Technology Status - NET Nowak Energie & Technologie AG
Technology Status - NET Nowak Energie & Technologie AG
Technology Status - NET Nowak Energie & Technologie AG
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
136<br />
Prospects for Geothermal Power<br />
Geothermal plant capital cost in 1999 USD/kW<br />
● Cost Reduction Opportunities<br />
6500<br />
6000<br />
5500<br />
5000<br />
4500<br />
4000<br />
3500<br />
3000<br />
2500<br />
2000<br />
0<br />
Because costs are closely related to the characteristics of the local resource<br />
system and reservoir, costs and cost reductions cannot be easily assessed on<br />
a general level.<br />
Binary-cycle power plants or Hot Dry Rock systems are more expensive in<br />
terms of kWh generated (see Figure 51) than conventional geothermal<br />
systems, but these new techniques use resources that would have been<br />
uneconomical in the past. Binary-cycle power plants are suitable for smallscale<br />
applications and lower-temperature resources.<br />
Major contributions can be expected from R&D for new approaches or for<br />
improving conventional approaches and smaller modular units will allow<br />
economies of scale on the manufacturing level. Within the power plant,<br />
considerable economies of scale occur on the level of component and plant size.<br />
Figure 51<br />
Capital Costs for US Geothermal Plants, 1999<br />
Binary Empire<br />
(1987)<br />
Double Flash<br />
Desert Peak (1985)<br />
Source: Data from Di Pippo.<br />
Binary Stillwater<br />
(1989)<br />
Single Flash Blundell<br />
(1984)<br />
Double Flash Brady<br />
Hot Springs (1992)<br />
Binary Stillwater<br />
(1989)<br />
Double Flash Brady Hot Springs<br />
(1992)<br />
Double Flash Beowawe<br />
(1985)<br />
Double Flash Heber<br />
(1985)<br />
Double Flash Dixie Valley<br />
(1988)<br />
10 20 30 40 50 60 70<br />
Geothermal plant size in MW<br />
GEOTHERMAL POWER X6