Global CO2 Capture and Storage Methods and a New Approach to Reduce the Emissions of Geothermal Power Plants with High CO2 Emissions: A Case Study from Turkey

  • Fusun S. Tut HaklidirEmail author
  • Kaan Baytar
  • Mert Kekevi
Part of the Understanding Complex Systems book series (UCS)


CO2 gas is a main cause of the greenhouse effect, with atmospheric concentrations reaching 405 ppm in 2018. The main sources of CO2 around the world are electricity production, heating, industrial purposes, and transportation. One of the critical factors, global energy-related CO2 emissions, increased to 32.5 Gt in 2017. However, carbon capture technologies have improved and carbon storage methods are beginning to be used widely around the world. One option to minimize the effects of CO2 gas is converting it into another product.

In addition to carbon emissions due to hydrocarbons, geothermal power plants, which have the highest capacity among renewables sources, emit non-condensable gases such as CO2 and H2S at high concentrations, based on geothermal reservoir characteristics and power cycle type. In Turkey, Italy, and some African countries that have important geothermal sources, geothermal-based CO2 gas emissions are greater than elsewhere in the world.

In Turkey, the country’s 40 installed geothermal power plants produce energy by different power cycles, such as binary, single, and multi-flash systems. The total installed capacity was approximately 1200 MWe in 2018 and is expected to reach to 4000 MWe in 2030. The non-condensable gases emitted from these plants are composed of 95–98% CO2 gas and are due to the reservoir rocks, such as marble and limestone from Paleozoic-aged Menderes metamorphic rocks. CO2 emissions emitted by the geothermal power plants range from 900 to1300 gr/kwh and are inevitable because of the use of open cycles in Western Anatolia in Turkey. Only a small amount of waste CO2 emissions have been used to produce dry ice in the region. However, Turkey is one of the countries that is required to reduce emissions according to the Kyoto and Paris Climate Agreements.

A global problem is the capture of CO2 gas and its storage or conversion to another product, which has been studied by researchers for a long time. A solution may be biofuel production from geothermal-based CO2 in countries with geothermal power plants that are high producers of CO2 emissions, such as Turkey and Italy. In this study, a conceptual design of the Helioculture process is applied to geothermal power plants to produce biofuel by CO2. The Helioculture process is a new approach by which it is possible to produce biofuel or ethanol using a photo-biocatalytic process. The process uses solar energy and waste CO2 to catalyze the direct-to product synthesis of renewable fuel. It is evaluated with applicable technology for high-CO2 producing geothermal power plants, such as the Kızıldere (Denizli) geothermal field in Turkey. Based on the results, Helioculture-based fuel production may be five times greater than traditional biodiesel production in the region.


CO2 emissions CO2 capture and storage Geothermal power plant Ethanol Biodiesel Hybrid system Turkey 


  1. AECOM. (2016). Kızıldere-III GPP Capacity Extension Project; Supplementary Lenders Information Package (SLIP) ESIA Addendum, Prepared for EBRD, Ankara, Turkey.Google Scholar
  2. Aksoy, N. (2014). Power generation from geothermal sources in Turkey. Renewable Energy, 68, 595–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amponsah, N. Y., Troldborg, M., & Kington, B. (2014). Greenhouse gas emissions from renewable energy sources: A review of lifecycle considerations. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 461–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baxter, L. (2009). Cryogenic carbon capture technology. Carbon Capture Journal, 10, 18–21.Google Scholar
  5. Baytar, K., Kekevi, M. (2016). Global CO2 capture and storage methods and probable methods for reducing geothermal CO2 emission in Turkey. BsC. Thesis. Istanbul Bilgi University, Depth. of Energy Systems.Google Scholar
  6. Bloomfield, K. K., & Moore, J. N. (1999). Production of greenhouse gases from geothermal power plants. Geothermal Resource Council Transactions, 23, 221–223.Google Scholar
  7. Brennan, L., & Owende, P. (2010). Biofuels from microalgae—A review of technologies for production, processing, and extractions of biofuels and co-products. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14, 557–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. CO2CRC–The Cooperative Research Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies. (2010).
  9. Consoli, P. C., & Wildgust, W. (2017). Current status of global storage resources. Energy Procedia, 1144623–1144628.Google Scholar
  10. Cook, P. J. (1999). Sustainability and nonrenewable resources. Environmental Geosciences, 6(4), 185–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cuellar-Bermudez, S. P., Garcia-Perez, J. S., Ritmann, E. B., & Parra-Salvidar, R. (2015). Photosynthetic bioenergy utilizing CO2: An approach on flue gases utilization for third generation biofuels. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cuéllar-Franca, R. M., & Azapagic, A. (2015). Carbon capture, storage and utilisation technologies: A critical analysis and comparison of their life cycle environmental impacts. Journal of CO2 Utilization, 9, 82–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. EBRD. (2016). Türkiye’de doğal kaynaklar bazlı CO2’nin ticari amaçlar için kullanımının değerlendirilmesi, Report. Pluto, Prepared by ECOFYS, EY, METU. 106 P.Google Scholar
  14. Elçık, H., & Çakmakçı, M. (2017). Mikroalg üretimi ve mikroalglerden biyoyakıt eldesi. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 32(3), 795–820.Google Scholar
  15. Galan, E., Aparicio, P., & Miras, A. (2014). Contribution of applied mineralogy group to capture and storage CO2. Workshop Mineralogía Aplicada. Macla, (18), p. 51–53.Google Scholar
  16. GEA. (2012). Geothermal energy and greenhouse gas emissions. Retrieved from
  17. Gökçen, G., Öztürk, H. K., & Hepbaşlı, A. (2004). Overview of Kızıldere geothermal power plant in Turkey. Energy Conversion and Management, 45, 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haizlip Robinson, J., Haklıdır Tut, F., Garg, S. K. (2013). Comparison of reservoir conditions in high non-condensable gas geothermal systems. 38th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 11–13 Feb 2013.Google Scholar
  19. Haklıdır Tut, F. S. (2017). Scaling types and systems used to provide controlling of scale occurrence in high temperature geothermal systems in Western Anatolia; Kızıldere-II (Denizli) Geothermal Power Plant Example. Geological Bulletin of Turkey, 60(2017), 363–382.Google Scholar
  20. Haklıdır Tut F. S. (2018). The importance of reduction of CO2 gas due to geothermal power plants in Western Anatolia and possible solutions: Converting CO2 to the different energy source. 71th Geological Congress of Turkey, Ankara, 23–27 April 2018.Google Scholar
  21. Haklıdır Tut, F. S., & Şengün, R. (2016). Thermodynamic effects on scale inhibitors performance at multi-flash and advanced geothermal power systems. Proceedings, 41st Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Stanford University, Stanford, California, 22–24 Feb 2016.Google Scholar
  22. Hinkov, I., Lamari, F. D., Langlois, P., Dicko, M., Chilev, C., & Pentchev, I. (2016). Carbon dioxide Capture By Adsorption (Review). Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, 51(6), 609–626.Google Scholar
  23. IEA. (2016). Energy technology perspectives, international energy agency 2016 (p. 2016). Paris: OECD/IEA.Google Scholar
  24. IEA. (2017). Global energy & CO2 status report 2017. Retrieved from
  25. IEA. (2018). Global energy & CO2 status report. Retrieved from
  26. IPCC. (2005). Special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014 mitigation of climate change. Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change;
  28. Joule. (2015). Photocatalytic conversion of CO2 to drop-in fuels, report, Joule Unlimited Inc., USA. 
  29. Layman, E. B. (2017). Geothermal Projects in Turkey: Extreme greenhouse gas emission rates comparable to or exceeding those from coal-fired plants. 42nd Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford University, California, 13–15 Feb 2017.Google Scholar
  30. Li, Y., Horsman, M., & Wu, N. (2008). Biofuels from microalgae. Biotechnology Progress, 24(4), 815–820.Google Scholar
  31. Metz, B., Davidson, O. R., Bosch, P. R., Dave, R., & Meyer, A. L. (2007). Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (p. 2007). Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Ming, Z., Yingjie, O., & Hui, S. (2014). CCS technology development in China. Status, problems and countermeasures - based on SWOT analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 609–616.Google Scholar
  33. NASA. (2015). The carbon cycle. Retrieved from
  34. Pires, J., Martins, F., Alvim-Ferraz, M., & Simões, M. (2011). Recent developments on carbon capture and storage: An overview. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 89, 1446–1460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rackley, S. A. (2010). Mineral carbonation. In Carbon capture and storage (pp. 207–225). Burlington: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  36. Robertson, D. E., Jacobson, S. A., Morgan, F., Berry, D., Church, G. M., & Afeyan, N. B. (2011). A new dawn for industrial photosynthesis. Photosynthesis Research, 107(3), 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sims, R. E. R., Rogner, H., & Gregory, K. (2003). Carbon emission and mitigation cost comparisons between fossil fuel, nuclear and renewable energy resources for electricity generation. Energy Policy, 31, 1315–1326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Snæbjörnsdóttir, S. Ó., Wiese, F., & Fridriksson, T. (2014). CO2 storage potential of basaltic rocks in Iceland and the oceanic ridges. Energy Procedia, 63, 4585–4600.Google Scholar
  39. Steynberg, A. P., & Dry, M. E. (2004). Fischer-Tropsch technology. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stockmann, G. J., Ranta, E., Trampe, E., Sturkell, E., & Seaman, P. (2018). Carbon mineral storage in seawater: Ikaite (CaCO3.H2O) columns in Greenland. Energy Procedia, 146, 59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Surampalli, Y. R., Zhang, T. C., Tyagi, R. D., Naidu, R., Gurjar, B. R., Ojha, C. S. P., Yan, S., Brar, K. S., Ramakrishman, A., & Kao, C. M. (2015). Carbon capture and storage (p. 550). Published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, US. ISBN-13: 978-0784413678.Google Scholar
  42. UNFCCC. (2018). Paris Agreement – Status of Ratification, UNFCCC. Retrieved from
  43. Varun, G., Prakash, R., & Bhat, I. K. (2009). Energy, economics and environmental impacts of renewable energy systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13(9), 2716–2721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Verma, M., Palacios, J., Pelletier, F., Godbout, S., Brar, K. S., Tyagi, R. D., & Surampalli, R. Y. (2015). Carbon Capture and Sequestration: Physical/Chemical Technologies. In Carbon Capture and Storage (p. 550). Published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, USA. ISBN (print): 978-0-7844-1367-8.Google Scholar
  45. Wei, N., Fang, Z., Bai, B., Li, Q., Liu, S., Jia, Y. (2015). Regional resource distribution of onshore carbon geological utilization in China, Journal of CO2 Utilization, 11, 20–30.Google Scholar
  46. Yu, C.-H., Chih-Hung, H., & Tan, C. S. (2012). A review of CO2 capture by absorption and adsorption. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 12, 745–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhang, Z., & Huisingh, D. (2017). Carbon dioxide storage schemes: Technology, assessment and deployment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 1055–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fusun S. Tut Haklidir
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kaan Baytar
    • 2
  • Mert Kekevi
    • 3
  1. 1.Istanbul Bilgi University, Depth. of Energy Systems Engineering, Santral Campus EyupIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Southern States UniversitySan DiegoUSA
  3. 3.Energy Pool Turkey, BesiktasIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations