Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Thermo-economic analysis of a direct supercritical CO2 electric power generation system using geothermal heat

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers in Energy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A comprehensive thermo-economic model combining a geothermal heat mining system and a direct supercritical CO2 turbine expansion electric power generation system was proposed in this paper. Assisted by this integrated model, thermo-economic and optimization analyses for the key design parameters of the whole system including the geothermal well pattern and operational conditions were performed to obtain a minimal levelized cost of electricity (LCOE). Specifically, in geothermal heat extraction simulation, an integrated well-bore-reservoir system model (T2Well/ECO2N) was used to generate a database for creating a fast, predictive, and compatible geothermal heat mining model by employing a response surface methodology. A parametric study was conducted to demonstrate the impact of turbine discharge pressure, injection and production well distance, CO2 injection flowrate, CO2 injection temperature, and monitored production well bottom pressure on LCOE, system thermal efficiency, and capital cost. It was found that for a 100 MWe power plant, a minimal LCOE of $0.177/kWh was achieved for a 20-year steady operation without considering CO2 sequestration credit. In addition, when CO2 sequestration credit is $1.00/t, an LCOE breakeven point compared to a conventional geothermal power plant is achieved and a breakpoint for generating electric power generation at no cost was achieved for a sequestration credit of $2.05/t.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

R :

The radial distance from the injection well to production well/m

D :

Diameter of well/m

ṁ :

Mass flowrate/(kg·s−1)

T :

Temperature/°C

P :

Pressure/MPa

h :

Specific enthalpy/(kJ·kg−1)

s :

Isentropic process

Q :

Thermal energy/kWth

v :

Velocity/(m·s−1)

z :

Well depth/m

S :

Well drilling successful rate/%

C :

Cost/M$

F capacity :

Capacity factor

F insurance&taxes :

Taxes and insurance factor

i :

Annual interest rate/%

n :

Loan period/a

\({b_{{\rm{C}}{{\rm{O}}_2}}}\) :

CO2 sequestration credit/($·t−1)

V :

Volume flowrate//(L·min−1)

N wellset :

Number of well-set required

W :

Power plant capacity/MWe

e :

Error in RSM design

r 2 :

Coefficient of determination

t :

Turbine

comp:

Compressor

inj:

Injection well

prod:

Production well

reinj:

Re-injection well

dis:

Discharge

opt:

Optimal value

th:

Thermal

α :

RSM regression coefficient

ε :

Heat exchanger effectiveness

ρ :

Density//(kg·m−3)

η :

Efficiency

sCO2 :

Supercritical carbon dioxide

RSM:

Response surface methodology

LCOE:

Levelized cost of electricity

O&M:

Operation and maintenance

HX:

Heat exchanger

APF:

Annual payment factor

M$:

Million US Dollars

References

  1. Romero C E, Wang X. Key technologies for ultra-low emissions from coal-fired power plants. In: Zhang Y S, Wang T, Pan W P, Romero C E, eds. Advances in Ultra-low Emission Control Technologies for Coal-fired Power Plants. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2019: 39–79

    Google Scholar 

  2. OSTI. GOV. Electric power monthly. Technical Report, Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), 1995

  3. Figueroa J D, Fout T, Plasynski S, et al. Advances in CO2 capture technology—the US Department of Energy’s carbon sequestration program. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2008, 2(1): 9–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Randolph J B, Saar M O. Coupling carbon dioxide sequestration with geothermal energy capture in naturally permeable, porous geologic formations: implications for CO2 sequestration. Energy Procedia, 2011, 4: 2206–2213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pan C, Chávez O, Romero C E, et al. Heat mining assessment for geothermal reservoirs in Mexico using supercritical CO2 injection. Energy, 2016, 102: 148–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Garapati N, Randolph J B, Saar M O. Brine displacement by CO2, energy extraction rates, and lifespan of a CO2-limited CO2-Plume Geothermal (CPG) system with a horizontal production well. Geothermics, 2015, 55: 182–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Adams B M, Kuehn T H, Bielicki J M, et al. A comparison of electric power output of CO2 Plume Geothermal (CPG) and brine geothermal systems for varying reservoir conditions. Applied Energy, 2015, 140: 365–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Adams B M, Kuehn T H, Bielicki J M, et al. On the importance of the thermosiphon effect in CPG (CO2 plume geothermal) power systems. Energy, 2014, 69: 409–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang L, Cui G, Zhang Y, et al. Influence of pore water on the heat mining performance of supercritical CO2 injected for geothermal development. Journal of CO2 Utilization, 2016, 16: 287–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahn Y, Bae S J, Kim M, et al. Review of supercritical CO2 power cycle technology and current status of research and development. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 2015, 47(6): 647–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Turchi C S, Ma Z W, Dyreby J. Supercritical carbon dioxide power cycle configurations for use in concentrating solar power systems. In: Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2012: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2013

  12. Persichilli M, Kacludis A, Zdankiewicz E, et al. Supercritical CO2 power cycle developments and commercialization: why sCO2 can displace steam. In: Power-Gen India & Central Asia, New Delhi, India, 2012

  13. Wright S A, Conboy T M, Rochau G E, et al. Supercritical CO2 power cycle development summary at Sandia National Laboratories. In: 1st International Seminar on Organic Rankine Cycle Power Systems, Delft, Netherlands, 2011

  14. Mecheri M, Le Moullec Y. Supercritical CO2 Brayton cycles for coal-fired power plants. Energy, 2016, 103: 758–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Noaman M, Saade G, Morosuk T, et al. Exergoeconomic analysis applied to supercritical CO2 power systems. Energy, 2019, 183: 756–765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Park S, Kim J, Yoon M, et al. Thermodynamic and economic investigation of coal-fired power plant combined with various supercritical CO2 Brayton power cycle. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2018, 130: 611–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sharan P, Neises T, Turchi C. Thermal desalination via supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle: optimal system design and techno-economic analysis without reduction in cycle efficiency. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2019, 152: 499–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li M, Xu J, Cao F, et al. The investigation of thermo-economic performance and conceptual design for the miniaturized lead-cooled fast reactor composing supercritical CO2 power cycle. Energy, 2019, 173:174–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Atrens A D, Gurgenci H, Rudolph V. Economic optimization of a CO2-based EGS power plant. Energy & Fuels, 2011, 25(8): 3765–3775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Levy E K, Wang X, Pan C, et al. Use of hot supercritical CO2 produced from a geothermal reservoir to generate electric power in a gas turbine power generation system. Journal of CO2 Utilization, 2018, 23: 20–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang X C. Investigation of geothermal heat extraction using supercritical carbon dioxide (sCO2) and its utilization in sCO2-based power cycles and organic Rankine cycles-a thermodynamic & economic perspective. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Bethlehem: Lehigh University, 2018

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wang X, Levy E K, Pan C, et al. Working fluid selection for organic Rankine cycle power generation using hot produced supercritical CO2 from a geothermal reservoir. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2019, 149: 1287–1304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pruess K, Oldenburg C M, Moridis G J. TOUGH2 User’s Guide Version 2[R]. Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), 1999, available at the website of digital.library.unt.edu

  24. Pruess K. ECO2N: A TOUGH2 Fluid Property Module for Mixtures of Water, NaCl, and CO2[R]. Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), 2005, available at the website of tough.lbl.gov

  25. Pan C, Romero C E, Levy E K, et al. Fully coupled wellborereservoir simulation of supercritical CO2 injection from fossil fuel power plant for heat mining from geothermal reservoirs. Journal of CO2 Utilization, 2018, 27: 480–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pan L, Freifeld B, Doughty C, et al. Fully coupled wellborereservoir modeling of geothermal heat extraction using CO2 as the working fluid. Geothermics, 2015, 53: 100–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pan L, Oldenburg C M. T2Well—an integrated wellbore-reservoir simulator. Computers & Geosciences, 2014, 65: 46–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pan L, Webb S W, Oldenburg C M. Analytical solution for two-phase flow in a wellbore using the drift-flux model. Advances in Water Resources, 2011, 34(12): 1656–1665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bezerra M A, Santelli R E, Oliveira E P, et al. Response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry. Talanta, 2008, 76(5): 965–977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Montgomery D C. Design and Analysis of Experiments. Hoboken, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2017

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gunst R F, Myers R H, Montgomery D C. Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. Technometrics, 1996, 38(3): 285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Plus ASPEN. Aspen technology. Inc., version. 2009, available at the website of aspentech.com

  33. Peletiri S, Rahmanian N, Mujtaba I. CO2 pipeline design: a review. Energies, 2018, 11(9): 2184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Vandeginste V, Piessens K. Pipeline design for a least-cost router application for CO2 transport in the CO2 sequestration cycle. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2008, 2(4): 571–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sanyal S K. Cost of geothermal power and factors that affect it. In: Proceedings of 29th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford, California, USA, 2004

  36. Gross R, Heptonstall P, Blyth W. Investment in electricity generation: the role of costs, incentives and risks. Imperial College Centre for Energy Policy and Technology (ICEPT) for the Technology and Policy Assessment Function of the UK Energy Research Centre, 2007

  37. Boggs P T, Tolle J W. Sequential quadratic programming. Acta Numerica, 1995, 4: 1–51

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Rubin E S, Chen C, Rao A B. Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage. Energy Policy, 2007, 35(9): 4444–4454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. USCODE. 26 USC 45Q: credit for carbon oxide sequestration. 2018, available at the website of uscode.house.gov

  40. Turton R, Bailie R C, Whiting W B, et al. Analysis, Synthesis, and Design of Chemical Processes (Prentice-Hall International Series in the Physical and Chemical Engineering Sciences). 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall/PTR, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  41. Silla H. Chemical Process Engineering: Design and Economics. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2003

    Book  Google Scholar 

  42. McCollum D L, Ogden J M. Techno-economic models for carbon dioxide compression, transport, and storage & correlations for estimating carbon dioxide density and viscosity. 2006, available at the website of ideas.repec.org

  43. Lemmon E W, Huber M L, McLinden M O. NIST reference fluid thermodynamic and transport properties-REFPROP. 2019–4, available at the website of nist.gov

  44. Morris D. RSMeans Mechanical Cost Data. 40th annual edition, Cordian RSMeans Data, Rockland, MA, USA, 2017

    Google Scholar 

  45. Charles J. Communications with sales rep from Mueller Environmental Designs, Inc. 2017, available at the website of muellerenvironmental.com

  46. Qiao Z, Tang Y, Zhang L, et al. Design and performance analysis of a supercritical CO2 (sCO2)-water separator for power generation systems using hot sCO2 from geothermal reservoirs. Geothermics, 2019, 81: 123–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the Mexican National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT in Spanish), under the Sectorial Fund for Energy Sustainability, CONACYT-Secretary of Energy (No. S0019-2012-04).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, 80401, USA

    Xingchao Wang

  2. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO, 80401, USA

    Xingchao Wang

  3. Energy Research Center, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA, 18015, USA

    Chunjian Pan & Carlos E. Romero

  4. Key Laboratory of Energy Thermal Conversion and Control of the Ministry of Education, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China

    Zongliang Qiao

  5. Department of Mechanical Engineering and Mechanics, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA, 18015, USA

    Arindam Banerjee

  6. Mechanical Engineering, Universidad Michoacán de San Nicolas de Hidalgo, Morelia, Michoacán, C.P. 58030, Mexico

    Carlos Rubio-Maya

  7. Energy Geosciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA

    Lehua Pan

Authors
  1. Xingchao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chunjian Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carlos E. Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zongliang Qiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Arindam Banerjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Carlos Rubio-Maya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Lehua Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chunjian Pan.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, X., Pan, C., Romero, C.E. et al. Thermo-economic analysis of a direct supercritical CO2 electric power generation system using geothermal heat. Front. Energy 16, 246–262 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-021-0749-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-021-0749-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation