Paper detail

Numerical simulation of a comparative study on heat extraction from Soultz-sous-Forêts geothermal field using supercritical carbon dioxide and water as a working fluid

Geothermal energy is an infinite energy source for the present human society. Energy extraction from the deep subsurface requires engineering using a working fluid that circulates between well doublet. Due to its thermal properties, CO2 is an ideal option as a heat transfer fluid. By using CO2, working fluid loss is an advantage compared to other working fluids. This study developed a field-scale hydro-thermal model to examine the heat extraction potential from Soultz-sous-Forêts with CO2 as the working fluid. Results are compared for the same scenario with water as the working fluid. A better understanding of the heat extraction mechanism is established by considering the reservoir response and the wellbore heat exchange. Sensitivity analyses are performed for different injection temperatures and flow rates for 50 years. Results show that the wellbore effect is multiple times higher than the reservoir response to the production temperature. Furthermore, lowering the injection temperature eventuates to a smaller temperature reduction at the subsurface, enhancing the overall heat extraction potential with a minor impact on thermal breakthrough. The cold region developed around the injection wellbore may affect the production fluid temperature due to its proximity to the production wellbore. To reach higher heat extraction efficiency, it is essential to use sufficient wellbore spacing. CO2 can be used as working fluid for over 50 years as it does not show significant thermal breakthrough and temperature plume evolution in the reservoir under studied conditions. CO2 shows lower temperature reduction for all injection rates and temperatures for 50 years of operation.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.