Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ https://digital.libr...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

Economic Predictions for Heat Mining: A Review and Analysis of Hot Dry Rock (HDR) Geothermal Energy Technology

Authors: Tester, Jefferson W.; Herzog, Howard J.;

Economic Predictions for Heat Mining: A Review and Analysis of Hot Dry Rock (HDR) Geothermal Energy Technology

Abstract

The main objectives of this study were first, to review and analyze several economic assessments of Hot Dry Rock (HDR) geothermal energy systems, and second, to reformulate an economic model for HDR with revised cost components. The economic models reviewed include the following studies sponsored by Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)-Cummings and Morris (1979), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)-Murphy, et al. (1982), United Kingdom (UK)-Shock (1986), Japan-Hori, et al. (1986), Meridian-Entingh (1987) and Bechtel (1988). A general evaluation of the technical feasibility of HDR technology components was also conducted in view of their importance in establishing drilling and reservoir performance parameters required for any economic assessment. In this review, only economic projections for base load electricity produced from HDR systems were considered. Bases of 1989 collars ($) were selected to normalize costs. Following the evaluation of drilling and reservoir performance, power plant choices and cost estimates are discussed in section 6 of the report. In Section 7, the six economics studies cited above are reviewed and compared in terms of their key resource, reservoir and plant performance, and cost assumptions. Based on these comparisons, the report estimates parameters for three composite cases. Important parameters include: (1) resource quality-average geothermal gradient (C/km) and well depth, (2) reservoir performance-effective productivity, flow impedance, and lifetime (thermal drawdown rate), (3) cost components-drilling, reservoir formation, and power plant costs and (4) economic factors-discount and interest rates, taxes, etc. In Section 8, composite case conditions were used to reassess economic projections for HDR-produced electricity. In Section 9, a generalized economic model for HDR-produced electricity is presented to show the effects of resource grade, reservoir performance parameters, and other important factors on projected costs. A sensitivity and uncertainty analysis using this model is given in Section 10. Section 11 treats a modification of the economic model for predicting costs for direct, non-electric applications. HDR economic projections for the U.S. are broken down by region in Section 12. In Section 13, the report provides recommendations for continued research and development to reduce technical and economic uncertainties relevant to the commercialization of HDR. [DJE-2005]

Country
United States
Related Organizations
Keywords

Geothermal Energy, Economics, Commercialization, Modifications, Impedance, 15 Geothermal Energy, Mining, Interest Rate, Geothermal Gradients, Electricity, Sensitivity Geothermal Legacy, Geothermal Legacy, Evaluation, Lifetime, Productivity, Power Plants

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    17
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
17
Top 10%
Top 10%
Average