased to
21 km2 on the basis of CSAMT studies (Sudarman et al., 1990), and a
gravity survey (in 1999) which indicated the low-density anomaly
continues to the northeast from the GandapuraKamojang com-
plex. Exploration wells in the north and southeast have conrmed
the extended size of the system (Fig. 2). The results of an MT survey
in 2009, further support an interpretation involving a conductive
layer with the possibility of upwelling thermal uid at a location
that coincides with a low-density anomaly detected by the gravity
survey (Enjinering Kamojang and ITB, 2007). Based on the MT and
gravity data, it is likely the steam reservoir extends further to the
northeast beyond the area indicated by the CSAMT survey of 1990,
and the total probable area of Kamojang is of the order of 30 km2 .
3. Twenty-seven years of commercial operation 19822009
3.1. Reservoir response
The natural state of the Kamojang geothermal system is catego-
rized as a typical vapour-dominated state with superheated steam
discharge from production wells. The non-condensable gas content
in the discharging uid is less than 1% by weight, and is composed
mostly of CO2 and H2 S with very low to nil chloride content.
Permeability thickness values (kh) of wells in the production
area generally range from 0.5 to 140 Darcy-m, with several pro-
duction wells displaying values greater than 4.9 Darcy-m (GENZL,
1992).
The central part of the Kamojang reservoir has water satura-
tion of the order of 2535%, determined by the Fischer-Tropsch
(FT-HSH) diagram method, while several new wells have water
saturations up to 50%. DAmore and Truesdell (1995) have demon-
strated the utility of this method in effectively monitoring reservoir
processes, especially in vapour-dominated elds, or those which
become vapour-dominated after a period of exploitation (Siega
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9

Suryadarma et al. / Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx 3

Table 1
Gas composition in steam and steam fraction y from the Fischer-Tropsch (FT-HSH) grid diagram, Fig. 4. Water saturation (Sw ) = [(1 y) Vl ]/[(y Vv )] + [(1 y) Vl ];
Vl = specic volume of liquid, Vv = specic volume of vapour.

Wells Mole-fraction in steam (mol) FT HSH T y Sw

H2 (105 ) H2 S (105 ) CO2 (104 ) CH4 (108 )

KMJ-11 2.07 2.56 5.22 30.00 15.5 9.1 246.6 0.05 31.1
KMJ-14 4.22 2.39 11.40 21.00 13.8 9.5 189.7 0.28 1.9
KMJ-18 1.16 1.98 4.14 5.60 15.9 9.2 246.7 0.04 36.9
KMJ-27 3.24 3.58 7.57 19.40 14.4 8.8 239.2 0.11 14.7
KMJ-28 2.07 3.12 7.89 3.28 14.4 8.8 238.2 0.11 14.2
KMJ-31 2.14 2.67 10.90 4.45 14.3 9.1 227.5 0.13 10.0
KMJ-37 2.89 3.26 5.56 13.60 14.5 8.9 238.4 0.10 15.7
KMJ-51 7.04 5.61 14.20 357.00 14.0 8.6 244.3 0.12 13.8
KMJ-62 0.35 0.72 2.08 6.04 18.3 10.0 232.1 0.01 63.6
KMJ-72 2.66 4.16 7.66 86.20 15.4 8.6 260.4 0.04 39.3

et al., 2000). In this method, reservoir temperature, mass steam
fraction, and water saturation in the reservoir (Sw ) can be evalu-
ated through the simulation of gas equilibria reactions. There are
four components of gas H2 , H2 S, CO2 , and CH4 used in the FT-
HSH evaluation. The prediction of Kamojang Sw using the FT-HSH
method is based on samples taken from 10 out of 28 production
wells in Kamojang at the time total electric generation capacity
was 140 MWe (Table 1). The FT-HSH data of Kamojang are shown
in Fig. 4. The estimated Sw values for Kamojang are quite variable
as shown in Table 1. Since it was difcult to determine a unique
value, numerical modeling was used to perform a sensitivity anal-
ysis using three values of Sw (0.3, 0.4, and 0.5).
Initial down-hole pressure logs from some wells showed liquid
pressure proles towards the bottomhole. Liquid pressure proles
at depth persist in some wells till the present time (Fig. 5). Because
of pressure decline with time due to production, and the fact that
the bottom 200 to 500 m of some wells have lled up with silt,
down-hole pressure logging does not reach the initial well depths,
and liquid pressure proles are no longer seen in these wells. Taking
into account the chemical and pressure data, the water saturation
is optimistically estimated at 50%.
The declining wellhead pressure during the continuous opera-
tion from 1982 to 2009 is a direct reection of decreasing reservoir
pressure. The greatest decline has occurred in well KMJ-39, which
lies in the low permeability zone. The smallest decline is seen for
well KMJ-18, which is located in the high permeability zone. This
indicates the pressure decline is directly related to reservoir per-
meability. According to decline curve analysis, the productivity of
individual wells that supply the 140 MWe plants has declined by
about 27%/yr from 1982 to 2008. The average decline is of the
order of 3% per year. To stabilize the total steam mass ow, it has
been necessary to drill three make-up wells every 23 years.
The pressure in the Kamojang reservoir has declined about
1725% from the initial conditions. On average, this is nearly
0.35 kg/cm2 /yr or 0.92% per year. Over the 27-year operation,
the average reservoir pressure drop has been about 9.5 kg/cm2
(9.3 bar), while temperature decline over the same period has been
about 27% from the initial conditions, or an average of about
0.7 C/yr or 0.3%/yr. The average temperature drop has been about
19 C over the 27-year utilization period.
The reservoir pressure in the eastern sector of the Kamojang
eld did not signicantly change during the period when only Units
1, 2, and 3 were on-line (Fig. 6). However, some decline has become
apparent in this area since production of Unit 4 started. This con-
forms with other experience that no matter how big the reservoir,
how large the discharge, and how few the wells, output will start
to decrease once production starts (James, 1995).
3.2. Steam gathering system
To support the combined 140 MWe power plants, the steam
transmission pipelines are divided into four separate units named
PL-401 ( 32 in.), PL-402 ( 24 in.), PL-403 ( 40 in.), and PL-404 (

Fig. 4. Grid diagram FT versus HSH. Chemical parameters for selected temperature
( C) and steam fraction are based on measurements of gas composition (see Table 1).
FT = 4 log(H2 /H2 O) log(CH4 /CO2 ), HSH = 3 log(H2 S/H2 O) log(H2 /H2 ). Fig. 5. Pressure proles for selected Kamojang wells based on down-hole logging.

Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9
4 Suryadarma et al. / Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx
Fig. 6. Map showing injection well locations and a comparison of initial feed-zone pressure of the wells with pressure in 2008, at the start of Unit-4 commercial operation
in the east sector (Enjineering Kamojang, 2009).
40 in.). Pipeline design pressures are up to10 bar-g. Turbine inlet
pressure and temperature are 6.5 bar-g and 161.9 C, respectively.
Each pipeline has a minimum ow-rate to prevent steam conden-
sation in the line. The need to drill make-up wells, drilling time,
and number of make-up wells depends on the development of
steam supply for the block of wells for each pipeline, which in turn,
depends on the associated reservoir performance and response.
Steam ow in each pipeline is manually controlled to provide
2.5% more than the corresponding power plant demand. The excess
steam is controlled automatically by buttery vent valves into vent
structures under normal operating conditions. In order to reduce
the excess steam from the vent structures, PERTAMINA has con-
trolled the steam supply from the four main production wells by
automatic control valves placed directly on the pipeline from each
of the wells in 1988. This advanced control system enables the wells
to immediately reduce the excess steam in the vent structures by
up to 2%. A SCADA system was developed and installed in 2003 by
adding transmitters to the control valves. The continuous venting
is due to the gathering system design of the turbines, which on
the average, have a steam consumption rate of 7.4 t/h per MWe at
6.5 bar-g inlet pressure.
Operation of the 60 MWe Unit-4 power plant is based on nine
production wells and two additional back-up wells. The pipeline of
the corresponding steam gathering system is called PL-405 with
36 in. diameter. The turbine inlet pressure and temperature are
11 bar-g and 184.2 C, respectively.
4. Steam eld management strategies
4.1. Production strategies
When the Kamojang eld started generating 30 MWe in 1983,
steam was supplied at a wellhead pressure of about 1517 bar-g
to feed the power plant at 6.5 bar-g inlet pressure. The min-
imum steam feed for the three Mitsubishi condensing turbine
units (1 30 and 2 55 MWe ) has been 10501100 t/h of steam.
Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
Between 1983 and 2000, six make-up wells were drilled to main-
tain constant steam supply to the plant. Unit 4 generating has a
turbine inlet pressure of 11 bar-g, and needs a minimum steam feed
of 425 t/h.
Fig. 7 is a plot of daily performance data over the entire
Kamojang production history, showing the total steam produc-
tion, condensate injection and electricity generation. Currently,
the total generation of the four units of the power plant is about
203204 MWe , with a steam input of about 15751600 t/h. Less
than 30% of steam is recovered as condensate and re-injected. This
is a serious concern for long-term reservoir management in Kamo-
jang and points to the importance of a long-term injection strategy
to maintain steam production.
A good production strategy is essential to maintain steam pro-
duction at Kamojang and to minimize the number of make-up
wells. An effective injection strategy will be needed to allow any
major increase in mass extraction, and to avoid further decline in
pressure. Some unproductive Kamojang wells have been used as
injection wells to help maintain the total steam production.
4.2. Reservoir monitoring and modeling
Monitoring is the key to good reservoir management. The most
important information is obtained through careful monitoring of
the response of a reservoir to long-term energy extraction. The data
gathered during exploration and exploitation history are required
for a proper understanding of the reservoir and for successfully
managing the resource. These data also provide an essential basis
for any reservoir modeling.
The Kamojang database system is called Integrated Reservoir
Information System, IRIS. It holds all Kamojang data, starting with
data collected during exploration and continuing with monitoring
data collected during the exploitation phase (Zuhro et al., 2005). The
database contains data collected from reservoir monitoring, pro-
duction history, and chemical sampling. Wellhead pressure is one
of the main parameters measured during well testing, as well as in
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9

Suryadarma et al. / Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx 5

Fig. 7. History of total steam supply for power generation and total condensate mass re-injection (Enjinering Kamojang, 2009a).

the reservoir monitoring program. Down-hole pressure and tem-
perature measurements are obtained using conventional Kuster
mechanical tools.
The results of a numerical reservoir modeling study carried out
in cooperation with Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB) in 2009
(Enjinering Kamojang and ITB, 2009), conrmed that the Kamo-
jang eld could sustain a capacity up to 230 MWe for the next 30
years. The simulation was based on the conceptual model of the
Kamojang geothermal eld shown in Fig. 8. A detailed numeri-
cal simulation was performed with natural state and production
history matching for a 30-year output forecast. The 3D numerical
model contains 12,480 grid-blocks. It has a surface area of 49.5 km2 ,
and is divided into 15 layers to a total depth of 3600 m. The simu-
lation consisted of three steps: reproducing the natural state (i.e.,
pre-production state), matching the production history, and fore-
casting the reservoir performance for the next 30 years for a set of
scenarios.
An example of the natural state match between the observed
temperature and pressure data and the simulation results is shown
in Fig. 9 for well KMJ-14. Simulation results indicate the top of the
steam zone to be at 800 m above sea level (m a.s.l.). Logging data
show a change in pressure gradient at about 600 m a.s.l., indicat-
ing the presence of water accompanied by decreasing temperature.
It is possible the water at the bottom of well KMJ-14 is not reser-
voir water, but condensate water. Condensation may occur in the
upper part of the wellbore having lower temperatures with the
water descending to the bottom of the well because of its higher
density. The main fracture zone in well KMJ-14 is at 800600 m a.s.l.

Fig. 8. Geothermal conceptual model of the Kamojang geothermal system (Enjinering Kamojang and ITB, 2009).

Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9
6 Suryadarma et al. / Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx
Fig. 9. Match between observed pressure and temperature for well KMJ-14 and
those simulated by the natural state model of the Kamojang geothermal system
(Enjinering Kamojang and ITB, 2009).
The condensate water which lls the fracture zone is in continuous
contact with steam in that zone and boils to steam again.
Well KMJ-27 is a representative example for production his-
tory matching using observed pressure data; the simulation results
are shown in Fig. 10. The observed pressure data is from two
sources namely, deliverability calculations, and measurements
during bleeding conditions. The basic equation used in the deliver-
ability method to calculate reservoir pressure is (Sabet, 1991):
n opment scenario is shown in Fig. 11. The results indicate that
q = C(Pr2 Pwf
2
) (1)
with q = production rate, Pr = reservoir pressure; Pwf = owing well
pressure; C = constant, n = turbulence factor (0.51.0).
Fig. 10. Match between estimated reservoir pressure history for well KMJ-27 and pressure simulated by the Kamojang numerical model (Enjinering Kamojang and ITB,
2009). The estimated pressure is either based on bleeding wellhead pressure or deliverability calculations.
Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
For n = 0.5, non-Darcy ow condition dominate; and n = 1 corre-
sponds to Darcy ow conditions. The values of n and C are obtained
from production tests. From Eq. (1) the reservoir pressure can be
calculated using:

 q 1/n
Pr = 2
+ Pwf (2)
C
Reservoir pressure estimated by the deliverability method does
not represent the real reservoir pressure because C is assumed to
be a constant. The real value of C is believed to depend on the skin
and the permeability thickness of the production zone for the well
in question. The well skin can change during production (increase
or decrease due to well-damage). Hence, there is a large discrep-
ancy between the reservoir pressure estimated by the deliverability
method and simulation results.
Another method of estimating reservoir pressure is based on
pressure measured under bleeding condition, when the well has
a very small discharge. Reservoir pressure is represented by the
wellhead pressure (whp) corrected by the gravitational pressure
loss:
Pwf = whp + gh (3)
with whp = well head pressure, Pwf = owing well pressure;
g = gravitational constant, h = well vertical depth,  = uid density.
In a steam reservoir the whp-correction can reach about 2 bar.
After completing the natural state and production simulations,
the production forecasts were performed for three production sce-
narios namely, for 200 MWe , 230 MWe , and 260 MWe generation.
The forecasts correspond to the total mass ow for each sce-
nario, including requirements for upgrade and make-up wells only
located inside the 21 km2 probable reservoir area, i.e., without the
south block and the Ciharus block (Fig. 2). The simulations also
allow for three different water saturations (Sw = 0.3, Sw = 0.4, and
Sw = 0.5) as shown in Fig. 11. A forecast for the 230 MWe devel-
increasing the capacity to 230 MWe for the next 30 years (start-
ing in 2009), by drilling using 2630 additional wells inside the
21 km2 prospective area, is possible. Table 2 shows the compari-
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9

Suryadarma et al. / Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx 7

Fig. 11. Forecast of total steam-ow for the 230 MWe prediction scenario, for the three reservoir steam-saturation cases studied (Enjinering Kamojang and ITB, 2009). To
sustain production for the next 30 years 30, 27, and 26 additional production wells are needed for the Sw = 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 cases, respectively.

son between the number of wells that need to be drilled for each 4.3. Injection strategies
scenario and the range of Sw -values used.
Another comparison study used decline curve analysis of To date, eight deep unproductive wells have been used as injec-
individual wells, using macro excel program developed by ITB tion wells (Fig. 6). Six of them are located in the center of the eld
Geothermal Laboratory. This program uses a method developed by within the low permeability zone, with the other two in a zone of
Spivey (1986) to determine hyperbolic decline curve parameters. medium permeability. Depending on the location of injection wells,
The basic decline equation was developed by Arp (1945): injection had a variable effect (no impact, loss, minimizing decline)
on productivity. Considering these effects, the injection strategy
q = qi (1 + nDt)(1/n) (4) was changed by repositioning the injection wells.
For example, well KMJ-18 had responded initially to injection
where qi is the initial production rate, q is production rate at time
in the surrounding area by a slower decline in production, but
t, D is a decline rate constant and n is a decline exponent. The value
increased injection caused loss of productivity (Fig. 13). The g-
of n denes the decline type: exponential decline for n = 0, hyperbolic
ure shows that prior to injection, the decline was exponential
decline for 0 < n < 1 and harmonic decline for n = 1.
at 3.89%/yr. During the years 20012006, injection caused the
The decline curve study predicted Kamojang could sustain
exponential decline rate to decrease to 3.08%/yr. Over the next 2
200 MWe capacity and possibly an upgrade to 230 MWe , as shown
years (20062007), an increasing injection rate caused an increased
in Fig. 12. The decline rates are based on actual annual decline
data up to March 2009. The prediction is based on the assump-
tion of successful make-up well drilling with steam discharge of
40 t/h per well and decline rates of 3%/yr per make-up well. The
230 MWe upgrade will commence commercial production in 2012.
The number of make-up wells drilled is more than predicted by the
numerical model because the number of wells depends not only
on the total mass ow rate needed for the total generated power,
but also on the minimum mass ow rate required to keep a stable
ow rate in each pipeline (Section 3.2). Forty-ve drilled wells are
required for a 230 MWe development operating during 20122038.

Table 2
The number of new wells required for the three 30-year future prediction scenarios
investigated by the numerical model for Kamojang. Comparison between the three
Sw cases are also presented.

Sw Number of required wells

200 MWe 230 MWe 260 MWe

0.3 16 30 42
Fig. 12. The Kamojang plan for upgrade and make-up drilling to sustain steam sup-
0.4 14 27 39
ply to 2037. Based on decline curve analysis up to 2009 (Enjineering Kamojang,
0.5 13 26 37
2009).

Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9
8 Suryadarma et al. / Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx
Fig. 13. Total injection surrounding steam-gathering area PL-401 and the response of well KMJ-18 to the re-injection (Enjinering Kamojang, 2009b).
decline rate of 7.10%/yr (exponential). A subsequent decrease in the
rate of injection resulted in a reduced decline rate (Fig. 13).
A further example of the impact of injection on production wells
is given by well KMJ-11 (Fig. 14), where the decline rate prior
to injection was 0.88%/year (harmonic). During the rst injection
period (20012006), the decline rate increased to 7.4%/yr (expo-
nential). Over the next period (20062008), increased injection rate
in well KMJ-13 caused an increased decline rate of 14.6%/yr (har-
monic). From 2007 to the present, a reduced injection rate resulted
in a lower decline rate of 0.18%/yr (exponential). Well KMJ-13 is
located north of well KMJ-11 and, based on tracer test results, the
injection ow is predominantly to the south of well KMJ-13. The
tracer breakthrough from KMJ-13 to KMJ-11 occurred at about 11
days and involved about 0.2% tracer mass recovery. Consequently,
the injection strategy was changed by repositioning the injection
and production wells as shown in Fig. 6.
A good re-injection strategy is, therefore, necessary for sus-
tainable steam supply to the power plant. Understanding the
connection between the injection and the production wells is crit-
ical for planning a successful injection scheme. In Kamojang the
initial injection strategies were primarily developed by trial and
error, and were revised based on monitoring and evaluation of the
response of production wells surrounding the injection wells. Many
Fig. 14. Total injection in surrounding steam-gathering area PL-401 and the
response of well KMJ-11 to the re-injection (Enjinering Kamojang, 2009b).
Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
tracer test studies have also been carried out in Kamojang to study
well connections and to predict cooling associated with injection
(Dwikorianto et al., 2005). Tritium was injected into injection well
KMJ-15 in 1983 and 1992. Tritium was also injected into KMJ-46
in 2003, KMJ-13 in 2007, KMJ-21 in 2008, and KMJ-20 in 2009.
The tritium recovery was good in KMJ-46 and KMJ-13, but not in
KMJ-21.
5. Future development
Geothermal resources have the potential of contributing sig-
nicantly to sustainable energy use in many parts of the world
(Axelsson et al., 2001). Indonesias energy blueprint aims to
increase the contribution of geothermal energy in the energy uti-
lization program of the country. This provides a good opportunity
for PT.PGE in the Kamojang area to develop geothermal projects
by increasing the maximum extraction from the resource in an
efcient and sustainable manner.
Kamojangs true potential will be realized by a step-by-step
development of production capacity based on reservoir assessment
results. As a rst step, further drilling will be carried out in early
2011, with the target to increase capacity from 200 to 230 MWe in
2012. The next step of development will be based on the reservoir
response to this increase.
6. Conclusions
Reservoir capacity is a dynamic quantity that can change with
production as the reservoir responds to the production and injec-
tion strategy, and reservoir capacity increases by the discovery of
new productive zones outside the known area. Kamojang has a 27-
year history of continuous operation with a stepwise increase in
production:
27 years for Unit 1 (30 MWe ) since 1983;
23 years for Units 2 and 3 (110 MWe ) since 1987;
2 years for Unit 4 (60 MWe ) since 2008;
There are production-induced changes in reservoir temperature
and pressure in the reservoir sector supplying Units 1, 2, and 3
with steam, with a drop in temperature of 14 C (0.71 C/yr) from
the initial temperature of 245 C, and a pressure drop of 9.3 bar
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G Model
GEOT-838; No. of Pages 9
Suryadarma et al. / Geothermics xxx (2010) xxxxxx
(0.31 bar/yr) from the 34 bar-g initial pressure. In the sector sup-
plying Unit 4 the changes are so far quite small because of the short
exploitation time.
Reservoir assessment conrms the possibility of sustainable
development of Kamojang at 230 MWe for the next 30 years
beginning in 2009. In order to sustain this production, wells will
need to be drilled to conrm the potential reserve in the NE
area where the 30 MWe Unit 5 will be installed. The exploited
area at Kamojang covers 21 km2 with limited space for drilling
of additional make-up wells. Deeper drilling is seen as a possi-
ble method to further develop the reservoir and would require
updating the reservoir model. Continued improvements in reser-
voir management, and the application of new technologies from
around the world will add another chapter to the success story of
Kamojang.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the management of Pertamina for
permission to publish this paper. We also wish to thank two review-
ers, Jim Lawless and Colin Harvey, as well the guest editors of this
special issue, Mike Mongillo and Gudni Axelsson, for their valuable
suggestions and comments.
References
Arp, J., 1945. Analysis of decline curves. AIME Transactions 160, 228247.
Axelsson, G., Gudmundsson, A., Steingrimson, B., Palmason, G., Armannson, H.,
Tulinius, H., Floven, O.G., Bjornsson, S., Stefansson, V., 2001. Sustainable pro-
duction of geothermal energy: suggested denition. IGA News, Quarterly No.
43, JanuaryMarch 2001, pp. 12.
DAmore, F., Truesdell, A.H., 1995. Correlation between liquid saturation and phys-
ical phenomena in vapor-dominated Geothermal reservoirs. Proc. 1995 World
Geothermal Congress, pp. 19271931.
Dwikorianto, T., Abidin, Z., Kamah, Y., Sunaryo, D., Hasibuan, A., Proyoto, 2005. Tracer
injection evaluation in Kamojang geothermal eld, West Java, Indonesia. In:
Proceedings World Geothermal Congress, Antalya, Turkey, April 2429, 2005, 8
pp.
Enjinering, Kamojang, I.T.B., 2007. Simulasi reservoir lapangan Kamojang. Internal
report, PT.PGE, Bandung, Indonesia, 195 pp.
Please cite this article in press as: Suryadarma, et al., Sustainable development of the Kamojang geothermal eld. Geothermics (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.geothermics.2010.09.006
9
Enjinering, Kamojang, I.T.B., 2009. Re-assessment reservoir area Kamojang. Internal
report, PT.PGE, Bandung, Indonesia, 469 pp.
Enjinering, Kamojang, 2009a. Ealuasi cadangan dan ketersedian Uap untuk upgrade
230 MWe . Internal report, PT.PGE, Kamojang, Indonesia, 45 pp.
Enjinering, Kamojang, 2009b. Evaluasi scenario re-injeksi tahun 2009 dan
penyusunan scenario injeksi 2010. Internal report, PT.PGE, Kamojang, Indonesia,
60 pp.
GENZL (Geothermal Energy New Zealand, Ltd.), 1992. Reservoir review and simula-
tion of the Kamojang eld relating to production decline and steam supply for
an additional 1 55 MW unit. Unpublished report, Pertamina, Indonesia, 38 pp.
Hochstein, M.P., 1975. Geophysical exploration of the Kawah Kamojang eld, West
Java. In: Proceedings 2nd U.N. Symposium on the Development and Use of
Geothermal Resources, vol. 2, San Francisco, CA, USA, May 2029, 1975, pp.
10491058.
James, R., 1995. Maximum discharging-pressure (MDP); decline under production.
In: Proceedings World Geothermal Congress, Florence, Italy, May 1831, 1995,
pp. 18311834.
Kamah, M.Y., Dwikorinato, T., Sunaryo, D., Hsibuan, A., 2005. The productive feed
zones identied based on spinner data and application in the reservoir poten-
tial review of Kamojang geothermal area, Indonesia. In: Proceedings World
Geothermal Congress, Antalya, Turkey, April 2429, 2005, 6 pp.
Sabet, M.A., 1991. Well Test Analysis. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, TX, U.S.A.,
pp. 195220.
Sanyal, S.K., Robertson-Tait., A., Klein, C.W., Butler, S.J., Lovekin, J.W., Brown, P.J.,
Sudarman, S., Syafei, S., 2000. Assessment of steam supply for the expansion
of generation capacity from 140 to 200 MW, Kamojang geothermal eld, West
Java, Indonesia. In: Proceedings World Geothermal Congress, Kyushu-Tohoku,
Japan, May 28June 10, 2000, pp. 21952200.
Siega, F., Salonga, N., DAmore, F., 2000. Gas equilibria controlling H2 S in differ-
ent Philippine geothermal elds. In: Proceedings World Geothermal Congress,
Kyushu-Tohoku, Japan, May 28June 10, 2000, pp. 21952200.
Spivey, J.P., 1986. A new algorithm for hyperbolic decline curve tting. SPE 15293
Presented at the Symposium on Petroleum Industry Application of Microcom-
puters, Silver Creek, CO, U.S.A., pp. 89100.
Sudarman, S., Lubis, L.I., Prijanto, 1990. Geothermal eld boundary delineation with
CSAMT, the Kamojang case. In: Proceedings 11th PNOC-EDC Conference, Tong-
onan Geothermal Field, Philippines, 21 pp.
Sudarman, S., Guntur, B., Satyajit, D., Sumantri, Y., 2000. Mapping reservoir perme-
ability with geoelectrical, FMS, and spinner data Kamojang eld Indonesia. In:
Proceedings World Geothermal Congress, Kyushu-Tohoku, Japan, May 28June
10, 2000, pp. 29112917.
Suryadarma, Azimuddin, T., Dwikorianto, T., Fauzi, A., 2005. The Kamojang geother-
mal eld: 25 years operation. In: Proceedings World Geothermal Congress,
Antalya, Turkey, April 2429, 2005, 5 pp.
Zuhro, A., Dwikorianto, T., Sunaryo, D., Hasibuan, A., 2005. Integrated reservoir
information system in Kamojang, Indonesia. In: Proceedings World Geothermal
Congress, Antalya, Turkey, April 2429, 2005, 7 pp.