Applied Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1537–1544

www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Solar–geothermal hybrid system

Álvaro Lentz *, Rafael Almanza
Instituto de Ingenierı́a, UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, Edificio 12, 04510 México DF, Mexico

Received 15 December 2004; accepted 2 December 2005

Available online 25 January 2006

Abstract

The Cerro Prieto Geothermal Power Plant is located in the northwest of Mexico, lat. 32°39 0 , long. 115°21 0 in the northern hemisphere.
A solar–geothermal hybrid system is proposed in order to increase the steam flow during the present geothermal cycle, adding a solar
field of parabolic trough concentrators. Energy is supplied to the geothermal flow from wells in order to increase the steam generation
rate. This configuration will increase the capacity factor of the system by generating additional steam during the peak demand hours. The
parabolic trough solar field is evaluated in North–South and East–West orientation collector alignments. A proposal to obtain an
increase of 10% in steam flow is evaluated, as the increase in flow is limited by the content of dissolved salts, so as to avoid a liquid phase
with high salt concentrations. The size of the parabolic troughs field was obtained.
Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Solar; Geothermal; Direct steam generation; Hybrid system

1. Introduction
Cerro Prieto is the most important geothermal field in
Mexico; this area has the highest levels of irradiance in
the country. These levels of irradiance make it feasible to
set up a solar collector field in a geothermal field to create
a hybrid system in order to increase electricity production
throughout the day. The average beam irradiance through-
out the year is 734 W/m2. Some solar–geothermal hybrid
systems have been proposed, like that of Archibald and
Karagiorgas [1,2], who report heating and cooling of build-
ings and geothermal solar desalination as discussed by
Garcı́a-Rodrı́guez [3]. However, this is the first time that
a solar–geothermal system has been proposed for electric-
ity generation.
The Cerro Prieto (CP) geothermal fields consist of four
units: CPI, CPII, CPIII and CPIV; CPIV started commer-
cial operation in 2000, while the others have been operating
since 1973. The most recent facility (CPIV) in this geother-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +52 55 56228139; fax +52 55 56228137.
E-mail address: alh@pumas.iingen.unam.mx (Á. Lentz).
mal field has a capacity of 100 MWe, with four 25 MW tur-
bines. Each unit has a different separation pressure to feed
steam to the unit; CPII and CPIII have a separation pres-
sure of 13 bar, while Cerro Prieto IV has 15 bar.
The hybrid system is proposed in order to increase the
steam flow available for power generation. The steam is
provided by many wells in Cerro Prieto IV, with different
thermodynamic properties; the geothermal wells have flows
that are a mixture of water (brine) and steam, with 34%
average steam quality. Sometimes, for different reasons,
the wells are out of service and do not provide steam to
the cycle, so the steam flow decreases; in addition, the
wells’ production decreases with time. Throughout the
summer, demand increases because the ambient tempera-
ture can reach 45 °C; therefore, the use of air conditioning
in this zone is necessary, which increases the power
demand. The reason for this project is to use the solar
resource to meet the increased power demand.
As a first step, it is necessary to evaluate whether the solar
resource can be useful for this purpose. In this article, some
preliminary evaluations are presented. It is known that the
state-of-the-art technology to generate steam directly at

1359-4311/$ - see front matter Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2005.12.008
1538 Á. Lentz, R. Almanza / Applied Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1537–1544
Nomenclature
h angle of incidence of beam irradiance on a sur-
face [°]
d solar declination [°]
/ latitude [°]
x hour angle [°]
b slope [°]
c surface azimuth angle [°]
q heat [kJ]
m_ mass flow [kg/s]
s collector area [m2]
G effective solar beam irradiance onto the collector
area [W/m2]
the absorbers of the parabolic troughs is progressing very
fast, and several problems have yet to be resolved.
This new technology is already known as direct steam
generation (DSG). Using this university’s solar thermal
plant for study, our group has published several papers
related to this subject [4,5]. Other groups in Spain and Ger-
many have been working on the same subject [6–8] for the
last several years. Martinez and Almanza [9] have studied
the thermal behavior of an absorber pipe when it conducts
a two-phase water flow with annular pattern and is warmed
up underneath by concentrated solar irradiance in the DSG
process. This research develops both theoretical and exper-
imental aspects of that process.
The Mexican Electricity Federal Commission (CFE),
which is owned by the government, has been in contact
with our group in order to study the technical and econom-
ical feasibility of a hybrid solar–geothermal system. There-
fore, the first part of this study is presented in this paper.
Two proposals have been studied up to now: the first
option consists of adding a solar field between the well
and the first separator; the second option consists of adding
a solar field between the first and second separators. Each
option must be evaluated with north–south (N–S), and
east–west (E–W) orientation alignments of the solar con-
centrators, comparing the steam production in both cases,
as seen in Fig. 3.
The parabolic trough collector efficiency with direct
steam generation from the absorbers [10–12] used for this
proposal was 70% [13]. It is desirable to obtain the steam
quantity generated by a solar field inserted into the hybrid
system throughout the year.
The main limitations up to now have been determining
the real efficiency of two-phase flow, mainly in annular flow
with parabolic troughs, in order to get a reliable evalua-
tion. Another important aspect is the composition of the
geothermal flow, which has dissolved salt and silica [14,
15]; the geothermal facilities have considerable experience
in using the brine flow, so it is not considered an impedi-
ment in the development of a solar–geothermal hybrid
system.
g efficiency
Dh enthalpy increment [kJ/kg]
h mixture enthalpy [kJ/kg]
hf liquid enthalpy [kJ/kg]
hfg vaporization enthalpy [kJ/kg]
(N–S) north–south alignment
(E–W) east–west alignment
CFE Mexican Electricity Federal Commission
SEGs solar electric generation systems
DISS direct solar steam
2. The geothermal cycle
The geothermal resource takes advantage of heat and
water somewhere underground [14], which is known as a
geothermal resource. Geothermal energy is the heat from
the Earth’s nucleus. The geothermal cycle in Cerro Prieto
is like any conventional open Rankine cycle for electricity
generation, but with the difference that steam is supplied
by geothermal wells. In some cases, the wells can provide
a mixture of liquid and steam, but, in this case, the mixture
is sent to a separator that feeds steam to the turbine, and
the remaining liquid is sent either to a second separation
system or to an evaporation pond.
The silica content in geothermal brine causes problems
for scaling at the power facility. At the well-head, the pres-
sure is, on average, 50 bar, in 1600 B tube; the primary
steam is flashed and separated at about 15 bar pressure.
Secondary steam is produced at lower pressure, 4.3 bar,
in another flash separator stage. The waste brine thus pro-
duced has a considerably higher concentration of dissolved
solids than the original reservoir fluid. In addition to the
concentrating effect, the flash process also reduces the fluid
temperature from 300 °C in the reservoir to about 130 °C
at the secondary flash-separation plant.
Cerro Prieto brine is at solubility equilibrium with
respect to quartz at the reservoir conditions. This equilib-
rium is disturbed when the geothermal fluid is extracted,
mainly due to the temperature drop caused by the flashing
process. At the beginning of the flash process, the brine
becomes supersaturated with respect to quartz. With large
temperature changes, the brine also becomes saturated with
respect to amorphous silica [16].
Techniques to prevent scale deposition include restricting
brine temperature to above silica saturation as well as acidi-
fication of brine phase in order to inhibit silica deposition.
3. The hybrid system
The solar–geothermal hybrid system uses two energy
resources to provide steam to a turbine to generate electric-
 Á. Lentz, R. Almanza / Applied Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1537–1544
Fig. 1. First alternative Cerro Prieto geothermal cycle diagram.
ity in a Rankine cycle. Using the Cerro Prieto geo-thermo-
electric cycle, two alternatives are presented by adding a
concentrator solar field for such system.
The first alternative, shown in Fig. 1, sets the solar field
between the wells and the first separator; the second alter-
native, shown in Fig. 2, sets the solar field between the first
and the second separator.
The solar field consists of a parabolic trough field with
LS-3 collectors such as the one used in the SEGS plants
[13,17]. The flow from the wells passes through the absor-
ber pipe of the solar concentrators using direct steam gen-
eration DGS [7,12] to generate steam. In this first
alternative, the flow is a mixture of liquid and steam from
the wells, while in the second one only liquid from the first
separator discharge is used.
4. Methodology
The Cerro Prieto geothermal steam is provided by many
wells with different qualities and pressures. For that reason,
an average of those qualities and pressures was used. The
flow obtained from the wells is a mixture of liquid and
vapor, which is the reason why it is necessary to separate
them to obtain the steam. The facility used in this process,
known as Cerro Prieto IV, is newer than the other facilities.
Fig. 2. Second alternative Cerro Prieto geothermal cycle diagram.
1539
Two options are proposed in order to add the concen-
trator solar fields. In each case, the area for the solar field
will be evaluated.
The equation relating the angle of incidence of beam
irradiance on a surface (h) is
cos h ¼ sin d sin / cos b  sin d cos / sin b cos c
þ cos d cos / cos b cos x
þ cos d sin / sin b cos c cos x
þ cos d sin b sin c sin x ð1Þ
Duffie and Beckman [18] evaluated different equations
relating the angle of incidence of beam irradiance on the
solar collectors (h); there are several cases of the equations
for tracking surfaces.
For horizontal surfaces b = 0, Eq. (1) is simplified. For
parabolic trough collectors in the east–west and north–
south alignments, the following equations were used for
all angles associated with such collectors:
cos h ¼ ð1  cos2 d sin2 xÞ1=2 ð2Þ
2 2 2 1=2
cos h ¼ ðcos hz þ cos d sin xÞ ð3Þ
where
hz ¼ sin d sin / þ cos d cos / cos x ð4Þ
Eq. (2) is used in an east–west (E–W) alignment, while
Eq. (3) is used for north–south (N–S) alignment.
The average beam irradiance for each hour of the day
and for all days of the year was obtained by multiplying
by the correspondent cos h to obtain the effective beam irra-
diance onto the collector surface. Figs. 4–7 show data from
four years of steam production.
To obtain the dimensions of the solar field, it is neces-
sary to calculate the heat required (q), as shown in Eq.
(5), which is a function of mass flow ðmÞ _ and the increase
of enthalpy (Dh). This enthalpy increase corresponds to a
1540 Á. Lentz, R. Almanza / Applied Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1537–1544
10% increase of steam in order to eliminate any problem
related to scaling. The flow from the well has a steam part
with low salt concentration and another liquid part with
high salt concentration [19].
The flow from the wells has a very low concentration of
salts (<2%); for this reason, it is possible to use the thermo-
dynamic properties of water [11].
q ¼ mðDhÞ
_ ð5Þ
The steam properties are calculated at a pressure of the
separator. The kilograms per second (kg/s) generated by
the solar field are assumed at the calculated pressure.
To obtain the quality of the steam, the following equa-
tion was used:
h  hf
x¼ ð6Þ
hfg
The enthalpy is given by
h ¼ hf þ xðhfg Þ ð7Þ
The quality increase (x 0 ) was developed using the follow-
ing equation:
sGg
þ h  hf
x0 ¼ m_
ð8Þ
hfg
It is possible to calculate the steam flow generated by a
solar field ðm_ v Þ by multiplying the total inlet flow ðmÞ
_ by the
difference between two qualities at separation pressure.
m_ v ¼ ðx0  xÞm_ ð9Þ
It is possible to obtain the steam flow quality with an
increment of 10% points via Eq. (6), using values of effec-
tive beam irradiance, collector area, mixture enthalpy,
liquid enthalpy and vaporization enthalpy; this increment
depends on the solar beam irradiance.
The steam generated for the solar geothermal hybrid sys-
tem is obtained from Eq. (9) by the difference between qual-
ities of the original flow and the flow with the increment,
plus the mass flow from wells or the second separator.
The steam flow generated will be evaluated with two
solar field orientations in one direction (N–S), Fig. 3(a),
Fig. 3. Parabolic trough solar field orientation: (a) N–S alignment; (b) E–W alignment.
and in the other direction (E–W), Fig. 3(b). The solar irra-
diance data were calculated half an hour before and half an
hour after as a representative hour, obtaining an average
for the respective hour. The irradiance data was provided
by the CFE (the Mexican Electricity Federal Commission).
For every hour of the year, the steam generation for the
hybrid system in Cerro Prieto was evaluated with solar
beam irradiance.
5. Alternatives
5.1. First alternative
The wells that feed steam to Cerro Prieto IV have an
average well pressure of 50 bar, point 1.1, as shown in
Fig. 1; after the separator, the pressure is lower, 15 bar,
point 1.2. This is the separation pressure. For example, Well
408 at Cerro Prieto IV has an enthalpy of 1566.1 kJ/k, so,
using Eq. (6), the quality is 37.1, 15 bar separation pressure,
point 1.2; 10 points of quality must be increased, from 37.1
to 47.1. The steam well flow is 166.2 tons/h, equivalent to
44.92 kg/s.
The value of the effective beam irradiance considered
was 900 W/m2 and 0.7 of solar field thermal efficiency
[12]. The 900 W/m2 corresponds to the maximum value
of beam irradiance multiplied by the angle of incidence
(cos h) in both concentrator alignments, so with this value
the highest steam production will result.
The steam quality increase will depend on the irradiance
values throughout day, corresponding to the average of
each hour. The steam flow generated by the solar field
was obtained via Eq. (9), with a well quality of 37.1.
5.2. Second alternative
As a second option, the solar field is located between the
first and second separators. The first separator pressure is
15 bar, point 2.2, as shown in Fig. 2. The second separator
pressure is 4.3 bar, point 2.3. Using the residual liquid from
the first separator flow, 844.2 kJ/kg enthalpy, in point 2.3
the quality is 15.7. The mass flow from the well is
 Á. Lentz, R. Almanza / Applied Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1537–1544 1541

44.9 kg/s, and the flow from the first separator is 27.9 kg/s,
so the separated water flow is lower because part of it in the
flow was sent to the turbine.
As in the first option, the steam quality depends on the
solar beam irradiance, and the steam flow generated is
defined by the differences in qualities multiplied by mass
flow.

6. Results

6.1. First alternative

The enthalpy with the increment in 10 points in steam

quality using Eq. (7) is 1760.5 kJ/kg, so the Dh is
194.4 kJ/kg. The required solar concentrator area is
13,863 m2, so 26 LS-3 collectors are needed (each
545 m2), giving an area of 14,170 m2.
Fig. 4 shows for the first alternative with N–S alignment
and E–W alignment. It is possible to observe an estimate of
Fig. 4. Steam production for the first alternative by N–S alignment and
average steam production in kilograms per hour for Janu- E–W alignment.
ary, June and September.
Fig. 4 shows that June has the highest production for the It is possible to see variations throughout the day in
hybrid system and January has the lowest production. both figures presented, but the highest variations for the
There is a high variation in steam production between these steam production are for the E–W alignment.
months. Fig. 5 shows the steam production for all days through-
Fig. 4 also shows that for the E–W alignment, June has out the year with a north–south orientation field alignment,
the highest production and January has the lowest produc- showing all-day production in kilograms per second (kg/s)
tion, with a difference of less than 50% in steam production at different hours throughout the day.
between these months.

5.000
4.500
4.000
3.500
1
36 3.000
Kg/s

71 2.500
106 2.000
141 1.500
176 1.000
D 211 0.500
ay
0.000
246
18:00
17:00

281
16:00
15:00
14:00
13:00

316
12:00
11:00
10:00

351
9:00

ur
8:00

Ho
7:00
6:00

6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

Fig. 5. Annual steam production in N–S alignment for the first alternative.
1542 Á. Lentz, R. Almanza / Applied Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1537–1544

6.000

5.000

1 4.000
34

Kg/s
67 3.000
100
133 2.000
166
1.000
199
Da

232 0.000
y

18:00
265

17:00
16:00
15:00
298

14:00
13:00
12:00
331

11:00
10:00
9:00

r
Hou
8:00

364
7:00
6:00

6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00

Fig. 6. Annual steam production in E–W alignment for the first alternative.

Fig. 6 shows the steam production for all days of the

year, but with an east–west orientation field alignment.
All-day production in kilograms per hour (kg/h) for differ-
ent hours of the day is shown.

6.2. Second alternative

In the second option, the second separator pressure is

4.3 bar, point 2.2, as shown in Fig. 2, with quality of
15.7. At this point the quality is increased in 10 points.
With Eq. (7), the resultant enthalpy is 997.0 kJ/kg, and
Dh equals 152.8 kJ/kg. This alternative requires
4316.1 kJ/s of heat and 6851 m2 of mirrors. Then a
7085 m2 solar field with thirteen LS-3 collectors is pro-
posed. If this steam is used, it needs to be sent to a low
pressure stage.
Fig. 7 shows the second alternative with N–S alignment
and E–W alignment. It can be observed that the average
steam production in kilograms per hour for January, June
and September; is similar to that shown in Fig. 4, but the Fig. 7. Steam production for the second alternative by N–S alignment and
difference is that the production is lower than in the first E–W alignment.
alternative, due to lower flow.

6.3. N–S and E–W alignments
Table 1 shows the total monthly production in kilo-
grams of steam generated over four months, one for every
season of the year. It can be seen that January has the low-
est steam production and June the highest production. The
E–W alignment does not have very high variations
throughout the year; however, a very high variation is
observed in the N–S alignment.
7. Discussion and conclusions
In the E–W alignment, the steam production variations
throughout the year are less than 50% average production,
 Á. Lentz, R. Almanza / Applied Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1537–1544
Table 1
Monthly steam production [kg]
January March June September
N–S alignment, 34,224 68,898 80,586 66,240
first alternative
N–S alignment, 21,684 43,650 51,054 41,976
second alternative
E–W alignment, 39,828 54,858 57,228 50,460
first alternative
E–W alignment, 25,187 34,758 36,258 31,968
second alternative
while the steam production in the N–S alignment could be
two times higher during the summer period than during the
winter period.
During the summer, the northwest of Mexico registers
the highest electricity demand levels; therefore, a high
steam demand exists, so a N–S alignment is recommended
to supply such demand.
Both options to increase the steam production in the
geothermal cycle are similar. The difference is in the mass
flow and the area required. The area is proportional to
the produced steam flow. However, the second option
has a problem in that the brine is more concentrated with
salts as well as silica.
Daily steam production in the N–S alignment is almost
constant. The highest variations during the day are pre-
sented in the E–W alignment. The highest production is
presented during the middle of day; in the N–S alignment,
there are two peaks, approximately four hours before and
after noon.
It is possible to increase the steam flow from geothermal
wells using solar collectors, although the salts dissolved in
the liquid flow limit this increase.
In order to verify the results shown in this work, it will
be necessary to evaluate the behavior in an experimental
hybrid system. It is also necessary to carry out an economic
evaluation.
This project needs to be practical for the purposes
already mentioned. In order to achieve this, some progress
has been made in the annular and stratified flows of this
university’s solar thermal power plant [4,10]. It is necessary
to work with annular flow, because under stratified flows
several problems appear, as mentioned by Flores and
Almanza [5]. For a real approach to the hybrid system, it
is necessary to evaluate absorbers with larger diameters
than the actual SEGS or DISS plants. The pipe diameters
already used at Cerro Prieto IV range from 25.4 cm up to
40.6 cm, so it is necessary to evaluate whether the absorb-
ers can be built with at least a 25 cm diameter. The first and
second alternatives for N–S and E–W alignments are sim-
ilar for the steam annual production; the difference consists
in such production during the year; i.e., in summer the
steam production is higher in the N–S alignment than in
the E–W, but, on the other hand, the E–W alignment pro-
duces more steam in winter.
1543
The modification of the pH of the solution scale is a
potential method of silica deposition control and represents
an option to make possible DSG in the hybrid system. The
hybrid system should take into consideration the scale in
tubes. Water treatment and a periodic check-up, and clean-
ing of pipes if required, is recommended.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the CFE, for the infor-
mation supplied, and CONACyT and PAPITT-UNAM,
for economic support.
References
[1] J. Archibald, E. Geoghegan, T. Surikova, Design of solar–geothermal
heating and cooling retrofit for a physics laboratory, 2002. Available
from: <http://www.americansolar.com/solar2002-design.pdf>.
[2] M. Karagiorgas, D. Mendrinos, C. Karytsas, Solar and geothermal
heating and cooling of the European centre for public law building in
Greece, Renewable Energy 29 (2003) 461–470.
[3] L. Garcı́a-Rodrı́guez, Renewable energy application in desalination:
state of the art, Solar Energy 75 (2003) 381–393.
[4] V. Flores, R. Almanza, Direct steam generation in parabolic trough
concentrators with bimetallic receivers, Energy 29 (5–6) (2004) 645–
651.
[5] V. Flores, R. Almanza, Behavior of the compound wall copper-steel
receiver with stratified two-phase flow regimen in transients states
when solar irradiance is arriving on one side of receiver, Solar Energy
76 (1–3) (2004) 195–198.
[6] H. Price, E. Lüpfert, D. Kearney, E. Zarza, G. Cohen, R. Gee, R.
Mahoney, Advances in parabolic trough solar power technology,
Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 124 (2) (2002) 109–125.
[7] E. Zarza, L. Valenzuela, J. León, D. Weyers, M. Eickhoff, M. Eck, K.
Hennecke, The DISS project: direct steam generation in parabolic
trough systems. Operation and maintenance experience and update
on project status, Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 124 (2) (2002)
126–133.
[8] M. Eck, W. Steinmann, Direct steam generation in parabolic troughs:
first results of the DISS project, Journal of Solar Energy Engineering
124 (2) (2002) 134–139.
[9] I. Martı́nez, Theoretical-experimental analysis of annular two-face
flow in horizontal pipes for a solar-geothermal system, Doctoral
thesis, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de México, 2005 (in
Spanish).
[10] R. Almanza, A. Lentz, G. Jiménez, Receiver behavior in direct steam
generation with parabolic troughs, Solar Energy 61 (4) (1997) 275–
278.
[11] R. Almanza, A. Lentz, Electricity production at low powers by direct
steam generation with parabolic troughs, Solar Energy 64 (1–3)
(1998) 115–120.
[12] R. Almanza, G. Jiménez, A. Lentz, DSG Under two-phase and
stratified flow in a steel receiver of a parabolic trough collector,
Transactions of ASME, Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 124
(2002) 140–144.
[13] E. Zarza, K. Hennecke, U. Herrman, J. Langenkamp, O. Goebel, M.
Eck, J. Rheinlännder, M. Ruiz, L. Valenzuela, S. Zunft, D. Weyers.
DISS-phase I Project. Final Project Report, Madrid, Editorial
CIEMAT, 1999, ISBN: 84–7834-358-X.
[14] R. Almanza, F. Muñoz, Solar Energy Engineering, El Colegio
Nacional, México DF, México, 1994 (in Spanish).
[15] E. Barbier, Geothermal energy technology and current status an
overview, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 6 (2002) 3–65.
[16] R. Hurtado, Developments in geothermal energy in Mexico—Part
twenty nine: scaling studies at the Cerro Prieto geothermal field, in:
1544 Á. Lentz, R. Almanza / Applied Thermal Engineering 26 (2006) 1537–1544

Heat Recovery Systems, vol. 10, No. 5/630, Pergamon Press, 1991, [18] J.A. Duffie, W.A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes,
pp. 469–479. second ed., Wiley Interscience, New York, 1991, pp. 13–21.
[17] S. Pilkington, Solar International, Status Report on Solar Trough [19] J. Elder, Geothermal Systems, Academic Press, Manchester Univer-
Power Plants, Pilkington Solar International GmbH, Germany, 1996. sity, 1981, pp. 20–40.