Feasibility study and economic analysis of geothermal well drilling

Shamoushaki, Moein; Fiaschi, Daniele; Manfrida, Giampaolo; Niknam, Pouriya H.; Talluri, Lorenzo

doi:10.1080/00207233.2021.1905309

Cited by 16 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We applied QUE$TOR to estimate the cost of drilling for different well depths, well type, geological features, geometry, tubular material, etc using the software's data for North America (Shamoushaki et al 2021). The total well drilling cost includes the sum of the equipment, materials, construction process, design and project management, insurance and certification, and contingency costs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geothermal power generation potential in the United States by 2050

Chen,

Merino-Garcia,

Lines

et al. 2024

Environ. Res.: Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geothermal energy provides a dispatchable source of carbon-free electricity that can balance the output of variable resources. However, geothermal provides just 3.7 gigawatts (GWe) (<1%) of electricity in the United States today, mostly from hydrothermal resources that are geographically constrained. Enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), which extract heat from deep rock, could be applicable in more locations. However, baseline levels and potential trends in EGS costs have been insufficiently characterized by previous studies. Here, we assess geothermal penetration potential by using as baseline the latest available data on drilling costs from three costing models to create updated estimates of costs and performance. We input those estimates along with various scenarios of cost trends, emissions policies, and electricity demand into the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) capacity expansion model to simulate electricity generation in the United States through 2050.The scarcity of hydrothermal resources limits deployments to no more than 18 GWe across our scenarios. EGS is more costly than hydrothermal for now, but it has greater potential to scale nationwide. Thus, future deployments of EGS depend strongly on projected cost reductions and emissions policies. In scenarios with moderate (<50%) reductions in costs by 2050, very little EGS is likely to be built, since wind and solar with storage provide lower-cost electricity. However, over 70% cost reductions from our updated baseline would make geothermal the least-cost carbon-free dispatchable resource. Under those cost trends, we project that 3 GWe of EGS would be built by 2050 under existing policies, 11 GWe with a 95% decarbonization policy, and 152 GWe if full decarbonization of electricity is mandated. Most geothermal would likely first be built in western states with the steepest subsurface temperature gradients, although mandates for full decarbonization could drive it to be deployed in other states.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geothermal power generation potential in the United States by 2050

Chen,

Merino-Garcia,

Lines

et al. 2024

Environ. Res.: Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, the considered LCOH only address the installation and operation of the transportation system and the HTHP installation. However, installing an HTHP lowers also the LCOH of the geothermal project itself (which are rather high especially caused by the drilling cost [25]) due to a higher utilization and it reduces the need for installing and/or integrating further alternative heat sources. Thus, while the installation of an HTHP might be useful from a thermo-economic perspective, it needs to be assessed in a broader system study considering also other available potential heat sources and technologies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thermo-Economic Comparison of CO2 and Water as a Heat Carrier for Long-Distance Heat Transport from Geothermal Sources

Ungar

Schifflechner

Wieland

et al. 2023

36th International Conference on Efficiency, Cost, Optimization, Simulation and Environmental Impact of Energy Systems (ECOS 20

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deep geothermal energy has tremendous potential for decarbonizing the heating sector. However, one common obstacle can be the mismatch between geologically attractive regions in the countryside and urban areas with a high heat demand density, which are therefore attractive for district heating systems. In the last years, an increasing number of regions consider the transport of geothermal heat into urban clusters. One example of such a region is the South German Molasse Basin in Upper Bavaria. However, such heat transport pipelines come along with massive upfront investment costs due to the required large pipe diameter and insulation thickness. While the classic concept foresees the use of water as a heat carrier in such long-distance heat transportation pipelines, CO 2 can be an attractive alternative. This study investigates the thermo-economic performance of CO 2 as a heat transport carrier for a potential long-distance heat transmission pipeline with a length of 20 km, which could connect a planned geothermal project in the South of Munich with the existing district heating network of Munich. The results of the base case scenario demonstrate that for both heat carrier options water and CO 2 rather low LCOH for the transport of the heat can be achieved. The resulting additional LCOH by the long-distance heat transport of around 0.6 cC/kWh are rather small compared to the typical overall LCOH of geothermal district heating systems. Comparing the thermo-economic performance of water and CO 2 reveals rather similar achievable LCOH, with a slight advantage for the classical concept of using water. However, this changes if the installation of a high temperature heat pump (HTHP) is considered in order to increase the thermal capacity of the heat transport system. In the case of using CO 2 , the additional temperature increase takes place directly within the CO 2 stream by just installing a compressor, while in the case of the water system, a complete HTHP system needs to be installed. In combination with a higher achievable COP, the CO 2 HTHP configurations results in lower overall LCOH compared to the water system.

show abstract

“…However, in this study, the additional cost of capital investment for drilling and completion is taken into account and can be evaluated with the following equations [55,56]:…”

Section: Economic Evaluation Of Geothermal Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Feasibility of Green Hydrogen Production by Water Electrolysis Using Wind and Geothermal Energy Resources in Asal-Ghoubbet Rift (Republic of Djibouti): A Comparative Evaluation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Republic of Djibouti has untapped potential in terms of renewable energy resources, such as geothermal, wind, and solar energy. This study examines the economic feasibility of green hydrogen production by water electrolysis using wind and geothermal energy resources in the Asal–Ghoubbet Rift (AG Rift), Republic of Djibouti. It is the first study in Africa that compares the cost per kg of green hydrogen produced by wind and geothermal energy from a single site. The unit cost of electricity produced by the wind turbine (0.042 $/kWh) is more competitive than that of a dry steam geothermal plant (0.086 $/kWh). The cost of producing hydrogen with a suitable electrolyzer powered by wind energy ranges from $0.672/kg H2 to $1.063/kg H2, while that produced by the high-temperature electrolyzer (HTE) powered by geothermal energy ranges from $3.31/kg H2 to $4.78/kg H2. Thus, the AG Rift area can produce electricity and green hydrogen at low-cost using wind energy compared to geothermal energy. The amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reduced by using a “Yinhe GX113-2.5MW” wind turbine and a single flash geothermal power plant instead of fuel-oil generators is 2061.6 tons CO2/MW/year and 2184.8 tons CO2/MW/year, respectively.

show abstract

Feasibility study and economic analysis of geothermal well drilling

Cited by 16 publications

References 16 publications

Geothermal power generation potential in the United States by 2050

Geothermal power generation potential in the United States by 2050

Thermo-Economic Comparison of CO2 and Water as a Heat Carrier for Long-Distance Heat Transport from Geothermal Sources

Economic Feasibility of Green Hydrogen Production by Water Electrolysis Using Wind and Geothermal Energy Resources in Asal-Ghoubbet Rift (Republic of Djibouti): A Comparative Evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About