Climate factors influencing effective use of geothermal resources in SE Poland: the Lublin trough
2021 (English)In: Geothermal Energy, E-ISSN 2195-9706, Vol. 9, no 1, article id 3Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]
Although geothermal resources are practically independent of climate factors, those factors significantly condition the potential use of the Earth's natural heat resources. Unlike all the other factors limiting or facilitating the use of geothermal heat (like receivers' temperature expectation, financial issues or local regulations), climate factors remain immovable. Thus, climate remains the main factor influencing the effective use of geothermal resources. Volumes of sold energy, typical capacity factors and rapid changes in heat demand may all influence the financial and technological performance of an investment. In the current paper, climate factors are translated into heat demand based on historical data (meteorological and district heating logs) by means of a dedicated artificial neural network, and analysed in terms of possible constraints and facilitators that might affect the effective use of geothermal energy. The results of ANN simulation indicate that average and typical operation is expected without any turbulences, yet about 10% of operating hours may require additional technical measures, like peak source support, smart management and buffers in order to limit pumping ramp rate. With appropriate dimensioning and exploitation, capacity factors as high as 60% are available, proving the potential for financially and environmentally effective use of geothermal resources.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
SPRINGER , 2021. Vol. 9, no 1, article id 3
Keywords [en]
Geothermal resources, Climate, Weather, Peak source
National Category
Energy Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-53571DOI: 10.1186/s40517-021-00184-1ISI: 000616321200001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85100606037OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-53571DiVA, id: diva2:1534406
Note
Correction: WOS:000703801800001Erratum: Scopus id: 2-s2.0-85116265804
AbstractThe original version of this (Ciapała et al. 2021) article was published with incorrect reference citations because of production errors. The supplementary file which was missed out in the original version was also provided in this Correction article. The original article has been corrected.
2021-03-052021-03-052024-01-16Bibliographically approved