IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/renene/v115y2018icp600-619.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparative profitability study of geothermal electricity production in developed and developing countries: Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of different ORC configurations

Author

Listed:
  • Karimi, Shahram
  • Mansouri, Sima

Abstract

By the growing usage of geothermal energy as an alternative approach to produce useful work such as electricity, the emission of global greenhouse gases could be reduced because of its environmentally friendly. In this paper, the thermodynamic and economic performances of three systems which contain a basic Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC), a Regenerative Organic Rankine Cycle (RORC) and a Two-Stage Evaporation Organic Rankine Cycle (TSEORC) are investigated in order to generate electrical power from geothermal sources. For operating the considered cycles, three types of pure organic working fluids including dry (R600a, R601a), wet (R152a and R134a) and isentropic (R11 and R123) ones are selected. Firstly, according to thermodynamic aspect, Peng Robinson (PR) and Soave-Redlich-Kwong (SRK) equations of state are used to determine thermodynamic properties of mentioned working fluids and geothermal water, respectively. Furthermore, the operating parameters involving evaporator and regenerative temperatures, degree of superheat and pinch point temperature difference in evaporator are optimized with three optimization methods. Objective functions are exergy efficiency, Specific Investment Cost (SIC) and a combination of exergy and SIC for thermodynamic, economic and exergoeconomic optimizations. The amount of boundary conditions constituting of heat source inlet temperature, heat sink inlet temperature, heat source inlet pressure, heat sink inlet pressure temperature of condenser, pinch point temperature in condenser and heat source mass flow rate are 423.14 (K), 293.15 (K), 5 (bar), 2 (bar), 308 (K), 5 (K) and 50 (kg/s) respectively. Optimizations results show that among all considered operating parameters, degree of superheat ranged between 0 and 20 is the most effective parameter which is almost obtained at lower, upper and in the middle range of optimization bounds in the thermodynamic, economic and exergoeconomic investigations respectively. Secondly, from economic view point, three economic indicators: Levelized Cost Of Electricity (LCOE), Return On Investment (ROI) and Payback Period (PBP) are utilized so as to focus on the economic performance of three mentioned ORC configurations based on exergoeconomic results for twenty countries with geothermal resources as well as different cost of electricity production and tax rates. The results indicate that Australia has the maximum amount of ROI making up a bit more than 100% and minimum amount of PBP accounting for lower than four years when R123 is applied as the working fluid in TSEORC system. Also, the maximum and minimum values of LCOE are obtained in basic ORC- R134a and RORC- R123 (0.1474 and 0.0493 respectively). In addition, the investigation of impact of operating parameters on economic indicators for Iran illustrate that the ROI value dramatically rise by increasing the evaporator temperature and degree of superheat. In contrast, pinch point temperature difference leads to a decline in the amount of ROI. This note should be taken in to account that ROI and PBP show the reverse results.

Suggested Citation

  • Karimi, Shahram & Mansouri, Sima, 2018. "A comparative profitability study of geothermal electricity production in developed and developing countries: Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of different ORC configurations," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 600-619.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:renene:v:115:y:2018:i:c:p:600-619
    DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2017.08.098
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148117308571
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.renene.2017.08.098?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. Desideri, Adriano & Gusev, Sergei & van den Broek, Martijn & Lemort, Vincent & Quoilin, Sylvain, 2016. "Experimental comparison of organic fluids for low temperature ORC (organic Rankine cycle) systems for waste heat recovery applications," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 460-469.
    2. Shokati, Naser & Ranjbar, Faramarz & Yari, Mortaza, 2015. "Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of basic, dual-pressure and dual-fluid ORCs and Kalina geothermal power plants: A comparative study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 527-542.
    3. Yang, Min-Hsiung & Yeh, Rong-Hua, 2015. "Thermo-economic optimization of an organic Rankine cycle system for large marine diesel engine waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 256-268.
    4. Guzović, Zvonimir & Rašković, Predrag & Blatarić, Zoran, 2014. "The comparision of a basic and a dual-pressure ORC (Organic Rankine Cycle): Geothermal Power Plant Velika Ciglena case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 175-186.
    5. Astolfi, Marco & Romano, Matteo C. & Bombarda, Paola & Macchi, Ennio, 2014. "Binary ORC (Organic Rankine Cycles) power plants for the exploitation of medium–low temperature geothermal sources – Part B: Techno-economic optimization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 435-446.
    6. Saleh, Bahaa & Koglbauer, Gerald & Wendland, Martin & Fischer, Johann, 2007. "Working fluids for low-temperature organic Rankine cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1210-1221.
    7. Wang, Xurong & Dai, Yiping, 2016. "Exergoeconomic analysis of utilizing the transcritical CO2 cycle and the ORC for a recompression supercritical CO2 cycle waste heat recovery: A comparative study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 193-207.
    8. Sadeghi, Mohsen & Nemati, Arash & ghavimi, Alireza & Yari, Mortaza, 2016. "Thermodynamic analysis and multi-objective optimization of various ORC (organic Rankine cycle) configurations using zeotropic mixtures," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 791-802.
    9. Yang, Min-Hsiung & Yeh, Rong-Hua, 2016. "Economic performances optimization of an organic Rankine cycle system with lower global warming potential working fluids in geothermal application," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1201-1213.
    10. Le, Van Long & Kheiri, Abdelhamid & Feidt, Michel & Pelloux-Prayer, Sandrine, 2014. "Thermodynamic and economic optimizations of a waste heat to power plant driven by a subcritical ORC (Organic Rankine Cycle) using pure or zeotropic working fluid," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 622-638.
    11. Lecompte, S. & Huisseune, H. & van den Broek, M. & De Schampheleire, S. & De Paepe, M., 2013. "Part load based thermo-economic optimization of the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) applied to a combined heat and power (CHP) system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 871-881.
    12. Shu, Gequn & Yu, Guopeng & Tian, Hua & Wei, Haiqiao & Liang, Xingyu, 2014. "A Multi-Approach Evaluation System (MA-ES) of Organic Rankine Cycles (ORC) used in waste heat utilization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 325-338.
    13. Toffolo, Andrea & Lazzaretto, Andrea & Manente, Giovanni & Paci, Marco, 2014. "A multi-criteria approach for the optimal selection of working fluid and design parameters in Organic Rankine Cycle systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 219-232.
    14. Meinel, Dominik & Wieland, Christoph & Spliethoff, Hartmut, 2014. "Economic comparison of ORC (Organic Rankine cycle) processes at different scales," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 694-706.
    15. Eyidogan, Muharrem & Canka Kilic, Fatma & Kaya, Durmus & Coban, Volkan & Cagman, Selman, 2016. "Investigation of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) technologies in Turkey from the technical and economic point of view," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 885-895.
    16. Hajabdollahi, Zahra & Hajabdollahi, Farzaneh & Tehrani, Mahdi & Hajabdollahi, Hassan, 2013. "Thermo-economic environmental optimization of Organic Rankine Cycle for diesel waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 142-151.
    17. Invernizzi, Costante & Bombarda, Paola, 1997. "Thermodynamic performance of selected HCFS for geothermal applications," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 22(9), pages 887-895.
    18. Astolfi, Marco & Romano, Matteo C. & Bombarda, Paola & Macchi, Ennio, 2014. "Binary ORC (organic Rankine cycles) power plants for the exploitation of medium–low temperature geothermal sources – Part A: Thermodynamic optimization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 423-434.
    19. Tempesti, Duccio & Fiaschi, Daniele, 2013. "Thermo-economic assessment of a micro CHP system fuelled by geothermal and solar energy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 45-51.
    20. Li, Tailu & Wang, Qiulin & Zhu, Jialing & Hu, Kaiyong & Fu, Wencheng, 2015. "Thermodynamic optimization of organic Rankine cycle using two-stage evaporation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 654-664.
    21. Quoilin, Sylvain & Broek, Martijn Van Den & Declaye, Sébastien & Dewallef, Pierre & Lemort, Vincent, 2013. "Techno-economic survey of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 168-186.
    22. Xi, Huan & Li, Ming-Jia & Xu, Chao & He, Ya-Ling, 2013. "Parametric optimization of regenerative organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for low grade waste heat recovery using genetic algorithm," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 473-482.
    23. Ghasemi, Hadi & Paci, Marco & Tizzanini, Alessio & Mitsos, Alexander, 2013. "Modeling and optimization of a binary geothermal power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 412-428.
    24. Yildirim, Deniz & Ozgener, Leyla, 2012. "Thermodynamics and exergoeconomic analysis of geothermal power plants," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 6438-6454.
    25. Akbari, Ata D. & Mahmoudi, Seyed M.S., 2014. "Thermoeconomic analysis & optimization of the combined supercritical CO2 (carbon dioxide) recompression Brayton/organic Rankine cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 501-512.
    26. Xiao, Lan & Wu, Shuang-Ying & Yi, Tian-Tian & Liu, Chao & Li, You-Rong, 2015. "Multi-objective optimization of evaporation and condensation temperatures for subcritical organic Rankine cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 723-733.
    27. Kanoglu, Mehmet & Bolatturk, Ali, 2008. "Performance and parametric investigation of a binary geothermal power plant by exergy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 2366-2374.
    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. Moein Shamoushaki & Mehdi Aliehyaei & Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary, 2021. "Energy, Exergy, Exergoeconomic, and Exergoenvironmental Assessment of Flash-Binary Geothermal Combined Cooling, Heating and Power Cycle," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-24, July.
    2. Yuan Zhao & Chenghao Gao & Chengjun Li & Jie Sun & Chunyan Wang & Qiang Liu & Jun Zhao, 2022. "Energy and Exergy Analyses of Geothermal Organic Rankine Cycles Considering the Effect of Brine Reinjection Temperature," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Mantas Svazas & Valentinas Navickas & Yuriy Bilan & Joanna Nakonieczny & Jana Spankova, 2021. "Biomass Clusterization from a Regional Perspective: The Case of Lithuania," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Shuozhuo Hu & Zhen Yang & Jian Li & Yuanyuan Duan, 2021. "A Review of Multi-Objective Optimization in Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) System Design," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-36, October.
    5. Amiri Rad, Ehsan & Mohammadi, Saeed & Tayyeban, Edris, 2020. "Simultaneous optimization of working fluid and boiler pressure in an organic Rankine cycle for different heat source temperatures," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    6. Anderson, Austin & Rezaie, Behnaz, 2019. "Geothermal technology: Trends and potential role in a sustainable future," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 18-34.
    7. Ayşe Fidan Altun, 2022. "A Conceptual Design and Analysis of a Novel Trigeneration System Consisting of a Gas Turbine Power Cycle with Intercooling, Ammonia–Water Absorption Refrigeration, and Hot Water Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Altun, A.F. & Kilic, M., 2020. "Thermodynamic performance evaluation of a geothermal ORC power plant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 261-274.
    9. Xue, Zhenqian & Ma, Haoming & Wei, Yizheng & Wu, Wei & Sun, Zhe & Chai, Maojie & Zhang, Chi & Chen, Zhangxin, 2024. "Integrated technological and economic feasibility comparisons of enhanced geothermal systems associated with carbon storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 359(C).
    10. Kazemi, Shabnam & Nor, Mohamad Iskandr Mohamad & Teoh, Wen Hui, 2020. "Thermodynamic and economic investigation of an ionic liquid as a new proposed geothermal fluid in different organic Rankine cycles for energy production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    11. Yilmaz, Ceyhun & Koyuncu, Ismail, 2021. "Thermoeconomic modeling and artificial neural network optimization of Afyon geothermal power plant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1166-1181.
    12. Michał Kaczmarczyk & Barbara Tomaszewska & Agnieszka Operacz, 2020. "Sustainable Utilization of Low Enthalpy Geothermal Resources to Electricity Generation through a Cascade System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-18, May.
    13. Cui, Guodong & Pei, Shufeng & Rui, Zhenhua & Dou, Bin & Ning, Fulong & Wang, Jiaqiang, 2021. "Whole process analysis of geothermal exploitation and power generation from a depleted high-temperature gas reservoir by recycling CO2," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    14. Yao, Sheng & Zhang, Yufeng & Yu, Xiaohui, 2018. "Thermo-economic analysis of a novel power generation system integrating a natural gas expansion plant with a geothermal ORC in Tianjin, China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 602-614.
    15. Niu, Jintao & Wang, Jiansheng & Liu, Xueling, 2023. "Thermodynamic and economic analysis of organic Rankine cycle combined with flash cycle and ejector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    16. Samadi, Fereshteh & Kazemi, Neda, 2020. "Exergoeconomic analysis of zeotropic mixture on the new proposed organic Rankine cycle for energy production from geothermal resources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 1250-1265.
    17. Zhang, Feng & Lei, Fang & Liao, Gaoliang & Jiaqiang, E., 2022. "Performance assessment and optimization on a novel geothermal combined cooling and power system integrating an absorption power cycle with an absorption-compression hybrid refrigeration cycle in paral," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(P1), pages 1061-1075.
    18. Shamoushaki, Moein & Fiaschi, Daniele & Manfrida, Giampaolo & Talluri, Lorenzo, 2022. "Energy, exergy, economic and environmental (4E) analyses of a geothermal power plant with NCGs reinjection," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 244(PA).

    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. Samadi, Fereshteh & Kazemi, Neda, 2020. "Exergoeconomic analysis of zeotropic mixture on the new proposed organic Rankine cycle for energy production from geothermal resources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 1250-1265.
    2. Steven Lecompte & Sanne Lemmens & Henk Huisseune & Martijn Van den Broek & Michel De Paepe, 2015. "Multi-Objective Thermo-Economic Optimization Strategy for ORCs Applied to Subcritical and Transcritical Cycles for Waste Heat Recovery," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-28, April.
    3. Yang, Fubin & Zhang, Hongguang & Bei, Chen & Song, Songsong & Wang, Enhua, 2015. "Parametric optimization and performance analysis of ORC (organic Rankine cycle) for diesel engine waste heat recovery with a fin-and-tube evaporator," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 128-141.
    4. Braimakis, Konstantinos & Karellas, Sotirios, 2017. "Integrated thermoeconomic optimization of standard and regenerative ORC for different heat source types and capacities," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 570-598.
    5. Sanne Lemmens, 2016. "Cost Engineering Techniques and Their Applicability for Cost Estimation of Organic Rankine Cycle Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-18, June.
    6. Li, Jing & Alvi, Jahan Zeb & Pei, Gang & Su, Yuehong & Li, Pengcheng & Gao, Guangtao & Ji, Jie, 2016. "Modelling of organic Rankine cycle efficiency with respect to the equivalent hot side temperature," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 668-683.
    7. Kazemi, Shabnam & Nor, Mohamad Iskandr Mohamad & Teoh, Wen Hui, 2020. "Thermodynamic and economic investigation of an ionic liquid as a new proposed geothermal fluid in different organic Rankine cycles for energy production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    8. Yang, Min-Hsiung & Yeh, Rong-Hua, 2015. "Thermo-economic optimization of an organic Rankine cycle system for large marine diesel engine waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 256-268.
    9. Amini, Ali & Mirkhani, Nima & Pakjesm Pourfard, Pedram & Ashjaee, Mehdi & Khodkar, Mohammad Amin, 2015. "Thermo-economic optimization of low-grade waste heat recovery in Yazd combined-cycle power plant (Iran) by a CO2 transcritical Rankine cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 74-84.
    10. Yu, Haoshui & Eason, John & Biegler, Lorenz T. & Feng, Xiao, 2017. "Simultaneous heat integration and techno-economic optimization of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) for multiple waste heat stream recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 322-333.
    11. Pezzuolo, Alex & Benato, Alberto & Stoppato, Anna & Mirandola, Alberto, 2016. "The ORC-PD: A versatile tool for fluid selection and Organic Rankine Cycle unit design," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 605-620.
    12. Liu, Qiang & Shang, Linlin & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2016. "Performance analyses of a hybrid geothermal–fossil power generation system using low-enthalpy geothermal resources," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 149-162.
    13. Juan J. García-Pabón & Dario Méndez-Méndez & Juan M. Belman-Flores & Juan M. Barroso-Maldonado & Ali Khosravi, 2021. "A Review of Recent Research on the Use of R1234yf as an Environmentally Friendly Fluid in the Organic Rankine Cycle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-21, May.
    14. Francesco Calise & Davide Capuano & Laura Vanoli, 2015. "Dynamic Simulation and Exergo-Economic Optimization of a Hybrid Solar–Geothermal Cogeneration Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-41, April.
    15. Florian Heberle & Dieter Brüggemann, 2015. "Thermo-Economic Evaluation of Organic Rankine Cycles for Geothermal Power Generation Using Zeotropic Mixtures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-28, March.
    16. Cavazzini, G. & Bari, S. & Pavesi, G. & Ardizzon, G., 2017. "A multi-fluid PSO-based algorithm for the search of the best performance of sub-critical Organic Rankine Cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 42-58.
    17. Lecompte, S. & Huisseune, H. & van den Broek, M. & De Paepe, M., 2015. "Methodical thermodynamic analysis and regression models of organic Rankine cycle architectures for waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 60-76.
    18. Li, Jing & Gao, Guangtao & Kutlu, Cagri & Liu, Keliang & Pei, Gang & Su, Yuehong & Ji, Jie & Riffat, Saffa, 2019. "A novel approach to thermal storage of direct steam generation solar power systems through two-step heat discharge," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 81-100.
    19. Yang, Fubin & Cho, Heejin & Zhang, Hongguang & Zhang, Jian, 2017. "Thermoeconomic multi-objective optimization of a dual loop organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for CNG engine waste heat recovery," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 1100-1118.
    20. Li, Jian & Ge, Zhong & Duan, Yuanyuan & Yang, Zhen & Liu, Qiang, 2018. "Parametric optimization and thermodynamic performance comparison of single-pressure and dual-pressure evaporation organic Rankine cycles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 409-421.

    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:renene:v:115:y:2018:i:c:p:600-619. 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.journals.elsevier.com/renewable-energy .

    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.