CALL FOR PROPOSALS:

ORGANIZERS

  • Harvey Thorleifson, Chair
    Minnesota Geological Survey
  • Carrie Jennings, Vice Chair
    Minnesota Geological Survey
  • David Bush, Technical Program Chair
    University of West Georgia
  • Jim Miller, Field Trip Chair
    University of Minnesota Duluth
  • Curtis M. Hudak, Sponsorship Chair
    Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC

 

Paper No. 8
Presentation Time: 10:10 AM

CARBON-DIOXIDE PLUME GEOTHERMAL (CPG) SYSTEMS, AN ALTERNATIVE ENGINEERED GEOTHERMAL SYSTEM (EGS): NET ENERGY PRODUCTION POTENTIAL COMPARED TO TRADITIONAL WATER-BASED GEOTHERMAL SYSTEMS


RANDOLPH, Jimmy B., Department of Earth Sciences, University of Minnesota, 310 Pillsbury Dr. SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 and SAAR, Martin, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, 310 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, rando035@umn.edu

In a carbon dioxide plume geothermal (CPG) system, carbon dioxide (CO2) is pumped into existing geologic formations with sufficiently high permeability and porosity that reservoir-scale artificial stimulation is not required, and which are overlain by a low-permeability caprock. The resulting CO2 plume largely displaces native formation fluid and is heated by the natural in-situ heat and background geothermal heat flux. A portion of the heated CO2 is piped to the surface to produce power and/or to provide heat for direct use before being returned to the subsurface. Non-recoverable CO2 in the subsurface is geologically sequestered, serving as a CO2 sink. Besides improving electricity production efficiencies compared to water, all else being equal, this approach results in a geothermal power plant with a negative carbon footprint.

Here, we compare the geothermal heat energy extraction and power production potentials of CPG and traditional water-based geothermal approaches. Included in this analysis are the consequences of a CO2 thermosyphon, which reduces CO2 pumping requirements, and choice of power system configuration. While additional research is required, numerical simulation results at present suggest CPG systems would be viable geothermal energy sources for electric power production, even in regions with low geothermal temperatures, low heat flow rates, and/or relatively low permeability geologic formations.

Meeting Home page GSA Home Page