IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v313y2024ics0360544224035217.html

Energy, exergy and exergo-economic analyses of supercritical CO2 cycles for the exploitation of a geothermal resource in the Italian water dominant Amiata site

Author

Listed:
  • Di Michele, N.
  • Talluri, L.
  • Ungar, P.
  • Fiaschi, D.

Abstract

Alternative powerplant layouts to commonly applied flash technology is investigated for the water dominant geothermal location of Amiata Mountain, Italy. The proposed solution avoids flashing the brine stream by a borehole pump capable of maintaining pressurized conditions, thus reducing the amount of non-condensable gases released when reaching the ground level. Therefore, the need of a gas treatment section is completely avoided. The heat recovered from the hot brine at ground level is transferred to different supercritical CO2 cycle configurations, equipped with high efficiency Printed Circuit Heat Exchangers (PCHE). The optimal 45.5 % calculated exergy efficiency was achieved for the recuperative cycle with intercooling and reheat, which however didn't show the optimal electricity costs (8.092 c€/kWh) because of the more complex heat exchangers network. The lowest cost of electricity (7.4 c€/kWh) was found for the recuperative cycle configuration. These costs are in line with the current levels of geothermal binary cycles, but almost doubled compared to the current single flash + ORC solution, due to a 40–50 % reduction of power output with sCO2 cycles. On the other hand, sCO2 binary cycles could guarantee an almost zero environmental impact, which is the main reason for social concerns related to the current flash powerplants.

Suggested Citation

  • Di Michele, N. & Talluri, L. & Ungar, P. & Fiaschi, D., 2024. "Energy, exergy and exergo-economic analyses of supercritical CO2 cycles for the exploitation of a geothermal resource in the Italian water dominant Amiata site," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:313:y:2024:i:c:s0360544224035217
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.133743
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544224035217
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2024.133743?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lorenzo Bruscoli & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Duccio Tempesti, 2015. "Improving the Environmental Sustainability of Flash Geothermal Power Plants—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Astolfi, M. & La Diega, L. Noto & Romano, M.C. & Merlo, U. & Filippini, S. & Macchi, E., 2020. "Techno-economic optimization of a geothermal ORC with novel “Emeritus” heat rejection units in hot climates," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(P3), pages 2810-2821.
    3. Lazzaretto, Andrea & Tsatsaronis, George, 2006. "SPECO: A systematic and general methodology for calculating efficiencies and costs in thermal systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 1257-1289.
    4. Frick, Stephanie & Kaltschmitt, Martin & Schröder, Gerd, 2010. "Life cycle assessment of geothermal binary power plants using enhanced low-temperature reservoirs," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2281-2294.
    5. Eyerer, Sebastian & Dawo, Fabian & Wieland, Christoph & Spliethoff, Hartmut, 2020. "Advanced ORC architecture for geothermal combined heat and power generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    6. Liu, Qiang & Duan, Yuanyuan & Yang, Zhen, 2014. "Effect of condensation temperature glide on the performance of organic Rankine cycles with zeotropic mixture working fluids," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 394-404.
    7. Yin, Hebi & Sabau, Adrian S. & Conklin, James C. & McFarlane, Joanna & Qualls, A. Lou, 2013. "Mixtures of SF6–CO2 as working fluids for geothermal power plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 243-253.
    8. Karimi, Shahram & Mansouri, Sima, 2018. "A comparative profitability study of geothermal electricity production in developed and developing countries: Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of different ORC configurations," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 600-619.
    9. Maria Laura Parisi & Melanie Douziech & Lorenzo Tosti & Paula Pérez-López & Barbara Mendecka & Sergio Ulgiati & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Isabelle Blanc, 2020. "Definition of LCA Guidelines in the Geothermal Sector to Enhance Result Comparability," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-18, July.
    10. Abubakr Ayub & Costante M. Invernizzi & Gioele Di Marcoberardino & Paolo Iora & Giampaolo Manzolini, 2020. "Carbon Dioxide Mixtures as Working Fluid for High-Temperature Heat Recovery: A Thermodynamic Comparison with Transcritical Organic Rankine Cycles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, August.
    11. Yari, M. & Mehr, A.S. & Zare, V. & Mahmoudi, S.M.S. & Rosen, M.A., 2015. "Exergoeconomic comparison of TLC (trilateral Rankine cycle), ORC (organic Rankine cycle) and Kalina cycle using a low grade heat source," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 712-722.
    12. Bayer, Peter & Rybach, Ladislaus & Blum, Philipp & Brauchler, Ralf, 2013. "Review on life cycle environmental effects of geothermal power generation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 446-463.
    13. Jiang, Yuan & Liese, Eric & Zitney, Stephen E. & Bhattacharyya, Debangsu, 2018. "Design and dynamic modeling of printed circuit heat exchangers for supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton power cycles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 1019-1032.
    14. Saner, Dominik & Juraske, Ronnie & Kübert, Markus & Blum, Philipp & Hellweg, Stefanie & Bayer, Peter, 2010. "Is it only CO2 that matters? A life cycle perspective on shallow geothermal systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(7), pages 1798-1813, September.
    15. Riccardo Basosi & Roberto Bonciani & Dario Frosali & Giampaolo Manfrida & Maria Laura Parisi & Franco Sansone, 2020. "Life Cycle Analysis of a Geothermal Power Plant: Comparison of the Environmental Performance with Other Renewable Energy Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-29, April.
    16. Schifflechner, Christopher & Dawo, Fabian & Eyerer, Sebastian & Wieland, Christoph & Spliethoff, Hartmut, 2020. "Thermodynamic comparison of direct supercritical CO2 and indirect brine-ORC concepts for geothermal combined heat and power generation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 1292-1302.
    17. Liu, Qiang & Duan, Yuanyuan & Yang, Zhen, 2013. "Performance analyses of geothermal organic Rankine cycles with selected hydrocarbon working fluids," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 123-132.
    18. Lacirignola, Martino & Blanc, Isabelle, 2013. "Environmental analysis of practical design options for enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) through life-cycle assessment," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 901-914.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Menberg, Kathrin & Heberle, Florian & Uhrmann, Hannah & Bott, Christoph & Grünäugl, Sebastian & Brüggemann, Dieter & Bayer, Peter, 2023. "Environmental impact of cogeneration in binary geothermal plants," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    2. Gkousis, Spiros & Welkenhuysen, Kris & Compernolle, Tine, 2022. "Deep geothermal energy extraction, a review on environmental hotspots with focus on geo-technical site conditions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    3. Michał Kaczmarczyk & Barbara Tomaszewska & Agnieszka Operacz, 2020. "Sustainable Utilization of Low Enthalpy Geothermal Resources to Electricity Generation through a Cascade System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Anderson, Austin & Rezaie, Behnaz, 2019. "Geothermal technology: Trends and potential role in a sustainable future," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 18-34.
    5. Menberg, Kathrin & Heberle, Florian & Bott, Christoph & Brüggemann, Dieter & Bayer, Peter, 2021. "Environmental performance of a geothermal power plant using a hydrothermal resource in the Southern German Molasse Basin," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 20-31.
    6. Maria Laura Parisi & Melanie Douziech & Lorenzo Tosti & Paula Pérez-López & Barbara Mendecka & Sergio Ulgiati & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Isabelle Blanc, 2020. "Definition of LCA Guidelines in the Geothermal Sector to Enhance Result Comparability," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Vitantonio Colucci & Giampaolo Manfrida & Barbara Mendecka & Lorenzo Talluri & Claudio Zuffi, 2021. "LCA and Exergo-Environmental Evaluation of a Combined Heat and Power Double-Flash Geothermal Power Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, February.
    8. Gkousis, Spiros & Thomassen, Gwenny & Welkenhuysen, Kris & Compernolle, Tine, 2022. "Dynamic life cycle assessment of geothermal heat production from medium enthalpy hydrothermal resources," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 328(C).
    9. Liu, Qiang & Shang, Linlin & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2016. "Performance analyses of a hybrid geothermal–fossil power generation system using low-enthalpy geothermal resources," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 149-162.
    10. Liu, Wen & Ramirez, Andrea, 2017. "State of the art review of the environmental assessment and risks of underground geo-energy resources exploitation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 628-644.
    11. Soltani, M. & Moradi Kashkooli, Farshad & Souri, Mohammad & Rafiei, Behnam & Jabarifar, Mohammad & Gharali, Kobra & Nathwani, Jatin S., 2021. "Environmental, economic, and social impacts of geothermal energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    12. Maryori Díaz-Ramírez & Snorri Jokull & Claudio Zuffi & María Dolores Mainar-Toledo & Giampaolo Manfrida, 2023. "Environmental Assessment of Hellisheidi Geothermal Power Plant based on Exergy Allocation Factors for Heat and Electricity Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-17, April.
    13. Dawo, Fabian & Fleischmann, Jonas & Kaufmann, Florian & Schifflechner, Christopher & Eyerer, Sebastian & Wieland, Christoph & Spliethoff, Hartmut, 2021. "R1224yd(Z), R1233zd(E) and R1336mzz(Z) as replacements for R245fa: Experimental performance, interaction with lubricants and environmental impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    14. Maria Milousi & Athanasios Pappas & Andreas P. Vouros & Giouli Mihalakakou & Manolis Souliotis & Spiros Papaefthimiou, 2022. "Evaluating the Technical and Environmental Capabilities of Geothermal Systems through Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-30, August.
    15. Huang, Huang & Zhang, Anan, 2026. "Incentive impact analysis of geothermal power plants in oil and gas fields using a life cycle assessment–system dynamics model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 256(PE).
    16. Riccardo Basosi & Roberto Bonciani & Dario Frosali & Giampaolo Manfrida & Maria Laura Parisi & Franco Sansone, 2020. "Life Cycle Analysis of a Geothermal Power Plant: Comparison of the Environmental Performance with Other Renewable Energy Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-29, April.
    17. Asdrubali, Francesco & Baldinelli, Giorgio & D’Alessandro, Francesco & Scrucca, Flavio, 2015. "Life cycle assessment of electricity production from renewable energies: Review and results harmonization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1113-1122.
    18. Lorenzo Bruscoli & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Duccio Tempesti, 2015. "Improving the Environmental Sustainability of Flash Geothermal Power Plants—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-22, November.
    19. Niknam, Pouriya H. & Talluri, Lorenzo & Fiaschi, Daniele & Manfrida, Giampaolo, 2021. "Sensitivity analysis and dynamic modelling of the reinjection process in a binary cycle geothermal power plant of Larderello area," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    20. Lorenzo Tosti & Nicola Ferrara & Riccardo Basosi & Maria Laura Parisi, 2020. "Complete Data Inventory of a Geothermal Power Plant for Robust Cradle-to-Grave Life Cycle Assessment Results," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:313:y:2024:i:c:s0360544224035217. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.