Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exergy Analysis and Environmental Impact Assessment of a Geothermal Power Plant

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Causes, Impacts and Solutions to Global Warming

  • 6621 Accesses

Abstract

Geothermal power plants are one of the environmentally benign systems among other types of power generation systems. In this chapter, the exergy efficiencies and exergy destruction rates are analyzed for the binary geothermal. In addition, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (in ton CO2-eq/kWh) during operation as well as the sustainability index are determined under various operating conditions. For the case study presented here, it is shown that the Dora II binary geothermal power plant produces no GHG emissions during operation since no fossil fuels are burned. For the same production capacity, it helps reduce the emissions by 56 Mega Ton CO2-eq/yr compared to a coal-fired power plant and 28 Mega Ton CO2-eq/yr compared to a natural gas combined cycle power plant.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

D p :

Depletion number

e :

Specific emission (kg CO2-eq/kWh)

E :

Emission (kg/kWh)

\( \dot{E}\mathrm{ x} \) :

Exergy rate (kW)

h :

Specific enthalpy (kJ/kg)

\( \dot{m} \) :

Mass flow rate (kg/s)

P :

Power (kW)

\( \dot{Q} \) :

Heat transfer rate (kW)

T :

Temperature (K or °C)

T 0 :

Ambient temperature (K or °C)

\( \dot{W} \) :

Work rate (kW)

\( \eta \) :

Exergy efficiency

a :

Air

\( av \) :

Avoided

bat :

Battery

cool:

Coolant

en :

Energy

ex :

Exergy

g :

Generation

geo :

Geothermal fluid

n:

n-Pentane

p :

Pump

pre :

Preheater

turb :

Turbine

vap :

Vaporizer

GHG:

Greenhouse gas

GWP:

Global warming potential

SI:

Sustainability index

References

  1. Dincer I, Balta MT (2011) Potential thermochemical and hybrid cycles for nuclear-based hydrogen production. International Journal of Energy Research 35(2):123–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ahmed M, Dincer I (2011) A review on methanol crossover in direct methanol fuel cells: challenges and achievements. International Journal of Energy Research 35(14):1213–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hammond GP (2000) Energy, environment and sustainable development: a UK perspective. Trans IChemE Part B Process Saf Environ Prot 78:304–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Self SJ, Reddy BV, Rosen MA (2013) Geothermal heat pump systems: status review and comparison with other heating options. Appl Energ 101:341–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lund J, Bertani R (2010) Worldwide geothermal utilization 2010. In: Geothermal resources council transactions, vol 34, p 182–185

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gerber L, Maréchal F (2012) Enviroeconomic optimal configurations of geothermal energy conversion systems: application to the future construction of enhanced geothermal systems in Switzerland. Energy 45:908–923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. IEA, Technology Roadmap (2011) Geothermal heat and power tech rep. International Energy Agency, Paris, France

    Google Scholar 

  8. White DE (1973) Characteristics of geothermal resources. In: Kruger P, Otte C (eds) Chap. 4 in Geothermal energy: resources, production, stimulation. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, pp 69–94

    Google Scholar 

  9. Barbier E (1997) Nature and technology of geothermal energy: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 1(1-2):1–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hochstein MP (1990) Classification and assessment of geothermal resources. UNITAR/UNDP 305 Center on Small Energy Resources, Rome, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  11. DiPippo R (2012) Geothermal Power Plants, Principles, Applications, Case Studies and Environmental Impact, Third Edition. Butterworth-Heinemann

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tester JW, Anderson BJ, Batchelor AS, Blackwell DD, DiPippo R, Drake EM, Garnish J, Livesay B, Moore MC, Nichols K, Petty S, Toksoz MN, Veatch RW Jr (2006) The future of geothermal energy: impact of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) on the United States in the 21st century, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. http://geothermal.inel.gov

  13. DiPippo R (1991) Geothermal energy: electricity generation and environmental impact. Energy Policy 19:798–807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kagel A, Bates D, Gawell K (2005) A guide to geothermal energy and the environment. Geothermal Energy Association, Washington, D.C

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Kristmannsdo´ttir H, Armannsson H (2003) Environmental aspects of geothermal energy utilization. Geothermics 32:451–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Verification report of the DORA-II 9.5 MWE geothermal power plant project in Turkey, Swiss Carbon Value Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Baniasadi E, Dincer I, Naterer GF (2012) Exergy and environmental impact assessment of solar photoreactors for catalytic hydrogen production. Chem Eng J 213:330–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dincer I, Midilli A, Hepbasli A, Karakoc H (2008) Global warming: engineering solutions. Springer, NY

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ganjehsarabi H, Gungor A, Dincer I (2012) Exergetic performance analysis of Dora II geothermal power plant in Turkey. Energy 46:101–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kanoglu M (2002) Exergy analysis of a dual level binary geothermal power plant. Geothermics 31:709–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ege University, Bornova, Izmir, TR-35100, Turkey

    Hadi Ganjehsarabi & Ali Gungor

  2. Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON, L1H 7K4, Canada

    Hadi Ganjehsarabi & Ibrahim Dincer

Authors
  1. Hadi Ganjehsarabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ibrahim Dincer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ali Gungor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hadi Ganjehsarabi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada

    Ibrahim Dincer

  2. Makina Muhendisligi Bolumu, Dokuz Eylul University, Buca, Izmir, Turkey

    Can Ozgur Colpan

  3. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Maslak, Istanbul, Turkey

    Fethi Kadioglu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ganjehsarabi, H., Dincer, I., Gungor, A. (2013). Exergy Analysis and Environmental Impact Assessment of a Geothermal Power Plant. In: Dincer, I., Colpan, C., Kadioglu, F. (eds) Causes, Impacts and Solutions to Global Warming. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7588-0_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7588-0_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7587-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7588-0

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation