IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v238y2019icp831-850.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Including seismic risk mitigation measures into the Levelized Cost Of Electricity in enhanced geothermal systems for optimal siting

Author

Listed:
  • Mignan, A.
  • Karvounis, D.
  • Broccardo, M.
  • Wiemer, S.
  • Giardini, D.

Abstract

The seismic risk associated with deep fluid injection in Enhanced Geothermal Systems can be mitigated by stopping reservoir stimulation when the seismic risk becomes unacceptable or by reducing production flow rates when seismicity occurs during the operational phase. So far, none of these mitigation measures have been included in the Levelized Cost Of Electricity. A meta-model is introduced that estimates the optimal price of electricity, based on an analytical geothermal energy model, and updates this cost to include the outlay for mandatory seismic risk mitigation measures. The proposed energy model computes both electricity production and heat credit. The costs added during reservoir stimulation are based on the probability of abandoning an injection well, based on a traffic-light system, defined as the ratio of scenarios that exceed a given seismic safety threshold in the risk space. In the production phase, the net energy generated is reduced by clipping the production flow rate so that the reservoir's overpressure does not exceed the regional minimum effective stress. Based on a generic geothermal triplet, we investigate the trade-off between heat credit and seismic risk mitigation cost. The added cost, mostly due to financial risk aversion, shifts the optimal site for a plant from between a few kilometres to tens of kilometres away from populated areas, for increasingly vulnerable building stocks. Finally, using a simple yet realistic optimisation strategy, we study the role that a seismic safety standard plays for determining the number of EGS plants that can be sited in a given region.

Suggested Citation

  • Mignan, A. & Karvounis, D. & Broccardo, M. & Wiemer, S. & Giardini, D., 2019. "Including seismic risk mitigation measures into the Levelized Cost Of Electricity in enhanced geothermal systems for optimal siting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 831-850.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:238:y:2019:i:c:p:831-850
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261919301230
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.109?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glenn Harrison & E. Rutström, 2009. "Expected utility theory and prospect theory: one wedding and a decent funeral," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(2), pages 133-158, June.
    2. Geoffrey Heal & Antony Millner, 2013. "Uncertainty and decision in climate change economics," GRI Working Papers 108, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    3. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2018. "Siting enhanced geothermal systems (EGS): Heat benefits versus induced seismicity risks from an investor and societal perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1311-1325.
    4. Adam Booij & Bernard Praag & Gijs Kuilen, 2010. "A parametric analysis of prospect theory’s functionals for the general population," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 115-148, February.
    5. 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.
    6. Iqbal, M. & Azam, M. & Naeem, M. & Khwaja, A.S. & Anpalagan, A., 2014. "Optimization classification, algorithms and tools for renewable energy: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 640-654.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Corina Paraschiv, 2007. "Loss Aversion Under Prospect Theory: A Parameter-Free Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1659-1674, October.
    9. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Olivier L’Haridon, 2008. "A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 245-266, June.
    10. Kelsey, David, 1993. "Choice under Partial Uncertainty," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(2), pages 297-308, May.
    11. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    12. Bartlett, Stuart & Dujardin, Jérôme & Kahl, Annelen & Kruyt, Bert & Manso, Pedro & Lehning, Michael, 2018. "Charting the course: A possible route to a fully renewable Swiss power system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 942-955.
    13. 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.
    14. Lu, Shyi-Min, 2018. "A global review of enhanced geothermal system (EGS)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2902-2921.
    15. Domenico Giardini, 2009. "Geothermal quake risks must be faced," Nature, Nature, vol. 462(7275), pages 848-849, December.
    16. Richard T. Woodward & Richard C. Bishop, 1997. "How to Decide When Experts Disagree: Uncertainty-Based Choice Rules in Environmental Policy," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(4), pages 492-507.
    17. Persson, Urban & Werner, Sven, 2011. "Heat distribution and the future competitiveness of district heating," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(3), pages 568-576, March.
    18. Jha, Sunil Kr. & Bilalovic, Jasmin & Jha, Anju & Patel, Nilesh & Zhang, Han, 2017. "Renewable energy: Present research and future scope of Artificial Intelligence," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 297-317.
    19. Xavier Gabaix, 1999. "Zipf's Law for Cities: An Explanation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 739-767.
    20. Noor, Sana & Yang, Wentao & Guo, Miao & van Dam, Koen H. & Wang, Xiaonan, 2018. "Energy Demand Side Management within micro-grid networks enhanced by blockchain," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1385-1398.
    21. Mohammed Abdellaoui, 2000. "Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(11), pages 1497-1512, November.
    22. Lacirignola, Martino & Blanc, Isabelle, 2013. "Environmental analysis of practical design options for enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) through life-cycle assessment," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 901-914.
    23. Tu, Q., 2005. "Empirical analysis of time preferences and risk aversion," Other publications TiSEM 01bd1b38-5741-4f44-8996-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    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. Arnaud Mignan & Marco Broccardo & Ziqi Wang, 2021. "Comprehensive Survey of Seismic Hazard at Geothermal Sites by a Meta-Analysis of the Underground Feedback Activation Parameter a fb," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-15, November.
    2. Selcuk Kacin & Murat Ozturk & Umur Korkut Sevim & Bayram Ali Mert & Zafer Ozer & Oguzhan Akgol & Emin Unal & Muharrem Karaaslan, 2021. "Seismic metamaterials for low-frequency mechanical wave attenuation," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 107(1), pages 213-229, May.
    3. Romanov, D. & Leiss, B., 2022. "Geothermal energy at different depths for district heating and cooling of existing and future building stock," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    4. Wei, Changjiang & Mao, Liangjie & Yao, Changshun & Yu, Guijian, 2022. "Heat transfer investigation between wellbore and formation in U-shaped geothermal wells with long horizontal section," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 972-989.
    5. Qiu, Lihua & He, Li & Kang, Yu & Liang, Dongzhe, 2022. "Assessment of the potential of enhanced geothermal systems in Asia under the impact of global warming," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 636-646.
    6. Baek, Haein & Chung, Ji-Bum & Yun, Gi Woong, 2021. "Differences in public perceptions of geothermal energy based on EGS technology in Korea after the Pohang earthquake: National vs. local," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    7. Daniilidis, Alexandros & Saeid, Sanaz & Doonechaly, Nima Gholizadeh, 2021. "The fault plane as the main fluid pathway: Geothermal field development options under subsurface and operational uncertainty," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 927-946.
    8. Aghahosseini, Arman & Breyer, Christian, 2020. "From hot rock to useful energy: A global estimate of enhanced geothermal systems potential," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    9. Eyerer, S. & Schifflechner, C. & Hofbauer, S. & Bauer, W. & Wieland, C. & Spliethoff, H., 2020. "Combined heat and power from hydrothermal geothermal resources in Germany: An assessment of the potential," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Matthijs Jan Kallen & Bert Scholtens, 2021. "Movers and Shakers: Stock Market Response to Induced Seismicity in Oil and Gas Business," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Hui, Gang & Chen, Zhangxin & Schultz, Ryan & Chen, Shengnan & Song, Zhaojie & Zhang, Zhaochen & Song, Yilei & Wang, Hai & Wang, Muming & Gu, Fei, 2023. "Intricate unconventional fracture networks provide fluid diffusion pathways to reactivate pre-existing faults in unconventional reservoirs," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    12. Sandro Andrés & David Santillán & Juan Carlos Mosquera & Luis Cueto-Felgueroso, 2019. "Thermo-Poroelastic Analysis of Induced Seismicity at the Basel Enhanced Geothermal System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.

    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. Kpegli, Yao Thibaut & Corgnet, Brice & Zylbersztejn, Adam, 2023. "All at once! A comprehensive and tractable semi-parametric method to elicit prospect theory components," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. Géraldine Bocquého & Julien Jacob & Marielle Brunette, 2020. "Prospect theory in experiments : behaviour in loss domain and framing effects," Working Papers hal-02987294, HAL.
    3. Adam Booij & Bernard Praag & Gijs Kuilen, 2010. "A parametric analysis of prospect theory’s functionals for the general population," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 115-148, February.
    4. Booij, Adam S. & van de Kuilen, Gijs, 2009. "A parameter-free analysis of the utility of money for the general population under prospect theory," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 651-666, August.
    5. Yao Thibaut Kpegli, 2023. "Smoothing Spline Method for Measuring Prospect Theory Components," Working Papers 2303, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    6. Géraldine Bocquého & Julien Jacob & Marielle Brunette, 2023. "Prospect theory in multiple price list experiments: further insights on behaviour in the loss domain," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 94(4), pages 593-636, May.
    7. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    8. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    9. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Olivier L'Haridon & Corina Paraschiv, 2011. "Experienced vs. Described Uncertainty: Do We Need Two Prospect Theory Specifications?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(10), pages 1879-1895, October.
    10. Simon Gächter & Eric J. Johnson & Andreas Herrmann, 2022. "Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 599-624, April.
    11. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & l’Haridon, Olivier, 2013. "Prospect theory in the health domain: A quantitative assessment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1057-1065.
    12. Ranoua Bouchouicha & Lachlan Deer & Ashraf Galal Eid & Peter McGee & Daniel Schoch & Hrvoje Stojic & Jolanda Ygosse-Battisti & Ferdinand M. Vieider, 2019. "Gender effects for loss aversion: Yes, no, maybe?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 171-184, October.
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:214-235 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Julius Pahlke & Sebastian Strasser & Ferdinand Vieider, 2015. "Responsibility effects in decision making under risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 125-146, October.
    15. Pau Balart & Lara Ezquerra & Iñigo Hernandez-Arenaz, 2022. "Framing effects on risk-taking behavior: evidence from a field experiment in multiple-choice tests," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1268-1297, September.
    16. Theo Offerman & Asa B. Palley, 2016. "Lossed in translation: an off-the-shelf method to recover probabilistic beliefs from loss-averse agents," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-30, March.
    17. Eyal Ert & Ido Erev, 2013. "On the descriptive value of loss aversion in decisions under risk: Six clarifications," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(3), pages 214-235, May.
    18. Lefebvre, Mathieu & Vieider, Ferdinand M., 2014. "Risk taking of executives under different incentive contracts: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 27-36.
    19. Resende, José Guilherme Lara & Tecles, Patricia Langsch, 2011. "A Simple Method of Elicitation of Preferences under Risk," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 31(2), December.
    20. Glenn W. Harrison & J. Todd Swarthout, 2016. "Cumulative Prospect Theory in the Laboratory: A Reconsideration," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2016-04, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    21. Simon Gaechter & Eric Johnson & Andreas Herrmann, 2007. "Individual-Level Loss Aversion In Riskless And Risky Choices," Discussion Papers 2007-02, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.

    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:eee:appene:v:238:y:2019:i:c:p:831-850. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    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.