IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/renene/v127y2018icp960-973.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification of prospective significance levels for potential geothermal fields of India

Author

Listed:
  • Puppala, Harish
  • Jha, Shibani K.

Abstract

This study aims to predict prospective significance levels of potential geothermal fields already identified by Geological Survey of India (GSI) and National Geophysical Research Institute (NGRI) by field investigations. Wide range of criteria's are considered in determining the relative significance level of each geothermal field in terms of cumulative score. These criteria's include useful resource base (URBfield), Areal extent (Afield), Minimum temperature as per geothermometry (Tmin), Maximum temperature as per geothermometry (Tmax), Utilization score (USfield), Cumulative discharge of thermal springs (Q), Minimum electrical resistivity (Rmin), Maximum electrical resistivity (Rmax) and Representative reservoir temperature as per Gas thermometry (Tgas). Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (Fuzzy AHP) is used to study the dominance of each geothermal field, evaluated over the aforementioned criteria to find cumulative score. URBfield depends on possible extraction temperature of reservoir estimated by COMSOL Multiphysics® modelling and simulation software. The geothermal fields are conceptualized as shallow homogenous reservoirs with injection and extraction wells. The attributes of remaining criteria are collected from published works of NGRI and GSI. The results of this study ratify that Puga geothermal field is the most significant site among the identified potential geothermal fields, to conduct further developmental works and for commercial extraction of geothermal energy.

Suggested Citation

  • Puppala, Harish & Jha, Shibani K., 2018. "Identification of prospective significance levels for potential geothermal fields of India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 960-973.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:renene:v:127:y:2018:i:c:p:960-973
    DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2018.04.075
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148118304932
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.renene.2018.04.075?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. Xiaohua, Wang & Zhenmin, Feng, 2002. "Sustainable development of rural energy and its appraising system in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 395-404, August.
    2. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1995. "Energy resource allocation incorporating qualitative and quantitative criteria: An integrated model using goal programming and AHP," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 197-218, September.
    3. Hobbs, Benjamin F & Horn, Graham TF, 1997. "Building public confidence in energy planning: a multimethod MCDM approach to demand-side planning at BC gas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 357-375, February.
    4. Jha, Shibani K. & Puppala, Harish, 2017. "Prospects of renewable energy sources in India: Prioritization of alternative sources in terms of Energy Index," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 116-127.
    5. Aliyu, Musa D. & Chen, Hua-Peng, 2017. "Optimum control parameters and long-term productivity of geothermal reservoirs using coupled thermo-hydraulic process modelling," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 151-165.
    6. Elkarmi, Fawwaz & Mustafa, Isam, 1993. "Increasing the utilization of solar energy technologies (SET) in Jordan : Analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 978-984, September.
    7. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    8. Bojan Srdjevic & Yvonilde Medeiros, 2008. "Fuzzy AHP Assessment of Water Management Plans," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(7), pages 877-894, July.
    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. Laveet Kumar & Md. Shouquat Hossain & Mamdouh El Haj Assad & Mansoor Urf Manoo, 2022. "Technological Advancements and Challenges of Geothermal Energy Systems: A Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Kaur, Sehajnoor & Yadav, Jairam Singh & Bhambri, Rakesh & Sain, Kalachand & Tiwari, Sameer K., 2023. "Assessment of geothermal potential of Kumaun Himalaya: A perspective for harnessing green energy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 940-952.
    3. Ali Mostafaeipour & Seyyed Jalaladdin Hosseini Dehshiri & Seyyed Shahabaddin Hosseini Dehshiri & Mehdi Jahangiri & Kuaanan Techato, 2020. "A Thorough Analysis of Potential Geothermal Project Locations in Afghanistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.

    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. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    2. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    3. Ghafghazi, S. & Sowlati, T. & Sokhansanj, S. & Melin, S., 2010. "A multicriteria approach to evaluate district heating system options," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 1134-1140, April.
    4. Theodorou, Savvas & Florides, Georgios & Tassou, Savvas, 2010. "The use of multiple criteria decision making methodologies for the promotion of RES through funding schemes in Cyprus, A review," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7783-7792, December.
    5. Supriyasilp, Thanaporn & Pongput, Kobkiat & Boonyasirikul, Thana, 2009. "Hydropower development priority using MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1866-1875, May.
    6. Blanco, G. & Amarilla, R. & Martinez, A. & Llamosas, C. & Oxilia, V., 2017. "Energy transitions and emerging economies: A multi-criteria analysis of policy options for hydropower surplus utilization in Paraguay," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 312-321.
    7. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    8. Løken, Espen, 2007. "Use of multicriteria decision analysis methods for energy planning problems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(7), pages 1584-1595, September.
    9. Kayakutlu, Gulgun & Daim, Tugrul & Kunt, Meltem & Altay, Ayca & Suharto, Yulianto, 2017. "Scenarios for regional waste management," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1323-1335.
    10. Henao, Felipe & Cherni, Judith A. & Jaramillo, Patricia & Dyner, Isaac, 2012. "A multicriteria approach to sustainable energy supply for the rural poor," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(3), pages 801-809.
    11. Patel, Sameer & Khandelwal, Anish & Leavey, Anna & Biswas, Pratim, 2016. "A model for cost-benefit analysis of cooking fuel alternatives from a rural Indian household perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 291-302.
    12. Heinrich, G. & Basson, L. & Cohen, B. & Howells, M. & Petrie, J., 2007. "Ranking and selection of power expansion alternatives for multiple objectives under uncertainty," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 2350-2369.
    13. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    14. Silva, Diego & Nakata, Toshihiko, 2009. "Multi-objective assessment of rural electrification in remote areas with poverty considerations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3096-3108, August.
    15. Chatzimouratidis, Athanasios I. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2008. "Multicriteria evaluation of power plants impact on the living standard using the analytic hierarchy process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 1074-1089, March.
    16. Chatzimouratidis, Athanasios I. & Pilavachi, Petros A., 2009. "Technological, economic and sustainability evaluation of power plants using the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 778-787, March.
    17. Jha, Shibani K. & Puppala, Harish, 2017. "Prospects of renewable energy sources in India: Prioritization of alternative sources in terms of Energy Index," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 116-127.
    18. Wang, Q. & Poh, K.L., 2014. "A survey of integrated decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 691-702.
    19. Al Garni, Hassan Z. & Awasthi, Anjali, 2017. "Solar PV power plant site selection using a GIS-AHP based approach with application in Saudi Arabia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 1225-1240.
    20. Nixon, J.D. & Dey, P.K. & Davies, P.A., 2010. "Which is the best solar thermal collection technology for electricity generation in north-west India? Evaluation of options using the analytical hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 5230-5240.

    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:127:y:2018:i:c:p:960-973. 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.