IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i12p3187-d373726.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

High-Temperature Geothermal Utilization in the Context of European Energy Policy—Implications and Limitations

Author

Listed:
  • Marta Ros Karlsdottir

    (Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Iceland, VR-II, Hjardarhaga 6, 107 Reykjavik, Iceland)

  • Jukka Heinonen

    (Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Iceland, VR-II, Hjardarhaga 6, 107 Reykjavik, Iceland)

  • Halldor Palsson

    (Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Iceland, VR-II, Hjardarhaga 6, 107 Reykjavik, Iceland)

  • Olafur Petur Palsson

    (Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Iceland, VR-II, Hjardarhaga 6, 107 Reykjavik, Iceland)

Abstract

The European Union (EU) has made climate change mitigation a high priority though a policy framework called “Clean Energy for all Europeans “. The concept of primary energy for energy resources plays a critical role in how different energy technologies appear in the context of this policy. This study shows how the calculation methodologies of primary energy content and primary energy factors pose a possible negative implication on the future development of geothermal energy when comparing against EU’s key energy policy targets for 2030. Following the current definitions of primary energy, geothermal utilization becomes the most inefficient resource in terms of primary energy use, thus contradicting key targets of increased energy efficiency in buildings and in the overall energy use of member states. We use a case study of Hellisheidi, an existing geothermal power plant in Iceland, to demonstrate how the standard primary energy factor for geothermal in EU energy policy is highly overestimated for efficient geothermal power plants. Moreover, we combine life cycle assessment and the commonly utilized combined heat and power production allocation methods to extract the non-renewable primary energy factor for geothermal and show how it is only a minimal fraction of the total primary energy factor for geothermal. The findings of the study apply to other geothermal plants within the coverage of the European Union’s energy policy, whether from high- or low-temperature geothermal resources. Geothermal has substantial potential to aid in achieving the key energy and climate targets. Still, with the current definition of the primary energy of geothermal resources, it may not reach the potential.

Suggested Citation

  • Marta Ros Karlsdottir & Jukka Heinonen & Halldor Palsson & Olafur Petur Palsson, 2020. "High-Temperature Geothermal Utilization in the Context of European Energy Policy—Implications and Limitations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-27, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:12:p:3187-:d:373726
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/12/3187/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/12/3187/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jukka Heinonen & Jani Laine & Karoliina Pluuman & Eeva-Sofia Säynäjoki & Risto Soukka & Seppo Junnila, 2015. "Planning for a Low Carbon Future? Comparing Heat Pumps and Cogeneration as the Energy System Options for a New Residential Area," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Shubbak, Mahmood H., 2019. "Advances in solar photovoltaics: Technology review and patent trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Anahita Farsaei & Sanna Syri & Ville Olkkonen & Ali Khosravi, 2020. "Unintended Consequences of National Climate Policy on International Electricity Markets—Case Finland’s Ban on Coal-Fired Generation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, April.
    5. Soimakallio, Sampo & Kiviluoma, Juha & Saikku, Laura, 2011. "The complexity and challenges of determining GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions from grid electricity consumption and conservation in LCA (life cycle assessment) – A methodological review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 6705-6713.
    6. DeLovato, Nicolas & Sundarnath, Kavin & Cvijovic, Lazar & Kota, Krishna & Kuravi, Sarada, 2019. "A review of heat recovery applications for solar and geothermal power plants," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Christian Moretti & Blanca Corona & Viola Rühlin & Thomas Götz & Martin Junginger & Thomas Brunner & Ingwald Obernberger & Li Shen, 2020. "Combining Biomass Gasification and Solid Oxid Fuel Cell for Heat and Power Generation: An Early-Stage Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, June.
    8. Buonocore, Elvira & Vanoli, Laura & Carotenuto, Alberto & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2015. "Integrating life cycle assessment and emergy synthesis for the evaluation of a dry steam geothermal power plant in Italy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 476-487.
    9. 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.
    10. Harmsen, Robert & Wesselink, Bart & Eichhammer, Wolfgang & Worrell, Ernst, 2011. "The unrecognized contribution of renewable energy to Europe's energy savings target," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3425-3433, June.
    11. Segers, Reinoud, 2008. "Three options to calculate the percentage renewable energy: An example for a EU policy debate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 3243-3248, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wenxiao Chu & Francesco Calise & Neven Duić & Poul Alberg Østergaard & Maria Vicidomini & Qiuwang Wang, 2020. "Recent Advances in Technology, Strategy and Application of Sustainable Energy Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-29, October.
    2. Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Barbara Mendecka & Lorenzo Tosti & Maria Laura Parisi, 2021. "A Comparison of Different Approaches for Assessing Energy Outputs of Combined Heat and Power Geothermal Plants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-13, April.
    3. 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.
    4. Ri Piao & Deok-Joo Lee & Taegu Kim, 2020. "Real-Time Pricing Scheme in Smart Grid Considering Time Preference: Game Theoretic Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-19, November.

    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. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. Abolhosseini, Shahrouz & Heshmati, Almas & Altmann, Jörn, 2014. "A Review of Renewable Energy Supply and Energy Efficiency Technologies," IZA Discussion Papers 8145, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Stemmle, Ruben & Blum, Philipp & Schüppler, Simon & Fleuchaus, Paul & Limoges, Melissa & Bayer, Peter & Menberg, Kathrin, 2021. "Environmental impacts of aquifer thermal energy storage (ATES)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Gerber, Léda & Maréchal, François, 2012. "Environomic optimal configurations of geothermal energy conversion systems: Application to the future construction of Enhanced Geothermal Systems in Switzerland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 908-923.
    7. Hanbury, O. & Vasquez, V.R., 2018. "Life cycle analysis of geothermal energy for power and transportation: A stochastic approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 371-381.
    8. Alessio Ilari & Daniele Duca & Kofi Armah Boakye-Yiadom & Thomas Gasperini & Giuseppe Toscano, 2022. "Carbon Footprint and Feedstock Quality of a Real Biomass Power Plant Fed with Forestry and Agricultural Residues," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, January.
    9. Campos-Guzmán, Verónica & García-Cáscales, M. Socorro & Espinosa, Nieves & Urbina, Antonio, 2019. "Life Cycle Analysis with Multi-Criteria Decision Making: A review of approaches for the sustainability evaluation of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 343-366.
    10. Maione, A. & Massarotti, N. & Santagata, R. & Ulgiati, S. & Vanoli, L., 2023. "Integrated environmental accounting of a geothermal grid," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Anderson, Austin & Rezaie, Behnaz, 2019. "Geothermal technology: Trends and potential role in a sustainable future," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 18-34.
    12. 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).
    13. Rinne, S. & Syri, S., 2013. "Heat pumps versus combined heat and power production as CO2 reduction measures in Finland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 308-318.
    14. 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.
    15. Jani Laine & Juudit Ottelin & Jukka Heinonen & Seppo Junnila, 2017. "Consequential Implications of Municipal Energy System on City Carbon Footprints," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-14, October.
    16. 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.
    17. Amponsah, Nana Yaw & Troldborg, Mads & Kington, Bethany & Aalders, Inge & Hough, Rupert Lloyd, 2014. "Greenhouse gas emissions from renewable energy sources: A review of lifecycle considerations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 461-475.
    18. López-González, Luis M. & López-Ochoa, Luis M. & Las-Heras-Casas, Jesús & García-Lozano, César, 2018. "Final and primary energy consumption of the residential sector in Spain and La Rioja (1991–2013), verifying the degree of compliance with the European 2020 goals by means of energy indicators," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2358-2370.
    19. Antonio Novelli & Valentina D’Alonzo & Simon Pezzutto & Rubén Aarón Estrada Poggio & Alessandro Casasso & Pietro Zambelli, 2021. "A Spatially-Explicit Economic and Financial Assessment of Closed-Loop Ground-Source Geothermal Heat Pumps: A Case Study for the Residential Buildings of Valle d’Aosta Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-22, November.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:12:p:3187-:d:373726. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.