Skip to main content

Science – Society – Technology

Geothermal Energy Cover Image

Table 3 Overview of porosity measurements from different projects for the Malm aquifer in the Bavarian Molasse Basin

From: Porosity–permeability relationship derived from Upper Jurassic carbonate rock cores to assess the regional hydraulic matrix properties of the Malm reservoir in the South German Molasse Basin

StratigraphyOutcropOutcrop/subsurfaceSubsurface
EpochAgeQuenstedt and Richter (1987)STD (2016)Hedtmann and Alber (2018)Mraz et al. (2018)Homuth (2014)Dingolfing FBLimestoneaDolostoneaMoosburg SC 4Pullach (Th 2)bUnterhaching (Gt Uha 1/1a)c
This studydBöhm (2012)This studyd
MeannMinMaxMednMinMaxMednMinMaxMed ± MADnMin–Max (Med)Min–Max (Med)nMinMaxMed ± MADnMin–Max (Med)
Early CretaceousPurbeck                  0.517.34.6 ± 2.573< 3.0
n = 5
 
Late JurassicTithonianMalm ζ 4–5Rennertshofen & Usseltal Fm.      < 0.117.85.13813.315.710.7 ± 5.160.7–17.1 (3.8), n = 141.5–6.7 (3.2), n = 9  3.119.213.6 ± 4.5325.0–10.0
n = 10
 
Malm ζ 3Mörnsheim Fm.  5.68.67.013  2.53.93.1 ± 0.3189.0
n = 2
Malm ζ 2Altmülthal Fm.  3.714.87.0311.817.73.5 ± 1.890.6–2.1 (0.7)30.310.25.6 ± 3.4351.0–4.0
(2.5), n = 4
Malm ζ 1Geisental Fm.5.8254.08.55.8214.212.29.2 ± 3.950.9 – 17.1 (7.3)50.318.42.1
± 1.5
32 
KimmeridgianMalm εTorleite Fm.3.611.26.9130.910.49.6812.512.74.6
± 1.1
191.1 – 5.4 (3.3)20.55.92.9 ± 1.719 
Malm δTreuchtlingen Fm.8.4281.66.94.6290.46.92.72262.36.33.2
± 0.7
122.4 – 7.6 (5.0)20.74.72.3 ± 1.136< 5.0
n = 3
6.0–18.0 (14.0), n = 4
Malm γArzberg Fm.      < 0.17.51.8112    1.411.13.22.0 ± 0.315  
OxfordianMalm βDietfurt Fm.      0.210.23.3181      0.43.52.0 ± 0.314  
Malm α      0.59.96.2145      0.310.31.0 ± 0.518  
Middle JurassicDogger ζ                  3.815.47.9 ± 2.420  
  1. aKoch et al. (2009), bBöhm et al. (2010), cBeichel et al. (2014), dporosity effective for water \(\phi_{\text{eff}}^{\text{w}}\), unit = %, Min minimum, Max maximum, Med median, MAD median absolute deviation, n count