Heat depletion in sedimentary basins and its effect on the design and electric power output of CO2 Plume Geothermal (CPG) systems

被引:34
|
作者
Adams, Benjamin M. [1 ,2 ]
Vogler, Daniel [1 ]
Kuehn, Thomas H. [2 ]
Bielicki, Jeffrey M. [3 ,4 ]
Garapati, Nagasree [1 ,5 ]
Saar, Martin O. [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Dept Earth Sci, Geothermal Energy & Geofluids Grp, Sonneggstr 5, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Univ Minnesota, Dept Mech Engn, 111 Church St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[3] Ohio State Univ, Dept Civil Environm & Geodet Engn, 2070 Neil Ave, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[4] Ohio State Univ, John Glenn Coll Publ Affairs, 1810 Coll Rd, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[5] West Virginia Univ, Dept Chem & Biomed Engn, POB 6102, Morgantown, WV 26506 USA
[6] Univ Minnesota, Dept Earth & Environm Sci, 116 Church St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
CO2; geothermal; Geothermal electricity; CCUS; Reservoir heat depletion; Sedimentary basin geothermal; ENERGY EXTRACTION; THERMOSIPHON; EMISSIONS; STORAGE; FLUID;
D O I
10.1016/j.renene.2020.11.145
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
CO2 Plume Geothermal (CPG) energy systems circulate geologically stored CO2 to extract geothermal heat from naturally permeable sedimentary basins. CPG systems can generate more electricity than brine systems in geologic reservoirs with moderate temperature and permeability. Here, we numerically simulate the temperature depletion of a sedimentary basin and find the corresponding CPG electricity generation variation over time. We find that for a given reservoir depth, temperature, thickness, permeability, and well configuration, an optimal well spacing provides the largest average electric generation over the reservoir lifetime. If wells are spaced closer than optimal, higher peak electricity is generated, but the reservoir heat depletes more quickly. If wells are spaced greater than optimal, reservoirs maintain heat longer but have higher resistance to flow and thus lower peak electricity is generated. Additionally, spacing the wells 10% greater than optimal affects electricity generation less than spacing wells 10% closer than optimal. Our simulations also show that for a 300 m thick reservoir, a 707 m well spacing provides consistent electricity over 50 years, whereas a 300 m well spacing yields large heat and electricity reductions over time. Finally, increasing injection or production well pipe diameters does not necessarily increase average electric generation. (c) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:1393 / 1403
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A comparison of electric power output of CO2 Plume Geothermal (CPG) and brine geothermal systems for varying reservoir conditions
    Adams, Benjamin M.
    Kuehn, Thomas H.
    Bielicki, Jeffrey M.
    Randolph, Jimmy B.
    Saar, Martin O.
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2015, 140 : 365 - 377
  • [2] On the importance of the thermosiphon effect in CPG (CO2 plume geothermal) power systems
    Adams, Benjamin M.
    Kuehn, Thomas H.
    Bielicki, Jeffrey M.
    Randolph, Jimmy B.
    Saar, Martin O.
    ENERGY, 2014, 69 : 409 - 418
  • [3] CO2 Plume Geothermal (CPG) Systems for Combined Heat and Power Production: an Evaluation of Various Plant Configurations
    Christopher Schifflechner
    Christoph Wieland
    Hartmut Spliethoff
    Journal of Thermal Science, 2022, 31 : 1266 - 1278
  • [4] CO2 Plume Geothermal(CPG) Systems for Combined Heat and Power Production: an Evaluation of Various Plant Configurations
    SCHIFFLECHNER Christopher
    WIELAND Christoph
    SPLIETHOFF Hartmut
    JournalofThermalScience, 2022, 31 (05) : 1266 - 1278
  • [5] CO2 Plume Geothermal (CPG) Systems for Combined Heat and Power Production: an Evaluation of Various Plant Configurations
    Schifflechner, Christopher
    Wieland, Christoph
    Spliethoff, Hartmut
    JOURNAL OF THERMAL SCIENCE, 2022, 31 (05) : 1266 - 1278
  • [6] A Geospatial Cost Comparison of CO2 Plume Geothermal (CPG) Power and Geologic CO2 Storage
    Ogland-Hand, Jonathan D.
    Adams, Benjamin M.
    Bennett, Jeffrey A.
    Middleton, Richard S.
    FRONTIERS IN ENERGY RESEARCH, 2022, 10
  • [7] Paving the way for CO2-Plume Geothermal (CPG) systems: A perspective on the CO2 surface equipment
    Schifflechner, Christopher
    de Reus, Jasper
    Schuster, Sebastian
    Villasana, Andreas Corpancho
    Brillert, Dieter
    Saar, Martin O.
    Spliethoff, Hartmut
    ENERGY, 2024, 305
  • [8] Increased Power Generation due to Exothermic Water Exsolution in CO2 Plume Geothermal (CPG) Power Plants
    Fleming, Mark R.
    Adams, Benjamin M.
    Kuehn, Thomas H.
    Bielicki, Jeffrey M.
    Saar, Martin O.
    GEOTHERMICS, 2020, 88
  • [9] INORGANIC CO2 AND H2S GENERATION IN SEDIMENTARY BASINS - EVIDENCE FROM GEOTHERMAL SYSTEMS AND STEAMFLOODING
    CATHLES, LM
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 1995, 210 : 20 - GEOC
  • [10] Numerical analysis and optimization of the performance of CO2-Plume Geothermal (CPG) production wells and implications for electric power generation
    Ezekiel, Justin
    Adams, Benjamin M.
    Saar, Martin O.
    Ebigbo, Anozie
    GEOTHERMICS, 2022, 98