GeoEnergy Science and Engineering 2024

The exploration of alternative energy sources has gained significant traction in recent years, driven by the urgent need to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and transition towards sustainable energy. Among these alternatives, ${\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}_2$ plume geothermal and hydrothermal systems have emerged as promising options due to their potential for providing clean, renewable energy. This study presents a probabilistic investigation into the sensitivity of ${\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}_2$ plume geothermal and hydrothermal systems under various reservoir conditions in the Williston Basin, North Dakota. In addition to elucidating the impact of reservoir conditions on system performance, the study utilizes probabilistic methods to assess energy output of ${\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}_2$ plume geothermal and hydrothermal systems. Insights derived from this probabilistic investigation offer valuable guidance for the working fluid selection, systems design and optimization in the Williston Basin and beyond. Results from the sensitivity analysis reveal the profound influence of reservoir conditions on the behavior and efficiency of ${\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}_2$ plume geothermal and hydrothermal systems. Our case study on Red River Formation and Deadwood Formations shows a potential of 34% increase and 32% decrease in heat extraction based on varying reservoir conditions. Our investigations in the Beaver Lodge field within the Red River Formation yielded arithmetic mean values for ${\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}_2$ best case resources, hydrothermal resources and the ${\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}_2$ worst case as 6.36 $\times {10}^{18}$ J, 4.75 $\times {10}^{18}$ J and 3.24 $\times {10}^{18}$ J, respectively. Overall, this research contributes to advancing the knowledge and understanding of ${\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}}_2$ plume geothermal and hydrothermal systems as viable pathways towards sustainable energy production and carbon sequestration. By highlighting the sensitivity of these systems to reservoir conditions, the study provides valuable insights that can inform decision-making processes and future research endeavours aimed at fostering the transition to a low-carbon energy landscape. Full article

The impacts that the available energy sources have had on society, the environment, and the economy have become a focus of attention in recent years, generating polarization of opinions. Understanding these impacts is crucial for rational evaluation and the development of strategies for economic growth and energy security. This review examines such impacts of the main energy resources currently exploited or in development, including fossil fuels, geothermal, biomass, solar, hydropower, hydrogen, nuclear, ocean, and wind energies on society through analysis and comparison. It is essential to consider how high energy demand influences energy prices, the workforce, and the environment and to assess the advantages and disadvantages of each energy source. One significant finding from this review is that the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) may vary substantially depending on the energy source used and show substantial ranges for different applications of the same energy source. Nuclear energy has the lowest LCOE range whereas ocean energy has the highest LCOE range among the nine energy sources considered. Fossil fuels were found to have the most substantial societal impacts, which involved on the positive side providing by far the largest number of jobs and highest tax revenues. However, on the negative side, fossil fuels, biomass, and nuclear energy sources pose the most significant health threats and social well-being impacts on communities and societies compared to other energy sources. On the other hand, solar, ocean and wind energy pose the lowest risk in terms of health and safety, with solar and wind also currently providing a substantial number of jobs worldwide. Regarding environmental consequences, fossil fuels generate the highest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and have the highest adverse impacts on ecosystems. In contrast, nuclear, ocean, solar and wind energies have the lowest GHG emissions and low to moderate impacts on ecosystems. Biomass, geothermal and hydropower energy sources have moderate to high ecosystem impacts compared to the other energy sources. Hydropower facilities require the most materials (mainly concrete) to build per unit of energy generated, followed by wind and solar energy, which require substantial steel and concrete per unit of energy generated. The lack of substantial materials recycling causes associated with solar and wind energy sources. All the energies that use thermal power generation process consume substantial quantities of water for cooling. The analysis and comparisons provided in this review identified that there is an urgent need to transition away from large-carbon-footprint processes, particularly fossil fuels without carbon capture, and to reduce the consumption of construction materials without recycling, as occurs in many of the existing solar and wind energy plants. This transition can be facilitated by seeking alternative and more widely accessible materials with lower carbon footprints during manufacturing and construction. Implementing such strategies can help mitigate climate change and have a positive impact on community well-being and economic growth. Full article