Geothermal and Biomass Energy: Technological innovations and economic viability in the renewable energy landscape
Keywords:
Biomass energy, Economic viability, Geothermal energy, Renewable energy, Technological innovationsAbstract
This review explores the technological innovations and economic viability of geothermal and biomass energy within the renewable energy landscape. Geothermal energy harnesses heat from the Earth's subsurface to generate electricity, offering stable baseload power with minimal environmental impact. In contrast, biomass energy utilizes organic materials such as agricultural residues and forest waste to produce heat, electricity, and biofuels, contributing to waste management and renewable energy goals. The review aims to assess the current state of these technologies, highlighting key advancements, economic considerations, and policy implications. Key findings reveal that geothermal energy benefits from advancements in enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) and improved drilling technologies, enhancing resource accessibility and efficiency. Economic viability is bolstered by low operational costs and long-term sustainability, although high initial investments and site-specific challenges remain barriers. Biomass energy innovations focus on optimizing conversion technologies like gasification and biochemical processes, enhancing energy yields and diversifying biomass applications. Economic challenges include feedstock variability and operational costs, mitigated by supportive policies and technological advancements. Implications suggest the need for integrated renewable energy planning that leverages the strengths of both technologies while addressing their respective limitations. Policy frameworks should prioritize incentives for technological innovation, sustainable biomass management, and grid integration to optimize contributions to global energy transitions. Future research directions should emphasize interdisciplinary approaches, including environmental assessments and policy innovation, to support the scalability and integration of geothermal and biomass energy into sustainable energy systems worldwide.
References
Aliyu, A. S., Dada, J. O., & Adam, I. K. (2015). Current status and future prospects of renewable energy in Nigeria. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 48, 336–346. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.098
Andoni, M., Robu, V., Flynn, D., Abram, S., Geach, D., Jenkins, D., McCallum, P., & Peacock, A. (2019). Blockchain technology in the energy sector: A systematic review of challenges and opportunities. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 100(2), 143–174. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.10.014
Ang, T.-Z., Salem, M., Kamarol, M., Das, H. S., Nazari, M. A., & Prabaharan, N. (2022). A comprehensive study of renewable energy sources: Classifications, challenges and suggestions. Energy Strategy Reviews, 43(4), 100939. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2022.100939
Apfel, D., Haag, S., & Herbes, C. (2021). Research agendas on renewable energies in the Global South: A systematic literature review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 148, 111228. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111228
Batra, G. (2023). Renewable energy economics: achieving harmony between environmental protection and economic goals. Social Science Chronicle, 2(2), 1–32. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.56106/ssc.2023.009
Connelly, L. M. (2020). Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria. Medsurg Nursing, 29(2).
Demirbas, A. (2005). Potential applications of renewable energy sources, biomass combustion problems in boiler power systems and combustion related environmental issues. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 31(2), 171–192. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2005.02.002
Duffield, W. A., & Sass, J. H. (2003). Geothermal energy: Clean power from the earth’s heat (Vol. 1249). Diane Publishing.
El Tabsh, Y. (2023). Modeling information and communication technology solutions for the energy sector management [Vilniaus Gedimino technikos universitetas]. https://etalpykla.vilniustech.lt/handle/123456789/107888
Ellabban, O., Abu-Rub, H., & Blaabjerg, F. (2014). Renewable energy resources: Current status, future prospects and their enabling technology. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39(1), 748–764. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.113
Fenhann, J. V., Mathiesen, A., & Nielsen, L. H. (2010). Geothermal energy. In Risø energy report 9: Non-fossil energy technologies in 2050 and beyond (pp. 51–54). Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Risø Nationallaboratoriet for Bæredygtig Energi. https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/5042317/ris-r-1729.pdf
Hai, T., Ali, M. A., Alizadeh, A. ad, Dhahad, H. A., Almojil, S. F., Almohana, A. I., Alali, A. F., Goyal, V., & Farhang, B. (2023). Second law evaluation and environmental analysis of biomass-fired power plant hybridized with geothermal energy. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 56, 102988. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2022.102988
Kitchenham, B., & Brereton, P. (2013). A systematic review of systematic review process research in software engineering. Information and Software Technology, 55(12), 2049–2075. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2013.07.010
Mallen, C., Peat, G., & Croft, P. (2006). Quality assessment of observational studies is not commonplace in systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(8), 765–769. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.12.010
Naber, R., Raven, R., Kouw, M., & Dassen, T. (2017). Scaling up sustainable energy innovations. Energy Policy, 110(22), 342–354. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.07.056
Patino, C. M., & Ferreira, J. C. (2018). Inclusion and exclusion criteria in research studies: definitions and why they matter. Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, 44, 84.
Pollock, A., & Berge, E. (2018). How to do a systematic review. International Journal of Stroke, 13(2), 138–156.
Tabak, J. (2009). Solar and geothermal energy. Infobase Publishing.
Turner, D. A. (1980). Energy action program for state legislators: a report on the National Legislative Town Meeting on energy. US Department of Energy (USDOE), Washington DC (United States). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2172/5316241
Ziagos, J., Phillips, B. R., Boyd, L., Jelacic, A., Stillman, G., & Hass, E. (2013). A technology roadmap for strategic development of enhanced geothermal systems. Lawrence Livermore National Lab.(LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2172/1219933
Zubairu, N., Mohammed, A., & Zohny, Z. (2024). Navigating the path to sustainable energy transition in Oman: a systematic literature review and future research opportunities. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-01-2024-0021
Sihotang, J. (2019). Implementation of Gray Level Transformation Method for Sharping 2D Images. INFOKUM, 8(1, Desembe), 16-19.
Sihotang, J. (2020). Analysis of service satisfaction level using rough set algorithm. Infokum, 8(2, Juni), 55-56.
Sihotang, J. (2020). Analysis Of Shortest Path Determination By Utilizing Breadth First Search Algorithm. Jurnal Info Sains: Informatika dan Sains, 10(2), 1-5.
Sihotang, J., Panjaitan, E. S., & Yunis, R. (2020). Evaluation of Information Technology Governance by Using CobIT 5 Framework at Higher Education. Jurnal Mantik, 4(3), 2194-2203.
Amri, S., & Sihotang, J. (2023). Impact of Poverty Reduction Programs on Healthcare Access in Remote Ar-eas: Fostering Community Development for Sustainable Health. Law and Economics, 17(3), 170-185.
Sihotang, J., Alesha, A., Batubara, J., Gorat, S. E., & Panjaitan, F. S. (2022). A hybrid approach for adaptive fuzzy network partitioning and rule generation using rough set theory: Improving data-driven decision making through accurate and interpretable rules. International Journal of Enterprise Modelling, 16(1), 12-22.
Sihotang, J. (2023). Optimization of Inventory Ordering Decision in Retail Business using Exponential Smoothing Approach and Decision Support System. International Journal of Mechanical Computational and Manufacturing Research, 12(2), 46-52.
Sihotang, J. (2023). Analysis Of The Differences In The Use Of Zoom And Google Meet In Learning At Putra Abadi Langkat University. Instal: Jurnal Komputer, 15(02), 474-479.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Hans Surewer, Petrick Wanoer, Mandowen Mandowen (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
