Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Energy Procedia 50 (2014) 263 – 269

Thee Internationnal Confereence on Technologies aand Materiaals for Renew

wable Energgy, Environ
nment
and Sustainabillity, TMREE ES14

A techniccal, econ
nomic an
nd envirronmenttal analy ysis of ccombining
geotherrmal eneergy witth carboon sequeestration for hyydrogenn
produuction
Soumia Raahmouni*a, Noureddiine Settoua , Nasreddine Chenno
oufa, Belkhhir Negroua,
b
Mustaphaa Houari .
a
Univv Ouargla, Fac. ddes sciences appliquées, Lab. Prom
motion et valorisaation des ressourrces sahariennes, Ouargla 30 000,, Algeria
b
Halliburton Energy SService. INC, Hasssi Messaoud, Ouuargla 30 000, Alggeria

Absttract

Amo ong numerous ttechniques for the hydrogen production

p withhout harmful emissions,
e especially avoidingg the carbon diioxide
emissions, hydrogenn technologies driven by geothermal energyy represent an attractive
a solution. This paperr is interested in the
proceess by which thhe electricity geenerated from geothermal
g pow ng CO2 as heat transmission flluid is
wer plant that iss operated usin
explooited for hydroogen productioon through watter electrolysis.. A numerical simulation is used to evaluaate the potential for
hydroogen productioon and to esttimate the leveelized cost off electrolytic hydrogen.
h We also present a brief analyssis of
envirronmental issuees, including thhe carbon tax. The
T results show w that the proccess has a goodd potential for ggeothermal hyddrogen
produuction, is capabble of producingg about 22 kg/h
h of electrolyticc hydrogen for the
t geothermal source of carboon dioxide masss flow
rate of
o 40 kg/s and a temperature of o 296 K. In economic regard,, the electric en nergy system co osts are the majjor component of the
total hydrogen prodduction cost (moore than 90%). The estimated ccost of hydrogeen is 8.24 $/kg H2. By includinng the carbon taax, the
cost of hydrogen prooduction becom mes far more coompetitive.
© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
© 20 014 The Authorrs. Published byy Elsevier Ltd.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Selecction and peer-rreview under reesponsibility off the Euro-Mediiterranean Instittute for Sustainable Developm ment (EUMISD)).
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Euro-Mediterranean Institute for Sustainable Development (EUMISD)
Keyw
words: Geothermaal energy; CO2 sequestration; alkalline electrolysis; hhydrogen producction; techno-econ
nomic modeling; environmental im
mpact;
numeerical simulation.

* Corresponding
C autthor. Tel.: +0-0000-000-0000 ; fax: +0-000-000-00000 .
E-mail
E addresss: soumiarahm
mouni@gmaill.com

1876-6102 © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Euro-Mediterranean Institute for Sustainable Development (EUMISD)
doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.06.032
264 Soumia Rahmouni et al. / Energy Procedia 50 (2014) 263 – 269

1. Introduction

The worldwide demand for energy has been increasing rapidly and almost exponentially since the industrial
revolution, according to the International Energy Agency, global total primary energy supply more than doubled
between 1971 and 2011, mainly relying on the utilization of unsustainable energy sources [1]. The depletion of
some primary energy (oil and gas), with an associated acceleration of global warming, as a result of drastically
increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, where the carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most important anthropogenic
GHG, are all factors that have promoted a new environmental policy and accordingly a new energy policy. The
environmental policy is based on reducing emissions, as required by the Kyoto Protocol signed on 11 December
1997 and ratified by hundred ninety-one countries in 2010 [2]. However, technologies that help reduce CO2
emissions from fossil fuels can be a key Carbon abatement option responds to the Kyoto Protocol objective. CO2
capture and storage (CCS) is particularly promising. CCS takes CO2 from large stationary sources and stores it in
deep geological layers to prevent its release into the atmosphere [3]. The sequestration of carbon is applied in the
electricity generation. Previous literature, have considered the technical feasibility of carbon dioxide sequestration in
deep saline aquifers, depleted hydrocarbon fields and exhausted oil and natural gas fields [4-9]. The economic
benefits of process have been studied [10, 11]. The energy policy is based on renewable energy. A transition to a
renewable based energy system is crucial. These energies are clean and inexhaustible. However, obstacles with
renewable electric energy conversion systems are often referred to the intermittency of the energy sources; the need
for their conversion into a versatile energy carrier in its use, storable, transportable and environmentally acceptable
is required. Of all the candidates answering these criteria, hydrogen presents the best assets; it is the most abundant
element in the universe; it is not pollutant [12]. Hydrogen produced from renewable energy sources offers the
promise of a clean and sustainable energy carrier. Hydrogen’s potential production from renewable energy
resources, such as solar, wind using the water electrolysis process has been suggested and investigated in many
research studies e.g., [13-16], a various studies have been reported in the literature on geothermal based hydrogen
production and heat generation using different technologies [17-20]. A few papers have expounded on hydrogen
production from CO2-based geothermal systems through water electrolysis [21]. The objective of this work is to
present a theoretical study of technical, economical and environmental analysis of the implementation an installation
of massive hydrogen production using a geothermal system that uses carbon dioxide as a working fluid to power an
industrial alkaline electrolyser in In Salah region.

Nomenclature

C Cost, $
CTA Total hydrogen production cost, $/kgH2
E Geothermal energy production, kWh
LEC Levelized Electricity Cost, $/kWh
LHV Hydrogen Lower Heating value, 33.31 kWh/kg
M Hydrogen gas mass produced, kg
N Number of well
T Installation life-time, year

Greek letters
ߟ Efficiency
߬ Discount rate, 6%

Subscripts
EGS Enhanced Geothermal System
El Electrolyser
H2 Hydrogen
i Investment
max Maximum
 Soumia Rahmouni et al. / Energy Procedia 50 (2014) 263 – 269 265

o Operatinng
r Replacem ment
t Considerred year
u unit, useeful

2. Hydrogen
H prod
duction at th
he local geotheermal power plant

2.1. System descriiption

The
T system w which we havee investigatedd in this studyy is an installlation of massive hydrogenn production. It is
mainnly composedd of two subsystems: the first
f is for thee production of
o renewable electric energgy; presented by a
geotthermal system m of electricity production using carboon dioxide as working flu uid and, the second part is an
electtrolysis system
m (hydrogen storage
s is not considered).
c T
The plant desiign basis is shown in Fig.1.

Geeothermal fluid CO
C 2 Water

Geothermal Electricity
Electrolysser
power plant

H2 O2
Fig. 1. Conceptual pro
ocess design for ggeothermal-based
d hydrogen produ
uction.

In
I this processs, the geotherm mal heat is firrst converted to mechanicaal work throug gh a geotherm mally driven power
p
plan
nt to produce eelectricity. Thhe electricity generated
g couuld then be useed for water electrolysis
e syystem for hydrrogen
prod
duction via alkkaline electrollysis by passinng electricity tthrough two electrodes in water.
w

2.1.1
1. Energy Reccovery from CO
C 2-based Geo
othermal

The
T basic systtem is a projeect to re-injecct the capturedd CO2 into reeservoir aquifeer. The CO2 iis injected thrrough
threee horizontal w
wells at up to 1800
1 m depthh in 20 m thickk carboniferou
us sandstone of
o 10 mD perm meability and 15%
poro
osity, which iss very similar to potential deeep saline CO
O2 storage form
mations in manny parts in thee world. The gas
g is
prod
duced in five wwells (see Fig..2) [22].

Fig. 2. Schem
matic representattion of enhanced geothermal
g system
m (EGS) using CO
C 2 as a geotherm
mal fluid in Krechhba field [22].
266 Soumia Rahmouni et al. / Energy Procedia 50 (2014) 263 – 269

Approximately, 1.2 million tons per year of CO2 has been removed, compressed and injected at a depth of
1800m. The total amount of CO2 injected into the geothermal well is 40 kg/s at a pressure of 64 bar and at a
temperature of 296 K. The thermal gradient in the geothermal well is assumed to be 50 °C/km [23]. The analysis
described in this paper is based on steady-state operation. The reservoir has been assumed to be homogenous and
filled with Carbone dioxide. Also, no losses to the surroundings have been taken into account [24]. The results
presented here were calculated using MATLAB. The process enabled to extract a calorific energy from the reservoir
equal to 7.68 MWth, which corresponds to an electrical energy output of the EGS power plant equal to 1.09 MWe,
which gives an efficiency of 14.28%. With a runtime of 7750 hours per year, the annual electrical energy produced
by the system is 8.5 GWh.

2.1.2. Electrolysis system

The generated eclectic by the geothermal energy system will be sent to the electrolyser to drive the electrolysis
process, as represented in Fig. 1. When the net power produced is used to split the water molecules into their
elements hydrogen and oxygen. Different kinds of water electrolyser exist, with different advancements levels; here
an alkaline electrolyser has been used. Alkaline electrolyser is considered the most mature technology; it is suited
for stationary and a significant operating record in industrial applications that allows remote operation [12]. It is one
of the easiest methods for hydrogen production, offering the advantage of simplicity. The challenges for widespread
use of water electrolysis are to reduce energy consumption, cost and maintenance and to increase energy efficiency,
reliability, durability and safety [17, 25]. The hydrogen produced with high purity can then be used for later
purposes. In this analysis, an electrolyser with power capacity of 52.5 kWh/kg is considered (which is equivalent to
about 75% in efficiency) [26]. The computation of the hydrogen mass produced from geothermal energy is
described as follow:
‫ܧ‬ா௟ ߟ௘௟ ‫ܧ‬ாீௌ
‫ܯ‬ுమ ൌ ൌ (1)
‫ܸܪܮ‬ுమ ‫ܸܪܮ‬ுమ

The lower heating value LHV of the produced hydrogen is taken as 33.31 kWh/kg. The general procedure
adopted to evaluate the hydrogen production from the proposed system is illustrates in Fig. 3.
Petro-physical data of the site

Evaluation of electrical energy

Mass flow of the produced by the geothermal
injected CO2 power plant for water
electrolysis

Evaluation of hydrogen Electrolyser

electrolysis production characteristics

Fig. 3. Diagram explaining the assessment of geothermal hydrogen production.

3. Economic analysis

In order to evaluate the economic performance of geothermal based hydrogen system, a techno-economic model
has to evaluate the capital costs and any on-going costs associated with each component. The total cost of producing
hydrogen ($/kg H2) is expressed with the following formula:
σ೅
೟సబ ሾሺ஼೔ǡಶ೗ ା஼೚ǡಶ೗ ା ஼ೝǡಶ೗ ሻାሺ஼೔ǡಶಸೄ ା஼೚ǡಶಸೄ ሻሿ ሺଵାఛሻ
ష೟
‫ܣܶܥ‬ுమ ൌ σ೅ ሺଵାఛሻష೟ ሿ
(2)
೟సబ ሾெ ಹ మ ǡ೟

Where ߬ is the discount rate and set as 6%, and ܶ is the plant life time and set as 50 year. The numerator has two
 Soumia Rahmouni et al. / Energy Procedia 50 (2014) 263 – 269 267

main groups of factors. The first being the investment cost of electrolyser; comprises the capital cost of electrolyser,
the operating cost and replacement cost , and the second; the investment cost of geothermal power plant; represented
by the summation of the capital and operating costs of the process. The denominator of the function is the annual net
hydrogen production (‫ܯ‬ுమǡ௧ (kgH2/year)) [27]. Technical and economical data for determination of the production
cost were obtained from various sources.

3.1. Investment cost of geothermal power plant

The capital cost of geothermal system can be divided into three major components, specifically:

x The power plant, CO2 capture system;

x A means of transporting the captured CO2;
x A storage reservoir and injection system.

The technical models and correlations for estimating the engineering and infrastructure requirements of the
process were described in many reports and researches [28-30]. In this analysis, only the costs of transportation and
storage are considered for one raison that in the In Salah project both the power plant and capture of carbon dioxide
are already designed. The cost of transportation includes the capital cost for the pipeline and the cost of storage
includes the cost of the injection system including the number of injection wells and energy conversion system. The
cost of the pipeline varies depending on the distance between compression station and site location. The annual
operating cost of the sequestration project can be approximated at 5–10% of the total capital cost [30]. The
economic performance is reduced at higher pipeline length and higher number of injection well as shown Fig. 4.




   
1 1 1 1

   









K



ᤢ

:
N







&
ᤡ

(
/

























3
L
S
H
O
L
Q
H

O
H
Q
J
W
K


N
P

ᤡ ᤢ

Fig. 4. Sensitivity of Levelized Cost of energy and number of injection well at different pipeline length.

3.2. Investment cost, of electrolysis system

The investment cost of the electrolyser includes the capital cost of electrolyser,‫ܥ‬௜ǡா௟ , production maintenance
costs, ‫ܥ‬௢ǡா௟ , and replacement cost, ‫ܥ‬௥ǡா௟ [31]. The electrolyser capital cost is determined by the required maximum
hydrogen production rate,‫ܯ‬ுమǡ௠௔௫ , the electrolyser useful efficiency, ߟ௨ , and the estimated specific unit cost of
electrolyser per kWe at nominal production, ‫ܥ‬௨ǡா௟ .
ெಹమ ǡ೘ೌೣ
‫ܥ‬௜ǡா௟ ൌ ‫ܥ‬௨ǡா௟ (3)
ఎೠǡಶ೗

Electrolyser economic parameters are the operating capacity factor as 87.5% with replacement interval of 7
years. The operation cost and replacement cost are the 2% and 25% of direct installed capital [32, 33].
268 Soumia Rahmouni et al. / Energy Procedia 50 (2014) 263 – 269

4%

Electrolysis system

Geothermal power plant

96%

Fig. 5. Hydrogen production cost breakdown.

This pie chart shows the breakdown of the costs of the hydrogen production portion of the forecourt (8.24 $/kg
of hydrogen). This shows that 96% of the cost is from the cost of the electricity needed and all the costs of
electrolyser account for only 4% of the hydrogen production cost.

4. Environmental benefits

The production and use of fossil fuel energy for electricity and heat production cause more environmental
damage than any other activity. The climate scientists stated that carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere
have been increasing significantly over the past century. For Algeria, a total CO2 emission from electricity and heat
production is 28.5 Mt in 2011 [1]. CO2-based geothermal system has great potential for reducing carbon emissions
and to generate sustainable, renewable electricity. This electric energy can be used in an electrolysis system to
produce green hydrogen, which is a major environmental benefit. From a purely economic standpoint, the aim of
Kyoto protocol is to tackle the threat of climate change by establishing an efficient regulatory framework that sets an
international price on emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. It proposed a tax of carbon, reaching values
between 12 and 50 $ per kg of carbon [2]. By including a value of 12 $/kg in the pricing of new power generation,
the levelized cost of both electricity and hydrogen production is presented in Tab.1.

Table 1. Variation of levelized costs with proposed carbon tax

Without carbon tax With imposed carbon tax
LEC ($/kWh) 0.16 0.06
CTA ($/kg H2) 8.24 3.85

It is interesting to observe that the cost of geothermal energy becomes far more competitive. The estimate
hydrogen production cost decrease with 46% when environmental costs are included. In short, a carbon tax is
improving the competitiveness of geothermal power enormously.

5. Conclusion

Production of hydrogen from geothermal energy with capture and sequestration of CO2 offers a route toward
near zero emissions in production. In the present study, the potential of power and hydrogen production from
geothermal energy using carbon dioxide as working fluid coupled with electrolysis system is investigated. Economic
performance of geothermal-based hydrogen production system is examined for specific case study of In Salah
project. Numerical simulation results presented in this paper confirm that the installation is capable to produce about
22 kg/h of electrolytic hydrogen for the geothermal source of carbon dioxide mass flow rate of 40 kg/s and a
temperature of 296 K. The hydrogen production cost is highly sensitive to geothermal power plant costs, when the
transport costs might vary by 100% depending on the supposed length of the pipeline. The estimated cost of
hydrogen is 8.24 $/kg H2. There is clear evidence that geothermal-based hydrogen production system is one of the
most environmentally forms of energy available, should be given much higher priority when future hydrogen
 Soumia Rahmouni et al. / Energy Procedia 50 (2014) 263 – 269 269

generation planning decision is made.

References

[1] IEA statistics. CO2 emissions from fuel combustion HIGHLIGHTS. 2103 ed. Paris: France; 2013.
[2] Grubb M. The Economics of the Kyoto Protocol. WORLD ECONOMICS. Vol. 4. No. 3. July–September 2003.
[3] IEA. CO2 capture and storage: A key carbon abetment option. Paris: France; 2008.
[4] Chennouf N, Negrou B, Dokkar B, Settou N. Valuation and estimation of geothermal electricity production using carbon dioxide as
working fluid in the south of Algeria. Energy Procedia 36 ; 2013. p.967 – 976.
[5] Atrens A.D, Gurgenci H, Rudolph V. Electricity generation using a carbon-dioxide thermosiphon. Geothermics 39; 2010. p.161–169.
[6] Pruess K. Enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) using CO2 as working fluid—A novel approach for generating renewable energy with
simultaneous sequestration of carbon. Geothermics 35; 2006. p.351–367.
[7] Pruess K. On production behavior of enhanced geothermal systems with CO2 as working fluid. Energy Conversion and Management
49 ; 2008. p.1446–1454.
[8] Procesi M, Cantucci B, Buttinelli M, Armezzani G, Quattrocchi F, Boschi F. Strategic use of the underground in an energy mix plan:
Synergies among CO2, CH4 geological storage and geothermal energy. Latium Region case study (Central Italy). Applied Energy
110 ; 2013. p.104–131.
[9] Mohan A.R, Turaga U, Shembekar V, Elsworth D, Pisupati S.V. Utilization of carbon dioxide from coal-based power plants as a heat
transfer fluid for electricity generation in enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). Energy 57; 2013. p.505-512.
[10] Jimmy B. Randolpha L, Saar M.O. Coupling carbon dioxide sequestration with geothermal energy capture in naturally permeable,
porous geologic formations: Implications for CO2 sequestration. Energy Procedia 4; 2011.p.2206–2213.
[11] Atrens A.D, Gurgenci H and Rudolph V. Economic Analysis of CO2 Thermosiphon. Proceedings World Geothermal Congress.
Indonesia: Bali; 2010.
[12] IEA. Hydrogen production and storage: R&D Priorities and Gaps. Paris: France; 2006.
[13] Gibson T.L, Kelly N.A. Optimization of solar powered hydrogen production using photovoltaic electrolysis devices. Int. Journal of
hydrogen energy 33 ; 2008. p. 5931-5940.
[14] Artuso P, Zuccari F, Orecchini F. Techno-economic optimisation of hydrogen production by PV-electrolysis: “RenHydrogen”
simulation program. Int. Journal of hydrogen energy 36; 2011. p. 1371-1381.
[15] Negrou B, Settou N, Chennouf N, Dokkar B. Valuation and development of the solar hydrogen production. Int. Journal of hydrogen
energy 36; 2011.p.4110-4116.
[16] Zhifanga S, Shijieb F, Cunman Z. Wind Farm Combined With Hydrogen Production System Evaluation. Energy Procedia 14; 2012.
p.160 – 166.
[17] Tolga Balta M, Dincer I, Hepbasli A. Potential methods for geothermal-based hydrogen production. Int. Journal of hydrogen energy x
xx; 2009. p. 1-13.
[18] Ouali S, Chader S, Belhamel M, Benziada M. The exploitation of hydrogen sulfide for hydrogen production in geothermal areas. .
Int. Journal of hydrogen energy x xx; 2010. p. 1-7.
[19] Kanoglu M, Bolatturk A, Yilmaz C. Thermodynamic analysis of models used in hydrogen production by geothermal energy. Int.
Journal of hydrogen energy 35; 2010. p. 8783-8791.
[20] Tolga Balta M, Dincer I, Hepbasli A. Thermodynamic assessment of geothermal energy use in hydrogen production. Int. Journal of
hydrogen energy 34; 2009. p. 2925-2939.
[21] AlZaharani A, Dincer I, Naterer G.F. Performance evaluation of a geothermal based integrated system for power, hydrogen and heat
generation. Int. Journal of hydrogen energy 38; 2013. p. 14505-14511.
[22] Deflandre J.P, Estublier A, Baroni A, Daniel J.M, Adjémian F. In Salah CO2 injection modeling: a preliminary approach to predict
short term reservoir behavior. Energy Procedia 4; 2011. p. 3574–3581.
[23] Himri Y, Malik A.S, Boudghene Stambouli A, Himri S, Draoui B. Review and use of the Algerian renewable energy for sustainable
development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13; 2009. p. 1584–1591.
[24] Janse D.H.M. Combining geothermal energy with CO2 storage Feasibility study of low temperature geothermal electricity production
using carbon dioxide as working and storage fluid. Sustainable development-Track energy and resources, University Utrecht ; 2010.
[25] Zeng K, Zhang D. Recent progress in alkaline water electrolysis for hydrogen production and applications. Progress in Energy and
Combustion Science 36 ; 2010.p.307–326.
[26] http://www.h2logic.com/com
[27] Sigurvinssona J, Mansillaa C, Loverab P, Werkoff F. Can high temperature steam electrolysis function with geothermal heat?.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32; 2007. p.1174 – 1182.
[28] Klemes J, Bulatov I, Cockerill T. Techno-economic modelling and cost functions of CO2 capture processes. Computers and Chemical
Engineering 31; 2007. p. 445–455.
[29] McCollum D.L, Ogden J.M. Techno-Economic Models for Carbon Dioxide Compression, Transport, and Storage & Correlations for
Estimating Carbon Dioxide Density and Viscosity. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis; 2006. 87p.
[30] Shafeen A, Croiset E, Douglas P.L, Chatzis I. CO2 sequestration in Ontario, Canada. Part II: cost estimation. Energy Conversion and
Management 45 ; 2004. p. 3207–3217.
[31] NREL. Current (2009) state_of_the_art hydrogen production cost estimate using water electrolysis. Colorado; 2009, 51p.
[32] Prince Richard S. A techno-economic analysis of decentralized electrolytic hydrogen production for fuel cell vehicles. Laval
University ; 1996, 200p.
[33] Saur G, Ramsden T. Wind electrolysis: hydrogen cost optimization. Colorado; 2011. 31p.