See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/362746840

Reuse of Abandoned oil and gas wells for Power generation in Western Dessert
and Gulf of Suez fields of Egypt

Article · August 2022

DOI: 10.1016/j.egyr.2022.07.067

CITATION READS

1 630

4 authors, including:

Ahmed S. Shehata Ali Shahata

Arab Academy for Science, Technology & Maritime Transport Arab Academy for Science, Technology & Maritime Transport
56 PUBLICATIONS 539 CITATIONS 50 PUBLICATIONS 537 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ahmed A Hanafy
Arab Academy for Science, Technology & Maritime Transport
40 PUBLICATIONS 576 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmed S. Shehata on 17 August 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect

Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

www.elsevier.com/locate/egyr

TMREES22-Fr, EURACA, 09 to 11 May 2022, Metz-Grand Est, France

Reuse of Abandoned oil and gas wells for Power generation in

Western Dessert and Gulf of Suez fields of Egypt
Ahmed M. Moustafaa ,∗, Ahmed S. Shehatab , Ali I. Shehataa , Ahmed A. Hanafya
a Mechanical Engineering Department, College of Engineering & Technology, Arab Academy for Science, Technology & Maritime
Transport, Alexandria, Egypt
b Marine Engineering Department, College of Engineering & Technology, Arab Academy for Science, Technology & Maritime

Transport, Alexandria, Egypt

Received 11 June 2022; accepted 18 July 2022
Available online xxxx

Abstract
This study investigates the capable outcome of using existing abandoned oil and gas wells as a geothermal energy source in
Egypt. Geothermal resources of Egypt are mainly located along the Gulf of Suez and Red Sea in addition to some additional
spots with lower potential in the Western Desert of Egypt. In Gulf of Suez the geothermal potential identified data and
parameters dignified from oil and gas wells under the regulation of the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation. Using
abandoned oil and gas well which already lost their economic value would save drilling time and cost which would decrease
the ROR of the investment. In this paper a simulation model cycle has been made by ASPEN HYSYS software to show
the reliability of using the abandoned oil and gas wells outlet fluid as a source geothermal energy in Egypt by mapping the
geothermal favorability locations with the oil and gas field area. Mapping shows that in Egypt there is potential of extracting
low, medium and high temperature extractions from wells according to the location. Results demonstrates that the output power
for the simulation geothermal power plant in different locations of Egypt and at various temperatures. Showing that in western
desert the maximum output power that can be generated from the modified binary cycle is 3.063 MW at output temperature
of 125 ◦ C. Whereas in the Gulf of Suez proposed maximum output is 44.6 MW that can be produced from modified Flash
steam cycle at an output temperature of 300 ◦ C.
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the TMREES22-Fr, EURACA, 2022.

Keywords: Geothermal energy; Oil and gas; Abandoned wells; Egypt; HYSYS; Renewable energy

1. Introduction
Egypt aims to increase the renewable energy share by 20% of the current country needs by 2020 and 40%
by 2035. The demand of electricity in Egypt is growing rapidly, it increases annually by almost 500 MW [1].
The main renewable energy sources in Egypt are utilized from wind and solar resources; however, the geothermal
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ammoustafa94@gmail.com (A.M. Moustafa).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.07.067
2352-4847/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:
//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the TMREES22-Fr, EURACA, 2022.
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

Nomenclature
h Enthalpy (kJ/kg)
H.P.S High pressure stage
HR Internal Heat Recovery
H.X Heat Exchanger
in Inlet
L.P.S Low pressure stage
ṁ Mass flow rate (kg/s)
ORC Organic Rankine Cycle
out Outlet
P Pressure (kPa)
Q̇ Heat transfer rate (kW)
R-134a Refrigerant
ROR Rate of Return
T Temperature (◦ C)
Ẇ Power (kW)
N Efficiency

energy is not yet included in the renewable energy map of Egypt. Nevertheless, harvesting geothermal energy is
not yet considered by the government as a result of the high initial cost and the long-term investment. Geothermal
energy is the stored thermal energy in the Earth crust. It is considered reliability, sustainability and environmentally
friendly source of energy. However, the drawbacks are suitable to particular Regions, high initial cost and the time
period strategy required for reconnaissance, exploration and drilling [2]. Researches thought about solutions for the
bottleneck obstacle of geothermal energy which is drilling cost and to minimize the drilling cost which is nearly
half the initial cost that makes the cost per unit of energy is higher than other renewable energies so using existing
abandoned oil and gas well already that lost their economic value shows promising potential in decreasing this
issue allowing geothermal energy to compete with other renewable resources. First the abandoned wells were used
for heating water for the surrounding area then other researchers thought of using the wells for desalination in
places where it is far away from any clean water source which can be useful but then, in this study, it is showing
the potential of power generation from the abandoned oil and gas wells as for Egypt where is power generation
deficiency is considered high. Geothermal energy on the contrary has many advantages regarding to the running cost,
it is deliberated the most economic energy source concerning maintenance as well as the emissions from geothermal
wells are considered negligible to greenhouse gases released from fossil fuel and other sources of energy.
In Egypt geothermal promising resources are located along the Gulf of Suez, Red Sea and the Western Desert
which happen to be the region of oil and gas extraction fields [3]. Geothermal energy can be utilized for different
purposes, mainly according to the source temperature. Generally, the geothermal source can be classified as three
types: high-temperature (>150 ◦ C), medium-temperature (90–150 ◦ C) and low-temperature source (<150 ◦ C).
As a result of the various output temperature range in Egypt, the low temperature can be used for direct use
applications such as district heating and cooling systems, or they can be considered for electricity generation with
the implementation of Organic Rankin Cycle (ORC) in the locations with low and moderate temperature such as
Western Desert, while in Gulf of Suez is considered high temperature region that can be utilized with Flash steam
geothermal power plants.

1.1. Available data around the world

Geothermal energy has been used since ancient Roman and Egyptian in bathing and other usage which is now
called direct use but as for generating power the first geothermal power plant in history is Larderello in Italy [4].
The first geothermal generator has been made in 1904 but the plant itself started working in 1913 with a capacity of
1350
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

250 kW and was able to produce 2750 kW of electricity, which Italian used to light railway and the nearby villages
of Larderello and Volterra. Nowadays it the second plant worldwide generating electricity by geothermal energy
with a capacity of 769 MW [5]. The world largest plant in 2021 is the Geysers Geothermal Complex, California,
US with a capacity of 1.2 GW, then comes thirdly Cerro Prieto Geothermal Power Station, Mexico with a capacity
720 MW. Moreover, Makban Geothermal Complex, Philippines distrait its position as fourth place with a capacity
of 458 MW, leaving Salak Geothermal Plant, Indonesia in the fifth place with capacity of 377 MW [6]. The major
drawback of the geothermal energy is its high initial cost which is mainly lost in drilling the well itself. To drill
a well of 4 km which is considered middle range depth, it costs about $5 million in 2020 [7]. So many countries
are taking in consideration the reuse of the abandoned oil and gas existing well to reduce the initial cost of the
geothermal power plant the proposed which will have a short payback period regarding the binary steam geothermal
power plant, the direct steam power plant has shorter period [8]. Additionally, oil and gas wells have been abandoned
in the world when petroleum reservoir was depleted without economic feasibility. Statistics show that about 20–30
million oil wells have been abandoned around the world. In 2015 a mathematical model has been made in Texas of
a binary cycle power plant to evaluate the reliability of output power using abandoned well showing a net power
range of 109 kW-630 kW for a 4200 m well with mass flow rate of 2.5 kg/s and output temperature of 130 ◦ C [9].
Then, in 2017 a simulation model for a binary cycle power plant has been made using also abandoned oil and
gas well in China showing that 644 kW can be extracted from wells deeper than 3 km with temperature range of
125–175 ◦ C [10].

1.2. Available data of geothermal wells in Egypt

Egypt has unused geothermal potential even though it has a lot of oil and gas, water and abandoned wells
throughout the country and especially in western dessert and in Gulf of Suez. Considering that oil and gas wells
in the same areas with the favourable geothermal regions by mapping shows a great potential that reusing the
abandoned oil and gas well in Egypt can ascertain a geothermal power plant field. As shown in Fig. 1 Gulf of Suez
area has the potential of harvesting steam unlike the western desert which shows a low to moderate temperature
output.

Fig. 1. Favourable locations for harvesting Geothermal energy in Egypt [11].

In this paper a simulation model would be made by ASPEN HYSYS to show the potential of these abandoned
oil and gas wells in different scenarios; using either Flash steam power plant type or binary cycle. In Flash steam
cycle, the working fluid leaving the well consists of steam water and this requires high temperature output, while
binary cycle the fluid is hot water under high pressure so it is in the liquid state which requires passing by heat
exchanger and use this heat energy to evaporate refrigerant to steam generating electricity. The refrigerant used in
1351
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

this study is R-134a which has high thermal stability, low boiling point, non-toxic and non-flammable as well as it
reaches its boiling point (−26.3 ◦ C) at atmospheric pressure that is why it will be used in the simulation model [12].
This can help Egypt reach its goal to increase the usage of renewable energy by 43% by the end of 2035 [13].
Saving the time and money of analysing the soil, exploration and drilling would decrease the initial cost of the
geothermal power plant by around 50%. Meanwhile, the abandoned oil and gas wells in Egypt range of depth is
2–4 km so with reference to the geothermal gradient of the wells an estimated range of the bottom temperature and
output would be valid (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 2. Egypt Oil and Gas Western Desert Concession Map July 2021 (producing, non-producing and abandoned wells) [14].

2. Methodology and data structure

The simulation model made with ASPEN HYSYS software consists of; Evaporator, Turbine, Condenser,
Circulating Pump and Preheater. The model is based on mass energy balance in steady state conditions
.
∑ ∑
m in = m˙out (1)
Where the mass inlet is equal to the mass outlet throughout both cycles the Flash steam and binary geothermal
power plant.
.
∑ ∑
Q̇ + m in h in = Ẇ + m˙out h out (2)
The overall energy balance can be shown as above, where Q̇ is the net heat input to the cycle and Ẇ is the net
output work which can be calculated as shown
Q̇ = Q̇ netin = Q˙in − Q˙out (3)
Ẇ = Ẇnetin = W˙out − W˙in (4)

2.1. Simulation for an Oil and Gas well in Western desert

The simulation model made with ASPEN HYSYS software consists of; Evaporator, Turbine, Condenser,
Circulating Pump and Preheater. The model consists of three different loops; first the heating loop which is the
hot water rising from the abandoned oil and gas well, the ORC loop which is the working fluid (R-134a), and
finally the cooling cycle for the condenser which is also water. An estimated scenario for an existing oil and gas
well in the western dessert area has been tested to assure the possibility of using this model for further simulation on
other abandoned wells. Since the western dessert is not one of the most promising areas regarding the geothermal
energy and considered to be low temperature area as shown in Fig. 3, so this simulation model of using ORC would
be suitable [15]. Other areas such as Gulf of Suez which could harvest direct steam from the well would use Flash
steam power plant model which would be included in this paper too for further simulation results [16].
1352
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of the single Binary flash geothermal power plant on HYSYS.

Table 1. Oil and gas wells in Egypt.

Well name in Egypt Bottom well Bottom well Basement rock Heat flow Geothermal
depth (m) temperature (◦ C) temperature (◦ C) (MW/m2 ) gradient (◦ C/km)
MATARIYA-1 4,150 122 164 86.07 29.68
MIT GHAMR-1 2,180 83 169 58.18 20.06
MONAGA-1 3,480 100 121 60.48 22.93
N. DILINGAT-1 2,118 71 163 71.19 24.55
NAF-1 3,882 93 179 24.33 24.33
QAWASIM-1 3,710 103 253 21.1 21.1
S.W. BILQAS-1 4,380 120 293 55.49 19.14
SAN EL HAGAR-1 3,720 115 169 88.26 30.44
SIDI SALIM-1 3,850 106 212 55.49 31.99
ABADIYA-1 3,620 104 272 55.78 19.23
ABU QIR 2,846 85 257 60.46 20.83
BALTIM-1 3,660 108 187 69.02 23.8
BUSEILI-1 2,420 72 242 70.02 24.15
EL WASTANI-1 3,450 96 238 79.43 27.39
EL-TABIA 2,393 71 219 67.5 23.28
MAHMOUDIYA-1 2,404 69 159 93.99 32.41

2.2. Simulation for an oil and gas well in Gulf of Suez

GULF OF SUEZ area is considered one of the most reliable areas containing abandoned oil and gas wells
that can harvest steam which can directly be used for heating or power generation as shown in Fig. 3. Therefore,
a model type has been made by ASPEN HYSYS and has been validated on an existing well in Mexico of Cerro
Prieto geothermal power plants. This model consists of; non-return valve, Separator, Turbine, Condenser, Circulating
pump and Mixer. This model consists of two loops the first loop is heating loop which is the steam coming from
the well enters from the valve which does not allow its return back the enters the separator where steam goes to the
upper area and the water condensate downwards to point 3, the steam then completes its cycle through the turbine
generating electricity then leaving the turbine heading to the condenser which is cooled by the second loop which
is the cooling loop (air cooled cooling tower) then after the condenser the water is pumped to the mixer to be mixed
with the water from separator then back to the injection well (see Fig. 4).

3. Model validation
3.1. Validation for the binary power plant of Kanoglu well in Turkey

To validate the present simulation of the model reliability, the results has been compared to an actual binary
geothermal power plant data given by Kanoglu [17]. In this model the condenser used is subjected to cooling
tower not like the actual plant which is air cooled condenser and the used only one evaporator for simplicity. The
1353
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of the single Flash steam geothermal power plant on HYSYS.

Table 2. Thermo-physical properties for Kanoglu Geothermal binary Power Plant.

Simulation of Kanoglu field in Turkey for Validation
No Fluid Fluid Phase Vapour/Phase Temperature (◦ C) Pressure (kPa) Mass flow rate (kg/s)
Fraction
Kanoglu Present Kanoglu Present Kanoglu Present
plant study plant study plant study
1 Thermal water Liquid 0 121 121 240 240 81 81
2 Thermal water Liquid 0 79 79 240 240 81 81
3 Thermal water Liquid 0 54.8 54.8 240 240 81 81
4 R-134a Vapour 1 39.8 39.8 537.5 537.5 94.3 94.38
5 R-134a Liquid 0 13 10.2 537.5 537.5 94.3 94.38
6 R-134a Liquid 0 14.2 11.4 2503 2503 94.3 94.38
7 R-134a Vapour 0 71.6 66.9 2503 2503 94.3 94.38
8 R-134a Vapour 1 97 96.7 2503 2503 94.3 94.38
9 Water Liquid 0 7 15 220 220 596.6 596.6
10 Water Liquid 0 15 7 220 220 596.6 596.6

Table 3. Turbine data from HYSYS.

Name Turbine
Power [kW] 2,766
Adiabatic Efficiency 85
Adiabatic Head [m] 3,516
Dynamic Fluid Head [m] 3,560

results show an accuracy ratio of 98.3% concluding the reliability of the present model and can be used for further
simulations with confidence.

3.1.1. Work input and output of binary power plant

With reference to the input power in the binary power plant cycle the circulating pump power in the actual
geothermal power plant of Kanoglu is 184.9 kW [18] and this study shows a pump output power of 184.8 kW
which is reliable as for validation. While the turbine in the actual geothermal power plant of Kanoglu is 2,720 kW
which is the output power of the cycle [19] despite the fact that this simulation model shows a theoretical output
power of 2,766 kW with a difference of (46 kW) output power with the same turbine adiabatic efficiency of 85%
1354
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

Table 4. Pump data from HYSYS.

Name Pump
Power [kW] 184.8
Adiabatic Efficiency [%] 80
Capacity [m3/h] 271
Pressure Head [m] 160
Total Rotor Power [kW] 185

Table 5. Thermo-physical properties for Cerro Prieto Flash steam Power Plant.
Simulation of Cerro Prieto field for Validation
No. Pressure [kPa] Temperature [◦ C] Mass Flow [kg/h] Vapour/ Phase Fraction
Cerro plant This study Cerro plant This study Cerro plant This study Cerro plant This study
1 3,972.76 3,912.98 250.00 250.00 1,512,000.00 1,512,000.00 0.2 0.2
2 650.00 617.47 162.20 160.00 1,512,000.00 1,512,000.00 0.4 0.4
3 650.00 617.47 162.20 160.00 1,216,728.00 1,226,700.00 0.0 0.0
4 650.00 617.47 162.20 160.00 295,272.00 285,300.00 1.0 1.0
5 11.50 11.85 48.51 49.35 295,272.00 285,300.00 0.9 0.9
6 11.50 11.85 48.51 45.30 295,272.00 285,300.00 0.0 0.0
7 650.00 617.50 48.54 45.36 295,272.00 285,300.00 0.0 0.0
8 650.00 617.47 140.20 139.05 1,512,000.00 1,512,000.00 0.0 0.0

Table 6. Turbine data from HYSYS.

Name Turbine
Power [kW] 38,533.8
Adiabatic Efficiency 80.0
Adiabatic Head [m] 61,977.1
Dynamic Fluid Head [m] 61,977.1

Table 7. Pump data from HYSYS.

Name Pump
Power [kW] 64.8
Adiabatic Efficiency [%] 75.0
Duty [kW] 64.8
Capacity [m3/h] 287.6
Pressure Head [m] 62.5

which is slightly more than expected but still within the acceptable range of validation and allow the model to
further modification with confidence.

3.2. Validation for the Flash steam power plant of Cerro Prieto field in Mexico

To validate the present simulation of the model reliability, the results has been compared to an actual Flash
steam geothermal power plant data given by Cerro Prieto field [20]. In this model the condenser used is subjected
to cooling tower not like the actual plant which is air cooled condenser. The results show an accuracy ratio of 97.5%
concluding the reliability of the present model and can be used for further simulations with confidence.

3.2.1. Work input and output of Flash steam power plant

The circulating pump power which is the cycle input power in the actual geothermal power plant of Cerro Prieto
is 65.5 kW [21] and this study shows a pump output power of 64.52 kW which is reliable as for validation. While
the output power of the cycle is the turbine which is 37.5 MW in the actual geothermal power plant of Kanoglu [22]
whereas this simulation model shows a theoretical output power of 38.47 MW with a difference of (0.97 MW) output
1355
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

power with the same turbine adiabatic efficiency of 85% which is slightly more than expected but still within the
acceptable range of validation and allow the model to further modification with confidence.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. The simulation results for the Western Desert well (GAWAHER N3)

The GAWAHER N3 well is located in the western desert region in Egypt which is considered low to moderate
temperature. So, as mentioned before in Table 2the outputs range that will be used is in this simulation to estimate
the work input and output of the cycle. With a bottom temperature of 158.9 ◦ C and depth of 2.7 km the first case;
where the output temperature from the well is 65 ◦ C and pressure is 240 kPa the output power of the turbine is
1,147 kW and the pumping power is 43.49 kW with a pumping pressure of 1000 KPa. Secondly, where the output
well temperature is 80 ◦ C and pressure 240 kPa the output turbine power is 1,881 kW and the circulating pump
power is 90.5 kW with pressure 1500 kPa. Moreover, the scenario where the output temperature from the well
is 110 ◦ C and pressure is 240 KPa the output turbine power is 2,386 kW and pumping power of 137.5 kW and
pumping pressure 2000 kPa. Finally, the highest temperature low to moderate can reach in this model which is
125 ◦ C and pressure 240 kPa the output power is 2,766 kW and consumed pumping power 185 kW. All these
results are subjected to adiabatic turbine efficiency of 80% and pump efficiency of 85% (see Figs. 5 and 6).

Fig. 5. Plant view for the Binary cycle by ASPEN HYSYS.

Fig. 6. Output Temperature range for low to moderate temperature abandoned oil and gas wells.

4.1.1. Modification simulation results for the Binary Cycle (H.R. HEAT EXCHANGER)
In order to improve the binary steam ORC geothermal power plant proposed in this study where the simulation
is made on GAWAHER N3 an abundant well in western dessert a modification has been made for a better use
of the heat loss after the turbine stage. Where the hot water is extracted from the production well at temperature
1356
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

Table 8. Data sheet of GAWAHER N3 oil and gas well, BAPETCO Oil Company.
Bapetco oil company oil and gas well model
Well name Location Depth (m) Bottom pressure (kPa) Bottom temperature (◦ C) Heat flow (MW/m2 )
GAWAHER N3 Western desert 2,783 16,202 158.89 96.69

and pressure of 125 ◦ C and 240 kPa respectively facing the evaporator which heats up the refrigerant leading to
reaching the boiling point turning to saturated steam then moves towards the turbine rotating its blades producing
output power of 3063 kW while the output steam is sent to a heat recovery unit which sends hot fluid to a preheater
in the cycle to increase the temperature of the inlet evaporator which will increase the cycle performance with
decreasing the heat loss. Then the steam leaving the heat recovery unit is sent to condenser to be condensed at
pressure 537.5 kPa to liquid form the get pumped by the circulating pump at pressure of 350 kPa and pumping
power of 182.6 kW rather than 185 kW. In addition to this the overall cycle efficiency increases (see Fig. 7).

Fig. 7. Plant view for the Modified Binary cycle by ASPEN HYSYS.

4.2. The simulation results for the Gulf of Suez well (GS392-2)

The Gulf of Suez location as mentioned before is said to be favourable region of geothermal energy extraction,
but unfortunately most wells in this area are shallow (less than 1 km depth) so these well might need secondary
drilling for the abandoned with potential, location and soil structure must be analysed first as shown in Table 4.
So, in this case a well of convenient depth has been chosen for this HYSYS model that has been made which
is GS 392-2 well with a depth of 2,747 m. Furthermore, the data for these wells is insufficient so the basement
surface temperature will be roughly predicted through the down extrapolation of the near surface average geothermal
gradient (from other available Wells).
This is available in each well within the depth range of the sedimentary section overlying the basement surface
(see Fig. 8).
The predictable Basement Surface Temperature can be estimated using the following equation:
( )
B H T − Ts
Td = Ts + ∗d (5)
TD
Where d: is the depth (km) at which the temperature to be estimated, T d: is the required temperature at that depth
(km), TD: is the total Well depth (km), TS: is the mean annual surface temperature (◦ C), BHT: is the bottom-hole
temperature (◦ C) available from each Well. For the first scenario where the temperature output from the GS 392-2
is 180 ◦ C and pressure 1003 kPa the output power of the turbine is 37.3 MW and pumping power is 57.3 kW.
Secondly, the scenario where temperature is 200 ◦ C and pressure is 3,972.76 kPa the output turbine power is 38.5
1357
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

Fig. 8. Plant view for the Flash steam cycle by ASPEN HYSYS.

Table 9. Oilfield’s depths in Gulf of Suez, Egypt.

Well name Well depth (m)
GS237–2 1,743
AMAL-6 2,151
GH 376–1 2,618
GS 392–2 2,747
GHARIB-164 617

MW and pumping power is 64.8 kW. Finally, the highest expected output temperature 250 ◦ C and pressure 8617 kPa
the output turbine power is 40.1 MW and pumping pressure of 142.7 kW. All these results are subjected to adiabatic
turbine efficiency of 75% and pump efficiency of 80% (see Fig. 9).

Fig. 9. Output Temperature range for high temperature abandoned oil and gas wells.

4.2.1. Modification simulation results for Flash Steam cycle (L.P.S & H.P.S)
In order to improve the Flash steam geothermal power plant output power and decrease the input power a
modification has been done in the cycle by separating it into two stages low- and high-pressure separator where
the well steam outlet temperature and pressure are 250 ◦ C and 3913 kPa respectively. The steam first enters high
pressure separator to separate the water from the saturated steam leading to the high-pressure turbine where its
output power is 18.647 MW. The steam then passes to the low-pressure separator for another separation stage
which works as a heat recovery stage to benefit from the wasted steam and increase the overall efficiency of the
cycle while the wasted water from both separators is injected to the injection well. The steam then transfers to the
low-pressure turbine where the highest output power is obtained of 44.626 MW then the condensation phase takes
place at the condenser at a pressure of 12 kPa and temperature 49.6 ◦ C then pumped by a circulating pump of
1358
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

pressure 385 kPa to be mixed with both the separators saturated water. The circulating power of the pump is 96 kW
which shows an excessive increase in output power in return to less input power which increase the overall cycle
efficiency (see Fig. 10).

Fig. 10. Plant view for the modification Flash steam cycle by ASPEN HYSYS.

5. Conclusion and future work

To conclude geothermal energy has been marginalized in comparison to other renewable energy sources in Egypt.
This study shows excessive potential especially by using the abandoned oil and gas wells which minimize the initial
cost by 40 to 60%. Regardless of the differences in geologic conditions there will always be an optimum geothermal
power plant cycle to match the output of the well fluid parameter. Adjusting the cycle will result in the highest energy
output possible as previously proven with the GAWAHER N3 in the Western dessert, where the optimistic net output
power was 2.58 MW for the basic cycle, while the modified net output power was 2.88 MW. In addition to the
Gulf of Suez fields, where the optimistic net power output was 39.8 MW for the basic cycle, while the modified net
output power was 44.6 MW. This current research covers a wide range of existing proposed temperatures that can
be extracted from oil wells in the Western dessert and the Gulf of Suez. This proves that research should take place
in the Gulf of Suez considering the abundancy of renewable energy sources leading to tremendous cost reduction.
Furthermore, in the abandoned well, an implementation of an internal heat study must be made to analyse the heat
variance using a CFD model resulting in an improved quality of the output steam increasing the overall efficiency
and performance of the power plant.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could
have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability
Data will be made available on request.

Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincerest thanks to Dr. Ahmed Samir, Dr. Aly Ismael and Dr. Ahmed Hanafy (Arab
Academy for Science and maritime transport) my professors who guided me through this paper with time and
knowledge. As well as I would like to express my gratefulness to my family and friends who gave me the endless
support and the endowment for this project which helped me finishing this research with all the struggles so I am
really thankful to them.
1359
A.M. Moustafa, A.S. Shehata, A.I. Shehata et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 1349–1360

References
[1] EEHP. Annual report of egyptian electricity holding company. Arab Republic of Egypt:Ministry of Electricity & Renewable Energy;
2015.
[2] Sanyal SK, Morrow JW. Successandthelearningcurveeffectingeothermal well drilling – a worldwide survey. In: Proceedings of the thirty
seventh workshop on geothermal reservoir engineering. CA: Stanford University; 2012.
[3] Morgan P, Blackwell D, Farris JC, Boulos K, Salib G. Preliminary geothermal gradient and heat flow values for northern Egypt and
the Gulf of Suez from oil well data. In: Proceedings, international congress on thermal waters, geothermal energy and volcanism of
the mediterranean area. Athens: National Technical University; 1976, p. 149–68.
[4] Lashin A. Review of the geothermal resources of Egypt: 2015–2020. In: Proceedings, world geothermal congress 2020.
Reykjavik,Iceland; 2020, p. 6.
[5] Minissale A. The larderello geothermal field: a review. Earth-Sci Rev 1991;31(2):133–51.
[6] E-commerce worldwide. Statistia, published by madhumitha jaganmohan. 2021, Accessed 12 Oct 2021.
[7] American Petroleum Institute. (API). Washington, DC, USA: Jointassociationsurveyon drilling costs; 1976–2009.
[8] Sveinbjornsson MB, Thorhallsson1 S. Cost and effectiveness of geothermal drilling. In: SIMS 53rd conference in reykjavik reykjavík.
Scandinavian Simulation Society; 2012.
[9] Campbell Ramiŕez HcE, et al. Thermodynamics applied to geothermal power plants: Case study—Unit 5, Cerro Prieto, Baja
California Mexico. In: Volume 4: energy systems analysis, thermodynamics and sustainability; combustion science and engineering;
nanoengineering for energy, parts a and B. 2011, p. 187–96.
[10] Nian Y-L, Cheng W-L. Insights into geothermal utilization of abandoned oil and gas wells. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;87:44–60.
[11] Geothermal resources in Egypt integrated with GIS-based analysis - scientific figure on ResearchGate. 2022, Available from: Accesse
d 1 Jun 2022.
[12] Gasservei. Technical data sheet. In: Gas-servei. 2022, https://gas-servei.com/shop/docs/technical-data-sheet-r-134a-gas-servei.pdf.
[13] HE Dr Mohamed Shaker Minster of electricity of renewable energy for the Arab republic of Egypt. Published in 2018 to the International
Renewable Energy Agency, IRENA https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2018/Oct/IRENA_Outlook_Egypt_2
018_En.pdf.
[14] Oil Egypt, Gas. Baker hughes. 2021, Accessed 24 Nov 2021.
[15] Geologic research and mining dept, aeromagnetic map of the Nile Delta Egypt. AAPG Bull 1963;63:967–74.
[16] Abdel Zaher M, Saibi H, Ehara S. Geochemical and stable isotopic studies of Gulf of Suez’s hot springs. Egypt Chin J Geochem
2012;1:120–7.
[17] Coskun A, Bolatturk A, Kanoglu M. Thermodynamic and economic analysis and optimization of power cycles for a medium temperature
geothermal resource. Energy Convers Manag 2014;78:39–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.10.045.
[18] Kanoglu M, Bolatturk A. Performance and parametric investigation of a binary geothermal power plant by exergy. Renew Energy
2008;33:2366–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.01.017.
[19] Kanoglu M, Bolatturk A. Performance and parametric investigation of a binary geothermal power plant by exergy. Renew Energy
2008;33:2366–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.01.017.
[20] Arellano VM, et al. The Cerro Prieto IV (Mexico) geothermal reservoir: Pre-exploitation thermodynamic conditions and main processes
related to exploitation (2000–2005). Geothermics 2011;40(3):190–8.
[21] Hernandez Martinez E, et al. Net power output and thermal efficiency data for single and double flash cycles of Cerro Prieto geothermal
power plants. Data Brief 2019;27:104698.
[22] Truesdell AH, Thompson JM, Coplen TB, Nehring NL, Janik CJ. The origin of the Cerro Prieto geothermal brine. Geothermics
1981;10:225e238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0375-6505(81)90006-7.

1360

View publication stats