IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i24p16580-d999878.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Techno-Economic Assessment of the Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Geothermal Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Mauro Tagliaferri

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50121 Firenze, Italy)

  • Paweł Gładysz

    (Faculty of Energy and Fuels, AGH University of Science and Technology, 30-059 Kraków, Poland)

  • Pietro Ungar

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50121 Firenze, Italy)

  • Magdalena Strojny

    (Faculty of Energy and Fuels, AGH University of Science and Technology, 30-059 Kraków, Poland)

  • Lorenzo Talluri

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50121 Firenze, Italy)

  • Daniele Fiaschi

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50121 Firenze, Italy)

  • Giampaolo Manfrida

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50121 Firenze, Italy)

  • Trond Andresen

    (SINTEF Energy Research, 7034 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Anna Sowiżdżał

    (Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental Protection, AGH University of Science and Technology, 30-059 Kraków, Poland)

Abstract

Enhanced geothermal systems distinguish themselves among other technologies that utilize renewable energy sources by their possibility of the partial sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). Thus, CO 2 in its supercritical form in such units may be considered as better working fluid for heat transfer than conventionally used water. The main goal of the study was to perform the techno-economic analysis of different configurations of supercritical carbon dioxide-enhanced geothermal systems (sCO 2 -EGSs). The energy performance as well as economic evaluation including heat and power generation, capital and operational expenditures, and levelized cost of electricity and heat were investigated based on the results of mathematical modeling and process simulations. The results indicated that sCO 2 mass flow rates and injection temperature have a significant impact on energetic results and also cost estimation. In relation to financial assessment, the highest levelized cost of electricity was obtained for the indirect sCO 2 cycle (219.5 EUR/MWh) mainly due to the lower electricity production (in comparison with systems using Organic Rankine Cycle) and high investment costs. Both energy and economic assessments in this study provide a systematic approach to compare the sCO 2 -EGS variants.

Suggested Citation

  • Mauro Tagliaferri & Paweł Gładysz & Pietro Ungar & Magdalena Strojny & Lorenzo Talluri & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Trond Andresen & Anna Sowiżdżał, 2022. "Techno-Economic Assessment of the Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Geothermal Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16580-:d:999878
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16580/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16580/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gładysz, Paweł & Saari, Jussi & Czarnowska, Lucyna, 2020. "Thermo-ecological cost analysis of cogeneration and polygeneration energy systems - Case study for thermal conversion of biomass," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 1748-1760.
    2. Zheng, Shuai & Li, Sanbai & Zhang, Dongxiao, 2021. "Fluid and heat flow in enhanced geothermal systems considering fracture geometrical and topological complexities: An extended embedded discrete fracture model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 163-178.
    3. Lu, Shyi-Min, 2018. "A global review of enhanced geothermal system (EGS)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2902-2921.
    4. Haris, Muhammad & Hou, Michael Z. & Feng, Wentao & Mehmood, Faisal & Saleem, Ammar bin, 2022. "A regenerative Enhanced Geothermal System for heat and electricity production as well as energy storage," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 342-358.
    5. 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.
    6. Ioan Sarbu & Matei Mirza & Daniel Muntean, 2022. "Integration of Renewable Energy Sources into Low-Temperature District Heating Systems: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-28, September.
    7. Paweł Gładysz & Anna Sowiżdżał & Maciej Miecznik & Maciej Hacaga & Leszek Pająk, 2020. "Techno-Economic Assessment of a Combined Heat and Power Plant Integrated with Carbon Dioxide Removal Technology: A Case Study for Central Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-34, June.
    8. Li, S. & Wang, S. & Tang, H., 2022. "Stimulation mechanism and design of enhanced geothermal systems: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    9. 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).
    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. Lianghan Cong & Shuaiyi Lu & Pan Jiang & Tianqi Zheng & Ziwang Yu & Xiaoshu Lü, 2024. "Research Progress on CO 2 as Geothermal Working Fluid: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Schifflechner, Christopher & de Reus, Jasper & Schuster, Sebastian & Corpancho Villasana, Andreas & Brillert, Dieter & Saar, Martin O. & Spliethoff, Hartmut, 2024. "Paving the way for CO2-Plume Geothermal (CPG) systems: A perspective on the CO2 surface equipment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    3. Ungar, Pietro & Schifflechner, Christopher & Wieland, Christoph & Spliethoff, Hartmut & Manfrida, Giampaolo, 2024. "Thermo-economic comparison of CO2 and water as a heat carrier for long-distance heat transport from geothermal sources: A Bavarian case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    4. Andrea Arbula Blecich & Paolo Blecich, 2023. "Thermoeconomic Analysis of Subcritical and Supercritical Isobutane Cycles for Geothermal Power Generation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-25, May.

    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. Guo, Tiankui & Zhang, Yuelong & He, Jiayuan & Gong, Facheng & Chen, Ming & Liu, Xiaoqiang, 2021. "Research on geothermal development model of abandoned high temperature oil reservoir in North China oilfield," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Liu, Jun & Zhao, Peng & Peng, Jiao & Xian, Hongyu, 2024. "Insight into the investigation of heat extraction performance affected by natural fractures in enhanced geothermal system (EGS) with THM multiphysical field model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    3. Anna Sowiżdżał & Paweł Gładysz & Leszek Pająk, 2021. "Sustainable Use of Petrothermal Resources—A Review of the Geological Conditions in Poland," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    4. Jiang, Sheng & Chen, Chen & Zhang, Shanling & Xu, Zhenhua & Liu, Xiang & Tu, Guigang & Zhao, Songying, 2025. "Thermo-Hydro-Mechanical coupling analysis of spiral wellbores in horizontal wells for heat extraction from hot dry rock: A case study of the Gonghe Basin, Qinghai, China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 319(C).
    5. Mu, Shuxing & Zhang, Ao & Zhao, Lianheng, 2024. "Investigation on the heat extraction performance considering a rough fracture network in heterogeneous reservoirs," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    6. Xue, Zhenqian & Wei, Zichao & Ma, Haoming & Sun, Zhe & Lu, Chengang & Chen, Zhangxin, 2025. "Exploring the role of fracture networks in enhanced geothermal systems: Insights from integrated thermal-hydraulic-mechanical-chemical and wellbore dynamics simulations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    7. Zheng, Jun & Li, Peng & Dou, Bin & Fan, Tao & Tian, Hong & Lai, Xiaotian, 2022. "Impact research of well layout schemes and fracture parameters on heat production performance of enhanced geothermal system considering water cooling effect," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    8. Zhou, Chunwei & Liu, Gang & Liao, Shengming, 2024. "Probing fractured reservoir of enhanced geothermal systems with fuzzy-genetic inversion model: Impacts of geothermal reservoir environment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    9. Zhao, Peng & Liu, Jun & Elsworth, Derek, 2023. "Numerical study on a multifracture enhanced geothermal system considering matrix permeability enhancement induced by thermal unloading," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 33-44.
    10. Qiao, Mingzheng & Jing, Zefeng & Feng, Chenchen & Li, Minghui & Chen, Cheng & Zou, Xupeng & Zhou, Yujuan, 2024. "Review on heat extraction systems of hot dry rock: Classifications, benefits, limitations, research status and future prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    11. Li, S. & Wang, S. & Tang, H., 2022. "Stimulation mechanism and design of enhanced geothermal systems: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    12. Paweł Gładysz & Anna Sowiżdżał & Maciej Miecznik & Maciej Hacaga & Leszek Pająk, 2020. "Techno-Economic Assessment of a Combined Heat and Power Plant Integrated with Carbon Dioxide Removal Technology: A Case Study for Central Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-34, June.
    13. Anna Sowiżdżał & Magdalena Starczewska & Bartosz Papiernik, 2022. "Future Technology Mix—Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) and Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS)—An Overview of Selected Projects as an Example for Future Investments in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-24, May.
    14. Adam Dominiak & Artur Rusowicz, 2022. "Change of Fossil-Fuel-Related Carbon Productivity Index of the Main Manufacturing Sectors in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-14, September.
    15. Jizhe Guo & Zengchao Feng & Xuecheng Li, 2023. "Shear Strength and Energy Evolution of Granite under Real-Time Temperature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-18, May.
    16. Leszek Pająk & Anna Sowiżdżał & Paweł Gładysz & Barbara Tomaszewska & Maciej Miecznik & Trond Andresen & Bjørn S. Frengstad & Anna Chmielowska, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Studies and Assessment Supporting the Selection of Locations and Technologies Used in CO 2 -EGS Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-18, November.
    17. Wang, Gaosheng & Song, Xianzhi & Shi, Yu & Yang, Ruiyue & Yulong, Feixue & Zheng, Rui & Li, Jiacheng, 2021. "Heat extraction analysis of a novel multilateral-well coaxial closed-loop geothermal system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 974-986.
    18. Zhang, Bo & Guo, Tiankui & Qu, Zhanqing & Wang, Jiwei & Chen, Ming & Liu, Xiaoqiang, 2023. "Numerical simulation of fracture propagation and production performance in a fractured geothermal reservoir using a 2D FEM-based THMD coupling model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    19. Zhang, Jiansong & Liu, Yongsheng & Lv, Jianguo & Yang, Gansheng & Xia, Jianxin, 2024. "Comparative investigation of heat extraction performance in 3D self-affine rough single fractures using CO2,N2O and H2O as heat transfer fluid," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    20. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16580-:d:999878. 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.