Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power

plant enhanced by a thermal storage
Martina Ciani Bassetti a, Daniele Consoli b, Giovanni Manente a, *, Andrea Lazzaretto a
a
University of Padova, Department of Industrial Engineering, Via Venezia 1, 35131, Padova, Italy
b
Enel Green Power - Innovation and Sustainability, Viale Regina Margherita 125, 00198, Rome, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Geothermal resources are subject to thermal depletion during the lifetime of geothermal power plants.
Received 19 January 2017 The decline of the geofluid temperature significantly affects both the magnitude and quality of the
Received in revised form thermal energy available for electrical conversion and, in turn, plant efficiency and power output.
25 March 2017
Furthermore, the performance of geothermal power plants based on air-cooled Organic Rankine Cycle
Accepted 25 May 2017
Available online xxx
systems (ORCs) markedly decreases at warm ambient temperatures because of the higher turbine
exhaust pressures. In this study a new hybrid Geothermal - Concentrating Solar Power (GEO-CSP) plant is
modelled, which enables a better utilization of geothermal energy and improves the performance of the
Keywords:
Organic Rankine cycle
geothermal ORC system during the whole lifetime of the power plant. Solar energy is used to heat up the
Concentrating solar power geothermal fluid entering the heat exchanger of the ORC. The CSP plant is equipped with a thermal
Hybridization energy storage (TES) unit which accumulates the surplus of solar thermal energy available during day-
Thermal energy storage time, while releasing it during night-time when the efficiency of the power system is higher. The inte-
Geothermal energy gration of the storage unit in the parabolic trough CSP system enables a 19% gain in the incremental
Sustainability annual energy production from solar, which raises from 5.3% to 6.3% compared to the geothermal-only
plant. Thus, the hybrid plant may greatly benefit from the addition of a TES unit.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction lifespan of the power plant.

In the last decade there has been increasing interest in renew-
able energy sources as a sustainable alternative to the non-
renewable counterparts. Low temperature energy sources are of
particular interest due to the wide availability worldwide. The
Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) system is commonly used to generate
electricity from solar, geothermal or biomass energy sources.
Geothermal energy in particular is cheap, sustainable, dispatchable
and has a high potential to fulfil the global energy demand [1,2].
However, it presents some weaknesses such as the productivity
decline. The temperature and mass flow rate of the geothermal
brine extracted from the production wells steadily decrease over
time, and may result in a significant reduction of power generation
and performance [3]. Furthermore, in air-cooled binary plants,
higher ambient temperatures correspond to higher condensation
pressure and, in turn, in a lower turbine power output [4].
Accordingly, the plant productivity varies both during the day and
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: giovanni.manente@unipd.it (G. Manente).
Budisulistyo et al. [5] proposed a lifetime design strategy for
binary geothermal plants which takes into account the resource
degradation during the exploitation both in terms of temperature
and mass flow rate. In particular, the temperature drop for the
Wairakei geothermal field located in New Zealand is 0.5
C per year
for the first twenty years and 0.2
C per year until the end of the
plant life time (30 years). The authors developed four different ORC
system designs corresponding to four different inlet brine condi-
tions that were properly selected during the plant life time. The
best design yielding the highest electricity production over the
plant lifetime was obtained with partially degraded geofluid con-
ditions. Manente et al. [6] searched for the optimum operating
parameters that maximize the electricity production of an air-
cooled geothermal ORC in response to changes of the ambient
temperatures between 0 and 30
C and geofluid temperatures be-
tween 130 and 180
C. They showed that the optimal control
strategy is different for subcritical cycles using isobutane compared
to supercritical cycles using R134a.
Hybridization of different renewable energy sources may
compensate and overcome the drawbacks of individual systems.
Peterseim et al. [7] considered different hybridization option of

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
0960-1481/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
2 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13

Nomenclature t solar transmissivity, rad

4 latitude, rad
A area, m2 u hour angle, rad
cp average specific heat at constant pressure, J/(kg K)
D diameter, m Subscripts
et tracking error b brine
f correction factor caph hour capacity
h specific enthalpy, J/kg capth thermal capacity
hw convective heat transfer coefficient, W/(m2 K) des design
H height, m e exit
IF intercept factor el electrical
lfocus mirror focal length, m env envelope
lrows spacing between collector rows, m i inlet
ltrough solar collector assembly length, m is isentropic
m_ mass flow rate, kg/s ml log-mean
M mass, kg nom nominal
Q_ heat rate, kW th thermal
T temperature, K o outlet
U global heat transfer coefficient, W/(m2 K) opt optical
V volume, m3 p pump
_ Qout volumetric flow rate
W power, kW
shad shading
wc mirror width, m
sky undisturbed value
t turbine
Greek symbols
wf working fluid
a solar absorptivity
bc collector tilt angle, rad
Dhis isentropic enthalpy drop variation
gc collector azimuth, rad
Acronyms and abbreviations
gHL tank loss coefficient, W/(m2 K)
ADNI Available Direct Normal Irradiance
gs solar azimuth, rad
CSP Concentrating Solar Power
d declination angle, rad
DNI Direct Normal Irradiance
ε emissivity
HTF Heat Transfer Fluid
h isentropic efficiency
ORC Organic Rankine Cycle
qi incidence angle, rad
PTC Parabolic Trough Collectors
qs solar elevation, rad
SCA Solar Collectors Assembly
qz solar zenith, rad
SF Solar Field
p phi, rad
SM Solar Multiple
rM mirror reflectivity, rad
TES Thermal Energy Storage
s Stefan-Boltzmann constant, (m2 kg)/(s2 K)

concentrating solar power (CSP) systems. Besides the hybridization
with coal and natural gas fuelled power plants, they assessed the
combination of CSP with biomass (see also [8]) and waste materials,
geothermal energy, and wind energy. As for the geothermal-CSP
combination, the authors claimed that solar energy is best suited
to superheat up to 380
C the geothermal steam usually available in
dry and flash plants at moderate temperatures between 150 and
200
C, by using a parabolic trough solar field. The authors
explained that the addition of solar energy can raise cycle efficiency
and, in turn, reduce the capital expenditure on production and
injection wells. A variation of this integration concept has been
analysed by Cardemil et al. [9] who recently assessed the perfor-
mance of single and double-flash geothermal power plants assisted
by parabolic trough concentrating (PTC) solar systems in Chile. The
solar thermal energy was supplied to superheat up to 320
C the
steam generated in the flashing process and to generate additional
steam from the separated liquid. In the double-flash hybrid power
plant scheme an additional solar heat exchanger was included to
superheat the low pressure steam generated in the second flashing
process. The maximum second law efficiencies (where the exergy
of the solar heat rather than the exergy of solar radiation is used) of
the hybrid systems were 44.0% and 51.7% for the single and double
flash schemes, respectively, which are higher than those achieved
by the geothermal only power plants (38.8% and 45.3%). In the
solaregeothermal hybrid system proposed by Lentz et al. [10] to
enhance the productivity of the double-flash plants in Cerro Prieto
(Mexico) the solar energy input is supplied to the water/steam
mixture produced from wells before the first separator. The solar
field of PTC is designed to increase the steam quality by 10%. The
authors demonstrated that a north-south alignment of the solar
collectors provides a higher annual steam production and energy
generation compared to an east-west alignment.
While the hybridization of solar energy in single and double
flash power plants may appear particularly attractive to reach high
temperatures and thermal efficiencies, it is still limited to locations
with medium-to-high enthalpy geothermal sources. Thus, a major
interest is currently addressed to the solar hybridization of
geothermal power plants fed by low-to-medium enthalpy re-
sources based on ORC systems. In the hybrid ORC system proposed
by Zhou et al. [11] solar energy was used to superheat the working
fluid (isopentane) leaving the geothermal evaporator as saturated
vapor. While superheating is convenient in flash-steam power
plants, it appears less advantageous when an organic fluid having a
positive slope of the saturated vapor curve is used. In a subsequent

Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13
work Zhou [12] evaluated both subcritical and supercritical ORC
layouts and found that the subcritical ORC has a larger thermal
mismatch in the heat transfer processes than the hybrid plant
based on the supercritical ORC. Greenhut et al. [13] evaluated the
performance of a solar-geothermal hybrid concept based on a
R134a supercritical binary cycle. The temperature of R134a leaving
the geothermal supercritical evaporator is raised by the heat
transfer fluid of the solar field up to temperatures below 180
C to
prevent the decomposition of the working fluid. The authors
showed that the “utilization” efficiency (based on the exergy input
to the system) reaches remarkable values (around 40%), close to
those of flash-binary hybrid plants. Also Astolfi et al. [14] focused on
a supercritical ORC system using R134a as working fluid. The
geothermal fluid was available at 150
C and off-design calculations
were performed by considering a solar heat exchanger placed after
the geothermal evaporator that allows the mass flow rate and/or
the maximum temperature of R134a to increase compared to the
geothermal-only plant. They showed that both mass flow rate and
maximum temperature must be raised to maximize electric pro-
duction when heat increases. The maximum conversion efficiency
of the solar heat into electricity was in the range 17.2e18%. Average
efficiencies of 8.5e9.4% were calculated for annual solar insolation
to electricity. Cakici et al. [15] assessed the performance of a solar-
geothermal organic Rankine cycle system where the working fluid
is consecutively heated at supercritical pressures by the geothermal
fluid available at 160
C and by the heat transfer fluid of a PTC field
composed of 100 SkyTrough® collectors. After hybridization with
solar energy the net power output of the geothermal power plant
increased by 10.9% whereas both the electrical and exergy effi-
ciencies decreased. R134a gave the highest power output among all
fluids considered (R124, R142b, R227ea and isobutane). This con-
firms the proper selection of the working fluid in the above
mentioned previous studies.
While there are only few practical realizations of supercritical
ORC systems, most of the existing geothermal power plants are
based on the subcritical configurations. To enhance the perfor-
mance of hybrid systems based on subcritical ORCs, Ghasemi et al.
[16] proposed a new layout in which solar thermal energy from a
PTC system is used in parallel with the geothermal fluid to vaporize
the working fluid. Accordingly, the working fluid mass flow rate
after being preheated by the geofluid is split into two streams, one
heated by solar energy, the other one by the geothermal fluid. The
authors demonstrated that this layout allows a higher extraction of
thermal energy from the geofluid since the geofluid can be cooled
down to lower temperatures. The resulting solar incremental effi-
ciency of the hybrid system was up to 17.9%. Ayub et al. [4] focusing
on the same hybrid solar-geothermal system layout maximized the
electricity generation by adjusting the mass flow rate of the heat
transfer fluid in the solar field depending on the ambient temper-
ature and direct normal irradiation. This strategy allowed a 0.8%-
point gain in electricity production compared to the operating
mode where the mass flow rate of the heat transfer fluid was kept
constant. A similar concept was proposed by Wendt et al. [3] to
mitigate the depletion of the geothermal resource in terms of
decreasing fluid temperature and flow rate during the life span of
the plant. The authors proposed to heat a portion of the geofluid
exiting the preheater by solar thermal energy and then recycle it to
the vaporizer inlet. They concluded that the solar retrofit can in-
crease net power generation and efficiencies.
The positive synergies deriving from the combination of solar
and geothermal energy in air-cooled ORC systems have stimulated
investments in practical applications. For instance, the construction
of a concentrating solar thermal (CSP) system is planned in Turkey
to improve the energy production of Gümüsko €y geothermal field
during summer when it loses up to 40% of its peak production
Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
3
capacity [17]. Manente et al. [18] proposed a hybridization scheme
between a solar thermal field and the existing subcritical air-cooled
33 MW ORC system of the Stillwater power plant, built by ENEL
Green Power in 2009. The goal was to recover the loss in power
output of the geothermal plant due to the progressive decrease of
the geothermal fluid temperature and mass flow rate in the first
years of plant operation. Firstly, a new criterion to adjust the load of
the four ORC engines was suggested, which improved power
output of about 5%. The solar resource, when available, was used to
complete the vaporization of the working fluid and, in turn, to in-
crease the maximum pressure of the cycle. It was found that the
hybrid plant could provide a power output gain throughout the
year, although with different increments depending on the season.
To compensate for the declining electricity production of the Still-
water geothermal plant, Enel Green Power added first (in 2011) a
photovoltaic unit and then (in 2014) a solar thermal system based
on low-temperature Parabolic Trough Collectors (PTCs) to increase
the temperature of the brine produced by the wells before the ORC
evaporator inlet.
Two studies have recently appeared on the hybrid geo-solar
system in Stillwater. Zhu et al. [19] carried out a comprehensive
optical characterization of the solar field by measuring the mirror
specular reflectance, mirror slope error and receiver position error
to accurately predict the real solar field performance. The authors
suggested an appropriate tracking-correction strategy to improve
this performance. In particular, they showed that the thermal en-
ergy delivered annually by the solar field is about 9% lower than the
collector manufacturer's prediction if an appropriate tracking-
offset algorithm is not implemented. Wendt et al. [20] developed a
model of the overall Stillwater hybrid geo-solar power plant that
was validated against real plant data, and used to predict the
impact of operating strategies aimed at maximizing the annual
energy production. These strategies include the optimization of IGV
position, ACC fan speed and working fluid composition, and allow
an increase in electricity generation of up to 7.6% to be obtained.
A design and off-design model of the overall hybrid Stillwater
geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a thermal storage unit
is developed in this work. The thermal storage is proposed to
overcome the negative effects on power production of high
ambient temperatures during the central hours of the day, which
strongly affect the condensation pressure in the air-cooled
condenser, and in turn reduce the enthalpy drop and power gen-
eration of the turbines. The aim is to ascertain whether the existing,
or an extended, solar field coupled with a thermal storage could be
a viable option to increase the annual electricity production in
presence of decreasing brine temperature and variable ambient
temperature.
2. The hybrid geothermal-solar power system
The hybrid Stillwater power plant is composed of two main
subsections: the geothermal power plant and the parabolic trough
solar system. Fig. 1 shows a schematic flow diagram of the hybrid
power plant configuration. The geothermal fluid is extracted from
several production wells at different temperatures. The geofluid
produced at lower temperatures is further heated in the solar heat
exchanger, and mixed with the remaining geofluid in the main
production line. The “enhanced” geofluid is then used to evaporate
the working fluid in two identical ORC units (only one unit is shown
in Fig. 1 for clarity purposes) to produce electricity, and finally re-
injected into the reservoir.
The geothermal power plant was originally designed for a
geofluid mass flow rate of 915 kg/s available at a temperature of
154.5
C and an ambient temperature of 12.1
C, which is the annual
ambient temperature in Fallon (NV, USA) where the plant is located.
4 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13
Fig. 1. Schematic layout of Stillwater hybrid geo-solar power plant.
The working fluid is impure isobutane (iC4) which operates be-
tween a maximum pressure close to 30 bar and a condensing
pressure of 4.5 bar. At design conditions the iC4 mass flow rate per
unit was approximately 390 kg/s and the net power output of each
unit was 16.8 MWe. Currently, the brine mass flow rate extracted
from the wells is only 586 kg/s (36% lower than the design) at a
temperature of 145
C (10
C lower than the design). Nonetheless, it
is evenly subdivided between two ORC units, as also suggested in
Ref. [18].
The solar field consists of parabolic trough collectors where
demineralized water is used as heat transfer fluid (HTF). In the solar
heat exchanger heat is transferred from the HTF to the geothermal
fluid. When solar thermal energy is available, the brine is heated
before entering the binary cycle to uplift the temperature as close
as possible to the design value. The integration of a Thermal Energy
Storage (TES) in the solar system is considered in this study to
improve the plant efficiency through a better conversion of solar
energy.
3. Design and off-design model of the geothermal power
plant
A simulation model of one unit of Stillwater geothermal binary
power plant is developed in the Aspen Plus® environment. The
model can predict the variation of the net power output in response
to deviations of the geothermal fluid temperature and ambient
temperature from the design values. The off-design behaviour of
each cycle component is modelled using the manufacturers' data
sheets and performance curves. As it appears from Fig. 2, each unit
is composed of two preheaters in series (PH1/2), one vaporizer
(EV), two expander/generators (TURB-1/2), one air cooled
condenser (COND) and three feed pumps (PUMP1/2/3).
The model assumes brine as pure water and working fluid as
pure isobutane. Each plant component is described by mass and
energy balances which, at steady-state conditions, can be
expressed as:
X X
m_ i ¼ m_ e ;
e
i
Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
X X
0 ¼ Q_  W_ þ m_ i $hi  m_ e $he ; (2)
i e
where m_ i and m_ e are the mass flow rates at inlet and outlet of the
control volume, respectively. Q_ and W _ are the net rate of heat and
work and m_ i $hi and m_ e $he are the enthalpy rates of the streams
through the boundary of the control volume.
Details of the design and off-design modelling of the main plant
components are presented in the following.
3.1. Turbines
The turbines expand the working fluid and transform its energy
into work. Assuming the expansion process as adiabatic and
neglecting the variations in potential and kinetic energy of the
working fluid [21], the power produced by the turbines is given by
W_ t ¼ m_ $ðh  h Þ ¼ m_ $h $ðh  h Þ; (3)
wf 1 2 wf t 1 2s
_ t is the turbine power output, m_
where W wf is the working fluid
mass flow rate, h1 and h2 are the working fluid enthalpy at turbine
inlet and outlet and ht is the isentropic efficiency. The latter is
calculated using the performance calculator provided by the
manufacturer. At design conditions, the isentropic efficiency rea-
ches the remarkable value of 0.869 but, at off-design conditions, it
is strongly affected by the deviations of the isentropic enthalpy
drop (Dhis ) and volumetric flow rate at the outlet of the expander
(Q_ out ) from their design values. Accordingly, two correction factors
(fQout and fDh;is for the volumetric flow rate and isentropic enthalpy
drop, respectively) are used to calculate the isentropic efficiency at
any condition (see Fig. 3) [22].
Accordingly, the off-design isentropic efficiency (his ) of the
turbines is the product of the design isentropic efficiency (86.9%)
and the two correction factors:
(1) his ¼ his;des $fQout $fDh;is ; (4)
The electrical power output (W _ ) is affected by the generator
el
efficiency (hgen ) assumed equal to 0.98, and is given by
 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13 5

Fig. 2. Aspen Plus® flowsheet of one unit of Stillwater geothermal power plant.

Fig. 3. Correction factors of turbine isentropic efficiency due to deviations from the design value of: a) volumetric flow rate at turbine outlet and b) isentropic enthalpy drop.

absorbed by the condensing section is assumed equal to 0.13 kW per

W_ ¼W_ t $h ; (5) kg/s of air. The main features of the ACC are summarized in Table 1.
el gen

3.2. Condenser 3.3. Feed pumps

The working fluid leaving the turbine is desuperheated and After the condenser, the working fluid is sent to the preheater
condensed in an induced draft air cooled condenser (ACC) due to through the feed pumps. The power needed to pump the conden-
water scarcity in the plant location. The heat rejected to the envi- sate is
ronment is given by
W_ p ¼ m_ $ðh  h Þ ¼ m_ $ðh4s  h3 Þ ; (7)
wf 4 3 wf
Q_ cond ¼ m_ wf $ðh2  h3 Þ ¼ m_ air $cpair $DTair ; (6) hp

where m_ air is the air mass flow rate, cpair is the average specific heat
in the considered range of temperature and DTair is the temperature
Table 1
difference between inlet and outlet and h2 and h3 are the specific
Main features of the air cooled condenser.
enthalpy values of the working fluid at condenser inlet and outlet,
respectively (the state numbers refer to Fig. 2). The condenser is Design Data
accurately modelled using Aspen Exchanger Design and Rating®, Fan configuration Induced
using the information included in the manufacturers' data sheets. Finned area [m2] 489000
High-finned tubes are used to increase the outer surface and Tube type G-finned
Global heat transfer coefficient (bare area) [W/m2-K] 445.7
compensate for the low air heat transfer coefficient. The power

Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
6 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13

Fig. 4. Pumps multi-speed performance curves (head and efficiency versus volumetric flow rate).

where hp is the hydraulic pump efficiency and the state numbers Table 3
refer to Fig. 2. Vaporizer design data.

The real plant is equipped with three feed pumps in parallel per Design Data
unit but due to the depleted geothermal resource only two pumps External tube area [m2] 5175
are needed. The multi-speed performance curves (head and effi- Tube outside diameter [mm] 15.9
ciency versus volumetric flow rate) provided by the manufacturer Tube number 4417
and validated experimentally are reproduced in Fig. 4 and imple- Tube type Low-fin
Tube layout 30
Triangular
mented in Aspen Plus®. The simulation model calculates the off-
Global heat transfer coefficient 606.4
design hydraulic efficiency and pump rotational speed for any (inner tube area) [W/m2-K]
value of working fluid volumetric flow rate and cycle maximum
pressure.
3.5. Cycle performance

3.4. Heat exchangers The system efficiency (hsystem ) of the geothermal power plant is
defined as:
The working fluid flows firstly into the two preheaters, where it
becomes a saturated liquid and is evaporated in the vaporizer. A W_
hsystem ¼  net  (9)
superheating of 3
C is ensured to avoid liquid droplet erosion at m_ b $ hbin  h0
turbines inlet. The governing equation to calculate the heat transfer
rate in the heat exchangers is: where W _ net is the difference between the turbine power and the
power absorbed by pump and air-cooled condenser. hbin and ho are
Q_ ¼ U$A$DTml ; (8) the enthalpy of the brine entering the plant and at ambient tem-
perature, respectively.
where U is the overall heat transfer coefficient, A is the heat transfer
surface area and DTml is the log-mean-temperature-difference be-
4. Model of the concentrating solar power plant
tween the two fluids. The U value varies in off-design conditions
due to variations of the flow rates and temperatures from the
The concentrating solar power plant is used to mitigate the
design values. The preheaters and vaporizer are shell-and-tube
thermal depletion of the geothermal source. A comprehensive re-
heat exchangers modelled by Aspen Exchanger Design and Rat-
view of the concentrating solar power technologies has been
ing®. The manufacturers' data sheets were taken as reference to
recently carried out by Zhang et al. [23]. In this work the solar plant
size the heat exchangers. The main features of the preheaters and
consists of parabolic trough collectors (PTCs) using demineralized
vaporizer obtained by the design procedure are shown in Tables 2
water as heat transfer fluid (HTF). The HTF is heated in the solar
and 3.
field and then its thermal energy is used to heat up the geothermal
fluid. As already mentioned in Section 2, a fraction of the brine
coming from the production wells is heated in the solar heat
Table 2
exchanger and then fed into the main production line to the ORC
Preheater 1 and preheater 2 design data.
system. A schematic layout of Stillwater concentrating solar power
Design Data Preheater 1 Preheater 2 section is shown in Fig. 5. In the following paragraphs the features
External tube area [m2] 38675 38675 of the solar field simulation model developed in the Matlab 2015b
Tube outside diameter [mm] 15.9 15.9 environment are described.
Tube number 7598 7598
Tube type Low-fin Low-fin
Tube layout 30
Triangular 30
Triangular 4.1. Solar field model
Global heat transfer coefficient 157.7 272.6
(inner tube area) [W/m2-K]
This section is about the modelling of the concentrating solar

Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13
To the
ORC System
From the
ProducƟon Well
Solar Heat
Exchanger
Fig. 5. Schematic layout of Stillwater concentrating solar power system.
field to calculate the optical and thermal efficiencies and the
thermal power generated. Similarly to the geothermal system,
design and off-design models are built to predict the solar system
behaviour under different operating conditions (DNI, sun position,
ambient parameters). At the nominal irradiance of 900 W/m2 the
solar field in Stillwater was designed to provide a solar thermal
power of 17 MWth.
The optical parameters are calculated with a time step of 1 h
throughout a year. The sun angles (zenith and azimuth) determine
the sun position in the sky and are represented in Fig. 6. The solar
zenith (qz ) is the angle between the direction of the solar rays and
the perpendicular to the ground and the solar azimuth (gs ) is the
angle between the projection of the solar rays on the ground and
the south. Both the solar zenith and azimuth depend on the solar
time, which is defined as the time based on the apparent angular
motion of the sun across the sky and the latitude of the location (4).
The sun angles are calculated from [24]:
qz ¼ arccosðcosð4Þ$cosðdÞ$cosðuÞ þ sinð4Þ$sinðdÞÞ;
p
qs ¼  qz ;
2
Fig. 6. Solar Zenith (qz ) and solar Azimuth (gs ).
Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
7
Parabolic Trough Solar Field
\\\
Expansion
Vessel
  
 cosðqz Þ$sinð4Þ  sinðdÞ 
gs ¼ sgnðuÞ$acos ; (12)
sinðqz Þ$cosð4Þ
where qs is the elevation angle, d is the declination angle and u is
the hour angle.
The calculation of the radiant solar energy concentrated on the
receiver tube depends on the optical efficiency of the reflectors. The
optical efficiency can be split into a component which is indepen-
dent of the sun rays incidence angle and other factors which are
instead related to it. The incidence angle-independent optical ef-
ficiency (hopt0 ) is defined as the product of the mirrors reflectivity
(rM ), the glass envelope solar transmissivity of the receiver (t), the
receiver tube solar absorptivity (a), the intercept factor (IF) and the
tracking error (et ).
hopt0 ¼ rM $t$a$IF$et ; (13)
While the longitudinal incidence angle (qi ) affects the optical
(10) performance of the collector (hopt ), the parabolic shape of the
mirror perfectly focuses the rays in the transversal direction. The
longitudinal incidence angle is given by Ref. [25]:
(11) qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
qi ¼ acos 1  ðcosðqs  bc Þ  cosðbc Þ$cosðqs Þ$ð1  cosðgs  gc ÞÞÞ2 ;
(14)
where bc and gc are the tilt and azimuth angles of the collector,
respectively.
The performance factor which takes into account the optical
path length of the sun rays is the incidence angle modifier (IAM),
which is given by a polynomial equation of the incidence angle,
with specific coefficients for each collector type [26].
As the collectors are not operated in isolation, the effect of
shadowing between rows is relevant in the evaluation of the optical
efficiency. Depending on the position of the sun, which determines
the orientation of the collectors, the spacing between rows (lrows )
and the mirror width (wc ), the shadowing factor (fshad ) may be
more or less significant.
lrows cosðqz Þ
fshad ¼ 1  $ ; (15)
wc cosðqi Þ
The collectors have a finite length. Thus, there is a portion of the
receiver tube which is not reached by the sun rays, the length of
8 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13
which depends on the incidence angle and ratio between the
mirror focal length (lfocus ) and the entire solar collector assembly
(SCA) length (ltrough ).
The performance factor fend takes into account the end losses,
and is calculated as:
lfocus
fend ¼ 1  $tanðqi Þ;
ltrough
Generally, conventional SCA are particularly exposed to dust
from soils and strong wind loads, thus the surface effectiveness is
influenced by the cleanliness factor (fclean ).
Thus, the overall optical efficiency is the product of the optical
efficiency (that is independent of the incidence angle) and all the
factors described above and/or calculated in Equations (15) and
(16).
hopt ¼ hopt0 $IAM$cosðqi Þ$fshad $fend $fclean ;
Finally, the radiant energy absorbed from the receiver tube is the
product of the direct normal irradiance (DNI), the collector area
(Acollector ) and the overall optical efficiency.
Q_ SF ¼ hopt $DNI$Acollector
The receiver tube is placed at the focal point of the solar col-
lector assembly. The thermal energy is transferred to the HTF by
convection. The energy balance for the receiver tube is:
 “normal operation mode”. Accordingly, the HTF enters the high-
m_ HTF $cp HTF $DTHTF ¼ Q_ SF  Q_ loss ;
The thermal power transferred to the heat transfer fluid is
m_ HTF $cp HTF $DTHTF where m_ HTF is the HTF mass flow rate in the
receiver tube, cp HTF is the average specific heat in the considered
range of temperature and DTHTF is the HTF temperature variation in
the receiver section. The tube is covered with absorptive coating
and has a glass envelope to reduce convective and radiative heat
losses, which are calculated by:
 between the inlet and the outlet of each loop. The mass flow rate of
Q_ loss ¼ p$Denv $L$hw $ðTenv  Tamb Þ þ p$εenv $s$Denv $L$ Tenv
4 the HTF exiting the hot tank and flowing into the solar heat
4
 Tsky ;
where L is the length of the linear receiver tube, Denv is the diameter
of the tube envelope, hw is the outside convective coefficient, s is
the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and εenv is the envelope emittance.
Tenv , Tamb and Tsky are the envelope temperature, the ambient
temperature in the tube proximity and the undisturbed ambient
temperature, respectively.
4.2. Thermal energy storage system model
A thermal energy storage system is added to the existing
concentrating solar power plant to enhance the overall system
performance by shifting the solar thermal production at lower
ambient temperatures when the geothermal plant is more efficient.
Although a sensible heat storage system is considered here, the
recent advances of latent heat storage using phase change materials
and thermochemical storage which uses reversible chemical re-
actions, recently described by Zhang et al. [27], could soon promote
their application in these plants.
The flowsheet of the CSP plant equipped with thermal energy
storage and connected to the geothermal system is shown in Fig. 7.
The storage system is a direct system (i.e., HTF and storage
Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
Hot
To the Tank
ORC unit
Solar Field
From the
(16)
producƟon well
Solar Heat \\\
Exchanger
Cold
Tank
Fig. 7. Configuration of the thermal energy storage system in the hybrid solar-
(17)
geothermal plant.
medium coincides) and consists of two tanks, one at a higher
temperature and one at a lower temperature. Demineralized water
stored in the low-temperature tank enters the solar field, where it
(18)
is heated up. Depending on the DNI, the heat transfer fluid reaches
different temperatures at the outlet of the solar field:
- If the temperature is higher than 170
C, the solar plant is in
(19) temperature tank and then flows into the heat exchanger to heat
up the geothermal fluid.
- If the temperature is lower than 170
C the “recirculation mode”
is activated. The heat transfer fluid leaving the solar field is
recirculated to the low-temperature tank in order to avoid
cooling the water in the hot tank.
The mass flow rate of the HTF exiting the cold tank is regulated
as a function of the DNI to obtain a temperature difference of 50
C
exchanger depends upon the operation mode and the temperature
of the environment:
(20)
- During normal operation, the HTF coming from the SF enters the
hot tank and its mass flow rate depends on the DNI. At the same
time, the HTF is sent to the solar heat exchanger to heat up the
geothermal brine and then is sent to the cold tank. The HTF mass
flow rate in the heat exchanger is equal to the design value.
- Conversely, when the CSP plant is working in recirculation
mode, the HTF accumulated in the hot tank is released only
when the ambient temperature is low. For each day of the
reference year, a threshold ambient temperature has been
calculated as a function of the daily ambient temperature vari-
ation. Thus, in recirculation mode the hot tank is emptied only
when the ambient temperature is lower than the daily threshold
value.
The useful solar thermal power of Stillwater plant is 17 MWth at
the nominal solar irradiance (ADNI equal to 900 W/m2). This
thermal energy is then used to heat up the geothermal brine to
increase the electricity production. As described in this study, the
purpose of the TES system is to accumulate additional solar energy
and release it at low ambient temperatures, i.e. when the
geothermal power plant is more efficient. Thus, a larger solar field is
needed to charge the TES system. A study of the average ambient
temperature was performed, and a daily threshold temperature
 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13 9

was defined. The stored energy is released only when the ambient Assuming a constant mass M in the tank for each time step, the
temperature is lower than the daily threshold temperature. On temperature in the tank (T) is calculated from the energy balance:
average, the ambient temperature is under the threshold temper-
ature for 6 h per day. So, the solar field is resized in order to produce dT
M$cv $ ¼ m_ i $cp $ðTi  TÞ  m_ e $cp $ðTe  TÞ  UA$ðT  Tenv Þ
the nominal capacity for the daily working hours and for the dt
additional storage ones. The design parameter which is represen- (24)
tative of the storage capacity is the solar multiple (SM):
where Ti and Te are temperatures of the inlet and outlet streams
and Tenv is the ambient temperature. It is here assumed that the
Q_ SF
SM ¼ ; (21) stream leaving the tank has the same temperature of the tank (i.e.,
_
Q PBnom Te ¼ T), so the second term on the right hand side of Eq. (24)
vanishes. The overall heat transfer coefficient UA is a function of
where Q_ SF is the thermal power provided by the solar field at the the volume of water in the tank and of the tank loss coefficient per
nominal solar irradiance and Q_ PBnom is the thermal power, provided unit area (gHL ), and is given by:
by solar, required by the power block at nominal conditions (17
 
MWth). In the model, the solar multiple is selected equal to 1.6. V
The thermal energy storage capacity can be expressed either in UA ¼ gHL $ þ p$D$H ; (25)
H
terms of thermal power or hours:
where V, H and D are respectively the volume and the height of the
TEScapth ¼ Q_ thnom $TEScaph ; (22) fluid in the tank and the diameter of the tank.
The storage tanks specifications are reported in Table 4.
where TEScapth and TEScaph are the TES thermal and hours capacity
and Q_ thnom is the nominal thermal power.
5. Results
The tanks are cylindrical and the water inside is assumed to be
fully-mixed. The incoming and the outgoing streams might not be
5.1. Geothermal power plant
equal, therefore the level of fluid can vary between specified high
and low level limits [28].
The geothermal binary cycle simulations are performed for
A differential equation is used to describe the rate of change of
the mass (M) in the tank: different brine inlet temperatures and ambient temperatures, in
the ranges 140
C ÷ 155
C and 10
C ÷ 35
C, respectively. For each
of these conditions, the pump rotational speed and the condensa-
dM
¼ m_ i  m_ e ; (23) tion pressure were modified in the search for the maximum power
dt output of the plant. The code calculates the working fluid mass flow
where m_ i and m_ e are respectively the mass flow rate entering and rate that is required to obtain a superheating of 3
C at the turbine
exiting the tank. inlet, and the air mass flow rate required in the ACC for a 2
C sub-
cooling of the working fluid. The net power output of the overall
power plant (both units) as a function of the brine and ambient
Table 4 temperatures is shown in Fig. 8.
Storage tank specifications. The net power output of the geothermal-only plant is highly
Tank diameter (D), m 17 affected by both the geothermal brine temperature and the
Tank height (H), m 9.9 ambient temperature.
Tank loss coefficient (gHL ), W/(m2 K) 0.4 The increase in brine temperature from 140
C to 155
C is
Tank volume, m3 2248
accompanied by a steep increment in net power output, the entity

Fig. 8. Net power output of the geothermal power plant versus ambient and brine temperatures.

Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
10 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13

Table 5
Net electrical power output variations compared to the reference case (ambient temperature equal to 12.1
C and brine temperature equal to 140
C).

Net Electrical Power Output Variation [%] Brine Temperature [
C]

154.5 152.2 150 147.5 145 142.5 140

Ambient Temperature [ C] 35 68% 64% 59% 54% 49% 44% 39%
30 84% 78% 72% 66% 60% 54% 50%
25 100% 93% 87% 79% 73% 67% 63%
20 117% 109% 101% 93% 86% 81% 77%
15 133% 124% 116% 107% 100% 94% 92%
12.1 142% 133% 124% 115% 108% 102% 100%
10 148% 138% 129% 120% 113% 108% 106%
5 160% 150% 141% 131% 124% 120% 119%
0 170% 159% 149% 140% 133% 130% 130%
5 176% 164% 155% 146% 139% 137% 138%
10 177% 165% 156% 147% 141% 140% 143%

of which varies depending on the ambient temperature. Indeed, it
is more relevant at low ambient temperatures compared to warmer
ones. As the brine temperature increases, the maximum pressure
and temperature in the ORC system is allowed to increase and, in
turn, the system efficiency and power output.
Conversely, the increase of the ambient temperature
from 10
C to 35
C involves a steep decrease of the net power
output due to the increase of the condensing pressure and the
reduction of the enthalpy drop in the turbine. At very low ambient
temperatures (below 0
C), the power output is almost constant
because the condensing pressure is limited to the minimum value
of 2.8 bar. This plateau is due to this limitation of the minimum
expander outlet pressure, which prevents further increases in the
enthalpy drop of the turbine.
Table 5 shows the net electrical power output variation
compared to the reference condition where the brine temperature
is 140
C (which is close to the actual temperature of the
geothermal fluid) and the ambient temperature is 12.1
C (i.e., the
annual average ambient temperature). The Table shows that by
heating the geothermal fluid up to the design temperature of
154.5
C the net power output from the ORC can be increased up to
42% compared to the reference situation.
5.2. Solar system
The solar system simulations are performed for the entire
reference year at hourly time steps. Although methods exist in the
literature to convert global solar irradiation data commonly avail-
able as monthly averages into direct irradiation hourly data (see
Ref. [23]), direct irradiation hourly data were obtained for the plant
location (Fallon, NV) from the NREL database. The estimated total
annual thermal energy produced by the oversized (SM ¼ 1.6) solar
field with storage and transferred to the geothermal brine is about
41.5 GWh/year. If the solar system was not equipped with the
storage unit, the thermal energy exchanged with the brine would
be slightly higher (~41.8 GWh/y) because the TES system does
create losses due to thermal dispersion in the tanks. However,
storage benefits are further explained in the next paragraph.
The trends of the heat exchanged in the solar heat exchanger,
both with storage (light blue lines) and without storage (violet
lines) are shown in Fig. 9 for five reference days of June. The ther-
mal energy is released during the day when the DNI is sufficiently
high to heat the HTF to more than 170
C. As shown in Fig. 9, the
integration of the TES in the solar plant allows thermal energy to be
released during night-time as well when the ambient temperature
is lower than the above mentioned thresholds.
5.3. Hybrid power plant
The results of the present study showed that electric power
production increases due to both the CSP plant and the TES unit.
Indeed, the temperature of the geothermal brine becomes closer to
the design value (154.5
C) both when the CSP plant is producing
energy during the day and when the TES system is releasing energy

Fig. 9. ADNI and thermal energy exchanged in the solar heat exchanger and transferred to the geothermal brine for five reference days of June, between the hours 3888th and
4008th of the year.

Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13 11

during the night. At the design irradiance the brine temperature
increments at the ORC system inlet from the actual geofluid tem-
perature (~140
C) are 7.1
C for SM ¼ 1, 11.6
C for SM ¼ 1.6 without
storage, and 7.4
C for SM ¼ 1.6 with storage. So, in the absence of a
storage system, the geofluid temperature reaches higher peaks
compared to the scenario with TES system but the temperature
increments are observed only during the daytime. Instead, with
storage the geofluid temperature increases both during the day and
a few hours during night-time. The strongly non-linear trend of the
net power output in Fig. 8 coupled with the specific climate of the
plant location (Fallon, NV) dictates the convenience of the system
with storage.
Indeed, the annual electrical output of the hybrid geo-solar
plant equipped with the TES system amounts to 170.9 GWh/year,
whereas the same plant without storage could generate “only”
169.3 GWh/year. Thus, the solar system allows an annual energy
increment of 10.2 GWh compared to the geothermal-only power
plant (160.7 GWh/year) when the TES is included, which reduces to
8.6 GWh/year in the absence of the TES system. So, the TES system
allows a 18.6% gain in incremental electrical power output
compared to the hybrid plant without storage.
The efficiency of the geothermal-only plant under design con-
ditions is about 11% and drops to 6% at warm ambient temperatures
and the current low brine temperatures. The efficiency of the
additional electrical power due to the CSP contribution, calculated
at noon of the summer solstice, is about 10%. While this value may
appear low when compared to other power systems generating
electricity from solar energy, it is still higher compared to the
conversion efficiency of the geothermal resource and therefore it
may be accepted if cheap PTC collectors are employed.
The comparison of the electrical power output between the
geothermal-only plant and the hybrid solar-geothermal plant with
storage is shown for five reference days of June in Fig. 10. It clearly
appears that the geothermal-only electrical output widely varies
during the day due to the considerable influence of the ambient
temperature on the ORC yield. Thus, the additional solar thermal
energy is released both during the day, when the geothermal power
output is lower because of the warm ambient temperatures and

Fig. 10. Electrical power output comparison (hybrid plant with storage versus geothermal-only plant) for five reference days of June, between the hours 3888th and 4008th of the
year.

Fig. 11. Electrical power output comparison (hybrid plant without storage versus geothermal-only plant) for five reference days of June, between the hours 3888th and 4008th of
the year.

Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
12 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13

18
17
16
15

Net Electrical Power Output [GWh/month]

14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

GEO-Only Hybrid GEO-CSP without TES Hybrid GEO-CSP with TES

Fig. 12. Comparison between monthly net electrical power output of the geothermal plant and the hybrid plant with and without TES.

during the night, when the geothermal efficiency is higher.
The comparison of the electrical power output between the
geothermal-only plant and the hybrid solar-geothermal plant with
the oversized solar field (SM ¼ 1.6) but without storage is shown for
five reference days of June in Fig. 11.
The following Fig. 12 shows the comparison between the
monthly electrical energy production of the geothermal-only plant
(green bars), hybrid plant with TES (yellow bars) and hybrid plant
without TES (pink bars). The hybrid plant with storage produces the
highest energy production during the whole reference year. Obvi-
ously, during wintertime the CSP contribution is not very important
due to the low irradiation levels.
The TES system allows a better exploitation of the additional
thermal power produced by the CSP plant. The CSP plant without
storage produces thermal energy that is immediately released to
heat up the geothermal brine, increasing the hybrid plant electrical
power output. On the other hand, the control logic implemented in
the TES system releases the additional solar thermal energy during
the night-time, when the ambient temperature is low and the
geothermal system is more efficient. Accordingly, the monthly net
electrical power output is higher, in particular during summertime
when the daily ambient temperatures are quite high.
6. Conclusions
design temperature, thereby ensuring a higher thermal efficiency of
the ORC system. The non-linear trend of the net power output
surface implies that the incremental solar-to-electrical conversion
efficiency varies depending on the solar input and ambient tem-
perature. By decoupling the two variables the thermal storage
system searches for those conditions which maximize the annual
electricity production. In particular, it is used to shift the incre-
mental solar energy production from daytime to night-time hours
when the ambient temperature is lower and the efficiency of the
power system is higher.
The addition of the parabolic trough CSP system designed for a
useful thermal power of 17 MWth results in an electrical energy
increase of 2.8% compared to the geothermal-only plant. This boost
becomes 5.3% when the CSP solar field is oversized by a solar
multiple of 1.6 and reaches 6.3% with the addition of a thermal
energy storage to the oversized field. So, the storage system alone
does increase the productivity of the solar section by 19%. The
addition of the thermal energy storage system is particularly
effective in the warm season when the thermal efficiency of the air-
cooled ORC system is very low during daytime.
Based on these results the hybrid plant configuration enhanced
by the storage system is seen as a promising option to offset the
depletion of the geothermal fluid characteristics and, in turn, allow
a better exploitation of both renewable energy sources.

The paper shows the main features of a detailed design and off-
design model of a real hybrid geothermal-solar power plant
composed of a parabolic trough collector solar field and an air-
cooled binary cycle geothermal plant. A strategy is suggested to
mitigate the thermal depletion of the geothermal source by using
solar energy to increase the temperature of the geofluid produced
from the wells. This enables the ORC system to maintain a high
efficiency while coping with the drop in geofluid temperature and
mass flow rate compared to the design values. The evaluation of
potential benefits deriving from the integration of a thermal energy
storage (TES) unit within the system are also evaluated.
The results of the simulations clearly show that both the brine
temperature and ambient temperature highly affect the perfor-
mance of the dry-cooled geothermal plant. The addition of the solar
system keeps the temperature of the geothermal fluid close to the
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Dott. Sergio Rech for his helpful
suggestions in the modelling of the hybrid geo-solar system.
References
[1] J.W. Tester, B.J. Anderson, A.S. Batchelor, D.D. Blackwell, R. DiPippo,
E.M. Drake, et al., The Future of Geothermal Energy e Impact of Enhanced
Geothermal Systems (EGS) on the United States in the 21st Century, Massa-
chusetts Institute of Technology, 2006.
[2] International Energy Agency (IEA), Statistics, 2006. https://www.iea.org/
statistics/ [Accessed 30 November 2016].
[3] D. Wendt, G. Mines, Use of a geothermal-solar retrofit hybrid power plant to
mitigate declines in geothermal resource productivity, in: Transactions of the
38th Annual Meeting of the Geothermal Resources Council, Oregon, Portland,
Sept .

Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
 M. Ciani Bassetti et al. / Renewable Energy xxx (2017) 1e13
[4] M. Ayub, A. Mitsos, H. Ghasemi, Thermo-economic analysis of a hybrid solar-
binary geothermal power plant, Energy 87 (2015) 326e335.
[5] D. Budisulistyo, C.S. Wong, S. Krumdieck, Lifetime design strategy for binary
geothermal plants considering degradation of geothermal resource produc-
tivity, Energy Convers. Manag. 132 (2017) 1e13.
[6] G. Manente, A. Toffolo, A. Lazzaretto, M. Paci, An Organic Rankine Cycle off-
design model for the search of the optimal control strategy, Energy 58
(2013) 97e106.
[7] J.H. Peterseim, S. White, A. Tadros, U. Hellwig, Concentrating solar power
hybrid plants - enabling cost effective synergies, Renew. Energy 67 (2014)
178e185.
[8] J.H. Peterseim, U. Hellwig, A. Tadros, S. White, Hybridisation optimization of
concentrating solar thermal and biomass power generation facilities, Sol.
Energy 99 (2014) 203e214.
[9] J.M. Cardemil, F. Cortes, A. Díaz, R. Escobar, Thermodynamic evaluation of
solar-geothermal hybrid power plants in northern Chile, Energy Convers.
Manag. 123 (2016) 348e361.
[10] A. Lentz, R. Almanza, Solaregeothermal hybrid system, Appl. Therm. Eng. 26
(2006) 1537e1544.
[11] C. Zhou, E. Doroodchi, B. Moghtaderi, An in-depth assessment of hybrid
solaregeothermal power generation, Energy Convers. Manag. 74 (2013)
88e101.
[12] C. Zhou, Hybridisation of solar and geothermal energy in both subcritical and
supercritical Organic Rankine Cycles, Energy Convers. Manag. 81 (2014)
72e82.
[13] A.D. Greenhut, J.W. Tester, R. DiPippo, R. Field, C. Love, K. Nichols, et al., Solar-
geothermal hybrid cycle analysis for low enthalpy solar and geothermal re-
sources, in: Proc. of the World Geothermal Congress, Bali, Indonesia, April
2010, pp. 25e29.
[14] M. Astolfi, L. Xodo, M.C. Romano, E. Macchi, Technical and economical analysis
of a solaregeothermal hybrid plant based on an Organic Rankine Cycle,
Geothermics 40 (2011) 58e68.
[15] D.M. Cakici, A. Erdogan, C.O. Colpan, Thermodynamic performance assess-
ment of an integrated geothermal powered supercritical regenerative organic
Rankine cycle and parabolic trough solar collectors, Energy. 120 (2017)
Please cite this article in press as: M. Ciani Bassetti, et al., Design and off-design models of a hybrid geothermal-solar power plant enhanced by a
thermal storage, Renewable Energy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.078
13
306e319.
[16] H. Ghasemi, E. Sheu, A. Tizzanini, M. Paci, A. Mitsos, Hybrid solaregeothermal
power generation: optimal retrofitting, Appl. Energ 131 (2014) 158e170.
[17] N. Aksoy, Power generation from geothermal resources in Turkey, Renew.
Energy 68 (2014) 595e601.
[18] G. Manente, R. Field, R. DiPippo, J.W. Tester, M. Paci, N. Rossi, Hybrid solar-
geothermal power generation to increase the energy production from a bi-
nary geothermal plant, in: Proc. of IMECE 2011, Denver, November 2011,
pp. 11e17.
[19] G. Zhu, C. Turchi, Solar field optical characterization at Stillwater geothermal/
solar hybrid plant, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 139 (3) (2017), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1115/1.4035518, 031002-031002-10, SOL-16e1342.
[20] D.S. Wendt, G.L. Mines, C.S. Turchi, G. Zhu, S. Cohan, L. Angelini, F. Bizzarri,
D. Consoli, A. De Marzo, Stillwater hybrid geo-solar power plant optimization
analyses, in: Transactions of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Geothermal
Resources Council, Reno, NV, Sept 20e23, 2014.
[21] R. DiPippo, Geothermal Power Plants: Principles, Applications, Case Studies
and Environmental Impact, third ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2012.
[22] G. Manente, Analysis and Development of Innovative Binary Cycle Power
Plants for Geothermal and Combined Geo-solar Thermal Resources, Ph.D.
Thesis, University of Padova, Italy, 2011.
ve, G. Cace
[23] H.L. Zhang, J. Baeyens, J. Degre res, Concentrated solar power plants:
review and design methodology, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 22 (2013)
466e481.
[24] J.A. Duffie, W.A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Process, fourth ed.,
John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, 2013.
[25] J.F. Feldhoff, Linear fresnel collectors: a technology overview, in: Technical
Presentation at SFERA Summer School, 28 June 2012 (Almeria, Spain).
[26] Lectures on Concentrating Solar Power Plants, KTH Royal Institute of Tech-
nology, Stockholm, 2015.
[27] H. Zhang, J. Baeyens, G. Ca ceres, J. Degre
ve, Y. Lv, Thermal energy storage:
recent developments and practical aspects, Prog. Energy Combust. 53 (2016)
1e40.
[28] University of Wisconsin-Madison, Solar Energy Laboratory, “TRNSYS 17-
Mathematical Reference”.