1. Under the assumptions in this paper (e.g., homogeneous, laterally-extensive reservoir), there is no difference in the subsurface between a TDF of 5-spots and a TDF of doublets. Therefore, these can both be treated as a TDF, and the equations for a 5-spot TDF also apply to a doublet TDF. Furthermore, the doublet pattern can potentially reduce the amount of surface piping compared to the 5-spot TDF pattern. 2. We cannot know whether the analytical or numerical impedance solution is better. The numerical solution gave a lower impedance than the analytical solutions, by approximately onehalf, which resulted in more power generation by up to a factor of two. Amongst the analytical solutions, we recommend the use of the "ID, Potential Flow" solution (Equation ) for IDs and the "TDF, Hybrid" solution (Equation ) for TDFs. The analytical solution utilizes simplifications (e.g., average fluid properties and uniform velocity profile through the crosssectional area). However, the analytical solution also has several benefits: (a) it is independent of grid resolution, (b) it is computationally inexpensive, and (c) it is probably easier to use than the numerical simulator for most people. 3. Wellbore heat losses may be justifiably neglected for small and large transmissivity (see ). For the reservoir we investigated, wellbore heat loss had a moderate effect on power generation for transmissivities between 3,200 mD-m and 32,000 mD-m. Below 3,200 mD-m, the flow rate was low, which resulted in little electricity generation (<0.2 MWe), with or without wellbore heat loss. Above 32,000 mD-m, the flow rate was large enough that the production temperature depletion was insignificant (i.e., Γ > 0.98), and the power generation was very similar with and without wellbore heat loss. 4. The reservoir heat depletion analytical and numerical solutions measure temperatures at different regions of the reservoir, but fundamentally they both reflect the temperature of reservoirs with the same initial amount of removable heat, which is replenished by conduction from the surroundings. It seems the analytical solution (Equation ) represents a lower bound on the average reservoir temperature for all positive time and represents a lower bound on the production temperature in early years (see Sec. 3.4). 5. The amount of heat initially in the reservoir is closely related to the reservoir size and can be approximated from a lumped mass, with (Equation ) or without (Equation ) conduction.