Comparative study on heat extraction performance of three enhanced geothermal systems

Xiaotian Wu , Yingchun Li , Chun'an Tang
{"title":"Comparative study on heat extraction performance of three enhanced geothermal systems","authors":"Xiaotian Wu ,&nbsp;Yingchun Li ,&nbsp;Chun'an Tang","doi":"10.1016/j.rockmb.2023.100041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Enhanced geothermal systems (EGSs) in this study are classified as fracturing-EGS (F-EGS), pipe-EGS (P-EGS) and excavation-EGS (E-EGS) according to reservoir stimulation strategies. However, the heat extraction performances of three EGSs employing different stimulation strategies are not fully understood. Here, we define the region where the pore pressure increment calculated by a hydraulic fracturing process is higher than rock tensile strength as the stimulation region for establishing a more accurate F-EGS model, and then compare three geothermal systems to select a appropriate reservoir stimulation strategy. We find that the F-EGS model assuming an entire stimulated region significantly exaggerates the heat extraction results. The optimal conditions for P-EGS are low injection rates and short operation times, which is suiTablefor seasonal heating or multi-energy co-generation projects including a thermal recovery phase. Theoretically, E-EGS has better geothermal extraction performance than F-EGS based on existing model assumptions, but its construction feasibility and economics need further exploration. H<sub>2</sub><em>O</em> is more suiTableas a heat exchange fluid in E-EGS than supercritical CO<sub>2</sub>. This study provides a reference for geothermal mining simulation and reservoir stimulation strategy selection.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101137,"journal":{"name":"Rock Mechanics Bulletin","volume":"2 2","pages":"Article 100041"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rock Mechanics Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773230423000148","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Enhanced geothermal systems (EGSs) in this study are classified as fracturing-EGS (F-EGS), pipe-EGS (P-EGS) and excavation-EGS (E-EGS) according to reservoir stimulation strategies. However, the heat extraction performances of three EGSs employing different stimulation strategies are not fully understood. Here, we define the region where the pore pressure increment calculated by a hydraulic fracturing process is higher than rock tensile strength as the stimulation region for establishing a more accurate F-EGS model, and then compare three geothermal systems to select a appropriate reservoir stimulation strategy. We find that the F-EGS model assuming an entire stimulated region significantly exaggerates the heat extraction results. The optimal conditions for P-EGS are low injection rates and short operation times, which is suiTablefor seasonal heating or multi-energy co-generation projects including a thermal recovery phase. Theoretically, E-EGS has better geothermal extraction performance than F-EGS based on existing model assumptions, but its construction feasibility and economics need further exploration. H2O is more suiTableas a heat exchange fluid in E-EGS than supercritical CO2. This study provides a reference for geothermal mining simulation and reservoir stimulation strategy selection.

三种增强型地热系统抽热性能对比研究
本研究中的强化地热系统(EGS)根据储层增产策略分为压裂EGS(F-EGS)、管道EGS(P-EGS)和开挖EGS(E-EGS)。然而,采用不同刺激策略的三种EGS的热提取性能尚不完全清楚。在这里,我们将水力压裂过程计算的孔隙压力增量高于岩石抗拉强度的区域定义为刺激区域,以建立更准确的F-EGS模型,然后比较三个地热系统,选择合适的储层刺激策略。我们发现,假设整个受激区域的F-EGS模型显著夸大了热提取结果。P-EGS的最佳条件是低注入率和短运行时间,这适用于季节性供暖或包括热回收阶段的多能源联合发电项目。理论上,基于现有模型假设,E-EGS比F-EGS具有更好的地热开采性能,但其建设可行性和经济性有待进一步探索。H2O比超临界CO2更适合作为E-EGS中的热交换流体。该研究为地热开采模拟和储层增产策略选择提供了参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信