Evaluation of Medium-Deep Geothermal Resources Based on Seismic Imaging Technology: A Case Study of the Midu Basin in Yunnan Province
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAuthors in the paper employ natural seismic data to perform a tomographic analysis of the geothermal system in the Midu basin. By using the P-wave velocity (Vp) and velocity ratio of P-wave and S-wave (Vp/Vs) at various depths, the findings reveal that the basin comprises two distinct structural layers. On the basis of layers structures and measurement results the authors determine the existence of high temperature geothermal resources for power generation, concentrated around the Midu fault on the western side of the basin, while the Yinjie fault area is more favorable for advancements in heating and wellness. Standard Seismic Imaging Technology is used in the research, but the results obtained are very significant for the evaluation and exploitation of geothermal energy in the Midu Basin in Yunnan Province. Therefore, I propose a paper for publication. Only with minor revision since it is not completely written in accordance with the template, and possible language improvements.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The English language is at a satisfactory level. Clearly some improvement is possible with careful reading by a native English speaker.
Author Response
Comments: Therefore, I propose a paper for publication. Only with minor revision since it is not completely written in accordance with the template, and possible language improvements.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We have made revisions to the minor issues in the paper.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript, "Evaluation of Medium-Deep Geothermal Resources Based on Seismic Imaging Technology: A Case Study of the Midu Basin in Yunnan Province," is rigorous and well-structured. It effectively uses seismic data to reveal geological structures and geothermal potential. The study's methodology is detailed and reliable, and the results offer valuable insights into the basin's geothermal system. However, the literature review could include more international studies, and a methodological flowchart would enhance clarity. Overall, the paper significantly contributes to geothermal resource development with high academic and practical value.The specific issues are as follows:
1.The literature review covers relevant studies but misses recent developments in the field. Include more recent references to strengthen this section.
2.Figure 1: The maps are helpful, but the resolution is low, making it difficult to read the finer details. Higher resolution images would enhance clarity.
3.Methodology (Line 220): The use of the Binchuan region's velocity model as an initial model is justified. However, discussing any potential biases this might introduce would be important.
4.The figures and tables are generally well-designed and informative. Ensure that all figures (e.g., Figure 10) have clear and descriptive captions.
5.The writing is clear and coherent, making the complex methodologies and findings accessible. However, some sections could be streamlined to avoid redundancy.
6、Ensure consistency in terminology and units throughout the manuscript. For example, temperature units should be consistently reported in either ℃ or K.
7.There are minor typographical errors (e.g., "Date acquisition" instead of "Data acquisition" on page 6) that need correction.
8.Language and Grammar: The manuscript is generally well-written, but there are occasional grammatical errors and awkward phrasings that need revision.
9.Minor Formatting Issues: There are some minor formatting issues, such as inconsistent font sizes and spacing, which should be standardized for a more professional appearance.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The quality of the English language in this manuscript is generally good, but there are a few areas that could benefit from improvement:
1. There are occasional grammatical errors and awkward sentence structures that could be refined for better readability.Example: "Date acquisition" should be corrected to "Data acquisition."
2. While the technical terms are appropriately used, some terms might need further explanation for readers who are not specialists in the field.Example: Clarify terms like "Vp/Vs ratio" and "seismic tomography."
3. There are minor typographical errors that need correction. Correct typos like "smarsolo-IGU-BD3C-5" to ensure all technical details are accurate.
Author Response
Comments1: The literature review covers relevant studies but misses recent developments in the field. Include more recent references to strengthen this section.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, We have reviewed and organized the research progress of geothermal in this region and added the latest advancements related to our current study.
Comments 2: Figure 1: The maps are helpful, but the resolution is low, making it difficult to read the finer details. Higher resolution images would enhance clarity.
Response 2: Thanks for your suggestions, we have increased the resolution of Figure 1 and replaced it in the paper.
Comments 3: Methodology (Line 220): The use of the Binchuan region's velocity model as an initial model is justified. However, discussing any potential biases this might introduce would be important.
Response 3: Thanks for your suggestions, The paper replaced the velocity model of the study with the velocity model of the adjacent area Binchuan. This may introduce some potential bias, but the bias is very small and can be ignored in qualitative analysis. We also explained this in the paper.
Comments 4: The figures and tables are generally well-designed and informative. Ensure that all figures (e.g., Figure 10) have clear and descriptive captions.
Response 4: We agree with this comment and have added some necessary explanations for Figure 10.
Comments 5: The writing is clear and coherent, making the complex methodologies and findings accessible. However, some sections could be streamlined to avoid redundancy.
Response 5: Thank you for your suggestions. Following your advice, we have deleted the redundant Figure 6 at the end of the paper and optimized some descriptions in the paper to make them more concisely and clearly.
Comments 6: Ensure consistency in terminology and units throughout the manuscript. For example, temperature units should be consistently reported in either ℃ or K.
Response 6: Thank you for pointing this out. We reviewed the terminology and units used in the paper, made some modifications, and standardized them.
Comments7: There are minor typographical errors (e.g., "Date acquisition" instead of "Data acquisition" on page 6) that need correction.
Response 7: Thanks for your suggestions, We have checked our paper thoroughly and insured the typographical errors as “Date acquisition” been fully corrected.
Comments 8: Language and Grammar: The manuscript is generally well-written, but there are occasional grammatical errors and awkward phrasings that need revision.
Response 7: Thanks for your suggestions, We have checked our paper thoroughly and revised the grammatical errors and awkward phrasings.
Comments 9: Minor Formatting Issues: There are some minor formatting issues, such as inconsistent font sizes and spacing, which should be standardized for a more professional appearance.
Response 9: Thank you for pointing this out. We have corrected the inconsistencies in font and spacing in the paper.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis article employs natural seismic data to perform a tomographic analysis of the geothermal system in the Midu basin, situated in the southeastern region of Dali Prefecture, Yunnan Province, China. The study used 87 stations, covering an area of about 28×28 km, which spans the entire Midu basin. By analyzing the propagation and reflection paths of seismic waves in conjunction with the velocity information of subsurface media, three-dimensional models of underground structures have been established in the study areas. I believe the work is well written and organized and has a significant contribution to the field. The following specific points needs to be addressed to help developing this paper:
1. Abstract: The abstract is quite lengthy, providing extensive details about the results while barely mentioning the methodology. Please consider revising the abstract to ensure it can stand alone, effectively summarizing key points from general to specific, and highlighting the novelty of the research.
2. Abstract (Line 37): It is better to specify here the temperature value or range ( >150°C ? ).
3. Keywords: "velocity ratio" may not be a good keyword here.
4. Line 61: "five eight times higher". Please correct this with the right number.
5. Figure 2: part (b) is not shown in this figure.
6. Line 137-159: Information in this paragraph needs citation. Please cite all information you got from other sources.
7. Line 181: Reference style of (1990 Wang Ji’an et al.) is not consistent with other references.
8. Line 207: "Where Pij、Sij、tP、tS、VP, and VS represent the .... and S-waves, respectively," This sentence does clearly describe the six symbols.
9. Figure 5: Y-axis label is missing.
10. Line 341: "At depths, shallower than 2 km, the fault is characterized by low Vp and high Vp/Vs. ratios, with the high Vp/Vs. boundary demarcating the edge of the Cenozoic basin." This sentence is not clear or has punctuation error. Is it one sentence or two?
Author Response
Comments 1: Abstract: The abstract is quite lengthy, providing extensive details about the results while barely mentioning the methodology. Please consider revising the abstract to ensure it can stand alone, effectively summarizing key points from general to specific, and highlighting the novelty of the research.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. Seismic tomography is a well-established method. The innovation of this paper lies in using this method to characterize the geothermal system of the Midu Basin and indicate exploration directions for different geothermal resources. Therefore, we did not introduce the method itself in the abstract.
Comments 2: Abstract (Line 37): It is better to specify here the temperature value or range ( >150°C ? ).
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We have specified the temperature range described in the Abstract (line 37) to >90°C.
Comments 3: Keywords: "velocity ratio" may not be a good keyword here.
Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. We modified the keywords by removing 'velocity ratio' and adding a term more related to geothermal energy: 'water-conducting'
Comments 4: Line 61: "five eight times higher". Please correct this with the right number.
Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. We correct it to three to five times as the operational duration of solar and wind energy ranges from 1,500 to 2,400 hours per year."
Comments 5: Figure 2: part (b) is not shown in this figure.
Response 5: Thanks for your suggestions. We have corrected the errors that appeared in Figure 2.
Comments 6: Line 137-159: Information in this paragraph needs citation. Please cite all information you got from other sources.
Response 6: Thank you for pointing this out. The information in lines 135-159 of the paper are divided into three parts. The first part consists of stratigraphic thickness data sourced from regional geological surveys, which serves as background information for the study area and does not require citation. The second part includes the geothermal data shown in Table 1, with most of it obtained through the authors' measurements and some sourced from previously published papers; citations have been added accordingly.
Comments 7: Line 181: Reference style of (1990 Wang Ji’an et al.) is not consistent with other references.
Response 7: Thanks for your suggestions, We have standardized the format of the references.
Comments 8: Line 207: "Where Pij、Sij、tP、tS、VP, and VS represent the .... and S-waves, respectively," This sentence does clearly describe the six symbols.
Response 8: Thanks for your suggestions, We believe that the symbols used in the line207 have been adequately explained, and readers should be able to understand their meanings.
Comments 9: Figure 5: Y-axis label is missing.
Response 9: Thanks for your suggestions, We have added the label to the Figure 5.
Comments 10: Line 341: "At depths, shallower than 2 km, the fault is characterized by low Vp and high Vp/Vs. ratios, with the high Vp/Vs. boundary demarcating the edge of the Cenozoic basin." This sentence is not clear or has punctuation error. Is it one sentence or two?
Response 10: Thanks for your suggestions, We have revised this paragraph to make it more coherent and removed any unnecessary “.” behind the Vp/Vs.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
