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

被引:8
|
作者
Fiaschi, Daniele [1 ]
Manfrida, Giampaolo [1 ]
Mendecka, Barbara [2 ]
Tosti, Lorenzo [3 ]
Parisi, Maria Laura [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florence, Dept Ind Engn DIEF, I-50135 Florence, Italy
[2] Univ Tuscia, Dept Econ Engn Soc & Business Org DEIM, I-01100 Viterbo, Italy
[3] Univ Florence, Ctr Colloid & Surface Sci CSGI, I-50135 Florence, Italy
[4] Univ Siena, Dept Biotechnol Chem & Pharm DBCF, I-53100 Siena, Italy
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
allocation; combined heat and power (CHP); geothermal energy; exergy; life cycle assessment (LCA); primary energy savings (PESs); LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; GENERATION TECHNOLOGIES; ELECTRICITY;
D O I
10.3390/su13084527
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
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 that, given the generally low temperature level of the cogenerated heat (80-100 degrees C, usually exploited in district heating), the use of exergy allocation largely marginalizes the importance of the heat byproduct, thus, becoming almost equivalent to electricity for the Chiusdino and Hellisheidi power plants. Therefore, the PES scheme is found to be the more appropriate allocation scheme. Additionally, the exergy scheme is mandatory for allocating power plants' environmental impacts at a component level in CHP systems. The main drawback of the PES scheme is its country dependency due to the different fuels used, but reasonable and representative values can be achieved based on average EU heat and power generation efficiencies.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Examples of combined heat and power plants using geothermal energy
    Geo-Heat Center, Oregon Institute of Technology, Klamath Falls, OR, United States
    Trans Geotherm Resour Counc, (225-230):
  • [2] Quantitative Analysis of Energy Storage in Different Parts of Combined Heat and Power Plants
    Deng, Tuoyu
    Tian, Liang
    Ge, Weichun
    Liu, Xinping
    Luo, Huanhuan
    Zhou, Guiping
    IEEE ACCESS, 2020, 8 : 225109 - 225122
  • [3] Thermo-economic analysis of combined different ORCs geothermal power plants and LNG cold energy
    Mosaffa, A. H.
    Mokarram, N. Hasani
    Farshi, L. Garousi
    GEOTHERMICS, 2017, 65 : 113 - 125
  • [4] BECCS with combined heat and power: Assessing the energy penalty
    Gustafsson, Kare
    Sadegh-Vaziri, Ramiar
    Gronkvist, Stefan
    Levihn, Fabian
    Sundberg, Cecilia
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2021, 108
  • [5] BECCS with combined heat and power: assessing the energy penalty*
    Gustafsson, Kare
    Sadegh-Vaziri, Ramiar
    Gronkvist, Stefan
    Levihn, Fabian
    Sundberg, Cecilia
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2021, 110
  • [6] ENERGY COST IN GEOTHERMAL POWER PLANTS
    Dagdas, Ahmet
    SIGMA JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND NATURAL SCIENCES-SIGMA MUHENDISLIK VE FEN BILIMLERI DERGISI, 2005, 23 (02): : 84 - 94
  • [7] Assessing the Environmental Sustainability of Deep Geothermal Heat Plants
    Maar, Lilli
    Seifermann, Stefan
    ENERGIES, 2023, 16 (19)
  • [8] Large combined heat and power plants in sustainable energy systems
    Lund, Rasmus
    Mathiesen, Brian Vad
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2015, 142 : 389 - 395
  • [9] ASSESSING COMBINED HEAT AND POWER
    不详
    ELECTRICAL REVIEW, 1977, 201 (06): : 31 - &
  • [10] Comparative analysis of cooling systems for energy equipment of combined heat and power plants and nuclear power plants
    Reutov B.F.
    Lazarev M.V.
    Ermakova S.V.
    Zisman S.L.
    Kaplanovich L.S.
    Svetushkov V.V.
    Thermal Engineering, 2016, 63 (7) : 463 - 470