Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Proposing new configurations of flash cycle for effective utilization of geothermal resources: thermodynamic and exergoeconomic assessments

  • Technical Paper
  • Published:
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study aims to seek for more efficient use of geothermal resources by proposing new configurations and comparing them with previously assessed ones. In this regard, two new triple flash-based configurations are proposed (labeled as triple flash type II and triple flash type III) utilizing the high-temperature saturated liquid exiting separator. Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic performances of the systems are compared with the conventional triple and double flash cycles. For all configurations, optimization is also carried out in order to maximize the net output power considering the pressure of separators as the decision variables. The results show that the highest values of net output power and exergy efficiency are 28,500 kW and 65.03%, and belong to triple flash type I. The turbines have the highest total cost rates in all cycles. Also, the lowest value of the power specific cost is determined as 3.762 $/GJ for the triple flash type III in the optimum condition. All triple flash configurations have better results from the net power and exergy viewpoints compared to the double flash at temperatures in the range of 240–320 °C. Moreover, for all configurations, as the temperature of the geofluid increases, the power specific cost value decreases, while the net output power and exergy efficiency increase.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

\(\dot{C}\) :

Cost rate ($ hr−1)

c :

Specific exergy cost ($ GJ−1)

\(\dot{E}\) :

Exergy rate (kW)

h :

Specific enthalpy (kJ kg−1)

\(\dot{m}\) :

Mass flow rate (kg s−1)

P :

Pressure (kPa)

s :

Specific entropy (kJ kg−1 K−1)

T :

Temperature (°C or K)

\(\dot{W}\) :

Power (kW)

\(Z\) :

Investment cost of components ($)

\(\dot{Z}\) :

Investment cost rate of components ($ h−1)

\(\dot{C}\) :

Cost rate ($ hr−1)

c :

Specific exergy cost ($ GJ−1)

ch :

Chemical exergy,

CI :

Capital investment

CRF :

Capital recovery factor

D:

Destruction

f :

Fuel

GPP:

Geothermal power plant

OM:

Operation and maintenance

P:

Pump, product

Ph:

Physical

T:

Turbine

TF:

Triple Flash

W,i:

Water inlet

W,o:

Water outlet

0:

Dead state

1,2,3…:

Cycle states

\(\eta_{ex}\) :

Exergy efficiency

\(\eta_{th}\) :

Thermal efficiency

References

  1. Abdolalipouradl M, Khalilarya S, Jafarmadar S (2019) Energy and exergy analysis of a new power, heating, oxygen and hydrogen cogeneration cycle based on the sabalan geothermal wells. IJE Trans C 32:445–450

    Google Scholar 

  2. Abdolalipouradl M, Khalilarya S, Mohammadkhani F (2020) Hydrogen production using proposed cycle from sabalan geothermal wells via proton exchange membrane electrolysis. Modares Mech Eng 20:267–278

    Google Scholar 

  3. Stefansson V, Fridleifsson IJEHOA, SCOTP Prospects for geothermal energy in Europe S (1998) Energy of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, France. Geothermal Energy European and worldwide perspective. 10

  4. Coskun A, Bolatturk A, Kanoglu M (2014) Thermodynamic and economic analysis and optimization of power cycles for a medium temperature geothermal resource. Energy Convers Manag 78:39–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Abdolalipouradl M, Mohammadkhani F, Khalilarya S, Jafarmadar S (2020) Thermodynamic analysis of new cogeneration cycle based on gaynarje hotspring. Int J Eng 33:1149–1155

    Google Scholar 

  6. Abdolalipouradl M, Khalilarya S, Jafarmadar S (2019) The thermodynamic analysis of a novel integrated transcritical CO2 with Kalina 11 cycles from Sabalan geothermal wells. Modares Mech Eng 19:335–346

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lund JW, Freeston DH, Boyd TL (2005) Direct application of geothermal energy: 2005 worldwide review. Geothermics 34:691–727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chamorro CR, Mondéjar ME, Ramos R, Segovia JJ, Martín MC, Villamañán MA (2012) World geothermal power production status: Energy, environmental and economic study of high enthalpy technologies. Energy 42:10–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Abdolalipouradl M, Khalilarya S, Jafarmadar S (2018) Exergy analysis of a new proposal combined cycle from Sabalan geothermal source. Modares Mech Eng 18:11–22

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kanoglu M, Bolatturk A (2008) Performance and parametric investigation of a binary geothermal power plant by exergy. Renew Energy 33:2366–2374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mehdikhani V, Mirzaee I, Khalilian M, Abdolalipouradl MJATE (2022) Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic assessment of a new combined power, natural gas, and hydrogen system based on two geothermal wells. Appl Thermal Eng 206:118116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dickson MH, Fanelli MJGE (2003) Utilization, U. Technology, Paris. Geothermal background. 125

  13. Shokati N, Ranjbar F, Yari M (2015) Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of basic, dual-pressure and dual-fluid ORCs and Kalina geothermal power plants: a comparative study. Renew Energy 83:527–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Shengjun Z, Huaixin W, Tao G (2011) Performance comparison and parametric optimization of subcritical Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) and transcritical power cycle system for low-temperature geothermal power generation. Appl Energy 88:2740–2754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Zhang X, He M, Zhang Y (2012) A review of research on the Kalina cycle. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16:5309–5318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bao J, Zhao L (2013) A review of working fluid and expander selections for organic Rankine cycle. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 24:325–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang E, Yu Z, Zhang F (2017) Investigation on efficiency improvement of a Kalina cycle by sliding condensation pressure method. Energy Convers Manag 151:123–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Walraven D, Laenen B, D’haeseleer W (2013) Comparison of thermodynamic cycles for power production from low-temperature geothermal heat sources. Energy Convers Manag 66:220–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mohammadkhani F, Shokati N, Mahmoudi S, Yari M, Rosen M (2014) Exergoeconomic assessment and parametric study of a Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor combined with two Organic Rankine Cycles. Energy 65:533–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Shokati N, Ranjbar F, Yari M (2015) Comparative and parametric study of double flash and single flash/ORC combined cycles based on exergoeconomic criteria. Appl Therm Eng 91:479–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bodvarsson G, Eggers D (1972) The exergy of thermal water. Geothermics 1:93–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Abdolalipouradl M, Mohammadkhani F, Khalilarya S (2020) A comparative analysis of novel combined flash-binary cycles for Sabalan geothermal wells: Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic viewpoints. Energy 209:118235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mosaffa A, Zareei A (2018) Proposal and thermoeconomic analysis of geothermal flash binary power plants utilizing different types of organic flash cycle. Geothermics 72:47–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Shokati N, Mohammadkhani F, Farrokhi N, Ranjbar F (2014) Thermodynamic and heat transfer analysis of heat recovery from engine test cell by Organic Rankine Cycle. Heat Mass Transf 50:1661–1671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Seshadri K (1996) Thermal design and optimization. In: Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M (eds) Wiley Interscience, John Wiley Sons Inc., New York Pergamon1996

  26. Wu C, Wang S-S, Li J (2018) Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of a combined supercritical carbon dioxide recompression Brayton/organic flash cycle for nuclear power plants. Energy Convers Manag 171:936–952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Yue T, Lior N (2017) Exergo economic analysis of solar-assisted hybrid power generation systems integrated with thermochemical fuel conversion. Appl Energy 191:204–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Abdolalipouradl M, Khalilarya S, Jafarmadar S (2019) Exergoeconomic analysis of a novel integrated transcritical CO2 and Kalina 11 cycles from Sabalan geothermal power plant. Energy Convers Manag 195:420–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Aali A, Pourmahmoud N, Zare V (2017) Exergoeconomic analysis and multi-objective optimization of a novel combined flash-binary cycle for Sabalan geothermal power plant in Iran. Energy Convers Manag 143:377–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Couper JR, Penney WR, Fair JR (2009) Chemical process equipment-selection and design (Revised 2nd Edition). Gulf professional publishing

  31. Marandi S, Mohammadkhani F, Yari M (2019) An efficient auxiliary power generation system for exploiting hydrogen boil-off gas (BOG) cold exergy based on PEM fuel cell and two-stage ORC: Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic viewpoints. Energy Convers Manag 195:502–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mohammadkhani F, Yari M, Ranjbar F (2019) A zero-dimensional model for simulation of a Diesel engine and exergoeconomic analysis of waste heat recovery from its exhaust and coolant employing a high-temperature Kalina cycle. Energy Convers Manag 198:111782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Abdolalipouradl M, Khalilarya S, Mohammadkhani FJMME (2020) Hydrogen production using proposed cycle from sabalan geothermal wells via proton exchange membrane electrolysis. 20

  34. Abdolalipouradl M, Mohammadkhani F, Khalilarya S, Yari M (2020) Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic analysis of two novel tri-generation cycles for power, hydrogen and freshwater production from geothermal energy. Energy Convers Manage 226:113544

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project has been supported by a research grant of the University of Tabriz (number 1605).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

    Mehran Abdolalipouradl & Mortaza Yari

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran

    Vahid Mousavi

  3. Mechanical Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty of Khoy, Urmia University of Technology, Urmia, Iran

    Farzad Mohammadkhani

Authors
  1. Mehran Abdolalipouradl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vahid Mousavi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Farzad Mohammadkhani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mortaza Yari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Farzad Mohammadkhani or Mortaza Yari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Technical Editor: Monica Carvalho.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abdolalipouradl, M., Mousavi, V., Mohammadkhani, F. et al. Proposing new configurations of flash cycle for effective utilization of geothermal resources: thermodynamic and exergoeconomic assessments. J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 44, 465 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-022-03736-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-022-03736-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation