The depletion of fossil fuels has led to an increase in energy demand.

To avoid the problems

such as carbon dioxide emissionenvironmental pollution and energy supply shortage, many
countries are urgently seekinghave developed Net Zero/green new clean energy in recent years
[1.]. In this context, the development of renewable energy is a good choice for the future is great
significance to the future world. Renewable energy is a sustainable, environmentally friendly and
cleaninglow CO2 energy. According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [2.] Geothermal
energy is an inexhaustible renewable energy source that have many advantages such as stable,
not affected by weather condition, good energy storage capacity, and can be used as a source of
social basic load than traditional energy sources. Compared with other renewable energy sources,
geothermal energy was stable, unaffected by weather conditions, good energy storage capacity,
and can be used as a source of social basic load. In most cases, it is more profitable to
economical to operate a power plant using geothermal energy as the base load energy source[3.].

Geothermal energy is the thermal energy  is the heat that stored in the rocks and fluids within the
Earth crust, which provides a source of power generation or direct use. The temperature in within
the Earth’s interior primarily increases with depth, so drilling can be used to transport steam or
hot water to the surface for utilization. Currently, the simulation of geothermal reservoirs
simulation focuses on the coupling of multiple physical parameters. Many references scholars
have established thermal-hydraulic (TH) models for the simulation, but the process of heat
extraction involves fluid flow, heat transfer, and rock deformation, and using only TH coupling
model to simulate the thermal performance of geothermal reservoirs is not accurate enough.
Many researchers have shown that rock deformation in the reservoir significantly affects heat
extraction. Yao et al. [4.] indicated that considering the effect of rock deformation in the
reservoir can increase, fracture permeability can increase more than fourfold during
operation .Cao et al. [5.] found that increasing the effective stress can increase the output thermal
power of the enhanced geothermal system (EGS), and re-injection temperature and re-injection
pressure have a significant impact on rock deformation. Zhang et al. [6.] established a thermal-
hydraulic-mechanical (THM ) models to investigate the effect of fractures on the long-term heat
extraction performance of EGS systems. The study indicated that fractures expand due to thermal
stress, leading to a more rapid decrease in production temperature. However, there are many
parameters that affect the study of reservoirs, such as permeability, which is one of the
fundamental parameters that control fluid flow in deep geological structures. In order to simulate
the actual appearance of reservoirs, many scholars references simulate heterogeneous
permeability. Currently, Musa et al. [7.] proposedshowed that geothermal gradient and reservoir
permeability are the main factors for geothermal energy exploitation. Therefore, heterogeneous
permeability within the reservoir will affects the main production capacity. Porosity is another
parameter that can help increase the reservoir productivity, as it involves the fraction of rock
material and spatial volume [8.]. Due to the limitations of current measurement techniques, it is
difficult to estimate the porosity of the entire matrix block in deep reservoirs [9.]. Therefore, it is
expected to adjusting the porosity values and checking their impact on reservoir productivity is
expected. On the other hand, thermal conductivity represents the ability of materials to transfer
heat [10.]. In deep underground systems, the thermal conductivity of formations depends on
temperature, pressure, and porosity [11.]. Fractures are also one of the factors. Kohl et al. [12.]
performed 2D numerical simulations forof the coupled THM process of flow within a single
crack using a non-linear joint closure law. They found that as the effective normal stress
decreased with an increase of, the crack aperture increased, and the productivity increased by
about 25% within 30 years. Hicks et al. [13.] developed a 2D THM model for a fracture network
in an HDR geothermal reservoir, and found that the heat transfer rate was enhanced due to the
network's ability to transport fluids and heat.

Geothermal power plants work similarly to with traditional thermal power plants. Tin that they
use turbines and generators in the energy process to convert heat into electricity. The difference
between them is the heat source. In a geothermal power plant, geothermal fluid provides heat
from a hydrothermal system. However, only for modeling heterogeneous reservoirs modeling
cannot accurately predict, many scholars references simulated and analyzed based on the actual
appearance of the reservoir. This approach can add realism to the simulation. Bérénice et al.
[14.]developed a two-dimensional THM model of the deep geothermal reservoir of Soultz-sous-
Forêts, based on simplified large-scale geology with a representative elementary volume of the
order of 100 m. Manojkumar et al[15.] improved a three-dimensional THM model is developed
to investigated the impact of hydraulic fractures and well patterns on the performance of the heat
production from the PUGA geothermal reservoir.

Geothermal power plants are basically divided into steam cycle and binary cycle. two types
steam cycle and binary cycle.In a steam cycle, geothermal fluids are boiled or flashed above
boiling point by reducing the pressure and becoming a two phasetwo-phases fluid, then the steam
is separated from the brine or water and expanded in a turbine. The process of reducing the
pressure to boil the fluid is called the flash process. In there, Therefore, flash cycle is currently
the most commonly used power generation system in geothermal power plants. However, during
the operation of a single flash cycle, the heat energy is wasted about 30% to 50% because the
liquid geothermal fluids cannot be fully flashed there will be liquid geothermal fluid that cannot
be completely flashed during operation, resulting in nearly 30% to 50% of heat energy being
wasted[16.].A double flash system is essentially the same as a single flash system; the only
difference is that the liquid phase from the first flash process is separated again to extract more
vapor at a lower pressure. Pambudi et al. [17.]indicated that double flash system power plants
can typically achieve 20% additional power output compared to single-flash power plants but it
requires additional components and costs. Back pressure power plants also utilize the steam that
produced from the flash process, with the difference being that their turbines vent the steam into
the atmosphere. While they produce less energy than condensing turbines, they are the simplest,
lacking a condenser, gas pumping systems, and cooling towers, making them more portable.
They are also the least expensive option [18.].Binary cycle uses an auxiliary working fluid in a
closed loop. A heat exchanger is used to transfer heat from the geothermal fluid to the working
fluid, which is vaporized and expanded in the turbine, and the cooled geothermal fluid is
reinjected into the reservoir. Research on the system types of geothermal power plants [19.]
indicated that when production temperatures were between 100°C and 220°C and over 220°C,
the power plant can be operated by the flash cycle and flash-binary cycle, respectively. high-
temperature geothermal resources with a temperature higher than 220 °C are more suitable for
commercial power generation using flash systems, while medium-low temperature thermal
resources at 100-220 °C are suitable for commercial use of binary cycle . The flash-binary cycles
system combines the flash cycle with a generation system, such as ORC or TRC, and recovers
the liquid geothermal fluid in the flash system through the binary system for secondary power
generation, reducing waste heat emissions and increasing Net power generation, the and other
effects can further improve the thermal efficiency of geothermal power plants [20.].
Abdolalipouradl et al. [21.] explored the performance of single flash cycles combined with ORC
and TRC respectively. The thermal performance of the system was analyzed with the production
temperature as the variable parameter. It was found that when the production temperature
increased by 20°C, the The power generation of the TRC system will increases by 22%, it and
the power generation of the TRC system is 7.2% higher than that of the ORC system. Mokarram
et al. [22.] combined the single flash system with TRC and ORC respectively, and compared it
the thermal performance and economic efficiency. of the two, and The results showedfound that
the first efficiency, second efficiency, irreversibility, and total cost of single flash- TRC All have
betterhas higher values. Along with performance discussion, economic evaluation is also a very
important part. Coskun et al. [23.] conducted thermal performance and economic analysis of
different types of power plants for medium and low temperature geothermal resources, and found
that the double flash system has better performance and economythermal performance than
double flash system and ORC systems performance and economy. Shokati et al. [24.] compared
the double flash cycle with the single flash binary cycle, and the results indicated that the
efficiency of the single flash binary cycle has a better value. Mosaffa et al [25.]applied Thermo-
Economic analysis to four arrangement of ORC- liquefied natural gas coupled model systems
combined liquefied natural gas. They indicated that the regenerative and binary system had has
lowest and highest total cost rate, respectively. Payback period (PBP) and electricity production
cost (EPC)are commonlymost often used to discuss analyze the economics of geothermal power
plants [26.]. ,Li et al. [27.] use the PBP as a comprehensive evaluation index of economy, and
according to their conclusions can be summarized as follows that with the increase of geothermal
water temperature, the cost and income increase gradually. and the income of oil recovery is
considered, the payback period will be largely shorter.

1. Mahmoudi, S. M. S., and M. Akbari Kordlar. "A new flexible geothermal based
cogeneration system producing power and refrigeration." Renewable energy 123 (2018):
499-512.
2. DOE
An Evaluation of Enhanced Geothermal Systems Technology
U.S. Department of Energy, (2008)
3. C Clauser, M Ewert
The renewables cost challenge: Levelized cost of geothermal electric energy compared to
other sources of primary energy–Review and case study
 Renew Sust Energ Rev, 82 (2018), pp. 3683-3693
4. J. Yao, X. Zhang, Z. Sun, Z. Huang, J. Liu, Y. Li, Y Xin, X Yan, W Liu
Numerical simulation of the heat extraction in 3D-EGS with thermal-hydraulic-
mechanical coupling method based on discrete fractures model
Geothermics, 74 (2018), pp. 19-34
5. W. Cao, W. Huang, F. Jiang
A novel thermal–hydraulic–mechanical model for the enhanced geothermal system heat
extraction
Int J Heat Mass Transf, 100 (2016), pp. 661-671
6. X. Zhang, Z. Huang, Q. Lei, J. Yao, L. Gong, Z. Sun, W. Yang, X. Yan, Y. Li
Impact of fracture shear dilation on long-term heat extraction in Enhanced Geothermal
Systems: Insights from a fully-coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical simulation
Geothermics, 96 (2021), pp. 102216
7. Aliyu, Musa D., and Hua-Peng Chen.
Sensitivity analysis of deep geothermal reservoir: Effect of reservoir parameters on
production temperature.
Energy 129 (2017): 101-113.
8. Saeid, S., Al-Khoury, R., Nick, H. M., and Hicks, M. A.
A prototype design model for deep low-enthalpy hydrothermal systems
Renewable Energy 77 (2015): 408-422.
9. Rejeki, Sri, Julfi Hadi, and Ilan Suhayati.
Porosity study for detail reservoir characterization in Darajat geothermal field, West Java,
Indonesia.
Proceedings, World Geothermal Congress, Antalya, Turkey. 2005.
10. Lewis, Roland W., Perumal Nithiarasu, and Kankanhalli N. Seetharamu.
Fundamentals of the finite element method for heat and fluid flow.
John Wiley & Sons, 2004.
11. DiPippo, Ronald.
Geothermal power plants: principles, applications, case studies and environmental
impact. Butterworth-Heinemann, 2012.
12. Kohl, T., Evansi, K. F., Hopkirk, R. J., and Rybach, L.
 Coupled hydraulic, thermal and mechanical considerations for the simulation of hot dry
rock reservoirs.
Geothermics 24.3 (1995): 345-359.
13. Hicks, T. W., Pine, R. J., Willis-Richards, J., Xu, S., Jupe, A. J., and Rodrigues, N. E. V.
A hydro-thermo-mechanical numerical model for HDR geothermal reservoir evaluation.
International journal of rock mechanics and mining sciences & geomechanics abstracts.
Vol. 33. No. 5. Pergamon, 1996.
14. Vallier, Bérénice, Magnenet, V., Schmittbuhl, J., and Fond, C.
Large scale hydro-thermal circulation in the deep geothermal reservoir of Soultz-sous-
Forêts (France).
Geothermics 78 (2019): 154-169.
15. Gudala, Manojkumar, Govindarajan, S. K., Yan, B., and Sun, S.
Numerical investigations of the PUGA geothermal reservoir with multistage hydraulic
fractures and well patterns using fully coupled thermo-hydro-geomechanical modeling.
Energy 253 (2022): 124173.
16. S. J. Zarrouk. H. Moon
Efficiency of geothermal power plants: A worldwide review
Geothermics, 51 (2014), pp. 142-153
17. Pambudi, Nugroho Agung, Itoi, R., Jalilinasrabady, S., and Jaelani, K.
Performance improvement of a single-flash geothermal power plant in Dieng, Indonesia,
upon conversion to a double-flash system using thermodynamic analysis.
Renewable Energy 80 (2015): 424-431.
18. Hiriart, Gerardo, and Luis CA Gutiérrez-Negrı́n.
Main aspects of geothermal energy in Mexico.
Geothermics 32.4-6 (2003): 389-396.
19. H. Hettiarachchi, M. M Golubovic, W. M. Worek, Y. Ikegami
Optimum design criteria for an organic Rankine cycle using low-temperature geothermal
heat sources
Energy, 32 (2007), pp. 1698-1706
20. R DiPippo
Geothermal power plants: Evolution and performance assessments
Geothermics, 53 (2015), pp. 291-307
21. M. Abdolalipouradl, F. Mohammadkhani, S. Khalilarya
A comparative analysis of novel combined flash-binary cycles for Sabalan geothermal
wells: Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic viewpoints
Energy, 209 (2020), pp. 118235
22. N. H. Mokarram, A. H. Mosaffa
Investigation of the thermoeconomic improvement of integrating enhanced geothermal
single flash with transcritical organic Rankine cycle
Energ Convers Manage, 213 (2020), pp. 112831
23. Coskun, A. Bolatturk, M. Kanoglu
Thermodynamic and economic analysis and optimization of power cycles for a medium
temperature geothermal resource
Energ Convers Manage, 78 (2014), pp. 39-49
24. N. Shokati, F. Ranjbar, M. Yari
Comparative and parametric study of double flash and single flash/ORC combined cycles
based on exergoeconomic criteria
Appl Therm Eng, 91 (2015), pp. 479-495
25. Mosaffa, A. H., Farshi, L. G., Ferreira, C. I., and Rosen, M. A.
Exergoeconomic and environmental analyses of CO2/NH3 cascade refrigeration systems
equipped with different types of flash tank intercoolers.
Energy Conversion and Management 117 (2016): 442-453.
26. Li, Tailu, N., Liu, J., Zhu, J., and Kong, X
Thermodynamic and economic evaluation of the organic Rankine cycle (ORC) and two-
stage series organic Rankine cycle (TSORC) for flue gas heat recovery
Energy conversion and management 183 (2019): 816-829.
27. Li, Tailu, Liu, Q., Xu, Y., Dong, Z., Meng, N., Jia, Y., and Qin, H.
Techno-economic performance of multi-generation energy system driven by associated
mixture of oil and geothermal water for oilfield in high water cut.
Geothermics 89 (2021): 101991.
28.