Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Energy Res.
Sec. Sustainable Energy Systems
Volume 12 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2024.1422285

Nationwide Cost and Capacity Estimates for Sedimentary Basin Geothermal Power and Implications for Geologic CO2 Storage

Provisionally accepted
Emily Cairncross Emily Cairncross 1,2Jonathan D. Ogland-Hand Jonathan D. Ogland-Hand 1*Benjamin M. Adams Benjamin M. Adams 1Richard Middleton Richard Middleton 1
  • 1 Carbon Solutions LLC, Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States
  • 2 University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Sedimentary basins are naturally porous and permeable subsurface formations that underlie approximately half of the United States. In addition to being targets for geologic CO2 storage, these resources could supply geothermal power: sedimentary basin geothermal heat can be extracted with water or CO2 and used to generate electricity. The geothermal power potential of these basins and the accompanying implication for geologic CO2 storage are, however, understudied. Here, we use the Sequestration of CO2 Tool (SCO2T PRO ) and the generalizable GEOthermal techno-economic simulator (genGEO) to address this gap by a) estimating the cost and capacity of sedimentary basin geothermal power plants across the United States and b) comparing those results to nationwide CO2 sequestration cost and storage potential estimates. We find that across the United States, using CO2 as a geothermal heat extraction fluid reduces the cost of sedimentary basin power compared to using water, and some of the lowest cost capacity occurs in locations not typically considered for their geothermal resources (e.g., Louisiana, South Dakota). Additionally, using CO2 effectively doubles the sedimentary basin geothermal resource base, equating to hundreds of gigawatts of new capacity, by enabling electricity generation in geologies that are otherwise (with water) too impermeable, too thin, too cold, or not deep enough. We find there is competition for the best sedimentary basin resources between water-and CO2based power, but no overlap between the lowest-cost resources for CO2 storage and CO2-based power. In this way, our results suggest that deploying CO2-based power may increase the cost of water-based systems (by using the best resources) and the cost of CO2 storage (by storing CO2 in locations that otherwise may not be targeted). As such, our findings demonstrate that determining the best role for sedimentary basins within the energy transition may require balancing tradeoffs between competing priorities.

    Keywords: sedimentary basin geothermal power, Geologic CO2 storage, CpG, genGEO, SCO2T PRO

    Received: 23 Apr 2024; Accepted: 03 Jul 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Cairncross, Ogland-Hand, Adams and Middleton. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Jonathan D. Ogland-Hand, Carbon Solutions LLC, Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.