Engineering topics

Witter, Erik

Publications and source records attributed to Witter, Erik.

11 records

DOE OSTI2025

Geothermal Power Systems Analysis: Outcome of Industry Stakeholders Workshop

Geothermal cost and performance evaluation implemented via techno-economic assessment (TEA) modeling is critical for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and other geothermal industry stakeholders in assessing the current state of geothermal technologies and to identify existing hurdles to commercially viable geothermal development. The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is a major TEA tool used in estimating the economic feasibility and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of conventional hydrothermal systems and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). Since 2021, GETEM has been transitioning from an intricate spreadsheet model to a user-friendly tool within the System Advisor Model (SAM) developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Apart from enabling an expanded visibility of the geothermal model among other renewable resources, having GETEM in SAM has the advantage of simulation automation, better usability, updates tracking, active user inputs/feedback, and extended financial modeling. GETEM is used in developing supply curves for NREL's Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), which provides inputs to the Renewable Energy Potential (reV) and the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) models. The geothermal module in NREL's reV model assesses the geothermal energy potential in the conterminous United States by defining the geospatial intersection of geothermal resources with existing grid infrastructure within the constraint of land use characteristics. The ReEDS model is a capacity expansion model used for simulating the long-term build-out and operation of the U.S. generation and transmission system based on current energy costs and policies. To ensure enhanced representation of current industry trends in our model transitions and development, we organized a two-day virtual workshop to elicit geothermal industry stakeholder input and recommendations on our current approaches and assumptions on techno-economic, resource assessment, and deployment scenarios modeling of geothermal technologies. Participants included developers, operators, investors, regulatory agencies, system modelers, national laboratory researchers, consultants, and other stakeholders. In this workshop, we gained stakeholder insights on current geothermal plant performance (i.e., capacity factors), updated drilling costs and learning curves, and next-generation technologies such as closed-loop and superhot rock geothermal. Other outcomes from this workshop and its impact on future geothermal development feasibility, resource availability, and capacity expansion studies are compiled and discussed.

annual technology baseline↗

DOE OSTI2024

Assessing the Viability of Geothermal Microgrid Deployment: A Geospatial Analysis Across the United States

Geothermal microgrids hold a potential of supplying clean and dependable power to communities throughout the United States (US), all while sidestepping the expenses associated with connecting to strained or isolated power grids. Nonetheless, their implementation is still in its early stages in the country. The objective of this analysis is to leverage available data to pinpoint regions across the US that exhibit favorable conditions for the development of geothermal microgrids. Drawing from a variety of sources, including estimates of geothermal resources, the costs associated with geothermal energy generation and electricity transmission, existing microgrid locations, and subsidy programs, we aim to identify promising areas for further exploration. By mapping out the contiguous US, Alaska, and Hawaii, we delineate regions with high relative favorability for geothermal microgrid deployment. Our findings reveal the presence of highly favorable regions across the Western states of the contiguous US, as well as isolated areas in Alaska and Hawaii. Furthermore, we delve into a discussion on state policies and incentive programs, considering their role in fostering favorable conditions or posing barriers to geothermal microgrid development.

Alaska↗

DOE OSTI2024

Geothermal Power Systems Analysis: Outcome of Industry Stakeholders Workshop: Preprint

Geothermal cost and performance evaluation implemented via technoeconomic assessment (TEA) modeling is critical for the Department of Energy (DOE) and other geothermal industry stakeholders in assessing the current state of geothermal technologies and to identify existing hurdles to commercially viable geothermal development. The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is a major TEA tool used in estimating the economic feasibility and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of conventional hydrothermal systems and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). Since 2021, GETEM has been transitioning from an intricate spreadsheet model to a user-friendly tool within the System Advisor Model (SAM) developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Apart from enabling an expanded visibility of the geothermal model among other renewable resources, having GETEM in SAM has the advantage of simulation automation, better usability, updates tracking, active user inputs/feedback, and extended financial modeling. GETEM is used in developing supply curves for the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB). The ATB data are inputs to the Renewable Energy Potential (reV) and the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) models. The geothermal module in NREL’s reV model assesses the geothermal energy potential in the conterminous United States by defining the geospatial intersection of geothermal resources with existing grid infrastructure within the constraint of land use characteristics. The ReEDS model is a capacity expansion model used for simulating the long-term build-out and operation of the US generation and transmission system based on current energy costs and policies. To ensure enhanced representation of current industry trends in our model transitions and development, we organized a two-day virtual workshop to elicit geothermal industry stakeholder input and recommendations on our current approaches and assumptions on technoeconomic, resource assessment, and deployment scenarios modeling of geothermal technologies. Participants included developers, operators, investors, regulatory agencies, system modelers, national laboratory researchers, consultants, and other stakeholders. In this workshop, we gained stakeholder insights on current geothermal plant performance (i.e., capacity factors), updated drilling costs and learning curves, and next generation technologies such as closed loop and superhot rock geothermal. Other outcomes from this workshop and its impact on future geothermal development feasibility, resource availability, and capacity expansion studies are compiled and discussed.

Annual Technology Baseline↗

DOE OSTI2024

Techno-Economic Analysis and Market Potential of Geological Thermal Energy Storage (GeoTES) Charged With Solar Thermal and Heat Pumps

In this project, we developed a techno-economic analysis (TEA) model that can be used to evaluate the viability of a proposed Geological Thermal Energy Storage (GeoTES) design. This MATLAB-based model integrates distinct subsystem models for the reservoir, wells, power cycle, and solar field to capture their distinct characteristics. It applies this approach in simulating GeoTES storage and dispatch operations for durations ranging from hourly to seasonal. Using cases studies based on GeoTES designs provided by industry partners - Premier Resource Management (PRM) and EarthBridge Energy - we validated the TEA model estimations of system performance and costs (such as thermal and electrical power/energy inflow and outflow, capital costs, and levelized costs of energy and storage) for both concentrating solar thermal (CST) and Carnot Battery (CB) pairings with GeoTES (CST-GeoTES and CB-GeoTES). For the CST-GeoTES case, the model was validated against the proposed system designed by PRM. It showed good agreement with PRM's estimations when well and pump costs derived from PRM's estimations were used. When GETEM-based costs were used, there was a slight overprediction due to GETEM's project/site agnostic assumption of these costs. From a sensitivity analysis perspective, the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of the CST-GeoTES case was most sensitive to well flow rate and the charging temperature. An optimal design scenario resulted in an LCOE of 0.11 $\$$/kWhe. CST-GeoTES can also provide a source of heat to meet seasonal demands. With 12-hour and 24-hour levelized cost of heat (LCOH) of 0.018 $\$$/kWhth and 0.022 $\$$/kWhth, respectively, CST-GeoTES could be competitive in the California market with an average industrial price of natural gas in California between 0.041-0.047 $\$$/kWhth. The levelized cost of storage (LCOS) for CST-GeoTES depends on the energy storage duration. Although the LCOS is relatively higher for shorter durations (e.g., ~0.50 $\$$/kWhe for 1 hour of storage), it is an order of magnitude lower (0.06 $\$$/kWhe) for longer storage durations and competitive with lithium-ion batteries (beyond 12 hours of storage) and molten-salt thermal energy storage (beyond 32 hours). Energy. Three options were explored and applied to the EarthBridge case study: (1) A Carnot Battery design using R125 working fluid with both hot and cold storage; (2) A Carnot Battery design using R125 working fluid with only hot storage; (3) A Carnot Battery using a commercially available heat pump with carbon dioxide (CO2) working fluid and hot storage only. The CB-GeoTES with cold storage only had a slight (round-trip) efficiency advantage over the system without (43.4% vs. 42.8%). This is because the cold storage is limited by the freezing point of water, so the cold storage is not much colder than the environment. The system using commercially available technologies was the least efficient - partly because different cycles were used in the heat pump (CO2) and heat engine (binary cycle) which leads to some inefficiencies. Using the commercially available design, the levelized cost of energy (LCOS) from the model (0.10 $\$$/kWhe) was higher than that estimated by EarthBridge (0.068 $\$$/kWhe). This is because of the low round-trip (38.7%) efficiency of the commercially available design. Sensitivity analysis reveals that the model is most sensitive to electricity price. Including electricity price in the TEA for CB-GeoTES leads to an increase in LCOS from the base value to 0.25 $\$$/kWhe. To determine storage sites suitable for GeoTES, we gathered and analyzed geological, petrophysical, and geophysical data of oil and gas reservoir and aquifers in California and Texas. We down-selected possible sites based on cut-off values for site characteristics (e.g., reservoir temperature, formation thickness, permeability, porosity, depth, and brine salinity) and preliminary costs. Using this approach, the Carrizo-Wilcox, Yegua-Jackson, and Dockum brackish aquifers in Texas were identified as having the highest suitability. Similarly, in the central California region, the White Wolf, Belridge South Tulare, and Belridge South Reef Ridge were the most suitable. Going further, we assessed the storage potential in the selected sites. To do this we developed distributions of reservoir characteristic data and applied a Monte Carlo-based analysis to account for intrinsic uncertainty in the acquired data. The analysis revealed that the Carrizo-Wilcox aquifer had the highest storage potential with a mean capacity of 554 TWhth (i.e., 63 TWhe). The estimated capacity serves as an upper limit of storage potential given that not all fields in the basin will be developed. We participated in multiple outreach activities including conference presentations, panel session discussions, and the facilitation of a GeoTES workshop at the NREL Golden campus.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Annual Technology Baseline: The 2024 Electricity Update

Consistent cost and performance data for various electricity generation technologies can be difficult to find and may change frequently for certain technologies. With the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory annually provides an organized and centralized set of such cost and performance data. The ATB uses the best information from the Department of Energy national laboratories' energy analysts. The ATB has been reviewed by experts and it includes the following electricity generation and storage technologies: land-based wind, offshore wind, distributed wind, utility-scale solar photovoltaics (PV), commercial-scale solar PV, residential-scale solar PV, concentrating solar power, geothermal power, hydropower, utility-scale battery storage, commercial battery storage, residential battery storage, pumped storage hydropower, nuclear, coal, and natural gas. EIA data for conventional biopower are included for reference. This webinar presentation introduces the 2024 update to the ATB Electricity data and documentation.

battery storage↗

DOE OSTI2024

Geological Thermal Energy Storage (GeoTES) Charged with Solar Thermal Technology Using Depleted Oil/Gas Reservoirs and Carnot-Battery Technique Using Shallow Reservoirs: Preprint

Geological thermal energy storage (GeoTES) utilizes the underground reservoirs to storage and dispatch energy per given demand schedule over a time scale up to seasons of a year. The energy input can be of various sources/forms; in this paper, we investigate 1) the GeoTES technology with solar thermal hybridization and using depleted oil/gas reservoirs; 2) the GeoTES technology with heat pumps charged by excess renewable electricity and using low-temperature shallow reservoirs. For each GeoTES technology, we carry out the suitability analysis of candidate reservoirs, develop initial techno-economic models, and validate the model with selected case study. The paper provides an overview of our technical progress on the topics of concern and aims to promote a wider acceptance of the GeoTES technologies in the future energy market.

Carnot battery↗

DOE OSTI2023

Variability in Diurnal and Seasonal Ambient Conditions on Geothermal Plant Performance and Cost: Preprint

Geothermal plant performance is bounded by the second law efficiency, which accounts for the quantity of exergy that can be converted into useful work. This in turn is dependent on the geothermal resource temperature and the temperature of the heat sink (i.e., the ambient temperature). In this study we show that ambient temperature variability on a diurnal and seasonal basis can affect performance and cost estimations for geothermal plants. We have utilized the updated System Advisor Model (SAM) to assess nine geothermal sites with existing resource capacities across three climate zones. Our analysis shows that both evaporatively-cooled flash and air-cooled binary cycle plants are affected by temperature, with a slightly higher effect in EGS binary sites. By assuming an ambient (wet bulb) temperature baseline of 15.6 degrees C (60 degrees F) and comparing baseline results to those from site-specific data we observe up to 15% underestimation of plant performance and up to 20% overestimation of cost.

ambient temperature↗

DOE OSTI2023

Variability in Diurnal and Seasonal Ambient Conditions on Geothermal Plant Performance and Cost

Geothermal plant performance is bounded by the second law efficiency, which accounts for the quantity of exergy that can be converted into useful work. This, in turn, is dependent on the geothermal resource temperature and the temperature of the heat sink (i.e., the ambient temperature). In this study, we show that ambient temperature variability on a diurnal and seasonal basis can affect performance and cost estimations for geothermal plants. We have utilized the updated System Advisor Model (SAM) to assess nine geothermal sites with existing resource capacities across three climate zones. Our analysis shows that both evaporatively-cooled flash and air-cooled binary cycle plants are affected by temperature, with a slightly higher effect in enhanced geothermal system binary sites. By assuming an ambient (wet bulb) temperature baseline of 15.6 degrees C (60 degrees F) and comparing baseline results to those from site-specific data, we observe up to 15% underestimation of plant performance and up to 20% overestimation of cost. These results make a case for the inclusion of location-based weather data as inputs to supply curves that are used in capacity expansion models for the prediction of future geothermal deployment scenarios.

ambient temperature↗

DOE OSTI2023

Techno-Economic Analysis and Market Potential of Geological Thermal Energy Storage (GeoTES) Charged With Solar Thermal and Heat Pumps into Depleted Oil/Gas Reservoirs and Shallow Reservoirs: A Technology Overview: Preprint

Depleted oil/gas reservoirs represent a waste of underground resources and investments of drilling, and also a potential risk to the earth's environment. Geologic thermal energy storage (GeoTES) is proposed as a solution to convert depleted oil/gas reservoirs into long-term seasonal energy storage. GeoTES can be hybridized with other techniques for viable commercial deployment, such as 1) concentrating solar power (CSP) collectors and 2) heat pumps with excess renewable energy. Here, a technology overview is given on the two GeoTES technologies, which includes system overview, techno-economic models, and case study. Both GeoTES technologies show great potential in the economics of individual project deployment and applicability across the US.

concentrating solar power↗

DOE OSTI2023

Geothermal Play Fairway Analysis Best Practices

Play fairway analysis (PFA) is a methodology that can improve success rates for geothermal exploration drilling, thus reducing the costs of geothermal projects while facilitating development in new areas. It was originally developed for the oil and gas industry, but has been adapted for discovering geothermal resources over the last decade. The geothermal PFA methodology involves systematically screening a set geographic area for promising qualities typically related to the presence of heat, permeability, and fluid. Successful application of PFA can identify hidden hydrothermal systems. From 2014 to 2021 the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) supported the development of PFA for geothermal resources through awards to 11 research teams across the country. The goal of these projects was to advance and adapt PFA for geothermal exploration to produce regional-scale maps that reduce exploration uncertainty. This report is an outcome of the NREL-led PFA Retrospective project, which compiled, synthesized, analyzed the results of GTO's geothermal PFA program. Ultimately, we find that these projects greatly advanced approaches to geothermal exploration and resulted in extensive new data and new discoveries of unrecognized geothermal systems. We used the results to distill best practices in this report and to provide guidance for future applications of geothermal PFA.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Annual Technology Baseline: The 2023 Electricity Update

Consistent cost and performance data for various electricity generation technologies can be difficult to find and may change frequently for certain technologies. With the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory annually provides an organized and centralized set of such cost and performance data. The ATB uses the best information from the Department of Energy national laboratories' renewable energy analysts. The ATB has been reviewed by experts and it includes the following electricity generation and storage technologies: land-based wind, offshore wind, distributed wind, utility-scale solar photovoltaics (PV), commercial-scale solar PV, residential-scale solar PV, concentrating solar power, geothermal power, hydropower, utility-scale battery storage, commercial battery storage, residential battery storage, pumped storage hydropower, coal, and natural gas. EIA data for nuclear and conventional biopower are included for reference. This webinar presentation introduces the 2023 update to the ATB Electricity data and documentation.

capacity factor↗