mdh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Performance and economic assessments of integrating geothermal energy into coal-fired power plant with CO2 capture
Tianjin University, Ministry of Education of China, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin University, Ministry of Education of China, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin University, Ministry of Education of China, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin University, Ministry of Education of China, Tianjin, China.
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Energy, ISSN 0360-5442, E-ISSN 1873-6785, Vol. 119, 278-287 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

A novel carbon capture and storage system integrated with geothermal energy was proposed to reduce energy consumption in the post-combustion CO2 capture (PCC) process. Geothermal energy at medium temperature was used to provide the heat required for solvent regeneration. A technical and economic assessment was conducted based on a 300 MWe coal-fired power plant. Additionally, the integrated system was also compared with a stand-alone geothermal power (GP) plant to evaluate individual advantages. Both an enhanced geothermal system (EGS) and a hot sedimentary aquifer (HSA) reservoir were selected to identify the effect of geological properties and heat characteristics on system performance. The results indicated that the geothermal-assisted post-combustion CO2 capture (GPCC) plant exhibited better performance than the PCC plant. The net plant average efficiency increased 5.56% and 4.42% in the EGS scenario and HSA scenario, respectively. Furthermore, the net incremental geothermal efficiency obtained corresponded to 21.34% and 20.35% in the EGS scenario and HSA scenario, respectively. The economic assessment indicated that the GPCC systems in both the EGS scenario and HSA scenario had lower marginal cost of electricity (70.84 $/MWh and 101.06 $/MWh) when compared with that of the stand-alone GP systems (151.09 $/MWh and 101.95 $/MWh). 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. Vol. 119, 278-287 p.
National Category
Energy Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-34611DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2016.12.029ISI: 000393727800025Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85008225243OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-34611DiVA: diva2:1065142
Available from: 2017-01-13 Created: 2017-01-13 Last updated: 2017-03-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Yan, Jinyue
By organisation
Future Energy Center
In the same journal
Energy
Energy Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 79 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf