## 1 Introduction
(1983), [PERSON] (1951), and [PERSON] et al. (2012) (S  
Figure 2: The wells previously drilled shown within the study area and the drilling area where Alberta No. 1 plans to drill production and injection wells. The areas encompass a planned light industrial park and the Norbord OSB facility. Previous studies have analyzed oil and gas temperature data specifically within the WCSB to estimate geothermal resources [7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22; 23; 24; 25; 26]. Drill Stem Tests (DST), BHTs, and Annual Pool Pressure (APP) results all include significant errors that require the data to be filtered. BHT measurements generally provide lower temperatures than DST and APP measurements. These studies involve temperature corrections to adjust the recorded temperatures to try to represent the actual temperature at depth. Several of these correction methods could not be used for this data set; the Horner correction requires input of elapsed time between cessation of circulation in the well bore and the temperature measurement. It is best when several temperature measurements have been made at regular time intervals. The data for this study do not include these measurements, so the Horner correction could not be applied. The thermal gradients of the study areas assessed by [PERSON] et al. (2020) [27] (including the Alberta No. 1 study area) appear to be linear with depth, suggesting that the Harrison correction method, which uses a second-order polynomial fit, is not suitable for the data in this study. [PERSON] et al. (2020) [27] suggest that the filtered, uncorrected BHT data in the WCSB may be more reliable than previously thought. Furthermore, many temperature correction methods increase the temperature from the measured BHT; if this estimation is overly optimistic, the temperature predictions can be detrimental to the project. An overestimation of temperature could falsely suggest that electricity production from the produced fluid is viable, but if the fluid is a few degrees lower, this may not be the case. For the purposes of the Alberta No. 1 geothermal project, a conservative, lower estimate of target formation temperatures is  
Figure 3: General stratigraphy of Devonian units in the Northwest Plains of Alberta. The Alberta No. 1 project area is not underlain by all the units depicted, but is targeting the formations from the Beaverhill Lake Group to the Granite Wash Formation, outlined in red [3]. required for understanding the reservoir, the well design, the expected flow rate, and the power plant design. Therefore, this study uses the raw, filtered BHT data to conservatively predict the lower limit of temperatures at depth. Fluid temperatures of at least 120 \({}^{\circ}\)C at depths of 4500 m or less are required to profitably operate the plant. As well, fluid temperature will dictate the required flow rate to produce 5 MWe net. Our results suggest that elevation to the top of the Beaverhill Lake Group ranges from 3104 m to 4094 m and temperature at the top of the formation ranges from 87 \({}^{\circ}\)C to 123 \({}^{\circ}\)C in the study area. Elevation to the top of the Precambrian Basement ranges from 3205 m to 4223 m and temperature at the formation top ranges from 74 \({}^{\circ}\)C to 124 \({}^{\circ}\)C. Within the area where Alberta No. 1 plans to drill, our results calculate depths to the top of the Beaverhill Lake Group and Precambrian Basement to range from 3634 m to 3839 m and 3740 m to 3906 m, respectively. Temperatures range from 87 \({}^{\circ}\)C to 123 \({}^{\circ}\)C and 89 \({}^{\circ}\)C to 127 \({}^{\circ}\)C at the top of the Beaverhill Lake Group and Precambrian Basement, respectively.