Technical Performance Comparison between U-Shaped and Deep Borehole Heat Exchangers

被引:6
|
作者
Alimonti, Claudio [1 ]
机构
[1] Sapienza Univ Rome, Dept Chem Engn Mat Environm, Via Eudossiana 18, I-00184 Rome, Italy
关键词
geothermal energy; closed-loop systems; deep borehole heat exchanger; U-loop; GEOTHERMAL-ENERGY EXTRACTION; CAMPI FLEGREI; CALDERAS; UNREST; WELL; CO2;
D O I
10.3390/en16031351
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
The geothermal industry is fronted by a fundamental decade to grow and become an energy supplier in transitioning to a sustainable energy system. The introduction of Closed-Loop Geothermal energy systems (CLG) can overcome the negative social response and increase the attractiveness of geothermal developments. The present work aims to investigate and compare the performance of CLG systems. For the comparison, the case study of Campi Flegrei was chosen. The maximum depth was fixed at 2000 m, and the two configurations were set up to analyse the performance and evaluate the best operational configuration. Both CLG configurations showed decay in the output temperature of the working fluid during the production time. For a U-shaped design, it is possible to find a working condition that allows constant thermal power over time. The DBHE specific power was always more significant, up to 350 kW/m, compared to the U-shaped, which attained a maximum of 300 W/m (15%). The comparison with Beckers et al. analysis highlights the similarity of our results with their base case. The consideration of the CLG system's length is related to the heat exchange and investment costs. For longer exchangers, there are higher investments and lower specific power.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Analysis of heat transfer and resistance performance of U-shaped baffle heat exchanger
    Gu X.
    Zhang Q.
    Wang C.
    Fang Y.
    Li N.
    Wang Y.
    Huagong Jinzhan/Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2022, 41 (07): : 3465 - 3474
  • [32] Experimental and grey prediction on the long term behavior of U-shaped ground coupled heat exchangers
    Department of Thermal Energy Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
    Taiyangneng Xuebao, 2006, 11 (1137-1141):
  • [33] Heat transfer performance of U-shaped coolant channel with dimple structure
    Shen, Zhongyang
    Xie, Yonghui
    Zhang, Di
    Hsi-An Chiao Tung Ta Hsueh/Journal of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 2013, 47 (03): : 108 - 113
  • [34] The influence of thermal boundary conditions of wellbore on the heat extraction performance of deep borehole heat exchangers
    LI, Jiashu
    Dai, Chuanshan
    Lei, Haiyan
    GEOTHERMICS, 2022, 100
  • [35] Thermal interaction between tunnel ground heat exchangers and borehole heat exchangers
    Bidarmaghz, Asal
    Narsilio, Guillermo A.
    Buhmann, Patrik
    Moormann, Christian
    Westrich, Bernhard
    GEOMECHANICS FOR ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, 2017, 10 : 29 - 41
  • [36] Thermal evaluation of coaxial deep borehole heat exchangers
    Holmberg, Henrik
    Acuna, Jose
    Naess, Erling
    Sonju, Otto K.
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2016, 97 : 65 - 76
  • [37] Deep Borehole Heat Exchangers - A Conceptual and Comparative Review
    Sapinska-Sliwa, Aneta
    Rosen, Marc A.
    Gonet, Andrzej
    Sliwa, Tomasz
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AIR-CONDITIONING AND REFRIGERATION, 2016, 24 (01)
  • [38] Performance evaluation of U-tube borehole heat exchangers employing nanofluids as the heat carrier fluid
    Jahanbin, Aminhossein
    Semprini, Giovanni
    Pulvirenti, Beatrice
    APPLIED THERMAL ENGINEERING, 2022, 212
  • [39] Simulation-Based Comparison Between the Thermal Behavior of Coaxial and Double U-Tube Borehole Heat Exchangers
    Quaggiotto, Davide
    Zarrella, Angelo
    Emmi, Giuseppe
    De Carli, Michele
    Pockele, Luc
    Vercruysse, Jacques
    Psyk, Mario
    Righini, Davide
    Galgaro, Antonio
    Mendrinos, Dimitrios
    Bernardi, Adriana
    ENERGIES, 2019, 12 (12)
  • [40] Design of borehole heat exchangers for ground source heat pumps: a comparison between two methods
    Staiti, Matteo
    Angelotti, Adriana
    6TH INTERNATIONAL BUILDING PHYSICS CONFERENCE (IBPC 2015), 2015, 78 : 1147 - 1152