Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256

www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Thermodynamic evaluation of Denizli Kızıldere

geothermal power plant and its performance improvement
Ahmet Da
€ urk, S
gdasß *, Recep Ozt€ ßu€kr€
u Bekdemir
_
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Yıldız Technical University, 34349 Besiktas, Istanbul, Turkey
Received 18 December 2003; accepted 21 February 2004
Available online 17 April 2004

Abstract
A thermodynamic optimization of the Denizli Kızıldere power plant is performed using real data, and
some important results are obtained. The optimum flashing pressure is found to be 200 kPa. According to
the existing geothermal power plant, 18% power augmentation is provided when the plant operates at this
state. In addition, a new flash-binary model is proposed, and the optimum operating pressure is found that
makes the power output maximum. In this model, the maximum power is found to be 18,238 kWe . This
means that 93.2% more power is obtained than that of the existing plant. Apart from that, the most suitable
working fluid is investigated for the binary cycle.
Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Geothermal power plant; Power generation; Exergy analysis; Denizli

1. Introduction

Turkey is one of the most important countries in terms of geothermal energy potential and
occupies seventh place in the resource and fifth place in direct use. The main application areas of
geothermal energy in Turkey are space and district heating, greenhouse heating, electricity pro-
duction, dry ice production, process heating in the textile industry and balneology. However,
Turkey has only one geothermal power plant that produces electricity with a nominal power 20.4
MWe . The power plant was built in Kızıldere-Denizli in 1984. In spite of the 20.4 MWe plant
capacity, it runs at approximately 10 MWe because of some operation problems due to the high
content of noncondensable gases and dissolved particles of considerable degree.

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-212-259-70-70; fax: +90-212-261-66-59.
E-mail address: dagdas@yildiz.edu.tr (A. Da
gdasß).

0196-8904/$ - see front matter Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2004.02.021
246 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256

Nomenclature

h0 enthalpy at dead state [kJ/kg]

h enthalpy [kJ/kg]
en specific energy [kJ/kg]
E_ n energy rate [kW]
m_ mass flow rate [kg/s]
ek specific exergy [kJ/kg]
E_ k exergy rate [kW]
T0 dead state temperature [°C]
s entropy [kJ/kg K]
s0 entropy at dead state [kJ/kg K]
W_ net net power output [kW]
E_ kR exergy rate of geofluid at reservoir conditions [kW]
E_ nR energy rate of geofluid at reservoir conditions [kW]
E_ nwh energy rate of geofluid at wellhead conditions [kW]
E_ kwh exergy rate of geofluid at wellhead conditions [kW]
gI overall first law efficiency of the power plant [%]
gII overall second law efficiency of the power plant [%]
UNDP United Nations Development Program

With reference to year 1998, electricity production in the world was 14,411 billion kW h (15,342
billion kW h in 2000). The contribution of renewable energy in this total generation is 2826 billion
kW h. Most of this contribution is from hydraulic energy and only 226 billion kW h is supplied
from geothermal, solar, wind, biomass and tidal energy [1]. Total electricity production in Turkey
is 28,332 MW of which 16,623 MW comes from fossil fuel power plants, and 11,673 MW comes
from hydraulic power plants (2001 data). The contribution of renewable energies (except
hydraulic) to total production is 0.12% (36.4 MW) [2]. Turkey has geothermal and wind power
plants as renewable energy sources. The role of geothermal energy will be the most important to
increase the contribution of renewable energies in the future.
Denizli province, which is located in the southwest of Turkey, has a great amount of geo-
thermal resources. Denizli also has many industrial plants, especially in the textile industry, which
is famous. On the other hand, tourism has a remarkable share in the economical activities.
Pamukkale (Hierapolis) and Laodicia are located in this area. Ancient thermal springs and
Roman baths in Pamukkale prove that this region was an important hydrothermal area in the
past. Kızıldere geothermal field is located 35 km west of Denizli and near the B. Menderes River.
The Kızıldere power plant was first installed in 1974 as a pilot power plant of 0.5 MWe . Then, it
was enhanced to 20.4 MWe . The estimated geothermal power potential of the field is approxi-
mately 30 MWe [3].
The noncondensable gases (NCG) and other chemical dissolved compounds in the geofluid give
serious problems. The Kızıldere geofluid contains total dissolved solids of 2500–3200 ppm and its
NCG content in steam is 10–21% (by weight). Most of the NCG content is CO2 (96–99%) [4]. For
 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256 247

these reasons, the plant cannot run at full capacity. On the other hand, scaling is also an
important problem. In this area, there are more than 20 research wells and 9 production wells.
These wells are fairly shallow, their depths varying from 500 to 900 m. The flow rate of such wells
ranges from 25 to 28 kg/s. Downhole temperatures vary from 200 to 210 °C. The geofluid is in
liquid condition in the reservoir. The downhole temperature and pressure of the new R1 well is
242 °C and 3430 kPa, respectively. The depth of the R1 well is 2261 m, and its power capacity is
6–7 MWe . The well produces 63 kg/s geofluid and 15.5 kg/s steam [5].
Investigations have shown that the discharged brine from the separator to the B. Menderes
River has considerably high energy and exergy. Hence, it must be used in a binary and cascaded
system for better energy generation [3,6]. In this study, the use of waste geofluid in a binary cycle is
investigated, and the performance analysis of a combined single flash-binary power plant is
performed. It is the first detailed combined system analysis for the Kızıldere field.

2. Description of power plant operation

The geofluid is in the liquid phase downhole. Its total flow rate and temperature are 264 kg/s
and 200 °C, respectively. The geofluid reaches the wellhead in two phase conditions (liquid-
steam). There is not enough steam to produce electricity in the two phase flow, so it must be
flashed. Flashing is a pressure drop process at constant enthalpy. The purpose of the flashing
process is to supply more steam to the turbine even though at a lower enthalpy (Fig. 1). After the
flashing process, the quality of the steam ðxÞ is 0.108, and the steam is separated from the brine in
the separator. After separation, saturated steam at 148 °C and 28.5 kg/s is obtained. The steam is
passed through a demister, and then, it is sent to a steam turbine–generator group to produce

Fig. 1. Flashing is a constant enthalpy process. After flashing more steam is produced.
248 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256

Fig. 2. A simplified scheme of Denizli-Kızıldere geothermal power plant.

electricity. On the other hand, the liquid leaving the separator is directly discharged to the B.
Menderes River. This process causes important environmental problems. The steam that exits
from the turbine enters a mixing type condenser. The temperature and pressure of the steam at the
outlet of the steam turbine are 48 °C and 10 kPa, respectively.
The condenser cooling water is geofluid, which is cooled through a cooling tower. The flow rate
of cooling water is 2378 kg/s. The cooling tower is of the wet type with four fans to supply the
cooling effect. Noncondensable gases (mainly CO2 ) in the condenser are extracted by two gas
compressors, then the CO2 is sent to a dry ice production plant, property of Karbogaz Co., which
produces 120,000 tonnes of dry ice a year [4]. The layout of the Denizli-Kızıldere geothermal
power plant is shown in Fig. 2.

3. Exergy and energy analysis

In this study, exergy and energy analyses are performed in order to optimize the performance of
the power plant. For the dead state, values of T0 ¼ 16 °C and P0 ¼ 95:9 kPa are derived from local
meteorological stations. The following equations are used in the exergy and energy analyses and
efficiency evaluations [7,8].
Energy equations:
en ¼ h  h0 ð1Þ

E_ n ¼ m_  en ð2Þ
Exergy equations:
ek ¼ h  h0  T0 ðs  s0 Þ ð3Þ

E_ k ¼ m_  ek ð4Þ
 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256 249

The first law efficiencies of the plants are

W_ net
gI ¼ ðat reservoir conditionsÞ ð5Þ
E_ nR

W_ net
gI ¼ ðat wellhead conditionsÞ ð6Þ
E_ nwh
and second law efficiencies are

W_ net
gII ¼ ðat reservoir conditionsÞ ð7Þ
E_ kR

W_ net
gII ¼ ðat wellhead conditionsÞ ð8Þ
E_ kwh
For performance analysis of geothermal power plants, first and second law efficiencies are usually
used, but second law efficiencies are more suitable to assess their performance [9]. Some
researchers indicate that the first law efficiencies of conventional plants compare directly
with second law efficiencies of geothermal plants [10]. In this study, we prepared a mathematical
model of the existing power plant and solved it with a computer. There are some basic
assumptions considered in the analysis. For example, in the existing power plant, each well has
its own separator, but we assumed that all streams are collected and flashed within the same
pressure in a separator. With these assumptions, the computer simulation gave the results shown
in Table 1.
At the Denizli geothermal power plant, the flashing pressure was not optimized so far. For this
reason, we determined the optimum flashing pressure for maximum power.

Table 1
Characteristic values of the Denizli geothermal power plant at major locations
State Temperature Pressure P Mass flow Enthalpy h Entropy s Energy flow Exergy flow
T (°C) (kPa) rate m_ (kg/s) (kJ/kg) (kJ/kg K) rate E_ n (kW) rate E_ k (kW)
0 16 95.90 – 67.23 0.238 0 0
R 200 1553 – 852.10 2.329 207,198 47,734
1 180 1002 264 852.10 2.335 207,198 47,275
2 148 450.80 264 852.10 2.364 207,198 45,056
3 148 450.80 28.50 2743 6.855 76,261 21,761
4 147 438.70 28.50 2742 6.864 76,226 21,651
5 48 10 28.50 2354 7.381 65,190 6360
6 39 6.98 2406.50 163.20 0.558 230,533 8588
7 29 4.00 2378 121.50 0.422 128,947 2557
8 36 10 4.36 9.26 0.468 )252.800 )535.600
9 130 99 4.36 93.46 0.272 114.400 72.610
10 148 450.80 235.50 623.20 1.820 130,937 25,530
250 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256

4. Performance evaluation of the Denizli geothermal power plant

A mathematical model of the existing plant was prepared to compute the performance values.
According to this analysis, the present plant gross power is evaluated to be 10,374 kWe and the net
power reduces to 9440 kWe because of internal uses.
The first and second law efficiencies of the plant are 4.556% and 19.97%, respectively, at
wellhead conditions. These values become 4.556% and 19.78% at reservoir conditions. As seen
from these values, the plant operates at low efficiencies with respect to similar geothermal plants.

4.1. Determination of the optimum flashing pressure

The flashing pressure that makes the power output maximum is obtained to be 200 kPa with the
computer simulation (Fig. 3). The net power rises to 11,140 kWe at this pressure, and this means
that 18% more power could be generated with the existing plant. On the other hand, the first and
second law efficiencies become 5.376% and 23.34%, respectively, at reservoir conditions. The
comparison of net power outputs and efficiencies is given in Table 2.
The geofluid of the Kızıldere field has considerably high amounts of dissolved mineral contents,
so there is a lower limit of flashing pressure. Otherwise, there could be scaling problems but this
phenomenon does not interest us here. In future, it can be solved.

4.2. Analysis of the proposed combined single flash-binary power plant

During the planning period of the plant (1980s), a binary cycle power system was firstly sug-
gested. It was calculated that a binary system would produce 30 MWe power with 2000 t/h
geofluid flow rate. In spite of its lower plant cost, the UNDP (United Nations Development
Program) could not dare to build a binary cycle because there were not enough experiences on it
at that time. For this reason, a plant with a single flash cycle was built and put in operation in
1984. The power plant nominal capacity was 20.4 MWe at a cost of 28.75 million $. In spite of that
capacity, the plant runs at 10 MWe average power [3].

Fig. 3. Computed net power output vs. flashing pressure.

 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256 251

Table 2
Comparison of existing and optimum values of Denizli single flash power plant (efficiencies are given at reservoir
conditions)
Present values Values at optimum flashing
pressure
Power output (kWe ) 9440 11,140
Overall first law efficiency (%) 4.556 5.376
Overall second law efficiency (%) 19.78 23.34

Since building a new plant is not feasible, modification of the existing plant will be more
acceptable. It can be seen from Table 1 that the geofluid leaving the separator has a considerably
high temperature. This fluid is discharged directly to the B. Menderes River without any other use
in the existing plant. The exergy loss is approximately 53.48% of the exergy available at wellhead
conditions (25,530 kW). However, we can use this exergy for increasing the power generation by
adding a binary cycle. The layout of the proposed combined system is shown in Fig. 4. In this
scheme, the geofluid leaving the separator is sent to a heat exchanger to evaporate the working
fluid. After that, the superheated organic vapor goes to a turbine-generator group to generate
electricity with the classic Rankine Cycle.
Isobutane is firstly chosen as the working fluid because of its good thermodynamic charac-
teristics. Since the saturated steam curve of isobutane has a positive slope, the organic vapor is
still at a superheated state at the last stages of the turbine. For this reason, there will not be a
deterioration of the turbine blades because of wet vapor, so the turbine life will be longer.
Characteristic values of the binary cycle are shown in Table 3. On the other hand, calculations
were also performed for different working fluids in the combined cycle in order to select the best
working fluid.
Geofluid heat is transferred to a binary system’s working fluid by means of a heat exchanger.
The inlet temperature of the geofluid to the heat exchanger is assumed as 148 °C. The outlet
temperature and pressure of the isobutane from the heat exchanger is chosen to be 135 °C and

Fig. 4. A simplified scheme of the proposed combined single flash-binary power plant in Denizli.
252 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256

Table 3
Characteristic and assumed values of binary cycle (at optimum conditions with isobutane)
No Phase Temperature (°C) Pressure (kPa) Mass flow rate (kg/s)
11 Sat. liquid (geofluid) 75.32 200 222.3
12 Superheated working fluid 135 1800 130.7
13 Superheated working fluid 93.78 405.6 130.7
14 Liquid working fluid 30 405.6 130.7
15 Liquid working fluid 31.15 1800 130.7
16 Liquid (water) 20 – 2801
17 Liquid (water) 25 – 2801

1000 kPa, respectively. The cooling tower is not used in the proposed plant and cooling water
taken from the B. Menderes River is used for condenser cooling. The inlet temperature of the
cooling water is taken as 20 °C and the outlet temperature is 25 °C. The flow rate of cooling water
becomes 3935 kg/s at this condition. On the other hand, the isentropic efficiency of the binary
cycle turbine is assumed to be 80% and the pump efficiency to be 72%. The pinch-point tem-
perature between the geofluid and working fluid is suggested as 6 °C. At these conditions, the net
power of the binary cycle turbine is 6139 kWe , and the total power output of the combined cycle
becomes 15,875 kWe .
The pressure of the isobutane at the heat exchanger outlet is optimized for maximum net power
output and the results of the calculations are given in Fig. 5. As can be seen from Fig. 5, the
optimum isobutane pressure for maximum power is 1800 kPa.

4.3. Performance analysis of combined geothermal power plant at optimum flashing pressure and
optimum isobutane pressure

With the proposed single flash-binary power plant, the computer simulation of the combined
plant is run again for optimum flashing pressure and optimum isobutane working pressure to
obtain maximum power. We obtained the net power output of the binary turbine as 7098 kWe and

7600
isobutane
7500

7400

7300

7200

7100

7000
1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400

Fig. 5. The optimum pressure of isobutane at the heat exchanger outlet for the proposed combined power plant.
(Optimum pressure that makes net power output maximum in binary cycle.)
 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256 253

Isobutane
250

200

150
12

100
1800 kPa 13

50 16

405.6 kPa 14
15
0

-50
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

-100
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

Fig. 6. Temperature–entropy diagram of the Rankine cycle executed by isobutane based on optimum operating
conditions.

Table 4
The comparison of existing values of single flash power plant and the values of proposed combined power plant at
optimum operating conditions
Present values Combined cycle values at Combined cycle values at
optimum conditionsa optimum conditionsb
Power output (kWe ) 9440 18,238 18,238
Overall first law efficiency (%) 4.556a 8.802 8.802
Overall second law efficiency (%) 19.78a 38.21 38.58
a
At reservoir conditions.
b
At wellhead conditions.

the total power output as 18,238 kWe . The T –s diagram of the Rankine Cycle with isobutane is
shown in Fig. 6. The power difference of the proposed combined cycle plant and existing plant is
8798 kWe . As can be seen from this result, the power output of the combined plant is 93, 2%
higher than that of the existing plant (Table 4). The increase of power output comes from opti-
mization of the single flash plant (1700 kWe ) and the addition of a binary cycle to the existing
plant (7098 kWe ).
According to the analysis, adding a binary system to the existing plant is suitable and feasible
even from an economic point of view. It is estimated that 5.5 million $ annual revenue is possible,
so the plant will be paid back within 3.5 years. On the other hand, the waste of geofluid, which has
75 °C temperature, could be used in greenhouse and district heating. There are large and fruitful
lands nearby the power plant. Although some greenhouses are present around, they are only used
for testing. Also, the towns located nearby such as Buldan, Buharkent, Sarayk€ oy could be heated
by waste fluid. In addition, the waste fluid heat could also be used as process heat in industrial
plants. To do this, the industry area of Denizli should expand west instead of east. In this way, it
will be possible to use the waste heat, reducing the pipeline and pumping cost. In the existing
plant, the waste geofluid is directly discharged to the B. Menderes River, and this causes a serious
chemical and thermal pollution. However, the spent brine contains boron at a high concentration
254 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256

(30 ppm). River water mixed with spent brine is used for irrigation purposes. As boron contents
must be lower than 1 ppm for irrigation [11], the plant is switched off during irrigation time in the
summer [5], causing important losses in electricity production and income. When the power plant
is switched off, the boron concentration of the B. Menderes River was measured before and after
the Kızıldere power plant and found as 0.38 and 1.4 mg/l, respectively [3]. It is clear that, when the
plant is running, the concentration of boron is higher. Thus, waste geofluid must be reinjected to
the reservoir via suitable wells as soon as possible.
Net power output and first and second law efficiencies are evaluated in the proposed combined
cycle power plant when using different working fluids. In addition to isobutane, isopentane and R
114 are also considered as working fluids. Power outputs and efficiencies are calculated for these
fluids too.

4.3.1. Use of isopentane

The proposed combined cycle computer model is operated for isopentane in this step. For the
initial calculation, the temperature and pressure of the working fluid at the heat exchanger outlet
are chosen at 135 °C and 1000 kPa, respectively. According to these assumptions, the optimum
isopentane pressure, which makes the power output maximum, is found to be 600 kPa (Fig. 7).
The flow rate of the isopentane will be 119.5 kg/s at the optimum situation. The efficiencies and
power outputs obtained from this study are given in Table 5.

4.3.2. Use of R 114

When R 114 is used as the working fluid in the binary part of the combined power plant with
the same initial values (135 °C and 1000 kPa), the optimum pressure of R 114 at the heat ex-
changer outlet is found to be 1200 kPa (Fig. 8). The flow rate of R 114 is 340.2 kg/s at optimum
conditions. The efficiencies and power outputs obtained in this alternative at optimum pressure
conditions are given in Table 5.
The efficiencies and power outputs computed in this study are listed in Table 5. As can be seen
by comparison of the results obtained with different working fluids, isobutane is the most con-
venient working fluid for the binary part of the combined power plant.

7500
7000 isopentane

6500
6000
5500
5000
4500
4000
3500
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100

Fig. 7. Optimum isopentane pressure of the heat exchanger outlet that makes net power output maximum.
 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256 255

Table 5
Power output and efficiency values of the combined single flash-binary power plant for different working fluid (at
optimum operating conditions)
Working fluid Binary unit Combined Combined Combined Combined Combined
power output plant total plant first law plant second plant first law plant second
(kWe ) power output efficiency law efficiency efficiency law efficiency
(kWe ) (%)a (%)a (%)b (%)b
Isobutane 7098 18,238 8.802 38.21 8.802 38.58
Isopentane 6760 17,900 8.639 37.5 8.639 37.86
R 114 6999 18,139 8.754 38 8.754 38.37
a
At reservoir conditions.
b
At wellhead conditions.

7500
7400 R114

7300
7200
7100
7000
6900
6800
6700
800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

Fig. 8. Optimum R 114 pressure of the heat exchanger outlet that makes net power output maximum.

5. Conclusions

The existing Denizli single flash geothermal power plant is running at lower efficiencies in
comparison to similar plants. The main reasons for low efficiencies in the Denizli power plant are
old technology and high chemical and noncondensable gas contents of the geofluid. More
importantly, the spent brine of the plant is discharged at 148 °C without using any cascaded
system in the Denizli power plant, whereas this temperature of geofluid becomes the first step of
geothermal utilisation in many countries. At present, it is possible to produce electricity easily
with this fluid by using a binary cycle system. For this reason, we focused on the combined cycle
constituted by adding a binary cycle to the present single flash plant. It is found that the optimum
flashing pressure is 200 kPa. When the plant is operated at this state, it could be possible to gain
approximately 18% of power production. Isobutane is found as the most convenient working fluid
for the binary cycle, and the total maximum power is computed to be 18,238 kWe for this fluid.
The first and second law efficiencies based on wellhead conditions are found to be 8.802% and
38.58%, respectively. These values point out that the proposed combined plant system can be
operated at higher performance characteristics.
256 A. Da

gdasß et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 46 (2005) 245–256

On the other hand, adding the binary cycle to the existing plant can supply 5.5 million $ annual
revenue, and the system will pay back in 3.5 years, which means that the combined plant will be
economical too.

Acknowledgements

_
The authors would like to thank the plant manager, Halil Sarıkurt, and Ismail €
Ozel for pro-
viding technical data of the Kızıldere geothermal power plant. The authors thank also Bahri
S
ß ahin, Arif Hepbasßlı, Ahmet Bay€
ulken and Mehmet Kano
glu for technical informations.

References

[1] Barbier E. Geothermal energy technology and current status: An overview. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2001;6:3–
65.
[2] TEAS, Turkish Electricity Generation and Transmission Company. 2001. Ankara, Turkey, http://www.teas.gov.tr.
[3] Serpen U. Technical and economical evaluations of Kızıldere geothermal reservoir, PhD dissertation prepared for
Istanbul Technical University [in Turkish].
[4] Gokcen G, Ozturk H, Hepbasli A. Overview of Kızıldere geothermal power plant in Turkey. Energy Convers
Manage 2004;45:83–98.
[5] Sarikurt H. Personal communication, 2001.
[6] C
ß ercßi Y. Performance evaluation of a single flash geothermal power plant in Denizli Turkey. Energy 2003;28:27–35.
[7] C
ß engel Y, Boles M. Thermodynamics: an engineering approach. 2nd ed. Istanbul: Literature; 1996.
[8] Kano
glu M, C ß engel Y, Turner R. Incorporating a district heating–cooling system to an existing geothermal power
plant. Trans ASME, J Energy Resour Technol 1998;120(2):179–84.
[9] DiPippo R. Small geothermal power plants––design, performance and economics. GHC Bull 1999;20(2):1–8.
[10] Kano
glu M, C ß engel Y, Turner R. Thermodynamic evaluation of a single flash geothermal power plant in Nevada.
ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, November 17–22, Atlanta, Georgia, USA,
Proceedings: AES, vol. 39, 1996. p. 347–54.
[11] Arıt€urk S, Parlaktuna M. Estimation of silica scaling temperatures of Kızıldere geothermal field effluent Turkey.
Energy Sources 2001;23:529–39.