Energy and Economic Analysis of Geothermal-Solar Trigeneration

Applied Energy 138 (2015) 224–241
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy
Energy and economic analysis of geothermal–solar trigeneration

systems: A case study for a hotel building in Ischia
Annamaria Buonomano, Francesco Calise, Adolfo Palombo, Maria Vicidomini ⇑
DII – University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
h i g h l i g h t s
A novel small trigenereation system is dynamically simulated and optimised.

The system is fed by solar and geothermal energy and it includes a 6 kW ORC.
Experimental measurements are performed to analyze the geothermal well.
New simulation models for ORC and geothermal well are presented.
In case of feed-in tariffs, pay back periods range from 2.5 to 7 years.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: This paper presents the design, simulation and optimisation of a small trigeneration plant supplied by
Received 31 July 2014 geothermal and solar energies. Different technologies are implemented in a dynamic simulation model
Received in revised form 20 October 2014 purposely developed for research scope: a 6 kWe micro Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC); a 30 kWf single
Accepted 27 October 2014
stage H2O/LiBr absorption chiller; a geothermal well; a solar field obtained by new prototypal flat-plate
Available online 14 November 2014
evacuated solar collectors. The ORC is supplied by heat obtained by a geothermal well in which geother-
mal brine is about at 95 °C. In order to improve system performance, additional heat is provided by solar
Keywords:
energy obtained through a 25 m2 solar field. Diathermic oil (up to 130 °C) is adopted as working fluid in
ORC (Organic Rankine Cycles)
Geothermal energy
order to supply heat to the ORC evaporator. A suitable oil storage tank is modelled in order to mitigate the
Solar energy temperature fluctuations due to the variability of solar energy availability. The output power of the ORC
Dynamic energy performance simulation depends on the availability of solar energy. The absorption chiller is switched-on in summer time and it is
Absorption chiller fed by geothermal energy only. This simulation model is implemented in TRNSYS environment. The ORC
is modelled by zero-dimensional energy and mass balances implemented in Engineering Equation Solver
(EES).
A case study is developed in order to test the energy and economic performance of this innovative
micro-trigeneration plant. In particular, the above mentioned model is applied to the Regina Isabella
hotel in Ischia (Naples, South Italy), famous for its geothermal sources. Currently, such hotel is already
equipped by a geothermal system (by several hot water wells) for thermal cares, domestic hot water pro-
duction and space heating. By TRNSYS the optimisation of the system design parameters and the calcu-
lation of the thermo-economic conditions were performed. The system showed excellent energy
performance indexes. In fact, the average yearly efficiency of the solar thermal collectors is close to
60%, whereas the average yearly ORC electric efficiency is about 6%, which is a good achievement consid-
ering the system driving temperature. Results also show that the system performance is more dependent
on the availability of the geothermal energy than the solar one. From the economic point of view, good
results are also obtained. In fact, in the worst operating conditions the Simple Pay Back Period is 7.6 years,
decreasing to 2.5 years in the most convenient considered scenario (public funding and full utilisation of
the produced thermal energy).
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: annamaria.buonomano@unina.it (A. Buonomano), frcalise@
In last few years, the application of renewable energy
unina.it (F. Calise), palombo@unina.it (A. Palombo), maria.vicidomini@unina.it
(M. Vicidomini). resources to supply electricity, heating and cooling energy to
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.10.076
0306-2619/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Buonomano et al. / Applied Energy 138 (2015) 224–241 225
Nomenclature
A area (m2) V_ volume flow rate (m3 s1)

Aq horizontal cross-section of the well (m2) Vw well volume (m3)
b fin spacing (m) w specific work (kJ kg1)
C_ heat capacity rate (kJ kg1 K1) w_ real gross power (kW)
cp specific heat at constant pressure (kJ kg1 K1)
cp,w specific heat capacity of the fluid in the well Greek symbols
(kJ kg1 K1) b angle at the fin tip
do tube diameter (mm) bexp angle at the fin tip
Ds shell diameter (mm) e heat exchanger efficiency
D diameter (m) Uf condensate retention angle
EL long wavelength radiation (outside solar spectrum) g efficiency
onto the collector plane (W/m2) kcon effective vertical thermal conductivity in the well
e fin height (m) (kJ m1 h1 K1)
f fin thickness (m) l dynamic viscosity (Pa s)
Fb bundle boiling factor (–) n logical switch
Fc mixture boiling correlation factor (–) q density (kg m3)
g gravitational acceleration (m s2) qw density of the fluid in the well (kg m3)
h heat transfer coefficient (W m2 K1) r surface tension (N m1)
H hydraulic head (m)
Hw well height (m) Subscripts
ilv latent heat of evaporation (kJ kg1 K1) a referred to ambient
LHVNG natural gas lower heating value (kW h/Sm3)
c cold fluid
ilv latent heat of evaporation (kJ kg1 K1) cond referred to the condenser
k thermal conductivity (W m1 K1) crit critical
m_ mass flow rate (kg s1) del delivery
m_ dp mass flow rate through the double port p (p = 1 . . . 10)
eq equivalent
(kg h1) est finned tube outer
N number of tubes (–) eva referred to the evaporator
Nnode number of nodes (–)
fin referred to fin
ndzk number of nodes in zone k with (UA)w,wk = const. h hot fluid
(k = 1 . . . 4) (–) i referred to number of node of well
nhy number of nodes occupied by heat exchanger x id ideal
(x = 1 . . . 4) (–)
in inlet
Nrow number of row (–) is isentropic
ntubepass number of passes into tubes (–) k number of a zone with (UA)w,wk = const. (1 . . . 4)
Nu Nusselt number (–) l liquid
NTU number of thermal unit (–)
natural natural convection
p pressure (kPa) nb nucleate boiling
Pr Prandtl number (–) min minimum
PT pitch tube (mm) max maxim
Q thermal power (kW)
o outer
Re Reynolds number (–) oil diathermic oil
s tubes thickness (mm) exit exit
T temperature (K)
p number of a double port (1 . . . 10)
t temperature (°C) real real
tm arithmetic mean temperature between inlet–outlet s, t single tube
temperature of the collector (°C) sat saturated
ta ambient air temperature close to the collector
shell referred to shell
arithmetic (°C) T iso-thermal wall
U overall heat transfer coefficient (W m2 K1) t referred to the value of a parameter in time step
u wind speed in (parallel to) the collector plane (m/s) tot total
UAhy,w constant heat transfer capacity rate between heat
v vapour
exchanger y and the well (kJ h1 K1) wall referred to wall
UA⁄hy,w temperature-difference and mass flow dependent heat w geothermal well
transfer capacity rate between heat exchanger y and
ww wall of well
the well (kJ h1 K1) y number of a heat exchanger (1 . . . 4)
UAw,wk constant heat transfer capacity rate between the well
and k wall zone (kJ h1 K1)
buildings was widely investigated. Many research studies by Quoilin et al. [1]. For low-temperature heat sources applica-
analysed alternative energy sources such as solar energy, tions in small scale units, as an example for residential applica-
geothermal energy and biomass products. An overview of the tions, the Organic Rankine Cycles (ORCs) are today an interesting
exploitation of such sources for ORC applications is presented opportunity.
226 A. Buonomano et al. / Applied Energy 138 (2015) 224–241
Presently, ORC raises considerable interest to produce electric- University of Western Australia (UWA). The available source tem-
ity from low temperature geothermal sources, typically within perature is around 90–100 °C. The economic analysis based on the
100–130 °C (exceptionally down to 90–95 °C). Note that often such real-time cooling load profile and the chiller operation scheme
sources are available by very deep wells (also below 1000 m). demonstrates the system viability.
Cammarata et al. [2] proposed a thermodynamic analysis of ORC are attractive also when coupled with solar thermal collec-
geothermal ORC in which a numerical flow-chart tool (based on tors (solar power system) Calise et al. [11] presented a novel pro-
a lumped parameters approach) is adopted for computing several totype of a 10 kWe solar power plant dynamically simulated in
thermodynamic operating parameters. The system components TRNSYS environment. The system was based on innovative flat-
are outlined by single blocks linked each other by connections plate evacuated solar collectors and a small Organic Rankine Cycle.
through balance equations. Results are obtained for several sets The solar field consists of about 235 m2 designed in order to heat
of operating parameters, such as the evaporation and condensation diathermic oil up to 180 °C. The ORC produces electricity and low
pressure for the working fluid, the mass flow rate of the geother- temperature (45 °C) cogeneration heat, simultaneously. Results
mal brine and the cooling water temperature. showed that the minimum payback period was achieved when
A theoretical analysis of transcritical Rankine power cycles the solar field area is about 200 m2 and the solar fraction is about
(based on 12 natural and conventional working fluids) driven by 75%.
low-temperature geothermal sources was carried out by Guo In an ORC solar power system, the suitable organic working
et al. [3]. Here, the pinch point analysis was adopted by using com- fluid must be selected as a function of the solar collector outlet
puter models. The results include: (i) the optimum turbine inlet design temperature. Calise et al. in [12] investigated the perfor-
pressure; (ii) the corresponding thermodynamic mean heating mance of the ORC system by using different working fluids and
temperature; (iii) the net power output; (iv) the thermal efficiency; varying the heat source temperature level from 120 to 300 °C.
(v) the heat transfer capacity; (vi) the real expansion rate in the The authors stated that R245fa can be used up to 170 °C. Many
turbine. efforts have been made on the selection of working fluids which
Branchini et al. [4] reported a thermodynamic analysis of ORC have a significant influence on the performance of ORC. From this
applications for generating energy by exploiting geothermal point of view, Zhai et al. [13] analysed the influence on the perfor-
sources. Results are carried-out for different working fluids and mance of a geothermal ORC system of HC (hydro carbon) and HFC
several operating and environmental conditions. (hydro fluorine carbon) physical properties. Authors concluded
Villani and Franco [5] studied a hierarchical optimisation proce- that for a specified source temperature, the optimised evaporating
dure for the design of binary plants dedicated to the exploitation of temperatures are almost the same for all the selected HCs and
medium temperature water-dominated geothermal heat sources. HFCs working fluids. Zhu et al. [14] present a brief state of the
Guzović et al. [6] showed a comparison between the ORC and art for several ORC working fluids (R123, R245fa, n-pentane, iso-
the Kalina cycle based on energy analysis results for a medium- pentane, n-hexane and cyclohexane), by analysing and comparing
temperature geothermal source with a relatively low temperature their capabilities to regenerate themselves. The analysis is focused
(140 °C). ORC shows a better thermal efficiency: 13.5 vs. 12.8% on the built-in and actual expansion ratio difference of an expan-
(and accordingly higher net power: 2225.5 vs. 2101.4 kW). This der, by also defining a suitable correction factor Fer. Authors also
difference is explained by the relatively high average annual tem- concluded that the best performance is obtained through R245fa.
perature of the cooling air in the condenser (15 °C), which has a Tempesti et al. [15,16] showed that R245fa allows one to achieve
more unfavourable influence on the condensing pressure in the the lowest price of electricity production and the lowest overall
Kalina cycle than in the ORC one (6.35 vs. 0.68 bar). In a recent cost of the CHP plant.
work, Guzović et al. [7], in order to improve the geothermal energy Zhao et al. in [17] designed, built up and tested a low-temper-
utilisation, investigated the replacement of a basic ORC with a ature solar ORC cycle in which R245fa was adopted as working
dual-pressure ORC. These dual-pressure cycles introduce an addi- fluid with a tailor made rolling-piston expander. The system is cou-
tional pressure level, leading to an evaporation occurring at two pled to evacuated solar collectors. The results showed an overall
different temperatures (high-pressure and a low-pressure loop power generation efficiency of 4.2%, when evacuated solar collec-
power cycles). A comparison between the basic ORC cycle and tor are utilised.
the proposed one, shows that the dual-pressure ORC has a slightly Al-Sulaiman et al. in [18–20] investigated from the energy and
lower thermal efficiency but a considerably higher exergy exergy points of view, a novel trigeneration system including: par-
efficiency and net power. abolic trough solar collectors, ORC machine and absorption chiller.
By low-temperature geothermal sources, efficient heat-driven The authors concluded that the maximum trigeneration exergy
absorption air-conditioning system can be supplied, too. Many efficiency was equal to: (i) 20% for the solar mode; (ii) 8% for solar
studies were carried out on this topic. Mohanty and Paloso in [8] and storage mode; (iii) 7% for the storage mode. Moreover, this
proposed a vapour absorption chiller employed for decreasing study showed that the main sources of exergy destruction rate
ORC condensing temperature. An increase of the power output are the solar collectors and ORC evaporators.
was also obtained. The absorption machine operates by LiBr/H2O The combination of solar and geothermal heat sources power-
for extracting heat from the geothermal brine leaving the ORC ing an ORC was investigated by several authors. Astolfi et al. in
vaporizer. The absorption chiller evaporator worked as the ORC [21] proposed an integration of a concentrating solar power system
condenser. The results indicate a reduction of the organic fluid flow to a supercritical ORC machine (about 4.5 MW). The system was
rate per unit power output, obtaining a more economic power designed for the optimal utilisation of an intermediate enthalpy
generation. geothermal source (150 °C). After the primary heat exchanger
Bendaikha and Larbi [9] reported a feasibility study of the sys- (between the R134a working fluid and the geothermal source),
tem obtained by a low-temperature geothermal source and proton the high temperature level was achieved by a solar parabolic
exchange membrane fuel cell technology for air-conditioning pro- trough field of 60,000 m2 for heating up R134a, increasing electric-
duction by a LiBr/H2O absorption chiller in a school canteen for 240 ity production. The authors stated that the integration with a solar
students. field could improve the attractiveness of many low-enthalpy geo-
Wang et al. [10] outlined the possible application of a large thermal sources widespread around the world.
scale geothermal absorption air-conditioning system to provide Zhou in [22] investigated a hybrid solar–geothermal plant using
base load cooling (about 3 MW) to the main campus of the both subcritical and supercritical ORCs with isopentane as working
fluid. The plant adopted an air-cooled recuperative binary ORC dimensional energy and mass balances, allows one to assess
machine with a geothermal reservoir temperature at 150 °C and the off-design performance of the system, by setting the
a well productivity of 50 kg/s. The solar field consists of parabolic geometrical parameters of all the heat exchangers of the
trough collectors. The simulation was carried out using package ORC and the design conditions of the turbine. The ORC
Aspen HYSYS. The paper aimed at identifying the superiority of simulation model developed in EES was subsequently inte-
the supercritical ORC plant over the subcritical hybrid one. grated in TRNSYS environment. Therefore, a complete
Recently, Ghasemi et al. [23] developed and validated a suitable dynamic model of a small-scale power plant has been
model for analysing an existing ORC utilising a low-temperature implemented, including the ORC machine and all the other
geothermal brine flow. The paper also includes a performance components of the plant (such as the novel stationary flat
analysis of the system components. The developed model was ret- plate evacuated solar collectors, the absorption refrigeration
rofitted with a low-temperature solar trough system, showing system, the geothermal energy well model and the plant
higher second-law efficiency (up to 3.4% difference) compared to heat exchangers);
combined individual geothermal and solar systems. (4) an experimental campaign has been performed in order to
The combination of small-scale ORC systems and absorption analyse and subsequently to predict the thermal perfor-
refrigeration systems supplied by low-temperature geothermal mance of the geothermal well which will supply heat to
and solar sources is presently scarcely investigated in literature. the trigeneration system prototype.
In authors’ knowledge this topic was approached by Tempesti
et al. [15]. They investigated a solar ORC and geothermal heat Finally, a suitable case study is developed for a hotel building
sources by using EES. The ORC inlet temperature obtained by evac- (Regina Isabella) located at Ischia (Naples, South Italy), a volcanic
uated solar collectors was 150 °C, while the geothermic fluid one is isle worldwide famous for thermal cares. Presently, this hotel uti-
80–100 °C. The small power unit (50 kWe) discharges heat at tem- lises geothermal energy to heat swimming pools and to produce
perature ranging from 60 to 80 °C, that is appealing for domestic domestic hot water. For such hotel building, the design of the
heating, or even for air conditioning, coupled with an absorption above mentioned trigeneration system is provided together with
chiller. An ORC efficiency of 7–11% was reached by using R245fa, the energy and economic system analysis.
reducing the solar field capital costs due to lower need of flow rate. In particular, the presented project aims at exploiting an exist-
On the basis of previous plant, Ruzzenenti et al. [24] analysed the ing low-temperature geothermal well (hot water @ 96 °C, 94 m
environmental sustainability through a Life Cycle Analysis and an depth) for producing electricity by a 6 kWe ORC machine. Such
Exergy Life Cycle Analysis, utilising existing geothermal wells. device is supplied by diathermic oil heated by geothermal and
However, the size of the above mentioned plant is significantly solar energy. In addition, the considered system produces: (i) cool-
higher than the one considered in the present paper (50 vs. 6 kWe). ing energy during summer by a 30 kWf absorption chiller (fed by
As shown in this section, a number of papers are available in lit- geothermal energy only); (ii) thermal energy for heating the hotel
erature about the analysis of different configurations of geothermal swimming pools and domestic hot water production.
sources coupled to ORC and other power machines. In this paper, a Note that this work concerns one of the research lines of the
novel prototype of small-scale trigeneration system using simulta- project called ‘‘GEOGRID’’, which aims at developing methods
neously geothermal and solar energy for producing electric, ther- and technologies suited to promote the use of geothermal energy
mal and cooling energy is presented. The layout of such novel in Campania Region (South Italy). Here, until today the available
system includes a plurality of technologies: innovative solar ther- different geothermal site (Campi Flegrei, Ischia, Roccamonfina,
mal collectors, ORC power plant, absorption chiller and geothermal Guardia dei Lombardi, etc.) were not adequately exploited. The
well. This study will be used to design and subsequently to build reason of this situation is also due to a certain misinformation
up a prototype of this innovative system. In particular, the investi- about the profitability, security and reliability of systems for the
gated system will be installed and experimented at a hotel in the geothermal energy conversion.
volcanic isle of Ischia (southern Italy).
As mentioned before, the main novelty of the presented paper
lies in the innovative layout of a small-scale plant suitable to sup- 2. System layout
ply electric, thermal and cooling energy to small buildings. In addi-
tion, this paper also includes further major improvements with The layout of the examined tri-generation plant supplied by
respect to the findings and/or to the methodologies available in geothermal energy with solar integration is shown in Fig. 1. The
literature, namely: main system circuits are:
(1) the proposed plant also includes innovative flat plate evacu- SCF: referred to the Solar Collector Fluid, consisting of diather-
ated solar thermal collectors, for the first time analysed in mic oil flowing between the solar field and the storage tank;
literature for typologies of plant similar to the investigated HF: referred to the Hot Fluid, consisting of diathermic oil flow-
one. Such collectors show several advantages vs. compact ing between the storage tank and the evaporator of the ORC
solar concentrating devices: (i) higher thermal efficiencies; machine;
(ii) scarce dependence to dusts; (iii) absence of tracking sys- HWHE: referred to the Hot fluid flowing into the downhole Heat
tems; (iv) easy building integration like other conventional Exchanger, consisting of hot water supplying the heat exchang-
flat plate solar thermal collectors; ers HE1 in the winter and HE3 in the summer;
(2) the performance of the trigeneration plant (for electricity, GHWE: referred to the Geothermal Hot water Well Exhausting
thermal and cooling energy production obtained by geother- (geothermal brine). Such circuit is necessary for allowing a suf-
mal and solar energy) is analysed through 1-year dynamic ficiently continuous high temperature of the well geothermal
performance simulations. Such result is obtained by a brine. In fact due to the heat utilisation by the downhole heat
dynamic energy performance simulation model, purposely exchanger the temperature is hand by hand decreased. By con-
developed by means of TRNSYS tool; tinuously exhausting of the well, high temperature geothermal
(3) in this work a specific analysis model for taking into account brine is suctioned from the geothermal ground to the well. The
variations of ORC evaporating and condensing temperatures geothermal brine is utilised for supplying the heat exchangers
was developed. Such model, written in EES by zero- HE2 in the winter and HE3 in the summer;
SC
P3
AH EX
P2
TK HE2 HE1 EV P4 CO
P5
M2 M1
HE4 D1 P6
HE3 ACH
P1
D2
DHHE HE5 P7
GW
P9 P8
SCF P1: water variable speed pump for the P9: geothermal brine pump for well
down hole heat exchanger; exhausting.
HF
P2: diathermic oil variable speed pump
HWHE for the solar loop; ACH Absorber H20-LiBr
GHWE P3: diathermic oil constant speed SC Solar Collectors
OF pump for the hot fluid loop; AH Auxiliary Heater
P4: R245fa ORC machine pump; TK Storage Tank
CSW
P5: sea water constant speed pump for EV Evaporator ORC
ACW ORC condenser cooling; CO Condenser ORC
P6: water constant speed pump for the EX ORC expander
GW M Mixer
building cooling;
P7: water constant speed pump for D Diverte
absorption chiller cooling; GW Geothermal Well
P8: sea water constant speed pump for DHHE DownHole Heat Exchangers
absorption chiller cooling;
Fig. 1. Sketch of the system layout.
OF: referred to the Organic Fluid, consisting of R245fa flowing P2: diathermic oil variable speed pump for the solar loop;
into the ORC machine; P3: diathermic oil constant speed pump for the hot fluid loop;
CSW: referred to the Cooling Sea Water, consisting of sea water P4: R245fa ORC machine pump;
for the absorber (by the HE5) and condenser cooling; P5: sea water constant speed pump for ORC condenser cooling;
ACW: referred to the Absorption machine Chilled Water, con- P6: water constant speed pump for the building cooling;
sisting of water chilled by absorption machine; P7: water constant speed pump for absorption chiller cooling;
GW: referred to the Grid Water, consisting of grid water heated P8: sea water constant speed pump for absorption chiller cool-
from 15 to 45 °C by outlet GHWE into the HE4 heat exchanger. ing (by HE5 heat exchanger);
P9: geothermal brine pump for well exhausting.
The system is based on the following main components:
The system also includes several valves, mixers (M1, M2) and
GW: Geothermal Well; diverters (D1, D2) managed by the control system during its oper-
SC: Solar Collectors, consisting of a field of evacuated flat plate ation. The operating principle of the system under investigation
solar collectors; and the related control strategies can be summarised as follows.
ORC: Organic Rankine Cycle machine, consisting of a 6 kWe In this plant, the low-temperature geothermal well (geothermal
system adopting R245fa as working fluid; brine @ 96 °C, depth 94 m) is equipped by a downhole heat
ACH: 30 kWf H2O/LiBr single stage absorption chiller; exchanger and a submerged geothermal brine pump. During the
TK: diathermic oil stratified vertical storage tank; winter D1 and D2 divert, respectively, the downhole exchanger
AH: Auxiliary gas-fired Heater; and geothermal brine to HE1 and HE2 for heating the ORC outlet
DHHE: DownHole Heat Exchanger; diathermic oil up to about 90 °C. This heat is the main ORC system
HE1: cross flow Heat Exchanger for heating the diathermic oil energy source. Then, diathermic oil is flowed to the TK tank that
by the downhole heat exchanger water during the winter per- collects also the diathermic oil heated by the solar collectors field.
iod (not active in summer); In fact, the solar loop is the heat source for the integration of the
HE2: cross flow Heat Exchanger for heating the diathermic oil available geothermal energy. These collectors are managed by a
by the geothermal brine; feedback controller operating on the P2 variable speed pump. In
HE3: cross flow Heat Exchanger for heating the downhole heat particular, such controller receives temperature measurements
exchanger water by the geothermal brine during the summer from the TK bottom (i.e., solar collector inlet temperature) and
period (not active in winter); the outlet pipe of solar collector loop. The controller returns a con-
HE4: cross flow Heat Exchanger for heating grid water by the trol signal, varying P2 flow rate in order to achieve the desired out-
downhole heat exchanger water; let set point temperature (130 °C). In addition, the controller also
HE5: cross flow Heat Exchanger for cooling the absorption stops the P2 pump when SC outlet temperature is lower than TK
machine by the sea water; bottom temperature, since in this case the heat stored by the TK
P1: water variable speed pump for the downhole heat tank would be unsuitably dissipated by the solar field. Such con-
exchanger; troller also receives the measured incident solar radiation and
stops pump P2 when such parameter falls below a certain set- anisms as well as the need of special reflectors cleaning. In addi-
point, in order to prevent heat dissipation. Thus, hot diathermic tion, reduced system CAPEX and OEM costs are also obtained.
oil (produced by the solar loop) supplies heat to the TK tank. Then, The collector is modelled by using a modified version of TRNSYS
P3 pumps the outlet fluid from TK to the ORC. This device is Type 132 [28], which is based on Hottel–Whillier equation inte-
designed in order to operate at variable temperature (90–130 °C) grated with the incidence angle modifier (IAM) coefficients, in
and constant flow rate. In addition, when the oil temperature exit- order to calculate the heat transferred from the solar collector to
ing from P3 is lower than the considered set-point, the fluid is the High Temperature Fluid (HTF) at each time-step. The Hottel–
heated by a natural-gas fired heater (AH) that provides the addi- Whillier equation coefficients and the IAM ones are determined
tional heat required to achieve the minimum ORC activation tem- by the tests according to EN 12975 and EN 12976 [29] (Fig. 2).
perature (usually higher than 85 °C). AH activation can be The examined collector, called HT-Power (version 4.0), is optimised
necessary in several hours of the summer period when the geo- for applications with high temperature ranges. In this solar collec-
thermal source has to supply the ACH too. In this period D1 collects tor low thermal losses are achieved since the return HTF from the
the geothermal DHHE water to HE3 for the ACH activation. In the solar field is included into the panels (where high-vacuum insula-
same season, if outlet diathermic oil temperature from ORC evap- tion is obtained) reducing the external piping connections consist-
orator is lower than the geothermal brine temperature, D2 diverts ing of a custom shell semi-rigid insulating enclosures [27].
such geothermal brine to HE2, otherwise to HE3. In addition, the Between the system low-temperature inlet and the high-tem-
outlet geothermal brine from HE2 and HE3 is collected by M2 for perature outlet a plurality of branches is installed, each one is
supplying HE4 heat exchanger for producing domestic hot water obtained by a series of panels.
and for other heating use (e.g., in the following case study, for heat- The simulation model was validated by several experimental
ing the hotel swimming pools). campaigns by different operating conditions. In particular, out-
doors and indoors solar tests were carried out obtaining many
3. System model experimental data for different system layouts. For sake of brevity,
in the following only the main model equations are reported.
The system described in the previous section was dynamically The output power of the solar collector per unit aperture area is:
simulated by TRNSYS, which is a well-known software diffusely Pout ¼ F 0 ðsaÞen K h ðhÞ G a1 ðtm t a Þ a2 ðt m t a Þ2 a3
adopted for both commercial and academic purposes. Such code dt m
includes a large library of built-in components, often validated u ðtm t a Þ þ a4 EL rT 4a a5 a6 u G ð1Þ
by experimental data [25]. In this paper the authors present three dt
new in-house developed simulation models, respectively for: (i) The total solar radiation G is divided into beam, Gb, and diffuse
the flat-plate evacuated solar collector; (ii) the ORC machine; (iii) radiation, Gd. A separate incidence angle correction is considered
the geothermal well. The remaining developed TRNSYS types mod- for the diffuse radiation, where F0 (sa)en is the zero loss efficiency
els are described by the authors in several previous papers [26]. of the collector at normal incidence angle for the solar radiation
Although the validation of the system as a whole was not pos- onto the collector and Kh (h) is the IAM dependence of the zero loss
sible since the prototype under exam was not experimented yet, all efficiency. For this solar collector, the description of the coefficients
the obtained simulations results can be considered as reliable since of Eq. (1) and their numerical values are reported in Table 1. In Eq.
all the accounted components models were validated by experi- (1) the wind dependence is modelled by the terms: (i) a6 u G,
mental data. that takes into account the wind effect on the zero loss efficiency;
(ii) a3 u (tm ta), that takes into account the wind influence on
3.1. Solar collector the heat losses. By the heat loss term a4 (EL rTa4), the long-wave
irradiance dependence of the collector is modelled. The first term
In this paper for the first time a simulation model for flat-plate of the second member of Eq. (1) can be written as:
evacuated solar collectors (designed and manufactured by TVP
1
Solar [27]) is presented. Because of the high-vacuum obtained F 0 ðsaÞen K h ðhÞ G ¼ F 0 ðsaÞen 1 b0 1 Gb
cos hb
inside to the collectors, by such panels high efficiency can be
reached up to 200 °C. Note that these high energy performances þ F 0 ðsaÞen K hd Gd ð2Þ
are achieved without solar concentration, avoiding tracking mech- where the factor reported in square brackets is the incidence angle
modifier (IAM) for beam radiation (b0 is the IAM determined by the
collector test), hb is the incidence angle for beam radiation onto the
solar collector plane, Khd is the IAM for diffuse radiation.
In Fig. 3 the sketch of this new flat-plate evacuated solar collec-
tor is reported.
Efficient Coefficients
Aperture Area=1.05 m2
I=1000 W/m2 Tamb= 27°C 3.2. ORC model
η0 0.820
2
a1 (W/m *K) 0.399
2 2
a2 (W/m *K ) 0.0067
A detailed model of the considered ORC machine (working at
variable temperature of the inlet oil to the evaporator and at vari-
able temperature of the inlet seawater to the condenser) was in-
house developed by zero-dimensional energy and mass balances.
The model is written in Engineering Equation Solver (EES).
In particular, specific subprograms are developed for each sys-
tem component. Each one consists of input and output variables
and specific equations set. The developed model allows one to cal-
culate all the useful output parameters on the basis of several
assumptions regarding the input variables. Obviously, the above
Fig. 2. Efficiency curve of solar collector (TVP, HT-Power panels v. 4.0). mentioned subprograms are strictly linked by physical connections
Table 1
Coefficients of Eq. (1).
Coefficients Description Unit

a1 Zero collector heat loss coefficient 0.399 W m2 K1
a2 Temperature difference dependence of the heat loss coefficient 0.0067 W m2 K2
a3 Wind speed dependence of the heat loss coefficient 0 J m3 K1
a4 Long-wave radiation dependence of the collector 0 –
a5 Effective heat capacity of the collector 7505 J m2 K1
a6 Wind speed dependence in zero loss efficiency 0 m s1
b0 Incidence angle modifier parameter 0.157 –
Fig. 3. Flat-plate evacuated solar collector.
occurring among the ORC machine components. The component Table 2

output data are managed by a suitable main code being eventually Coefficients of Eqs. (38) and (39).
utilised as input for other components. Such main code also Coefficients i=1 i=2 i=3 i=4
includes congruence equations and the input parameters required ai (–) 0.2679 0.3338 1.308 84.59
to carry out the system performance calculations. bi (–) 1.5 26.03 180.10
In this ORC simulation model, the input parameters are temper-

atures, pressures and mass flow rates of: (i) inlet diathermic oil to
the evaporator; (ii) inlet cooling seawater to the condenser. The low flammability and toxicity, good material compatibility and
code is linked to TRNSYS by these input parameters and by the low cost. The selected diathermic fluid is an eutectic mixture of
resulting output ones. two very stable compounds, biphenyl and diphenyl oxide, called
According to the scheme discussed in Section 2, an indirect heat DOWTHERM™ A of DOWÒ. It can be used in heat transfer applica-
transfer is taken into account between the heat source and the ORC tions both in liquid and vapour phases. In the developed model it
machine working fluid. The selected organic fluid is R245fa was utilised as liquid (from 15 to 400 °C at atmospheric pressure).
(according to its performance and critical temperature vs. those The analytical functions of the fluid properties were obtained by
reached by this plant [30]). producer datasheets [31].
The inlet thermal energy to the ORC is obtained by diathermic For ORC, Table 3 shows the selected geometric features of con-
oil heated by the geothermal (mainly) and the solar sources. In par- denser and evaporator together with the design temperatures, flow
ticular, diathermic oil is heated by different heat exchangers. By rates and pressures. Data included in this table are obtained from
the first one the heat is obtained by the fluid circulating within a an iterative procedure implemented in order to design the 6 kWe
downhole heat exchanger (located in the geothermal well). By ORC machine adopted for this study. Such procedure was per-
the second heat exchanger, diathermic oil is heated through the formed scaling the data regarding a similar ORC previously inves-
geothermal brine (when the temperature of the well geothermal tigated system [12,32]. Note that the geometric features of the heat
brine decreases, a pump is switched on allowing a temperature exchangers were varied in order to obtain the desired performance
increase due to the suction of geothermal brine from the geother- of the ORC at rated conditions. On the other hand, pump and
mal aquifer). The hot diathermic oil is stored in a suitable tank expander parameters included in Table 3 were obtained from liter-
where additional thermal energy is eventually obtained by the ature and/or manufactures’ data, as discussed later on. Obviously,
solar field. Note that by such system configuration the undesired the model allows one to vary all of these parameters, obtaining
boiling process within the solar collectors can be avoided. Being alternative ORC configurations. It is also worth noting that all the
constant the geothermal brine temperature, the temperature of features of the heat exchangers shown in Table 3 are consistent
the diathermic oil entering the evaporator may vary as a conse- with the data included in [33–35].
quence of the solar radiation availability only. The developed model allows one to vary both operating param-
For the diathermic oil, the main required properties are: good eters (oil and cooling water flow rates and temperatures) and
chemical and thermal stability, low viscosity, high specific heat, design variables (heat exchangers geometrical features, turbine
Table 3 difference between single-phase and two-phase behaviours.

Input design parameters of the ORC machine. Hence, the actual heat exchanger has been divided in two different
Parameter Description Unit ones, pre-heater and evaporator, whose total area is equal to the
tTK,min Minimum value of temperature for ORC 90 °C heat transfer area of the actual shell and tube boiler. This approach
activation is widely used in the scientific literature [36–40].
PORC,rated Rated ORC electricity power 6 kW The pre-heater included into the evaporator heats the organic
gORC ORC electrical efficiency 6.3–7 % fluid up to saturated liquid. This condition is the unique thermody-
Oil namic constraint modelled for this system component. The calcu-
m_ Flow rate 3960 kg/h lation of heat transfer coefficients is based on the assessment of
p Pressure 3 bar
fluid thermophysical properties, which are obtained by using the
tinORC ORC inlet oil temperature 90– °C
130 state equations included in EES software.
toutORC ORC outlet oil temperature 42– °C The following Eqs. (3) and (4) are adopted for assessing the tube
102 and shell convective heat transfer coefficients. As it is well known
Seawater they are respectively referred to fully laminar (Re < 2300) [35] and
m_ Flow rate 18,000 kg/h fully developed turbulent flows (Re > 2300) [33] inside ducts with
tin Condenser inlet temperature 16–25 °C
isothermal wall.
p Pressure 3 bar
8
Evaporator < 3:66 Re < 2300
L Length 3.5 m NuT ¼ 0:5f ðRe103 ÞPr ð3Þ
N Tubes number 866 – : 1þ12:7ðf =2Þ0:5 Pr2=3 1 Re > 2300
ð Þ
Ds Shell diameter 300 mm
do Tube outside diameter 14 mm (
PT Pitch tube 23.75 mm
0:079 Re1=4 2300 < Re < 2 104
s Tubes thickness 1.2 mm f ¼ ð4Þ
n tube Number of passes into tubes 4 – 0:046 Re 1=5
Re > 2 104
pass
In order to assess the heat exchanger performance the e-NTU
Condenser
L Length 4.5 m method is adopted, as shown in Eqs. (5)–(7). Eq. (5) is used for
N Tubes number 490 – the common shell and tube heat exchangers [34].
Ds Shell diameter 350 mm
do Tube outside diameter 14 mm 2
PT Pitch tube 23.75 mm
e¼
1=2
ð5Þ
1þexp NTU ð1þx2 Þ
1 þ x þ ð1 þ x 2 Þ1=2

s Tubes thickness 1.2 mm 1=2
1exp NTU ð1þx2 Þ
n tube Number of passes into tubes 4 –
pass C_
Nrow Row number 8 – x ¼ _ min ð6Þ
C max
Expander
FF Filling factor 0.8 –
UA
NTU ¼ ð7Þ
betavol Positive displacement volume built-in ratio 4.5 – _C min
rpm Rotating speed 2500 min1
CC Cubic capacity 1360 cm3 By the following well-known Eqs. (8) and (9) it is possible to
gm Mechanical efficiency 0.825 – calculate the heat exchanged between the hot and cold fluid and
to assess the outlet temperature of the diathermic oil.

Q id ¼ C_ min Dtmax ¼ C_ min t h;in tc;in ð8Þ
technology, etc.) analysing system performances and identifying
the best plant configuration. Q
e¼ ð9Þ
As it is well known, the layout of an ORC machine consists of: Q id
evaporator, expander, condenser and pump. The examined ORC The two-phase heat transfer process occurring in the evaporator
machine was modelled without super-heater and regeneration is particularly complex especially when the phase change takes
process since by the carried out analysis these operating place outside the tubes, as it occurs in this case. The boiling process
procedures do not significantly improve the overall system energy out of the horizontal tube bundle can be described as follows. The
efficiency. For these reasons, the inlet organic fluid to the expander two-phase heat transfer on the external surface of the horizontal
is assumed as dry saturated vapour. tube bundle boiler is governed by the nucleate and convective boil-
In this paper, the steady-state zero-dimensional model ing and thin-film evaporation mechanisms. The complexity of the
presented in Ref. [32] was improved in order to better analyse boiling process is such that it can be considered as an unresolved
the off-design performance of the ORC cycle. In particular by such problem. As a consequence, empirical methods are adopted for
model inlet and outlet performance parameters for all the system predicting the boiling heat transfer coefficients. In the scientific lit-
components can be calculated. erature many correlations are available. In this paper, the correla-
In the following the details of the simulation model is reported tions suggested by Palen [33] and Mostinski [41] are utilised.
for each ORC machine component. According to Palen correlation, which is based on superposition
method, the boiling heat transfer coefficient is the sum of two
3.2.1. Evaporator terms: the single tube nucleate pool boiling coefficient, hnb, and
The selected evaporator is a shell-and-tube heat exchanger. It the natural convection heat transfer coefficient hnatural:
consists of a pre-heater and an evaporator. The diathermic oil flows hb ¼ hnb F b F c þ hnatural ð10Þ
inside the evaporator tubes while the organic fluid fills the shell
side. A rigorous approach to the problem does not allow one to where Fb = 1.5 (bundle boiling factor); Fc = 1 (mixture boiling corre-
divide the boiler into different heat exchangers. However, the cal- lation factor for pure fluid and azeotropic mixtures); hnatural = 250
culations of the overall heat transfer coefficients of preheating and W/m2 K [42]. A formulation for hnb was developed by Mostinski.
boiling processes has to be performed separately, due to the This correlation (without a surface-fluid parameter or fluid physical
properties) gives reliable results for a wide range of fluids at 3.2.3. Condenser
reduced pressures: The condenser of the examined ORC power plant is designed as
a shell and tube heat exchanger. Cooling water flows inside tubes
€0:7 p0:69
hnb ¼ 0:00417 q crit F p ð11Þ
while the organic vapour streams across the finned tube bundle.
where q € is heat flux between organic fluid and diathermic oil, pcrit is The organic fluid enters inside the condenser as superheated
critic pressure of the organic fluid and Fp (pressure correction fac- vapour and exit as saturated liquid.
tor) is calculated as: Since shell and tube condensers are widely analysed and
0:17 1:2 10 adopted the condensation film process on the tube bundle is a
p p p well known and studied phenomena. In this study, the vertical
F p ¼ 1:8 þ4 þ 10 ð12Þ
pcrit pcrit pcrit row-number correction method was implemented to analyse the
The tube-side heat transfer coefficient can be assessed by using performance of the system condenser [33]. According to this
Eqs. (3) and (4). Then, by the e-NTU method, the evaporator effec- technique the heat transfer coefficient of the shell side is assessed
making reference to the film condensation on a single tube, h s;t . The
tiveness can be calculated. Note that here Eq. (5) becomes easier
than in the shell-side case since x = 0. Nusselt theory is utilised since laminar film condensation of
quiescent vapours occurs on isothermal horizontal tubes [44]:
3.2.2. Expander " #1=4
The expander design in an ORC machine depends on different ql ðql qv Þ g ilv k3l
hs;t ¼ 0:729 ð26Þ
working conditions and operating parameters. The main ones ll ðtsat twall Þ do
are: the required mechanical power, the volumetric expansion s;t is the heat transfer coefficient of single tube, q is the den-
where h
ratio, the working fluid type and its mass and volume flow rate
sity, k is the thermal conductivity, l is the dynamic viscosity, tsat is
[43]. For the case investigated in this paper, a screw volumetric
the saturated temperature of organic fluid, twall is the wall temper-
expander was selected.
ature of condenser and do is the outer diameter of tubes.
In the developed simulation model, input parameters (reported
The modified latent heat (ilv ) is introduced in the above
in Table 3 and based on data reported in [43]) are: the positive dis-
mentioned Eq. (26) for accounting the additional heat delivered
placement volume built-in ratio (betavol); the expander rotating
during the condensation process. For this reason the organic fluid
speed (rpm); the cubic capacity (CC); the filling factor (FF); the
is extra cooled to an average temperature obtained between tsat
screw expander mechanical efficiency (gm); the condensation and
and twall ilv⁄ is a function of the latent heat (ilv) as follows [45]:
evaporation pressure (pcond and peva); the working fluid mass flow

_ assessed by the following Eq. (13).
rate, (m), ilv ¼ ilv þ 0:68 cp l ðt sat twall Þ ð27Þ

CC rpm The system condenser as well as the above mentioned evapora-
_ ¼ qðp ¼ pcond ; t ¼ tcond Þ
m FF ð13Þ
60 tor is arranged with low finned tubes. Obviously, the heat transfer
on such tubes is greater than that on smooth ones. In addition, they
where q is the density of the organic fluid.
exhibit a shorter condensing length also enhancing the surface ten-
For the selected organic working fluid, the calculation of several
sion drainage forces along the fins.
thermophisical properties is necessary. In particular, the specific
The tube-side heat transfer coefficient is calculated by the the-
heat capacities (cp and cv), the specific enthalpy (h), specific
ory suggested by Rose [46] for film condensation on single horizon-
entropy (s) are calculated by EES through the following equations:
tal trapezoidal finned tubes:
cp;del ðp ¼ pdel ; x ¼ 1Þ
kdel ¼ ð14Þ h fin W1 þ W2 þ W3
cv ;del ðp ¼ pdel ; x ¼ 1Þ s;t ¼ 0:728 ðb þ f Þ ð28Þ
h
kdel
1
pdel ¼ pev a ð15Þ where
betav ol
3=4 " #1=4
his ¼ hðp ¼ pcond ; s ¼ sev a Þ ð16Þ Dest B r Dest
W1 ¼ f 0:281 þ 3
ð29Þ
Do f g ðql qv Þ
s ¼ sev a ðp ¼ pev a ; x ¼ 1Þ ð17Þ 1=4
Uf 1 f f D2est D2o B r ev
The specific work of the expander is assessed by: W2 ¼ 0:791 þ ð30Þ
p cos b 2 e1=4 3=4
v Dest e3 g ðql qv Þ
w1 ¼ hev a ðp ¼ pev a ; x ¼ 1Þ hdel ðp ¼ pdel ; s ¼ sev a Þ ð18Þ " #1=4
U B r Do
w2 ¼ v ðp ¼ pdel ; s ¼ sev a Þ ðpdel pcond Þ ð19Þ W3 ¼ f Bl ð1 f r Þ br n3 þ 3 ð31Þ
p br g ðql qv Þ
In Eq. (19) v is the specific volume of the organic fluid. n ¼ 0:874 þ 0:1991 102 Uf 0:2642 101 U2f
The output parameters of expanders are calculated as:
þ 0:5530 102 U3f 0:1363 102 U4f ð32Þ
w _ real
hcond ¼ hev a ð20Þ 1 tanðb=2Þ 2 r cos b tanðUf =2Þ
m_ ff ¼ ð33Þ
ðw1 þ w2 Þ 1 þ tanðb=2Þ ql g Do e Uf
gis ¼ ð21Þ 1 tanðb=2Þ 4r tanðUf =2Þ
hev a his fr ¼ ð34Þ
gexp ¼ gis gm ð22Þ 1 þ tanðb=2Þ ql g Dest br Uf
8
p < ev ¼ sinUUf e Uf 6 p2
bexp ¼ ev a ð23Þ f
ð35Þ
pcond : ev ¼ Uf e p 6 U 6 p
2sin U 2 f
t cond ¼ tðp ¼ pcond ; h ¼ hcond Þ ð24Þ f
The equation referred to the condensate retention angle Uf

The global expander power is assessed by:
(angle between the top of the tube and the point where in the tube
w _ ðw1 þ w2 Þ gis gm
_ real ¼ m ð25Þ the condensation starts) has been suggested by Honda et al. [47]:

4 r cos b where Hreal and Heq are respectively the real and equivalent hydrau-
Uf ¼ cos1 1 for
ql g b Dest lic head; nreal is the rotating speed real. In the above reported equa-
e > 2bð1 sin bÞ= cos b ð36Þ tions the equivalent rotating speed (neq) is equal to the design value
(2900 rpm).
where r is the surface tension of the organic fluid at tsat, Dest is the
The pump head is calculated as:
finned tube outer diameter, b is the fin spacing, e is the fin height
and b is the half-angle at the fin tip. ðpev a pcond Þ
The influence of: (i) aerodynamic forces; (ii) shear stress Hreal ¼ ð42Þ
ql g
between the vapour and the condensate; (iii) separation effects;
(iv) tube bundles configuration have not been taken into account Hence, combining Eqs. (38) and (39) with (40) and (41) the off-
in above reported equations. Other authors investigated the effects design performance of the pump can be assessed.
of condensate inundation assessing that the number of rows has a
large influence on the condensation process [48–50]. In the pre-
3.3. Geothermal well model
sented model the Eissenberg equation [50] was adopted for calcu-
lating the average heat transfer coefficient for condensation
A suitable stratified well is modelled. For this general model, up
process outside horizontal tubes bundle.
to four downhole heat exchangers and ten double ports can be

h 1=4
shell ¼ hfin ð0:6 þ 0:42 N row Þ ð37Þ taken into account. A simplified sketch of the well model, referred
where Nrow is the row number. to only two heat exchangers and one double port, is shown in
Finally, the tube-side convective heat transfer coefficient for the Fig. 4. Note that a double port simulates one inlet to the well and
system condenser is calculated by Eqs. (3) and (4). one outlet from the well through which the mass flow balance
must be satisfied. The inlet geothermal brine flows to the well from
3.2.4. Pump the geothermal ground by suitable openings located at selected
After the condensation process, the working fluid (as saturated heights (usually close to the well bottom). The unique well geo-
liquid) is suctioned by the pump that increases the liquid pressure thermal brine outlet is obtained by a submerged pump. The pump
up to the boiling one. Usually, pumps are modelled by taking into flow rate is obviously equal to the sum of the inlet flow rates. Note
account the performance curves provided by manufacturers. Since that in the developed model such pump is continuously switched
such data for the ORC pump are not available, a suitable tool was on being selectable the operating flow rate (at constant speed).
utilised in order to select the pump to be modelled and the related The number of stratification layers in the well is set by a suitable
operating map (Standart Pompa Software [51]). Such tool requires parameter equivalent to the simulated number of nodes (Nnode).
as input independent variables the volume flow rate and the pump In the model such number is selected as a function of the well ver-
head. The following polynomial equations are utilised for tical temperature gradient. In each layer a completely mixed fluid
correlating such parameters and the pump efficiency. volume is modelled.
Heat is continuously charged in the well through the inlet
H ¼ a1 V_ 3 þ a2 V_ 2 þ a3 V_ þ a4 ð38Þ
groundwater openings. Note that in general the temperature of
g ¼ b1 V_ 3 þ b2 V_ 2 þ b3 V_ þ b4 ð39Þ the inlet geothermal brine depends on the depth of the groundwa-
In these equations the coefficients are obtained by curve fitting ter. Energy balances for each layer of the well allow one to
of manufacturer data (Table 2). calculate their temperatures. Therefore, discrete temperature
When the pump runs at different rotating speed the affinity stratification is obtained.
lows for incompressible fluid in rotating machine allows the pro- According to the heat transfer phenomena among the well
gram to calculate the corresponding pump head and efficiency layers (nodes), the installed downhole heat exchangers and the
for a certain volume flow rate (or mass flow rate). These results surrounding well walls (potential heat loss depending on the
are achieved by the following equations: variable wall temperature) a temperature change occurs. In the
simulation, the initial condition of the well geothermal brine tem-
V_ real nreal perature depends on the temperatures and flow rates of the
¼ ð40Þ
V_ eq neq different inlet groundwater flows. When heat is required by
2 the plant through the downhole heat exchangers the well temper-
Hreal nreal
¼ ð41Þ ature decreases discharging the geothermal well. Under a selected
Heq neq
temperature threshold at the outlet of the downhole heat
double port outlet

dp at zdp,i = 0
free dynamic surface

i = 20
Nnode = 20
Hw= 69 m
heat exchanger 1
heat exchanger 2
zh1,in ≈ zh2,out Hw
z i=3
zdp,i
i=2 p = number of a double port (1…10)

zh1,out ≈ zh2,in i=1 y = number of a heat exchanger (1...4)
0
double port inlet

dp at zdp,i = 0
Fig. 4. Geothermal well model for the case study.

exchangers the corresponding pumps are switched off until such Note that:
threshold temperature is surpassed again by submerged pump
_ hy > 0, else n5 = 0;
n5 = 1 if m
running.
_ hy < 0, else n6 = 0.
n6 = 1 if m
For a reference z axis with the origin at the well bottom (Fig. 4),
the absolute height (z) of each well component can be indicated by
The temperatures ti+1,j or ti1,j represent the inlet and outlet
different numbers.
temperature of the heat exchanger. The heat loss capacity rate
The nodes temperatures are calculated by solving a set of differ-
from the heat exchangers to surroundings (the rocks of the ground-
ential equations. All the necessary data are therefore stored in an
water), (UA)hy,ww, is selected equal to 0 since the heat exchangers
array of Nnode 3. The first column (j = 1) includes the data of the
are completely immersed into the geothermal brine of the well
first and fourth heat exchanger, the second one (j = 2) the data of
and their surface is not in contact with the groundwater. Note that
the well and the last one (j = 3) the data of the second and third
the heat losses between the heat exchangers and the air above the
heat exchanger. Up to ten different mass flow rates (m _ dp ) through
dynamic free surface are neglected.
the ten double ports can be taken into account in each well node.
The energy balance for each node (i) of the well (j = 2) is repre-
3.4. Economic model
sented by the following Eq. (43).
The economic analysis was performed for assessing the even-
V w qw cp;w @t i;2 X 10
¼ _ dp cp;w
m tual economic savings obtained by the examined geothermal–solar
Nnode @# p¼1 trigeneration system, vs. a conventional reference system (RS). In

n1 ðt i1;2 t i;2 Þ þ n2 ðt i;2 tiþ1;2 Þ RS, cooling energy is supplied by a conventional vapour-compres-
sion chiller (typically used for residential applications), whereas
ðUAÞh1=4;w
þ n3 ðti;1 t i;2 Þ þ n4 electricity is supplied by the national grid.
nh1=4 The cash flow takes into account the electricity and cooling
ðUAÞh2=3;w Aq energy savings obtained by examined system. In fact, a significant
ðt i;3 t i;2 Þ þ kcon Nnode amount of the electricity and cooling energy is provided by the
nh2=3 Hw
geothermal–solar trigeneration system, avoiding the energy
ðt iþ1;2 t i;2 Þ þ ðti1;2 ti;2 Þ
required by the national grid. The yearly economic saving achiev-
ðUAÞw;wk able by system is calculated by Eq. (45). The operating cost of the
ðti;2 t ww Þ ð43Þ
n dzk plant, Cop, is due to the eventual natural gas consumption for the
AH auxiliary gas-fired heater.
where (UA)⁄h1/4,2w is the heat transfer capacity rate between
the heat exchanger 1 and heat exchanger 4 and the well; nh1/4 is X Echill;ACH;t cEE
the number of nodes occupied by the heat exchangers 1 and 4; DC op ¼ ðEel;ORC;t Eel;aux;t Þ cEE þ
t
COP
(UA)⁄h2/3,w is the heat transfer capacity rate between the heat ! #
exchanger 2 and heat exchanger 3 and the well; nh2/4 is the f EHE4;t cNG;user Eth;AH;t cNG 1
þ Q ð45Þ
number of nodes occupied by the heat exchangers 2 and 3; kcon is gb gb;AH;t LHV NG
the effective thermal conductivity in the well. A mass flow from
the bottom to the top counts positive, and vice versa negative, ni where Eth,AH,t is the thermal energy supplied by the AH; Eel,ORC,t is
are the logical switches, note that: the electricity produced by the ORC and Eel,aux,t is the electricity
required by the auxiliary devices (e.g. pumps and the auxiliary elec-
_ dp > 0, else n1 = 0;
n1 = 1 if m tricity power required by the absorption chiller); Echill,ACH,t is the
_ dp < 0, else n2 = 0;
n2 = 1 if m cooling energy produced by the absorption chiller; EHE4,t is the ther-
n3 = 1 if the store node i is in contact with the node i of heat mal energy obtained by HE4. In the RS, thermal energy required for
exchanger 1 or 4, else n3 = 0; the domestic hot water production and swimming pools heating is
n4 = 1 if the store node i is in contact with the node i of heat supplied by the geothermal source and thus, in the calculation of
exchanger 2 or 3, else n4 = 0. economic saving, such term is not accounted (fQ = 0). Conversely,
if fQ = 1 the cash flow is computed by the savings due to the thermal
The first member of Eq. (43) describes the node internal energy energy for producing the domestic hot water and swimming pools
variation with the time. The heat transfer caused by mass flows is heating by a conventional gas-fired boiler. In the simulation code,
represented by the first sum on the right hand side. The heat trans- a detailed cost model was also implemented, for calculating both
fer between the heat exchanger nodes and a well node is described operating and capital costs. All the cost functions (Ji) of the system
with the second and third term of Eq. (43). The fourth term components (pumps, gas-fired auxiliary heater, heat exchangers,
describes the conduction heat transfer between the layers in the absorption chiller) were considered. The capital costs for pumps,
well and the last one the heat loss to the surroundings (the walls storage tank and heat exchangers are calculated by suitable polyno-
of the well in contact with the rock of the groundwater). mial equations as a function of the nominal flow rate, the volume
The energy balance for a heat exchanger node is given by the and heat exchange area, respectively. Finally, the economic perfor-
following Eq. (44). For the first heat exchanger (y = 1) or fourth mance of the system is calculated by Eqs. (46) and (47). Here, the
one (y = 4) and j = 1. For the second (y = 2) or third (y = 3) heat Simple Pay Back period (SPB), is respectively assessed (both in case
exchanger j = 3. of fQ = 0 and fQ = 1) without and with government economic incen-
tives, inc [52].
V hy qhy cp;hy @ti;j
_ hy cp;hy ðt i1;j t i;j Þ þ n6 m
¼ n5 m _ hy P
nhy @#
i Ji
SPB ¼ ð46Þ
ðUAÞhy;w DC op
cp;hy ðt i;j tiþ1;j Þ þ ðt i;2 ti;j Þ
nhy P
ðUAÞhy;ww i Ji
SPBinc ¼ ð47Þ
ðt i;j t ww Þ ð44Þ DC op þ inc
nhy
The electricity produced by the geothermal–solar trigeneration resulted at 96 °C. In this case, a maximum vertical temperature
system is utilised for supplying the user grid and also the system gradient of only 3 °C was detected up to the dynamic free water
auxiliary devices. The Net Present Value (NPV) and the Profit Index surface. By the obtained experimental results several design and
(PI) were calculated too by the following Eqs. (48) and (49). operating system parameters are selected.
! The design and operating parameters assumptions for the ORC
X
NPV ¼ AF DC op Ji ð48Þ machine are reported in Table 3, where the considered geometric
i configuration of both the condenser and evaporator are described
too. The electricity power of the ORC machine, equipped by a screw
NPV volumetric expander, is 6.0 kWe. The electric capacity of the con-
PI ¼ P ð49Þ sidered prototype is extremely lower than the overall electricity
i Ji
required by the hotel taken into consideration. The machine sizing
was done through two criteria. The first one is related to budget
4. Case study constraints of the project. It is worth noting that the paper presents
the design and the optimisation of a prototype that will be exper-
The developed simulation model for the innovative micro-tri- imented in the next future. Therefore, a small-scale prototype of
generation plant (Fig. 1) was applied to a suitable case study other potentially larger systems has been analysed. The second cri-
referred to the hotel ‘‘Regina Isabella’’ in Ischia (Naples, South of terion is referred to the maximisation of the energy production
Italy. Note that this volcanic isle is worldwide famous for its ther- obtained by the prototype. From this point of view, the smaller
mal sources). In this hotel several geothermal wells were drilled for the capacity of the system, the higher the amount of electric, ther-
thermal care purposes. One of them was dedicated to the research mal and cooling energy effectively supplied to the hotel. In fact, the
themes investigated in this paper. In partnership with the INGV undersizing of the system capacity allows one to achieve a full util-
(Italian National Institute of geology and volcanology), some isation of the energies produced by the prototype (avoiding any
experimental measurements were carried out for assessing: (i) dissipation of the eventual energy produced in excess), also
the available geothermal brine flow rate in the selected geothermal improving its economic feasibility indexes. The adopted working
well in the above mentioned hotel; (ii) the static and dynamic free fluid is R245fa. The resulted ORC machine efficiency ranges
surface water level for different geothermal brine flow rates; (iii) between 6.3% and 7.0% basically depending on the inlet oil temper-
the ground and geothermal brine temperature for different well ature that may vary from 90 to 130 °C. Note that such temperature
depths. A picture of the geothermal well experimental setup is a function of the geothermal brine source and of the magnitude
arranged for the measurement of the above mentioned parameters of the solar radiation. In addition, the ORC efficiency depends on
is reported in Fig. 5. In particularly, the temperature and the sur- the inlet sea water temperature for the condenser cooling, which
face level of the geothermal brine are measured by a phreatimeter. may vary from 16 to 25 °C during the year. By the performance
The results of the experimental campaign performed for measuring curves of the ORC machine pump (SKMV 32/3) the head and the
the well geothermal brine profile temperature in static conditions pump efficiency are linked to the system operating volume flow
are reported in Fig. 6. In dynamic conditions (for a test brine flow rate. In particular, a volume flow rate and a pump head of 2 l/s
rate of 5400 kg/h) the well bottom geothermal brine temperature and 80 m are respectively assessed.
The design and operating parameters of all the other system
components are shown in Table 4. The solar field is designed with
an area of 25 m2. A collectors tilt of 30° with respect to the horizon-
tal plane was selected. The coefficients of the efficiency curve are
referred to [29]. In addition, the parameters of the geothermal well
Measurement probe Inlet duct of the were obtained by the above mentioned on-site measurements.
downhole heat exchanger Conversely, all the remaining parameters (flow rate, set-point tem-
peratures, etc.) were selected on the basis of an iterative procedure.
In particular, the initial values were selected through several data
Well geothermal available in literature [12,26,30,32,52]. Then, such parameters
brine duct
Outlet duct of the were iteratively varied in order to achieve a satisfactory system
downhole heat exchanger configuration. All the technical features of the adopted solar collec-
Geothermal well tors are shown in Table 5, as reported in [29]. It is worth noting
that, for the main parameters selected by the authors, a sensitivity
analysis is provided at the end of this section, in order to assess
Fig. 5. Measurement for the geothermal well at the Regina Isabella hotel in Ischia.
their influence on the overall system performance.
For the auxiliary heater (AH) and for the single stage absorption
chiller (ACH) a nominal power of 200 and 30 kWf are selected in
Temperature (°C)
the system layout, respectively (Fig. 1). For the ACH a rated COP
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
0 equal to 0.7 was assumed. A DT of 5 °C for the inlet–outlet chilling
10 water is considered in the simulated system.
20 On the basis of these data, in summer the necessary flow rate of
30 the downhole exchanger supplying the ACH by the heat exchanger
Depth (m)
40 HE3 is 7364 kg/h. During winter the flow rate of such downhole
50 exchanger, utilised for supplying the ORC machine by the heat
60 exchanger HE1, is decreased to 800 kg/h.
70 The well submerged pump is continuously switched on with an
80 operating flow rate of 4100 kg/h (in order to ensure the minimum
90 ORC activation temperature). In the presented case study, the
geothermal source is exploited also by an U shaped downhole heat
Fig. 6. Measurement of the well geothermal brine temperature in static conditions. exchanger. Such system configuration is modelled by two heat
Table 4 25 m. Thus a resulting geothermal brine column of 69 m is

Other input design parameters of the simulated plant. obtained. For the heat loss between the well geothermal brine
Parameter Description Unit and the ground, a wall temperature of the well of 50 °C was taken
Solar loop into consideration (according to the performed measurements).
ASC Solar collector aperture area 25 m2 In the economic analysis, the following assumptions are consid-
qP2 P2 rated flow rate 3960 kg/h ered: the unitary cost of natural gas for both the AH of the geother-
vTK Tank TK volume per unit SC aperture area 5 l/m2 mal–solar trigeneration system (cNG) and for the reference system
g0 SC zero loss efficiency at normal incidence 0.82 –
a1 1st order SC heat loss coefficient 0.399 W/m2 K
heater (cNG,user) is 0.80 €/Sm3; the thermal efficiency of the refer-
a2 2nd order SC heat loss coefficient 0.0067 W/ ence system gas fired heater (gb), is 80%. Note that the efficiency
m2 K2 of the auxiliary heater is a simulation output. The unitary cost of
cf Diathermic oil specific heat 1.8 kJ/kg K electricity (cEE) is 0.2 €/kW h. The capital cost per surface area of
a Collector slope 30 °
the solar collectors (CSC) is 350 €/m2; the ORC machine capital cost
b Collector azimuth 0 °
Tset,SC SC outlet set point temperature 130 °C (CORC) is 35 k€; the absorption chiller capital cost (CACH) is 15 k€;
qP3 P3 flow rate 3960 kg/h the capital cost of the gas-fired auxiliary heater (CAH) is 10 k€.
AH For the assessment of government economic incentive, the
PAH,rated Rated AH heat power 200 kW assumed feed-in tariff (cEE,INC) is 0.135 €/kW h (Italian rule for
Tset,AH AH outlet set point temperature 90 °C geo-thermoelectric plants). In Eq. (48) the Annuity Factor (AF) is
Geothermal well assumed equal to 12.5 considering a discount rate equal to 5%
Hwell Depth 94 m and a time horizon of 20 years.
Twell Temperature 96 °C The simulation starts January 1st and end December 31st. The
qP9 P9 flow rate 4100 kg/h
qsum Downhole heat exchanger flow rate in 7364 kg/h
summer period in this case study is referred to May 1st–September
summer 30th.
qwin Downhole heat exchanger flow rate in 800 kg/h
winter
5. Results and discussion
ACH
PACH,rated Rated cooling power 30 kW
COP Rated COP 0.7 – In order to evaluate the energetic and economic performance of
TsetACH Set-point temperature for the chilled water 6.5 °C the system presented in Section 2, dynamic simulations and sensi-
TinACH Chilled water inlet temperature 11.5 °C tivity analysis were carried out on the basis of the input data
shown in Section 4. The analysis aims at predicting the dynamic
behaviour of the system and at selecting the optimal characteris-
tics of system design parameters, such as: solar collector area, min-
Table 5
Design parameters of the solar collector. imum geothermal brine flow rate, P3 flow rate and tank volume.
An economic analysis was carried out for investigating the feasibil-
Description Unit
ity of the plant. The simulation is performed on the basis of the
Energy performance weather data included in Meteonorm package and it is performed
Thermal output at 180 °C (1000 W/m2, Tamb 30 °C) 0.6 kW
from 0 h to 8760 h. Nevertheless, the code also allows one to inte-
Aperture area 1.05 m2
grate the results for different integration periods, such as: hours,
Operating conditions
weeks, months and years.
Stagnation temperature 345 °C
Maximum operating pressure 15 bar
Pressure drop at 260 l/h, 50 °C 0.5 kPa 5.1. Yearly results
Physical features
Dimensions See Fig. 3 Table 6 shows the main annual energy flows for the system
Weight 44 kg
Gross area 1.2 m2
under investigation. The majority of the thermal energy supplied
Weight per gross area 38 kg/m2 to the ORC is due to the contributions of HE1 and HE2 (geothermal)
which is dominant over the solar one.
Note that the exchanged thermal energy by HE2, EHE2, is the
much greater (603.2 MW h/y) than EHE1 (40.1 MW h/y). In fact,
exchangers linked through a suitable pipe (Fig. 4). In this case the HE1 provides heat from geothermal downhole heat exchanger,
number of stratification layers in the well (Nnode) was set equal to whereas HE2 supplies heat from geothermal brine. Obviously, the
20 since during the preliminary tests a small vertical temperature heat supplied by geothermal brine is much higher than the one
gradient (3 °C) was measured when the geothermal brine pump is of the downhole heat exchanger. Therefore, results show that
switched on. A single double port is modelled for representing the HE1 provides only a slight preheating of the diathermic oil while
outlet geothermal brine from the well. The hot geothermal brine HE2, supplied by geothermal brine, allows one to achieve the min-
suctioned from the ground is assumed at a constant temperature imum temperature for ORC activation of 90 °C. Note also that HE1
of 96 °C (according to the carried out measurements). The well is not activated in summer, since the heat of the downhole geo-
depth up to the bottom is 94 m, the dynamic free surface is @ thermal heat exchanger is used to drive the absorption chiller. This
Table 6
Annual energy results.
Param. Itot ESC ETK EHE1 EHE2 EHE4 Eth,ACH Ecool,ACH Eth,AH PEAH Eth,inORC Eel,ORC Eel,aux
Unit MW h/y
Ischia 43.3 25.6 24.9 40.1 603.2 1116.3 161.5 109.5 32.4 37.7 698.5 44.7 6.09
Pantelleria 42.9 25.3 24.6 40.0 603.5 1115.7 161.5 109.5 32.9 38.3 699.2 44.7 6.09
Aeolian Is. 46.7 28.4 27.8 39.9 601.1 1118.2 161.5 109.5 31.2 36.3 698.6 44.8 6.09
is another reason of the significant difference between EHE1 and Table 8

EHE2. The overall thermal energy produced by the solar field, ESC, NPV and IP.
is 25.6 MW h/y, being the incident solar radiation, Itot, equal to Param. NPV NPVinc IP IPinc
43.3 MW h/y, corresponding to a radiative flow of 1.73 MW h/m2, fQ = 0 fQ = 1 fQ = 0 fQ = 1 fQ = 0 fQ = 1 fQ = 0 fQ = 1
typical for southern Mediterranean countries. ETK (equal to
Unit k€ –
24.9 MW h/y) represents the solar energy converted into thermal Ischia 58.3 220.6 194.6 357.6 0.6 2.4 2.2 3.9
energy collected in the storage tank of the plant and delivered to Pantelleria 57.1 219.6 193.4 357.1 0.6 2.4 2.1 4.0
the user. The difference between ESC and ETK is due to the thermal Aeolian Is. 59.8 222.5 197.1 359.6 0.7 2.5 2.2 4.0
losses of the tank and pipes. EHE2 is also much higher than ETK,
showing that the contribution of solar field to the overall thermal
production is marginal compared with the geothermal one. Table 9
The heat produced by the AH auxiliary gas-fired heater, Eth,AH, is Annual efficiencies results.
much lower (32.4 MW h/y) than EHE2, showing that the combina- Param. gSC gAH gORC COPACH
tion of solar and geothermal heat sources allows one to drive the
59.2% 86.0% 6.4% 0.68
system for the majority of the time, particularly during summer.
About 6.4% of inlet thermal energy of ORC, Eth,inORC is converted
into electricity, Eel,ORC, (44.7 MW h/y), whereas the electricity used
by auxiliary devices of the plant, Eel,aux, (pumps) is about 13.6% of 130 °C. ACH coefficient of performance, COP, is equal to 0.68, close
the ORC produced energy. This is a good result since the electricity to rated value of 0.7. The AH average efficiency is about 86%. It is
production can be used for supplying such devices, especially the worth noting that the whole system under investigation cannot
submerged geothermal pump. During the summer operation, the be characterised by a single efficiency parameter since it is fed
geothermal source (by the downhole heat exchanger) supplies by a plurality of fuels (geothermal and solar energy and natural
ACH absorption chiller, which produces 109.5 MW h/y of cooling gas). Such system simultaneously produces electricity and thermal
energy (Ecool,ACH). Note that the heat used to drive the ACH is only and cooling energies. However, it is possible to investigate the
due to the contribution of the downhole geothermal heat exchan- results of the system as a whole, defining its average annual elec-
ger. In fact, geothermal brine, by D2, is always brought to the ORC tric and thermal efficiencies as follows. The overall inlet energy to
loop for the majority of the time. Therefore, HE3 remains always the system is obtained by: (i) the geothermal well (by HE1, HE2,
deactivated. In fact, the activation of HE3 occurs when ORC outlet HE3 and HE4); (ii) the incident solar radiation; (iii) the natural
oil temperature is higher than geothermal brine one (in order to gas used by an auxiliary heater. This inlet fuel energy is equal to
avoid heat dissipation). However, this circumstance never occurs 1.84 GW h/y (95.5% geothermal, 2.4% solar and 2.1% natural gas).
for the case study analysed in this paper. The overall system thermal efficiency can be calculated by the ratio
Tables 7 and 8 show the main parameters of the economic anal- between the thermal energy delivered to the user (both to HE4 and
ysis. In particular, in Table 7, the capital cost of the plant, J0, is to drive the absorption chiller, ACH) and the inlet fuel. This effi-
90.4 k€, which is due to the ORC (35 k€), absorption chiller ciency is very high (69.4%) since the majority of this fuel is used
(15 k€), auxiliary heater (10 k€). This overall cost is not very high, to produce heat in HE4 (60.6%), whereas 8.8% of the inlet fuel is
since the well structure is pre-existing. The economic results are delivered to the generator if the ACH. Finally, the overall electric
particularly sensitive to the amount of heat demanded by the user. efficiency (i.e. the ratio between the net electricity produced and
Therefore, two scenarios are considered, assuming respectively a the inlet fuel) is 2.1%. As expected, system overall electric effi-
full (fQ = 1) or null (fQ = 0) utilisation of the heat produced by ciency is much lower than ORC electric efficiency, since the ther-
HE4. For both scenarios, the economic analysis is performed con- mal energy supplied to the ORC is only a small fraction of the
sidering two cases: the first one in with the system can benefit overall fuel of the system. Note that all the above mentioned effi-
of incentives and the second one where no incentive is considered. ciencies are calculated by considering both renewable and non-
Obviously, the highest economic saving is achieved for fQ = 1 and renewable sources as fuels. Considering only non-renewable
considering the incentive. For such case, a significant economic sources, such efficiency would be much higher than 100%, as usu-
saving (35.8 k€/y) and a very low Simple Pay Back (SPBinc), about ally occurs for renewable energy systems.
2.5 years, are achieved. In this scenario, the Net Present Value
(NPVinc) of the system, Table 8, is about 357.6 k€. In the worst case 5.2. Weekly results
(without incentive and no thermal energy demand), SPB increases
up to 7.6 years which can be considered as an acceptable result. The annual results above discussed do not emphasize the vari-
Table 9 shows system efficiencies. The average efficiency (gSC) of ation of system performance during the year. Therefore, in order to
the solar collector field is excellent (59.2%). This efficiency is partic- better analyse such variations, results are here analysed also on a
ularly high to the novel design of the evacuated flat-plate solar weekly basis. In Fig. 7, the cooling energy obtained by ACH, Ecool,ACH,
thermal collector considered in this paper. ORC average efficiency the inlet thermal energy to ORC, Eth,inORC, the electricity obtained by
is about 6.4%, which is consistent with the data available in litera- ORC, Eel,ORC, thermal energy obtained by heat exchangers HE1, HE2,
ture, considering the inlet oil temperature varies between 90 and HE3 and HE4 (EHE1, EHE2, EHE3, EHE4) are shown. Eth,inORC consists of:
Table 7
Annual economic savings and SPB.
Param. J0 DCop DCop + inc SPB SPBinc

fQ = 0 fQ = 1 fQ = 0 fQ = 1 fQ = 0 fQ = 1 fQ = 0 fQ = 1
Unit k€ k€/y years
Ischia 90.4 11.9 24.9 22.8 35.8 7.6 3.6 4.0 2.5
Pantelleria 90.4 11.8 24.8 22.7 35.8 7.7 3.6 4.0 2.5
Aeolian Is. 90.4 12.0 25.0 23.0 36.0 7.5 3.6 4.0 2.5
30 1.2 140
Tout , SC Ttop ,TK ≡ Tout , AH
Energy (MWh/week)
Eel,ORC (MWh/week)
25 1.0 120
Eth ,inORC
Temperature (°C)
20 0.8 100
EHE 4 Eel ,ORC
15 0.6 80
10 0.4 60
Ecool , ACH EHE 2 EHE1
EHE 3
5 0.2 40
0 0.0 Tin , SC
20
0 10 20 30 40 50 Tout ,ORC
Week 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Fig. 7. Weekly energy. Time (h)
Fig. 9. Simulated temperatures obtained in a winter day.

geothermal energy by HE1 and HE2 (i.e. heat exchangers which
heat diathermic by the downhole heat exchanger and by geother-
mal brine respectively), solar energy, and, eventually, the energy 140
provided by AH. Heat production by HE1 is almost constant during Tout , AH
120
the winter weeks, being this heat exchanger deactivated in sum- Ttop , TK
Temperature (°C)
Tout , SC
100
mer since in that period geothermal heat (by the downhole heat
80
exchanger) is delivered to the absorption chiller. Conversely, in Tin , SC
summer HE2 thermal energy increases for two reasons, namely: 60
(i) HE1 heat exchanger is deactivated and it does not preheat the 40
Tout , ORC
oil, thus, the inlet oil temperature to HE2 is lower; (ii) the outlet 20
oil temperature from ORC evaporator is about 20 °C lower than 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
the average winter one (Figs. 9 and 10) due to variation of conden-
sation temperature, as discussed later. In fact, the lower the inlet Time (h)
temperature of the cold fluid (outlet oil from ORC), the higher Fig. 10. Simulated temperatures obtained in a summer day.
the thermal capacity of the heat exchanger HE2. As a consequence,
considering also the higher amount of solar energy, during the and, during the winter, it is dominant over the other energy
summer weeks (May 1st–September 30th), an overall increase of sources, considering that solar radiation is low. In winter, %Eth,AH
Eth,inORC is detected. Conversely, ORC production, Eel,ORC decreases. is equal 0, i.e. the AH is always switched off since the minimum
In fact, although ORC thermal input is higher, its efficiency dramat- value of ORC activation, 90 °C, is always achieved only by geother-
ically decreases in summer due to the increase of the inlet sea mal source and by a very small solar integration. Conversely, dur-
water temperature to condenser. In fact, the used dynamic data ing the summer, a significant amount of the geothermal energy is
of the seawater temperatures indicate that during the winter, such supplied to the ACH, in order to produce cooling energy. Thus, a
temperatures are equal to about 16–20 °C and the relative effi- small amount of thermal energy, %Eth,AH, is demanded to the AH
ciency of ORC is around the 9%, while during the summer the sea in order to achieve the minimum input temperature required by
water temperature is also 25 °C, and so the ORC efficiency reduces the ORC.
dramatically to 4.5%. In winter, ACH is deactivated and all geother-
mal heat is supplied to HE1 and HE2. Conversely, during the sum- 5.3. Daily results
mer, downhole heat exchanger supplies heat to the ACH which
produces Ecool,ACH. Such energy is constant for the operation period. Fig. 9 shows the main temperatures of the plant in a typical
However, in summer a significant reduction of the heat produced winter day. These results allow one to analyse the real behaviour
by EHE4 is detected (Fig. 7), due to a corresponding reduction of of the system. The outlet temperatures from the tank, Ttop,TK, and
the temperature of the hot fluid. Nevertheless, EHE4 is always from the auxiliary heater, Tout,AH, are coincident. This means that
higher than domestic hot water demand estimated for the hotel. the AH is switched off since ORC inlet temperature is always higher
In Fig. 8, the single rates of heat sources with respect the total than the minimum required setpoint, even without the integration
energy used for supplying the ORC are shown: solar energy col- of solar radiation. ORC outlet oil temperature, Tout,ORC, varies as a
lected into the TK tank, %ETK, geothermal energy, %(EHE1 + EHE2), function of the ORC inlet temperature, Tout,AH. During the night,
auxiliary heater energy, %Eth,AH. %ETK is equal only to 3% during Tout,ORC is constant and lower as a consequence of the variation of
all year. Geothermal energy rate, %(EHE1 + EHE2), is the main source the plot of the ORC inlet temperature, Tout,AH. Ttop,TK grows as soon
as Tout,SC increases, as a consequence of the availability of solar
energy. The selected control strategy of the solar loop determines
100 75 its activation after 8:00 am. However, even if Tout,SC achieves the
set point temperature, 130 °C, Ttop,TK is very lower, about 90 °C. In
80 60
fact, for obtaining the set point temperature, the control signal of
Energy rate (%)
(%)
P2 variable pump actives it with a very low flow rate, negligible

60 45
respect the flow rate of fixed-volume pump P3. During a represen-
SC
tative summer day (shown in Fig. 10), temperatures, Tout,AH and

ORC,
40 30
Ttop,TK, are not coincident and the auxiliary heater is often switched
20 15 on, except during the hours of maximum radiation (9:00–
16:00 am). In fact, in summer, geothermal source is used simulta-
0 0 neously for ORC and ACH. Thus, for obtaining a continuous ORC
0 10 20 30 40 50
Week
operation, during the night, when solar radiation is not available,
auxiliary heater is activated in order to achieve ORC minimum inlet
Fig. 8. Weekly energy rates entering to the ORC machine and efficiencies. temperature.
5.4. Sensitivity analysis 120 52
Ecool,ACH , Eth,AH (MWh/y)

100 50
A sensitivity analysis has been carried out in order to analyse the
Eel,ORC (MWh/y)
Ecool , ACH
effects of the variability of some of the main design parameters on 80 48
Eth , AH
other representative indicators of energy efficiency and economic 60 46
feasibility.
40 44
The increase of collectors area from 2 to 80 m2 allows one to
achieve a higher conversion rate of solar energy into thermal 20 42
Eel , ORC
energy, increasing the electricity production and the ORC efficiency
0 40
with relative energy and economic savings, DCop (Fig. 11). ACH 2700 3000 3300 3600 3900 4200 4500 4800 5100 5400
cooling energy produced, Ecool,ACH is not affected by the capacity P9 flow rate (kg/h)
of the solar collector field since ACH is supplied only by the geo-
thermal well. The increase of solar field determines a reduction Fig. 13. Sensitivity analysis: energy vs. P9 flow rate.
of thermal energy from auxiliary heater, the relative operation
time and so yearly fuel cost, Cost,gas,AH (k€/year). Simultaneously,
this increase determines higher capital cost, J0, due to the higher its electricity consumption increases as well. For a flow rate of
solar collectors cost, CSC. Even if the economic savings, DCop, 5400 kg/h this consumption is equal to about 12% of the total elec-
increase, the capital cost increases as well. For a solar field area tricity production of ORC. Another effect of this increase regards
around 25 m2 (solar collectors area in the reference configuration) the strong decrease of the thermal energy required by the auxiliary
the optimal NPV and SPB, without incentive (Fig. 12), are found. heater, Eth,AH, and so the relative economic saving. Fig. 14 shows
Note that NPV and SPB are evaluated assuming fQ = 0. In case of that for all the considered scenarios and indexes, the optimal con-
incentives, assuming SPB as objective function, the optimal config- figuration is found for the highest brine flow rate. However, it must
uration is found for the smallest solar field capacity. However, this be considered that an excessive brine mass flow rate cannot be
assessment was done with a gas cost of 0.8 €/Sm3 and these trends supported by the well, resulting in a dramatic decrease of the avail-
may be different in the case of an increase in the price of gas. ability of geothermal brine.
A sensitivity analysis varying the flow rate of geothermal brine Another sensitivity analysis is performed in order to investigate
(flow rate of P9 pump), from 2700 to 5400 kg/h, has been per- the effects of the variation of groundwater temperature. Such tem-
formed. Fig. 13 shows an increase of the electricity obtained by perature was varied from 90 to 100 °C. Fig. 15 shows that an
ORC, Eel,ORC, since a greater brine flow rate allows one to achieve increase of the well geothermal brine temperature determines a
higher water temperatures in the geothermal well and HE2 can general increase of ORC inlet temperature. In such circumstance,
heat the diathermic oil at higher temperatures. Thus, the inlet oil an increase in the output electricity of the ORC, Eel,ORC, is observed
temperature to ORC evaporator is higher and this effect determines due to the improvement of ORC efficiency, gORC, from 6.4% to 7.2%.
an increase of electricity production. ACH cooling energy, Ecool,ACH, This involves a decrease of the energy supplied by the auxiliary
is slightly affected by brine flow rate since it is supplied by the heater, Eth,AH, since the geothermal source will always be able to
downhole heat exchanger. However, when P9 flow rate is higher, achieve the minimum inlet temperature for the ORC. Conversely,
140 14
240 16
Capital Cost J0, CSC (k€)
120 12
ΔCOP,Cost,gas,AH (k€/y)
Δ COP 200 14
NPVinc
SPB, SPBinc (years)

100 10
NPV,NPVinc (k€)
J0 160 12
80 8 SPB
120 10
60 6
Cost gas , AH 80 8
NPV
40 4
40 6
CSC SPBinc
20 2 0 4
0 0 -40 2
2 12 22 32 42 52 62 72 2700 3000 3300 3600 3900 4200 4500 4800 5100 5400
ASC (m2) P9 Flow rate (kg/h)
Fig. 11. Sensitivity analysis: costs vs. solar collectors area. Fig. 14. Sensitivity analysis: SPB and NPV vs. P9 flow rate.
Eel,ORC, Ecool,ACH, Eth,AH (MWh/y)
210 9
120 8.0
180 8 100 7.6
SPB,SPBINC (years)
NPV,NPVINC (k€)
NPVinc Ecool , ACH ηORC

150 7 7.2
ηORC (%)
80
SPB Eth , AH
120 6 60 6.8
SPBinc 40 6.4
90 5
Eel , ORC
20 6.0
60 4
NPV 0 5.6
30 3 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100
2 12 22 32 42 52 62 72
Well geothermal brine temperature (°C)
ASC (m2)
Fig. 15. Sensitivity analysis: energy and efficiency vs. well geothermal brine
Fig. 12. Sensitivity analysis: SPB and NPV vs. solar collectors area. temperature.
cooling energy, Ecool,ACH, is not significantly affected by the 6. Conclusion

variation of well temperature. For higher well temperatures,
economic indexes improve both for the increase of the electricity The results of the dynamic simulations developed by TRNSYS
production and for the decrease of the energy required by the show significant potential energy savings achievable by the inves-
auxiliary heater. The sharp increase of yearly economic saving tigated system. In the developed model, the ORC machine is sup-
involves a significant increase in the NPV, and a decrease in the plied by diathermic oil from a storage tank (which collects heat
SPB both with and without incentive (Fig. 16). The well geothermal supplied by the collectors and the geothermal well). The heat nec-
brine temperature is the most important parameter of the plant. In essary for the absorption chiller activation is obtained by geother-
fact, a lower temperature respect one in the reference configura- mal well only.
tion (96 °C) would involve an incompatible thermal level with The above mentioned simulation model was applied for devel-
the purpose of the work, especially as regards the production of oping a suitable case study referred to a hotel in Ischia (close to
electricity by ORC. In fact, with a temperature lower than 96 °C, Naples, South Italy). Here, some geothermal well are already avail-
the economic feasibility of the plant is prohibitive since the SPB able and currently exploited for thermal care and domestic water
is equal to 20 years, without incentive, and about 6 years with production only. Note that the isle of Ischia is worldwide popular
incentive. for its volcanic geothermal energy sources.
Finally, a further sensitivity analysis is also performed aiming at Results show that the system is capable to produce electricity,
analysing the effects of the system location (i.e. weather condi- cooling energy, and heat for the above mentioned uses. Some inter-
tions) on the overall energy and economic performance. For this esting technical results are obtained by the carried out analysis: (i)
scope, two additional Italian geothermal sites have been investi- the ORC efficiency is strongly affected by inlet temperature to sys-
gated: Pantelleria and Aeolian Isles. Such sites, located respectively tem evaporator and condenser; (ii) the energy performance of such
in the southern and northern part of Sicily, have geothermal kind of plants is slightly affected by the solar radiation energy,
sources similar to those available in the isle of Ischia, assumed as while it is dramatically influenced by geothermal energy level in
reference case. Therefore, in order to assess the effects of the sole terms of temperature and brine flow rate.
variation of the climatic area, in the following analysis it is For the accounted system capital cost (90 k€, well drilling
assumed to locate the same system discussed for Ischia (with the excluded) the carried out economic analysis showed a good profit-
same geothermal well features) in the two new additional ability. In particular, for the best case with feed-in tariff and full
locations. Note that this assumption is compliant with the data heat recovery (for domestic hot water production and thermal
regarding geothermal sources available in literature, showing that swimming pool heating), the SPB is only 2.5 years. For the worst
the available temperature of their geothermal sources may be even case (where no recovered thermal energy and feed-in tariff are
higher than the one achieved in Ischia [53]. In addition, the small considered) the SPB reaches 7 years.
capacity of the considered system allows one to assume a full util- Results show that the system is very profitable when high-tem-
isation of the produced energies, for all the selected locations. perature (>90 °C) geothermal sources are available. In particular,
Results of this analysis are shown in Tables 6–8, where the energy the system performance is also greatly affected by the magnitude
and economic results of the reference case are compared with of the available geothermal flow rate. Conversely, the system loca-
those of the two new locations. As expected, the higher the solar tion (and/or the capacity of the solar field) marginally affects the
radiation availability (Itot), the higher the amount of thermal overall system performance. Therefore, results suggest that this
energy produced by solar thermal collectors (ESC). From this point technology may be applied to all sites where low-cost (i.e. low
of view, the best results are obtained for the Aeolian Isles. How- depth) and high temperature (>90 °C) geothermal sources are
ever, as discussed in the first part of this section, solar energy is available, independently from the magnitude of the incident solar
a small percentage of the overall system fuel which is dominated radiation. Simultaneously, large thermal demands during both
by geothermal energy. As a consequence, the overall production summer and winter are crucial in order to achieve a good economic
of thermal energy (EHE4), cooling energy (Ecool,ACH) and electricity performance. The combination of these two circumstances, such as
(Eel,ORC) are marginally affected by the weather data. Similarly, no availability of geothermal energy and large thermal energy
significant variation of the economic indexes is detected among demands, can be achieved by hotels opened all year long and
the three investigated locations. located in zones with a suitable geothermal energy availability
The overall results of the sensitivity analysis suggest that the such as several Mediterranean volcanic islands.
feasibility of the system is strictly connected to the availability of By the carried out analyses interesting design and operating
a geothermal source in terms of temperature and brine flow rate. guidelines can be usefully obtained for similar non-residential
Conversely, the availability of solar energy and/or system location applications where geothermal energy (and solar radiation) are
and/or the capacity of the solar field do not significantly affect the available.
overall energy and economic performance indexes.
Acknowledgements
265 24
The authors wish to gratefully acknowledge INGV (Italian
215 20 National Institute of geology and volcanology) for the measure-
SPB,SPBinc (years)
NPV,NPVinc (k€)
ments carried out in the geothermal well of the Regina Isabella

165 16
NPVinc NPV hotel in Ischia.
SPB
115 12
SPBinc
65 8
References
15 4
90 92 94 96 98 100 [1] Quoilin S, Broek MVD, Declaye S, Dewallef P, Lemort V. Techno-economic
-35 0
survey of organic rankine cycle (ORC) systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
Well geothermal brine temperature (°C) 2013;22:168–86.
[2] Cammarata G, Cammarata L, Petrone G. Thermodynamic analysis of ORC for
Fig. 16. Sensitivity analysis: SPB and NPV vs. well geothermal brine temperature. energy production from geothermal resources. Energy Proc 2014;45:1337–43.
[3] Guo T, Wang H, Zhang S. Comparative analysis of natural and conventional [26] Calise F. Thermoeconomic analysis and optimization of high efficiency solar
working fluids for use in transcritical rankine cycle using lowtemperature heating and cooling systems for different Italian school buildings and climates.
geothermal source. Energy Res 2011:530–44. Energy Build 2010;42:992–1003.
[4] Branchini L, De Pascale A, Peretto A. Systematic comparison of ORC [27] Palmieri V. European patent application 2 672 194, 2012; 2012.
configurations by means of comprehensive performance indexes. Appl [28] Perers B, Bales C. Report of IEA SHC – Task 26, Solar Combisystems, 2002;
Therm Eng 2013;61:129–40. 2002.
[5] Villani M, Franco A. Optimal design of binary cycle power plants for water- [29] Institut für Thermodynamik und Wärmetechnik (ITW). Test report n.
dominated, medium-temperature geothermal fields. Geothermics 11COL1028; 2012.
2009;38:379–91. [30] Calise F, Capuozzo C, Vanoli L. Design and parametric oprtimization of an
[6] Guzović Z, Majcen B, Cvetković S. Possibilities of electricity generation in the organic rankine cycle powered by solar energy. Am J Eng Appl Sci
Republic of Croatia from medium-temperature geothermal sources. Appl 2013;6:178–204.
Energy 2012;98:404–14. [31] Dow Chemical Company. Dowtherm a – heat transfer fluid – product technical
[7] Guzović Z, Rašković P, Blatarić Z. The comparision of a basic and a dual- data, accessed 11/07/2014. Available at: http://www.dow.com.
pressure ORC (organic rankine cycle): geothermal power plant Velika Ciglena [32] Calise F, Capuozzo C, Carotenuto A, Vanoli L. Thermoeconomic analysis and
case study. Energy 2014. off-design performance of an organic rankine cycle powered by medium-
[8] Mohanty B, Paloso Jr G. Economic power generation from low-temperature temperature heat sources. Sol Energy 2013.
geothermal resources using organic rankine cycle combined with vapour [33] Bejan A. Heat transfer. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.; 1993.
absorption chiller. Heat Recovery Syst CHP 1992;12:143–58. [34] Liu H, Kakac S. Heat exchangers – selection, rating and thermal design. 2nd
[9] Bendaikha W, Larbi S. Hybrid fuel cell and geothermal resources for air- ed. CRC Press; 2002.
conditioning using an absorption chiller in Algeria. Energy Proc [35] London AL, Saha RK. Laminar flow: forced convection in ducts. Academic Press;
2012;28:190–7. 1978.
[10] Wang X, Bierwirth A, Christ A, Whittaker P, Regenauer-Lieb K, Chua HT. [36] Quoilin S, Aumann R, Grill A, Schuster A, Lemort V, Spliethoff H. Dynamic
Application of geothermal absorption air-conditioning system: a case study. modeling and optimal control strategy of waste heat recovery organic rankine
Appl Therm Eng 2013;50:71–80. cycles. Appl Energy 2011;88:2183–90.
[11] Buonomano A, Calise F, Dentice d’Accadia M, Ferruzzi G, Scarpellino M. Design [37] Bamgbopa MO, Uzgoren E. Quasi-dynamic model for an organic rankine cycle.
and simulation of a prototype of a small-scale solar power plant based on Energy Convers Manage 2013;72:117–24.
evacuated flat-plate solar collectors and organic rankine cycle. In: Proceedings [38] Bamgbopa MO, Uzgoren E. Numerical analysis of an organic rankine cycle
of ECOS 2014 – the 27th international conference on efficiency, cost, under steady and variable heat input. Appl Energy 2013;107:219–28.
optimization, simulation and environmental impact of energy systems; 2014. [39] Sun WLJ. Operation optimization of an organic rankine cycle (ORC) heat
[12] Calise F, Capuozzo C, Vanoli L. Design and parametric optimization of an recovery power plant. Appl Therm Eng 2011;31:2032–41.
organic rankine cycle powered by solar energy. Am J Eng Appl Sci [40] Lecompte S, Huisseune H, van den Broek M, De Schampheleire S, De Paepe M.
2013:178–204. Part load based thermo-economic optimization of the organic rankine cycle
[13] Zhai H, Shi L, An Q. Influence of working fluid properties on system (ORC) applied to a combined heat and power (CHP) system. Appl Energy
performance and screen evaluation indicators for geothermal ORC (organic 2013;111:871–81.
rankine cycle) system. Energy 2014;74:2–11. [41] Mostinski IL. Application of the rule of corresponding states for calculation of
[14] Zhu Y, Jiang L, Jin V, Yu L. Impact of built-in and actual expansion ratio heat transfer and critical heat flux. Teploenergetika 1963;4:66.
difference of expander on ORC system performance. Appl Therm Eng [42] Fujita Y, Tsutsui M. Experimental investigation in pool boiling heat transfer of
2014;71:548–58. ternary mixture and heat transfer correlation. Exp Thermal Fluid Sci
[15] Tempesti D, Manfrida G, Fiaschi D. Thermodynamic analysis of two micro CHP 2002;26:237–44.
systems operating with geothermal and solar energy. Appl Energy [43] Declaye S, Quoilin S, Lemort V. Expansion machine and fluid selection for the
2012;97:609–17. organic rankine cycle. HEFAT 2010. In: 7th International conference on heat
[16] Tempesti D, Fiaschi D. Thermo-economic assessment of a micro CHP system transfer, fluid mechanics and thermodynamics, Antalya, Turkey; 2012.
fuelled by geothermal and solar energy. Energy 2013;58:45–51. [44] Nusselt W. The condensation of steam on cold surface. Z.d. Ver. Deut. Ing.
[17] Wang XD, Zhao L, Wang JL, Zhang WZ, Zhao XZ, Wu W. Performance 1916;60:541.
evaluation of a low-temperature solar rankine cycle system utilizing R245fa. [45] Bergman TL, Lavine AS, Incropera FP, DeWitt DP. Fundamentals of heat and
Sol Energy 2010;84:353–64. mass transfer. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2011.
[18] Al-Sulaiman FA, Dincer I, Hamdullahpur F. Exergy modeling of a new solar [46] Rose JW. An approximate equation for the vapour-side heat-transfer
driven trigeneration system. Sol Energy 2011;85:2228–43. coefficient for condensation on low-finned tubes. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
[19] Al-Sulaiman FA, Hamdullahpur F, Dincer I. Performance assessment of a novel 1994;37:865–75.
system using parabolic trough solar collectors for combined cooling, heating, [47] Honda H, Nozu S, Mitsumori K. Augmentation of condensation on finned tubes
and power production. Renewable Energy 2012;48:161–72. by attaching a porous drainage plate. In: ASME-JSME thermal engng joint
[20] Al-Sulaiman FA. Exergy analysis of parabolic trough solar collectors integrated conference; 1983. p. 289–96.
with combined steam and organic rankine cycles. Energy Convers Manage [48] Nusselt W. The condensation of steam on cold surface. Z.d. Ver. Deut. Ing.
2014;77:441–9. 1916;60:541.
[21] Astolfi M, Xodo L, Romano MC, Macchi E. Technical and economical analysis of [49] Kern DQ. Mathematical development of loading in horizontal condensers. Am
a solar–geothermal hybrid plant based on an organic rankine cycle. Inst Chem Eng 1958;4:157–60 [John Wiley & Sons].
Geothermics 2011;40:58–68. [50] Eissenberg DM. An investigation of the variables affective steam condensation
[22] Zhou C. Hybridisation of solar and geothermal energy in both subcritical and on the outside of a horizontal tube bundle. Knoxville: University of Tennessee;
supercritical organic rankine cycles. Energy Convers Manage 2014;81:72–82. 1972.
[23] Ghasemi H, Sheu E, Tizzanini A, Paci M, Mitsos A. Hybrid solar–geothermal [51] Pompa S. Online pump selection; 2013. <http://www.standartpompa.com/en/
power generation: optimal retrofitting. Appl Energy 2014;131:158–70. >.
[24] Ruzzenenti F, Bravi M, Tempesti D, Salvatici E, Manfrida G, Basosi R. Evaluation [52] Calise F, Dentice d’Accadia M, Vanoli L. Thermoeconomic optimization of solar
of the environmental sustainability of a micro CHP system fueled by low- heating and cooling systems. Energy Conver Manag 2011;52:1562–73.
temperature geothermal and solar energy. Energy Convers Manage [53] Calise F, Cipollina A, Dentice d’Accadia M, Piacentino A. A novel renewable
2014;78:611–6. polygeneration system for a small Mediterranean volcanic island for the
[25] Klein SA et al. Solar Energy Laboratory. TRNSYS. A transient system simulation combined production of energy and water: dynamic simulation and economic
program. Madison: University of Wisconsin; 2006. assessment. Appl Energy 2014.

Energy and Economic Analysis of Geothermal-Solar Trigeneration

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Energy and Economic Analysis of Geothermal-Solar Trigeneration

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Applied Energy 138 (2015) 224–241

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy and economic analysis of geothermal–solar trigeneration

A novel small trigenereation system is dynamically simulated and optimised.

A area (m2) V_ volume ﬂow rate (m3 s1)

Fig. 1. Sketch of the system layout.

Coefﬁcients Description Unit

Fig. 3. Flat-plate evacuated solar collector.

occurring among the ORC machine components. The component Table 2

In this ORC simulation model, the input parameters are temper-

Table 3 difference between single-phase and two-phase behaviours.

The equation referred to the condensate retention angle Uf

double port outlet

free dynamic surface

i=2 p = number of a double port (1…10)

double port inlet

Fig. 4. Geothermal well model for the case study.

Table 4 25 m. Thus a resulting geothermal brine column of 69 m is

is another reason of the signiﬁcant difference between EHE1 and Table 8

Param. J0 DCop DCop + inc SPB SPBinc

Fig. 9. Simulated temperatures obtained in a winter day.

P2 variable pump actives it with a very low ﬂow rate, negligible

tative summer day (shown in Fig. 10), temperatures, Tout,AH and

5.4. Sensitivity analysis 120 52

Ecool,ACH , Eth,AH (MWh/y)

SPB, SPBinc (years)

NPVinc Ecool , ACH ηORC

cooling energy, Ecool,ACH, is not signiﬁcantly affected by the 6. Conclusion

ments carried out in the geothermal well of the Regina Isabella

Você também pode gostar