IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i11p4622-d1404803.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Qualtra Geothermal Power Plant: Life Cycle, Exergo-Economic, and Exergo-Environmental Preliminary Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Claudio Zuffi

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50139 Florence, Italy)

  • Pietro Ungar

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50139 Florence, Italy)

  • Daniele Fiaschi

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50139 Florence, Italy)

  • Giampaolo Manfrida

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50139 Florence, Italy)

  • Fausto Batini

    (MagmaEnergy Italia SrL, 52100 Arezzo, Italy)

Abstract

Qualtra, an innovative 10 MW geothermal power plant proposal, employs a closed-loop design to mitigate emissions, ensuring no direct release into the atmosphere. A thorough assessment utilizing energy and exergy analysis, life cycle assessment (LCA), exergo-economic analysis, and exergo environmental analysis (EevA) was conducted. The LCA results, utilizing the ReCiPe 2016 midpoint methodology, encompass all the spectrum of environmental indicators provided. The technology implemented makes it possible to avoid direct atmospheric emissions from the Qualtra plant, so the environmental impact is mainly due to indirect emissions over the life cycle. The result obtained for the global warming potential indicator is about 6.6 g CO 2 eq/kWh, notably lower compared to other conventional systems. Contribution analysis reveals that the construction phase dominates, accounting for over 90% of the impact for almost all LCA midpoint categories, excluding stratospheric ozone depletion, which is dominated by the impact from the operation and maintenance phase, at about 87%. Endpoint indicators were assessed to estimate the single score value using normalization and weighting at the component level. The resulting single score is then used in an Exergo-Environmental Analysis (EEvA), highlighting the well system as the most impactful contributor, constituting approximately 45% of the total impact. Other substantial contributions to the environmental impact include the condenser (21%), the turbine (17%), and the HEGeo (14%). The exergo-economic analysis assesses cost distribution across major plant components, projecting an electricity cost of about 9.4 c€/kWh.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudio Zuffi & Pietro Ungar & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Fausto Batini, 2024. "Qualtra Geothermal Power Plant: Life Cycle, Exergo-Economic, and Exergo-Environmental Preliminary Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:11:p:4622-:d:1404803
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/11/4622/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/11/4622/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    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. Oyekale, Joseph & Petrollese, Mario & Cau, Giorgio, 2020. "Modified auxiliary exergy costing in advanced exergoeconomic analysis applied to a hybrid solar-biomass organic Rankine cycle plant," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).
    2. Sadi, M. & Arabkoohsar, A., 2019. "Exergoeconomic analysis of a combined solar-waste driven power plant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 883-893.
    3. Petrakopoulou, Fontina & Tsatsaronis, George & Morosuk, Tatiana & Carassai, Anna, 2012. "Conventional and advanced exergetic analyses applied to a combined cycle power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 146-152.
    4. Picallo-Perez, Ana & Catrini, Pietro & Piacentino, Antonio & Sala, José-Mª, 2019. "A novel thermoeconomic analysis under dynamic operating conditions for space heating and cooling systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 819-837.
    5. Yue, Ting & Lior, Noam, 2017. "Exergo economic analysis of solar-assisted hybrid power generation systems integrated with thermochemical fuel conversion," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 204-222.
    6. Primabudi, Eko & Morosuk, Tatiana & Tsatsaronis, George, 2019. "Multi-objective optimization of propane pre-cooled mixed refrigerant (C3MR) LNG process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 492-504.
    7. Das, Mainak & Reddy, K.S., 2025. "Modelling and optimization of combined supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle and organic Rankine cycle for electricity and hydrogen production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 377(PC).
    8. Silveira, Jose Luz & Lamas, Wendell de Queiroz & Tuna, Celso Eduardo & Villela, Iraides Aparecida de Castro & Miro, Laura Siso, 2012. "Ecological efficiency and thermoeconomic analysis of a cogeneration system at a hospital," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 2894-2906.
    9. Aygun, Hakan & Turan, Onder, 2021. "Exergo-economic analysis of off-design a target drone engine for reconnaissance mission flight," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    10. Soltanian, Salman & Kalogirou, Soteris A. & Ranjbari, Meisam & Amiri, Hamid & Mahian, Omid & Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Jafary, Tahereh & Nizami, Abdul-Sattar & Gupta, Vijai Kumar & Aghaei, Siavash & Pe, 2022. "Exergetic sustainability analysis of municipal solid waste treatment systems: A systematic critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    11. Lee, Young Duk & Ahn, Kook Young & Morosuk, Tatiana & Tsatsaronis, George, 2018. "Exergetic and exergoeconomic evaluation of an SOFC-Engine hybrid power generation system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 810-822.
    12. Silva, J.A.M. & Flórez-Orrego, D. & Oliveira, S., 2014. "An exergy based approach to determine production cost and CO2 allocation for petroleum derived fuels," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 490-495.
    13. Zhong, Like & Yao, Erren & Zou, Hansen & Xi, Guang, 2022. "Thermodynamic and economic analysis of a directly solar-driven power-to-methane system by detailed distributed parameter method," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 312(C).
    14. García Kerdan, Iván & Raslan, Rokia & Ruyssevelt, Paul & Morillón Gálvez, David, 2017. "A comparison of an energy/economic-based against an exergoeconomic-based multi-objective optimisation for low carbon building energy design," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 244-263.
    15. Aghaei, Ali Tavakkol & Saray, Rahim Khoshbakhti, 2021. "Optimization of a combined cooling, heating, and power (CCHP) system with a gas turbine prime mover: A case study in the dairy industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    16. Hossein Nami & Amjad Anvari-Moghaddam & Ahmad Arabkoohsar & Amir Reza Razmi, 2020. "4E Analyses of a Hybrid Waste-Driven CHP–ORC Plant with Flue Gas Condensation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-21, November.
    17. Hepbasli, Arif & Alsuhaibani, Zeyad, 2011. "Exergetic and exergoeconomic aspects of wind energy systems in achieving sustainable development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 2810-2825, August.
    18. Christoph Sejkora & Lisa Kühberger & Fabian Radner & Alexander Trattner & Thomas Kienberger, 2020. "Exergy as Criteria for Efficient Energy Systems—A Spatially Resolved Comparison of the Current Exergy Consumption, the Current Useful Exergy Demand and Renewable Exergy Potential," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-51, February.
    19. Mohammadkhani, F. & Shokati, N. & Mahmoudi, S.M.S. & Yari, M. & Rosen, M.A., 2014. "Exergoeconomic assessment and parametric study of a Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor combined with two Organic Rankine Cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 533-543.
    20. Piacentino, Antonio & Cardona, Fabio, 2010. "Scope-Oriented Thermoeconomic analysis of energy systems. Part I: Looking for a non-postulated cost accounting for the dissipative devices of a vapour compression chiller. Is it feasible?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 943-956, March.

    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:16:y:2024:i:11:p:4622-:d:1404803. 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.