2021
DOI: 10.3390/su13084527
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Comparison of Different Approaches for Assessing Energy Outputs of Combined Heat and Power Geothermal Plants

Abstract: In this paper, we assess using two alternative allocation schemes, namely exergy and primary energy saving (PES) to compare products generated in different combined heat and power (CHP) geothermal systems. In particular, the adequacy and feasibility of the schemes recommended for allocation are demonstrated by their application to three relevant and significantly different case studies of geothermal CHPs, i.e., (1) Chiusdino in Italy, (2) Altheim in Austria, and (3) Hellisheidi in Iceland. The results showed t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(22 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A commonly used simple method that is adopted from the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES) assumes that the production of electricity is half as efficient as the production of heat. This derived from the fact that the standalone electricity production plants average an efficiency of about 40%, while the efficiency for separate heat production averages 89% [34]. Therefore, the impact is that the CHP plant will use twice as much fuel to generate one unit of electricity compared to what is required to generate one unit of heat.…”
Section: Accounting For Chp Heat Bonusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A commonly used simple method that is adopted from the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES) assumes that the production of electricity is half as efficient as the production of heat. This derived from the fact that the standalone electricity production plants average an efficiency of about 40%, while the efficiency for separate heat production averages 89% [34]. Therefore, the impact is that the CHP plant will use twice as much fuel to generate one unit of electricity compared to what is required to generate one unit of heat.…”
Section: Accounting For Chp Heat Bonusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As both plants are of the combined heat and power (CHP) type, exergy allocation was applied so that the two types of products can be considered: the Functional Unit is 1 MJ of exergy. Within the plant, components dedicated to electricity or heat production were identified wherever possible; when components were serving a dual purpose, their environmental single score was allocated according to the exergy fractions retraceable to power or heat respectively (Fiaschi et al, 2021). After the Life Cycle Assessment, the LCI was reprocessed to disaggregate the contribution of the most relevant components (Fig.…”
Section: Description Of the Geothermal Power Plantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Exergy provides a potential indicator of environmental impact [9] and, thus, can be applied to LCA. Using exergy, the life cycle inventory (LCI) assesses the building as a whole [10]. The benefit of including exergy is especially useful in LCAs of buildings where the LCI details of subprocesses may be lacking.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%