IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i11p2841-d366695.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Techno-Economic Assessment of a Combined Heat and Power Plant Integrated with Carbon Dioxide Removal Technology: A Case Study for Central Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Paweł Gładysz

    (Faculty of Energy and Fuels, AGH University of Science and Technology, 30-059 Kraków, Poland)

  • Anna Sowiżdżał

    (Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental Protection, AGH University of Science and Technology, 30-059 Kraków, Poland)

  • Maciej Miecznik

    (Department of Renewable Energy and Environmental Research, Mineral and Energy Economy Research Institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences, 31-261 Kraków, Poland)

  • Maciej Hacaga

    (Faculty of National Security, War Studies University, 00-910 Warszawa, Poland)

  • Leszek Pająk

    (Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental Protection, AGH University of Science and Technology, 30-059 Kraków, Poland)

Abstract

The objective of this study is to assess the techno-economic potential of the proposed novel energy system, which allows for negative emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). The analyzed system comprises four main subsystems: a biomass-fired combined heat and power plant integrated with a CO 2 capture and compression unit, a CO 2 transport pipeline, a CO 2 -enhanced geothermal system, and a supercritical CO 2 Brayton power cycle. For the purpose of the comprehensive techno-economic assessment, the results for the reference biomass-fired combined heat and power plant without CO 2 capture are also presented. Based on the proposed framework for energy and economic assessment, the energy efficiencies, the specific primary energy consumption of CO 2 avoidance, the cost of CO 2 avoidance, and negative CO 2 emissions are evaluated based on the results of process simulations. In addition, an overview of the relevant elements of the whole system is provided, taking into account technological progress and technology readiness levels. The specific primary energy consumption per unit of CO 2 avoided in the analyzed system is equal to 2.17 MJ LHV /kg CO 2 for biomass only (and 6.22 MJ LHV /kg CO 2 when geothermal energy is included) and 3.41 MJ LHV /kg CO 2 excluding the CO 2 utilization in the enhanced geothermal system. Regarding the economic performance of the analyzed system, the levelized cost of electricity and heat are almost two times higher than those of the reference system (239.0 to 127.5 EUR/MWh and 9.4 to 5.0 EUR/GJ), which leads to negative values of the Net Present Value in all analyzed scenarios. The CO 2 avoided cost and CO 2 negative cost in the business as usual economic scenario are equal to 63.0 and 48.2 EUR/t CO 2 , respectively, and drop to 27.3 and 20 EUR/t CO 2 in the technological development scenario. The analysis proves the economic feasibility of the proposed CO 2 utilization and storage option in the enhanced geothermal system integrated with the sCO 2 cycle when the cost of CO 2 transport and storage is above 10 EUR/t CO 2 (at a transport distance of 50 km). The technology readiness level of the proposed technology was assessed as TRL4 (technological development), mainly due to the early stage of the CO 2 -enhanced geothermal systems development.

Suggested Citation

  • Paweł Gładysz & Anna Sowiżdżał & Maciej Miecznik & Maciej Hacaga & Leszek Pająk, 2020. "Techno-Economic Assessment of a Combined Heat and Power Plant Integrated with Carbon Dioxide Removal Technology: A Case Study for Central Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-34, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:11:p:2841-:d:366695
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/11/2841/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/11/2841/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cui, Guodong & Ren, Shaoran & Rui, Zhenhua & Ezekiel, Justin & Zhang, Liang & Wang, Hongsheng, 2018. "The influence of complicated fluid-rock interactions on the geothermal exploitation in the CO2 plume geothermal system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 49-63.
    2. Sara Raos & Perica Ilak & Ivan Rajšl & Tena Bilić & Ghislain Trullenque, 2019. "Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making for Assessing the Enhanced Geothermal Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-23, April.
    3. Wang, Chang-Long & Cheng, Wen-Long & Nian, Yong-Le & Yang, Lei & Han, Bing-Bing & Liu, Ming-Hou, 2018. "Simulation of heat extraction from CO2-based enhanced geothermal systems considering CO2 sequestration," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 157-167.
    4. Bujakowski, Wiesław & Barbacki, Antoni & Miecznik, Maciej & Pająk, Leszek & Skrzypczak, Robert & Sowiżdżał, Anna, 2015. "Modelling geothermal and operating parameters of EGS installations in the lower triassic sedimentary formations of the central Poland area," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 441-453.
    5. Biagi, James & Agarwal, Ramesh & Zhang, Zheming, 2015. "Simulation and optimization of enhanced geothermal systems using CO2 as a working fluid," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 627-637.
    6. Gładysz, Paweł & Saari, Jussi & Czarnowska, Lucyna, 2020. "Thermo-ecological cost analysis of cogeneration and polygeneration energy systems - Case study for thermal conversion of biomass," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 1748-1760.
    7. Lu, Shyi-Min, 2018. "A global review of enhanced geothermal system (EGS)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2902-2921.
    8. Ajay Gambhir & Isabela Butnar & Pei-Hao Li & Pete Smith & Neil Strachan, 2019. "A Review of Criticisms of Integrated Assessment Models and Proposed Approaches to Address These, through the Lens of BECCS," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-21, May.
    9. Olasolo, P. & Juárez, M.C. & Morales, M.P. & Olasolo, A. & Agius, M.R., 2018. "Analysis of working fluids applicable in Enhanced Geothermal Systems: Nitrous oxide as an alternative working fluid," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 150-161.
    10. McCollum, David L & Ogden, Joan M, 2006. "Techno-Economic Models for Carbon Dioxide Compression, Transport, and Storage & Correlations for Estimating Carbon Dioxide Density and Viscosity," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt1zg00532, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    11. Sara Restrepo-Valencia & Arnaldo Walter, 2019. "Techno-Economic Assessment of Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage Systems in a Typical Sugarcane Mill in Brazil," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-13, March.
    12. Mengying Li & Noam Lior, 2014. "Comparative Analysis of Power Plant Options for Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-19, December.
    13. Manuele Gatti & Emanuele Martelli & Daniele Di Bona & Marco Gabba & Roberto Scaccabarozzi & Maurizio Spinelli & Federico Viganò & Stefano Consonni, 2020. "Preliminary Performance and Cost Evaluation of Four Alternative Technologies for Post-Combustion CO 2 Capture in Natural Gas-Fired Power Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-32, January.
    14. Kaiyong Hu & Jialing Zhu & Wei Zhang & Xinli Lu, 2016. "A Selection Method for Power Generation Plants Used for Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-12, July.
    15. Vassilis Stavrakas & Niki-Artemis Spyridaki & Alexandros Flamos, 2018. "Striving towards the Deployment of Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS): A Review of Research Priorities and Assessment Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-27, June.
    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. Adam Dominiak & Artur Rusowicz, 2022. "Change of Fossil-Fuel-Related Carbon Productivity Index of the Main Manufacturing Sectors in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-14, September.
    2. José Ramón Fernández, 2023. "An Overview of Advances in CO 2 Capture Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-4, February.
    3. Mauro Tagliaferri & Paweł Gładysz & Pietro Ungar & Magdalena Strojny & Lorenzo Talluri & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Trond Andresen & Anna Sowiżdżał, 2022. "Techno-Economic Assessment of the Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Geothermal Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Anna Sowiżdżał & Paweł Gładysz & Leszek Pająk, 2021. "Sustainable Use of Petrothermal Resources—A Review of the Geological Conditions in Poland," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Barbara Kaczmarczyk & Karolina Lis & Anna Bogucka, 2023. "Renewable Energy Management in European Union Member States," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-12, August.
    6. Guo, Tiankui & Zhang, Yuelong & He, Jiayuan & Gong, Facheng & Chen, Ming & Liu, Xiaoqiang, 2021. "Research on geothermal development model of abandoned high temperature oil reservoir in North China oilfield," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1-12.
    7. Leszek Pająk & Anna Sowiżdżał & Paweł Gładysz & Barbara Tomaszewska & Maciej Miecznik & Trond Andresen & Bjørn S. Frengstad & Anna Chmielowska, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Studies and Assessment Supporting the Selection of Locations and Technologies Used in CO 2 -EGS Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-18, November.
    8. Anna Sowiżdżał & Magdalena Starczewska & Bartosz Papiernik, 2022. "Future Technology Mix—Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) and Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS)—An Overview of Selected Projects as an Example for Future Investments in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-24, May.
    9. Ziółkowski, Paweł & Badur, Janusz & Pawlak- Kruczek, Halina & Stasiak, Kamil & Amiri, Milad & Niedzwiecki, Lukasz & Krochmalny, Krystian & Mularski, Jakub & Madejski, Paweł & Mikielewicz, Dariusz, 2022. "Mathematical modelling of gasification process of sewage sludge in reactor of negative CO2 emission power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 244(PA).
    10. Paweł Ziółkowski & Paweł Madejski & Milad Amiri & Tomasz Kuś & Kamil Stasiak & Navaneethan Subramanian & Halina Pawlak-Kruczek & Janusz Badur & Łukasz Niedźwiecki & Dariusz Mikielewicz, 2021. "Thermodynamic Analysis of Negative CO 2 Emission Power Plant Using Aspen Plus, Aspen Hysys, and Ebsilon Software," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, 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. Esteves, Ana Filipa & Santos, Francisca Maria & Magalhães Pires, José Carlos, 2019. "Carbon dioxide as geothermal working fluid: An overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Anna Sowiżdżał & Paweł Gładysz & Leszek Pająk, 2021. "Sustainable Use of Petrothermal Resources—A Review of the Geological Conditions in Poland," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Guo, Tiankui & Zhang, Yuelong & He, Jiayuan & Gong, Facheng & Chen, Ming & Liu, Xiaoqiang, 2021. "Research on geothermal development model of abandoned high temperature oil reservoir in North China oilfield," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1-12.
    4. Anna Sowiżdżał & Magdalena Starczewska & Bartosz Papiernik, 2022. "Future Technology Mix—Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) and Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS)—An Overview of Selected Projects as an Example for Future Investments in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-24, May.
    5. Chen, Cihai & Deng, Yaping & Ma, Haichun & Kang, Xueyuan & Ma, Lei & Qian, Jiazhong, 2024. "Deep learning-based inversion framework by assimilating hydrogeological and geophysical data for an enhanced geothermal system characterization and thermal performance prediction," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 302(C).
    6. Sun, Fengrui & Yao, Yuedong & Li, Guozhen & Li, Xiangfang, 2018. "Geothermal energy extraction in CO2 rich basin using abandoned horizontal wells," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 760-773.
    7. Hou, Xinglan & Zhong, Xiuping & Nie, Shuaishuai & Wang, Yafei & Tu, Guigang & Ma, Yingrui & Liu, Kunyan & Chen, Chen, 2024. "Study on the heat recovery behavior of horizontal well systems in the Qiabuqia geothermal area of the Gonghe Basin, China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    8. Lin, David T.W. & Hsieh, Jui Ching & Shih, Bo Yen, 2019. "The optimization of geothermal extraction based on supercritical CO2 porous heat transfer model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 1162-1171.
    9. Anderson, Austin & Rezaie, Behnaz, 2019. "Geothermal technology: Trends and potential role in a sustainable future," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 18-34.
    10. Ma, Yuanyuan & Li, Shibin & Zhang, Ligang & Liu, Songze & Liu, Zhaoyi & Li, Hao & Shi, Erxiu & Liu, Xuemei & Liu, Hongliang, 2020. "Analysis on the heat extraction performance of multi-well injection enhanced geothermal system based on leaf-like bifurcated fracture networks," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    11. Lu, Xinli & Zhao, Yangyang & Zhu, Jialing & Zhang, Wei, 2018. "Optimization and applicability of compound power cycles for enhanced geothermal systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 128-141.
    12. Günther, Philipp & Ekardt, Felix, 2022. "Human Rights and Large-Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal: Potential Limits to BECCS and DACCS Deployment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 11(12), pages 1-29.
    13. Qiao, Mingzheng & Jing, Zefeng & Feng, Chenchen & Li, Minghui & Chen, Cheng & Zou, Xupeng & Zhou, Yujuan, 2024. "Review on heat extraction systems of hot dry rock: Classifications, benefits, limitations, research status and future prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    14. Zhang, Jiansong & Liu, Yongsheng & Lv, Jianguo & Gao, Wenlong, 2024. "The flow and heat transfer characteristics of supercritical mixed-phase CO2 and N2 in a 3D self-affine rough fracture," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    15. Mauro Tagliaferri & Paweł Gładysz & Pietro Ungar & Magdalena Strojny & Lorenzo Talluri & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Trond Andresen & Anna Sowiżdżał, 2022. "Techno-Economic Assessment of the Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Geothermal Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.
    16. Anna Wachowicz-Pyzik & Anna Sowiżdżał & Leszek Pająk & Paweł Ziółkowski & Janusz Badur, 2020. "Assessment of the Effective Variants Leading to Higher Efficiency for the Geothermal Doublet, Using Numerical Analysis‒Case Study from Poland (Szczecin Trough)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, May.
    17. Norouzi, Amir Mohammad & Pouranian, Fatemeh & Rabbani, Arash & Fowler, Neil & Gluyas, Jon & Niasar, Vahid & Ezekiel, Justin & Babaei, Masoud, 2023. "CO2-plume geothermal: Power net generation from 3D fluvial aquifers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    18. Jussi Saari & Petteri Peltola & Tero Tynjälä & Timo Hyppänen & Juha Kaikko & Esa Vakkilainen, 2020. "High-Efficiency Bioenergy Carbon Capture Integrating Chemical Looping Combustion with Oxygen Uncoupling and a Large Cogeneration Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, June.
    19. Philipp Günther & Felix Ekardt, 2022. "Human Rights and Large-Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal: Potential Limits to BECCS and DACCS Deployment," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-29, November.
    20. Olasolo, P. & Juárez, M.C. & Morales, M.P. & D´Amico, Sebastiano & Liarte, I.A., 2016. "Enhanced geothermal systems (EGS): A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 133-144.

    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:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:11:p:2841-:d:366695. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.