166 Geothermal Power Plants: Principles, Applications, Case Studies and Environmental Impact

Table 8.5 Comparison of efficiencies of single- and dual-pressure binary cycles [17].

Working fluid Brine temperature Thermal efficiency, % Utilization efficiency, %

Basic Dual-press Basic Dual-press

i-C4H10 93
C (200
F) 5.5 4.6 31.9 39.7

i-C5H12 93
C (200
F) 5.2 4.2 30.5 37.0
i-C4H10 149
C (300
F) 10.3 9.8 48.8 56.9
i-C5H12 149
C (300
F) 9.8 8.8 44.6 51.5
i-C5H12 204
C (400
F) 13.7 13.1 57.7 61.2

Note: The condensing and dead-state temperatures were both taken as 38
C (100
F).

The analysis of a dual-pressure cycle follows the same methodology as for a basic
cycle but is merely longer. A detailed comparison of basic cycles (single-pressure)
and the dual-pressure cycles has been conducted by Khalifa and Rhodes [17] for two
different working fluids; their results are summarized in Table 8.5. The results are
quite interesting. In all cases, the thermal efficiency for a dual-pressure cycle is actu-
ally lower than for a basic cycle, but the utilization efficiency for a dual-pressure cycle
is significantly higher than for a basic cycle, ranging from a 6% advantage at the
highest brine temperature to 24% at the lowest.
The thermal efficiency depends on the amount of heat added to the cycle but makes
no distinction between high-exergy heat and low-exergy heat, and ignores the temper-
ature difference between the fluids. Thermodynamics requires that the higher the aver-
age temperature of the heat added to a cycle, the higher will be the thermal efficiency,
for the same heat sink temperature. Since a significant amount of heat is needed to
evaporate the fluid from 89 (see Fig. 8.11) at a relatively low temperature, this
adversely affects the thermal efficiency of the dual-pressure cycle. However, the utiliza-
tion efficiency depends on how effectively the exergy of the brine is used. By more
closely matching the brine cooling curve with the heating and boiling curves, the
average temperature difference between the two fluids is made smaller and the irrever-
sibilities are reduced. This allows more exergy from the brine to enter the cycle and
leads to a higher overall utilization efficiency.
The 5 MW Raft River dual-boiling plant in Idaho, U.S., was the first to make use
of the dual-pressure concept [18]. It was operated as a demonstration plant from
198182 by the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory for the U.S. Dept. of Energy;
see Chap. 20.

8.4.3 Dual-fluid binary cycle

It may sound odd but the first commercial binary plant in the United States was a
remarkably advanced design, the Magmamax plant at East Mesa in California’s
Imperial Valley. It was a 12.5 MW plant that began operations in 1979 using a dual-
fluid cycle in which two different hydrocarbons were used in interlocking Rankine
cycles, one a subcritical cycle and one a supercritical cycle [19, 20]. We will present a
detailed case study of this plant in Chap. 18; here we will describe the thermodynamic
principles that underlie the design of such a system.