Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Study optimizes energy output in geothermal systems, suggesting improved operation under variable conditions.
Geothermal Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) plants are increasingly required to operate flexibly to support power systems with high penetrations of variable renewables. Off-design performance is strongly influenced by non-condensable gas (NCG) disturbances and operating constraints that introduce non-smooth response regions associated with phase-change limits and heat-transfer bottlenecks. This study develops a surrogate-assisted offline optimisation framework for a dual-source (flash-binary) geothermal ORC and quantifies how optimal setpoints shift under varying CO 2 /NCG disturbance intensity. A physics-consistent DWSIM (open-source process simulation) model generates a 5,000-point dataset spanning feasible operating regimes; a Random Forest surrogate achieves R 2 = 0.959, root mean square error (RMSE) = 283.4 kW and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) = 0.39%, capturing the non-smooth thermodynamic response surface. The surrogate is embedded in a Powell-Conjugate Hybrid Evolution Strategy (PCH-ES) combining Differential Evolution for global exploration with Powell refinement for local exploitation, producing a pre-computed disturbance-indexed setpoint scheduling table. Results identify an optimal split-ratio (SR*) band: in the low-CO 2 regime the optimum lies near SR* = 0.671; above approximately 1.8% CO 2 it shifts to SR* = 0.710, providing a disturbance-aware design rule for distributing working fluid between steam- and brine-side heat recovery. Net power declines 13% across the studied disturbance range (27,612 to 23,921 kW) as a thermal-capacity effect. The optimisation also identifies a thermodynamic knee in working-fluid circulation near 315 to 320 kg/s, beyond which additional pumping yields diminishing returns. The resulting offline setpoint lookup provides actionable scheduling guidance for disturbance-aware supervisory operation without requiring real-time modelling software.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dev et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: