International Scientific Journal

Authors of this Paper

External Links


The thermodynamic and economic suitability of four geothermal power systems is analyzed. When the heat source temperature ranges from 100-150°C, the performance indicators of power capacity per unit geo-fluid, exergy efficiency, payback period, net present value and internal rate of return for four types of the power system are calculated. The results show that when the heat source temperature increases from 100-150°C, the power capacity per unit geo-fluid for single flash, organic rankine cycle (ORC), double flash, and flash-ORC system increases from 2.26-7.72 kWh/t, 2.05-8.37 kWh/t, 2.96-9.96 kWh/t, and 2.76-9.82 kWh/t, respectively, and the performance indicators of two-stage energy conversion systems are better than single systems. R245fa is selected as the working fluid based on anti-scaling and better performance. When the heat source temperature is 130°C, the payback period, net present value and internal rate of return of flash-binary power system are six years, 2508000 US$ and 16.09%, respectively. The research shows that, unlike the single objective optimization of the two power systems, the multi-objective feasibility analysis is a technical integration innovation of the existing research. The research can provide technical support for power construction and realize the sustainable development of clean energy in China.
PAPER REVISED: 2021-12-20
PAPER ACCEPTED: 2022-01-14
CITATION EXPORT: view in browser or download as text file
THERMAL SCIENCE YEAR 2022, VOLUME 26, ISSUE Issue 4, PAGES [3255 - 3269]
  1. Hou, P. Gao, L. Xing, Y., et al., Effect of thermal cycling on mechanical properties and energy evolution of sandstone,Thermal Science, 24(2020), 6, pp, 4001-4009.
  2. Denda, S. L. Micic, J. M., Milanovic, P. Z., et al., Utilization of geothermal springs as a renewable energy source Vranjska Banja case study,Thermal Science, 23(2019), 6, pp, 4083-4093.
  3. Huttrer, G. W., Geothermal power generation in the world 2015-2020 update report, World Geothermal Congress 2020. Reykjavik, Iceland. 2020.
  4. Coskun, A. Bolatturk, A. Kanoglu, M., Thermodynamic and economic analysis and optimization of power cycles for a medium temperature geothermal resource, Energy Conversion and Management, 78(2014), pp, 39-49.
  5. Alessandro, F. Marco, V., Optimal design of binary cycle power plants for water-dominated, medium-temperature geothermal fields, Geothermics, 38(2009), pp, 379-391.
  6. Hardi, A. Qurrahman, W., et al., Energy and Exergy Analysis of Dieng Geothermal Power Plant, International Journal of Technology, 12(2021), 1, pp, 175-185.
  7. Gnaifaid, H. Ozcan, H., Development and multiobjective optimization of an integrated flash-binary geothermal power plant with reverse osmosis desalination and absorption refrigeration for multi-generation, Geothermics, 89(2021), pp, 1-12.
  8. Hu, S. Yang, Z. Li, J., et al., Thermo-economic optimization of the hybrid geothermal-solar power system: A data-driven method based on lifetime off-design operation, Energy Conversion and Management, 229(2021), pp, 1-17.
  9. Jalili, M. Chitsaz, A. Hashemian, M., et al., Economic and environmental assessment using emergy of a geothermal power plant, Energy Conversion and Management, 228(2021), pp, 1-12.
  10. Yousefi, H. Roumi, S. Ármannsson, H., et al., Cascading uses of geothermal energy for a sustainable energy supply for Meshkinshahr City, Northwest, Iran, Geothermics, 79(2019), pp, 152-163.
  11. Wang, W. Wang, J. Lu, Z., et al., Exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analysis of a combined heating and power system driven by geothermal source, Energy Conversion and Management, 211(2020), pp, 1-13.
  12. Wang, Y. Yu, L. Nazir, B., et al., Innovative geothermal-based power and cooling cogeneration system; Thermodynamic analysis and optimization, Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 44(2021), pp, 1-19.
  13. DiPippo, R., Geothermal Power Plants: Principles, Applications, Case Studies and Environmental Impact, 2nd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Elsevier, UK, 2008.
  14. Çetin, G. Keçebas, A., Optimization of thermodynamic performance with simulated annealing algorithm: A geothermal power plant, Renewable Energy, 172(2021), pp, 968-982.
  15. Hu, S. Yang, Z. Li, J., Optimization of thermodynamic performance with simulated annealing algorithm: A geothermal power plant, Renewable energy, 172(2021), pp, 968-982.
  16. Bejan, A. Tsatsaronis, G. Moran, M., Thermal design and optimization, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1996, pp, 1-533.
  17. Ilas, A. Ralon, P. Rodriguez, A., Renewable power generation costs in 2017, International Renewable Energy Agency, 2017, pp, 1-12.
  18. Jon, G. Harold, A. Pablo, R., et al., Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2018, Abu Dhabi: International Renewable Energy Agency, 2019, pp, 11-80.
  19. Jefferson, W. T., The future of geothermal energy, Technical Report. Massachusetts institute of technology, 2007, pp, 1-372.

© 2023 Society of Thermal Engineers of Serbia. Published by the Vinča Institute of Nuclear Sciences, National Institute of the Republic of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International licence