Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.
We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.
To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India:
CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd.
www.cbspd.com
|
customercare@cbspd.com
Electrical energy demand for Southern Thailand is continuously increasing, with new coal/gas-fired power plants planned. However, coal/gas-fired power plants are not only large CO2 emitters, thus intensifying the on-going climate change crisis, but also their technology costs remain stagnant at comparable high levels. Solar and wind energy can be produced at far lower costs; however, their shares on the renewable energy mix are comparably small in Thailand, but with steady increase. A disadvantage of solar and wind energy is that the production is not constant due to day/night and weather, respectively. Such can be compensated by adding geothermal energy, which can act as a backbone of the renewable energy mix, although absolute amounts might be relatively low. In Southern Thailand, hot springs are the surface expressions of active geothermal systems at depth. Surface exit temperatures can reach up to 80°C and reservoir temperatures up to 143 °C, thus being considered as low enthalpy resources, which can be utilized applying binary power plant technology. In the current renewable power plant, geothermal energy is not considered, but Southern Thailand holds promising quantities of geothermal resources. The only current geothermal power plant in Thailand located in Fang can act as a positive example.
Faculty of Science, Geophysics Research Center, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Thailand
*Address all correspondence to: eleonore.dalmais@es.fr
1. Introduction
The current and ongoing climate change is mainly the result of the human-made emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), as well as other greenhouse gases, for example, methane (CH4). At the beginning of the CO2 concentration measurements in the atmosphere at the Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawai’i, USA, the CO2 value was around 313 ppm (March 29, 1958) and around 200–300 ppm during the approximate 800,000 years before. Today, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere stands at around 420 ppm as of July 2022 [1]. Scientific evidence has clearly shown that the increase in greenhouse gas emissions is already resulting in a warming at global scale and will continue to do so [2], with subsequent changes in rainfall patterns and continental aridity, for example [3]. Recent data show that the first 3 months of 2020 were the second warmest on meteorological record, only being superseded by the year of 2016 with a strong El Niño observed, for example, [2]. Subsequently, mitigation efforts of the climate change induced global warming require an accelerated decarbonization of all relevant sectors in industry and society at global scale, from energy, over transport, to heating/cooling, in order to reduce significantly the CO2 emissions by human activities and thus meet the Paris Climate Agreement with a 1.5°C goal [4].
CO2 emissions from burning fossil energy resources and other sources have increased steadily over the last 70 years and even after a dip down during the height of the COVID-19 pandemics in 2020, CO2 values are project to bounce back for 2021 [5]. For 2020 global fossil, CO2 emissions originated from the following main sources are projected as follows [5]: around 41% from coal/lignite, 32% from oil, 22% from natural gas, 5% from cement production. Other smaller sources include gas flaring during petroleum exploitation, steel, and petrochemical industry as well as refineries. For year 2020, it is further projected that about 61.5% of this CO2 is emitted by only 10 countries according to [5], with China (24.2%), USA (15.9%), India (4.7%), Russia (4.5%), and Japan (3.4%). Thailand’s global CO2 contribution for the same year stands by 0.72% (global rank #24 from 221 countries/regions). From this 43.3% are from oil, 29.5% from gas, 21.3% from coal, and 5.9% from cement production (see [5]; Figure 1).
Figure 1.
Annual fossil CO2 emissions in Thailand in Mt. CO2 with the growth rates of each sector in percent for 2020; the total emission growth in 2020 was −5.4% due to COVID-19 pandemics (from [5]; used with permission of the global carbon project under the creative commons attribution 4.0 international license).
For Southern Thailand, the electrical energy supply is currently maintained by mainly conventional gas and diesel-powered units as well as hydro dams and to a minor extent by biomass/gas systems, mostly related to agro-industries, as well as electricity add from central Thailand and to minor extent imports from Malaysia (see [6]; Figure 2). The conventional gas and diesel-powered units are as follows: (1) In Songkhla’s Chana District are combined 1531 MW natural gas-fired power plants, which are connected to the Thailand Malaysia Joint Development Area’s (JDA) gas field in the Gulf of Thailand via a pipeline. (2) Smaller units with 244 MW natural gas and diesel-powered plants are located in Surat Thani’s Phun Phin District. (3) In Krabi’s Nuea Khlong District is a 340 MW a fuel oil-powered plant. Here, diesel has to be transported via small ships through mangrove areas protected under the Ramsar Convention [8]. The Krabi power plant was originally lignite fired as deposits were found in the area nearby (Krabi Basin, geologically), but mining has finished since more than a decade. Attempts to replace diesel by coal were put on hold and finally discarded as it would require a new port facility to handle the coal as well as several kilometer long conveyor belt systems to transport the coal to the power plant [9]. (4) In Khanom District of Nakhon Si Thammarat Province is a 930 MW natural gas power plant. Two major hydropower dams are located in Southern Thailand: (5) the 240 MW Rajjaprabha Dam in Surat Thani and (6) the 72 MW Bang Lang Dam in Yala’s Bannang Sata District [10]. Both dams were already completed in the 1980s, with much larger dams in the central and northern part of the country. Renewable electricity-producing units are, for example, (7) a 2.062 MW biogas unit in Krabi using palm oil wastewater for methane production [11]. (8) A larger 25 MW biomass power plant using rubber trees as fuel source started commercial operation on March 1, 2020 in Songkhla’s Chana district [12]. Further, three wind power plant projects with a combined capacity of 126 MW in Nakhon Si Thammarat and Songkhla province are currently under construction [13]. (9) Additional electricity is channeled via 115 kV and 230 kV transmission lines from the central part to the southern region and electricity is also purchased from Malaysia via a 300 kV DC line with a maximal transmission rate of 300 MW [14].
Figure 2.
Electricity generation in Southern Thailand. Status: R = running, operating; C = under construction; P = planned. Fuel source: Yellow = oil, gas; green = biomass; blue-hydro. Power: Values next to symbols, in MW (further information and references in the text). Globe via [7].
Due to increasing electricity demand and in line with the Thailand Power Development Plan 2015 (PDP 2015), the government via the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) proposed the construction of a 2200-MW coal-fired power plant in Songkhla Province (Thepa District) by 2024 [15]. The coal supposed to come via new and yet-to-build deep sea ports with shipments from Indonesia, Australia, and South Africa. A few years later, these plans were put on hold and according to the PDP 2018, Revision 1 [16], the electricity gap left by these still proposed coal plants will so far be filled with two units of natural gas-fired power plants having a combined capacity of 1400-MW, which are under construction in Surat Thani Province and coming online in 2027 and 2029, to ensure energy stability for Southern Thailand [17]. However, in January 2020, the Thai government outlined a new special economic zone in Chana district, located also in Songkhla province, but further north of Thepa, and proposed four power plants with a combined electricity-generating capacity of 3700 MW [18]. Fuel sources are not mentioned, but very likely the plants will follow somehow the blue prints of the Thepa power plant as outlined above.
For Southern Thailand, the electricity demand side comprises mainly of the main tourists areas in Phuket, Krabi, and parts of Phang Nga and Surat Thani (e.g., Koh Samui), located near the shore lines of the Andaman Sea and the Gulf of Thailand. There, also the sea food processing and cold storage facilities are located. Further, significant demand is coming from the larger area of Hat Yai, a commercial center for Southern Thailand, and Songkhla, both with seafood processing and rubber processing companies. The situation in the southern part of Thailand reflects the overall situation of the country, where the electricity generation is dominated by gas due to the discovery of mainly gas and less oil fields in the Gulf of Thailand [6, 19]. For the new special economic zone in Chana district, Songkhla Province, a number of industries are proposed, including petrochemical plants and others [18], following somehow the development and blue print of the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC), which comprises Chachoengsao, Chon Buri, Rayong, Bangkok, and Samut Prakan Province [20].
Geothermal energy is exploiting the heat inside the Earth as the temperature in general increases with depth; this separates it from the other main renewable energy source, solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind, which both utilize external energy sources. However, the heat flow from the interior of the Earth to the surface is not uniform across the globe, and it is mainly directed by the local and regional tectonic setting, especially in relation to lithospheric plate boundaries [21]. In general, areas along divergent (extensional) plate boundaries are not accessible as they are mainly under the ocean’s sea level, except Iceland. Here, the main energy production is coming from geothermal sources, including also steam [21]. Eastern Africa is another example of extensional tectonics; with some, but limited use of geothermal resources. At convergent plate boundaries, especially at subduction zones, the occurrence of volcanoes manifests active geothermal systems at depth, which can be and are utilized for geothermal energy production, like in the Philippines [21]. Both resource types are usually classified as high-temperature or high-enthalpy resources, with exit temperature values of more than 150°C, which can be exploited using conventional turbine technologies where electrical power can be directly produced from hot steam or from a high-temperature two-phase fluid (steam and hot water). After electricity production, the outlet water can still reach temperatures of 150°C or less and therefore can be used for cooling and food processing and even after that for greenhouse warming, making it a cascade system [21]. In other geographical areas, like in Central Europe, for example, enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) utilize medium enthalpy geothermal resources, where much deeper reservoirs have to be tapped to get higher temperatures. Here, weakly fractured hot rocks at depth are used as energy sources, rather than directly hot water or steam. However, water has to injected from the surface through one well, and the heated water then is produced through another second well [21].
In many other countries, however, low-temperature geothermal resources can be found, with exit temperatures below 150°C, even less than 100°C. Hot springs are often the surface manifestation of such systems; they present a unique interplay of heat at depth, water circulation, geothermal reservoirs, and open pathways to the surface [22]. Geothermal reservoir temperatures of such systems, however, often high enough to be tapped as low enthalpy resources, which can be utilized for electrical energy production through binary technology systems [20]. Usually, low enthalpy resources are utilized for drying, for example, food, wool, and others, as well as heating, for example, for housing or salt evaporation [23] and not for electricity production. However, in recent years, the binary technology has rapidly advanced, for example, [24], ground installations can be quite compact and scalable (e.g., Climeon, Sweden, climeon.com; or Eavor, Canada, www.eavor.com). For such systems, the minimum feed in temperatures and flow rates currently can be as low as 70°C and 10 L/s, respectively. However, such values have to be proven through drilling geothermal exploration wells into or closer to the geothermal reservoir, a necessary requirement to ensure continues hot water supply [21].
In Southern Thailand, numerous hot springs are known and mainly used for recreational or spa activities, thus following questions arise: 1) Can the hot springs be utilized for geothermal electrical energy production? and 2) What role would geothermal energy has in a 100% renewable energy scenario for Southern Thailand?
In Thailand, hot springs can be found from the far northern region to the South, but not in the north-eastern part of the country. Between Ratchaburi and Chumphon Province, both south of Bangkok, no hot springs occur (Figure 3). From all hot springs in Southern Thailand, 30 main hot springs were chosen, visited, and subsequently characterized in terms of their geological setting and their water parameters.
Figure 3.
Location of all main 30 hot springs in Southern Thailand (for abbreviations see text and Table 1). Color code refers to Figure 4. KMFZ—Khlong Marui, and RFZ—Ranong Fault Zones. Globe via [7].
On-site measurements have been done, and water samples have been taken at each hot spring site. Coordinates of all sampling locations were recorded using a global positioning system device (Universal Transverse Mercator, UTM, Zone 47, WGS-84). On-site measurements of exit temperatures were done in the hot spring pool and/or outflow with a glass thermometer (1°C division, max. 100°C). In all cases, water samples for geochemical analysis were collected in a 500-mL well-cleaned airtight polypropylene bottle (with good chemical resistance), after it was rinsed at least three times with the same water prior to final collection (e.g., [26]). If possible, samples were taken about 50 cm below water surface in order to prevent atmospheric exposure. Bottles, labeled accordingly, indicating date, number, purpose of analysis, and location, were cooled down naturally to ambient temperatures (30–35°C) as thermal contraction is reasonably small (around 0.5% and smaller, see [27]) and then sent to the laboratory at the Faculty of Science Laboratory of Prince of Songkla University in Hat Yai. Parameters have been analyzed in a few days after samples were taken. Ca2+, Na+, K+, and SiO2 concentrations were determined by ICP-OES. Some data were taken from [25]. Based on the SiO2 concentrations of the hot spring waters, silica geothermometer calculations (here quartz geothermometer) were carried out to determine the reservoir temperature [28]. All data and results are presented in Table 1.
Code, after [25], location (in Universal Transverse Mercator, UTM, WGS-84, Zone 47), exit temperature (°C), concentrations of selected cations and anions (mg/L), and calculated reservoir temperatures (°C) of main hot spring sites in Southern Thailand.
In Southern Thailand, geothermal systems can be divided into three general groups ([29]; Figure 3; Table 1): Group 1 hot springs with exit temperatures of more than 60°C are mainly found in a granitic setting, however not often in sedimentary rocks, with examples in Phang Nga (PG, Ranong (RN), and Yala (YL). The near-surface sediment layer here is quite thin. Cooler meteoric water is flowing down along open pathways, where it is heated up, and then, the hot water moves along open fractures up to the surface. Group 2 comprises hot springs with exit temperatures of around 60°C, in general associated with sedimentary or metamorphic rocks; examples here are Surat Thani (SR), Krabi (KB), Chumphon (CP), and Phatthalung (PL). The sediment cover here is comparably thicker. Also here, pathways for the cooler and hotter water are provided by open faults and fractures. However, these faults are often not fully developed up to the near surface, so that uprising hot water mixes with groundwater; this results in lower hot spring exit temperatures. Further, often more than one hot spring at the surface can be found in such areas; examples are in Surat Thani. Group 3 hot springs are associated with or are close to major fault zones. In the South of Thailand, the Khlong Marui (KMFZ) and Ranong Fault Zones (RFZ) are the main fault zones, crossing the Peninsula from the Andaman Sea to the Gulf of Thailand. Hot springs here are often directly affected by the fluid flow along such fault zones. Finally, the real heat sources for all hot springs in Southern Thailand are not yet established, either igneous bodies or higher heat flow through onshore basin development.
Surface exit temperature for the 30 hot springs in Southern Thailand ranges from 40 to 80°C, whereas the reservoir temperatures based on silica geothermometer calculations range from 73 to 143°C (Figure 4, Table 1). For seven hot springs with higher surface temperatures than 60°C (grouped in red color), the reservoir temperatures are above 105°C. For another 15 hot springs, the exit temperatures are lower than 60°C, but their reservoir temperatures are above 105°C (orange colored group). Exit temperatures lower than 60°C and reservoir temperatures lower than 105°C can be found for eight hot springs (blue-colored group). Higher exit temperatures than 60°C and reservoir temperatures lower than 105°C are not realized here.
Figure 4.
Reservoir temperature based on silica geothermometer versus exit temperature of 30 hot springs in Southern Thailand. Colors relate to Figure 3 (see also Table 1).
Although no geothermal well data are available for all hot spring, the potential geothermal electrical power production can be estimated by using properties of hydrothermal fluids, for example, [30, 31], as the amount of electrical power output depends on them and the technology and type of power plant used, for example, [30, 31]; here, binary systems utilizing a secondary fluid cycle could be suitable. Calculating generated electricity was presented with net generated electric power (NEP) [32]. Assuming power plants were running at full capacity [29], proposed Eq. (1) for calculating the approximate NEP for a binary power plant was used, considering inlet temperatures between 80°C and 150°C and outlet temperatures of 40°C and 50°C (Figure 5). The relative efficiency will be roughly 58% of the triangular efficiency, when adequate accuracy is required [32], with:
Figure 5.
Approximated net generated electrical power output for a geothermal power plant using geothermal fluids with different total mass flow rate estimates, inlet (Tin) and outlet temperatures (Tout). Dead-state temperature 20°C. for further details see text (after [33]).
NEP≅2.47m˙(Tin−T0Tin+T0)(Tin−Tout)E1
where NEP is the approximated net generated electric power, kWe, ṁ is the total mass, kg/s, T0 is the dead-state temperature (20°C), Tin is the geothermal inlet temperature of the primary fluid, in °C, and Tout is the fluid temperature leaving the cold side of the heat exchanger, in °C.
The power production is highly dependent on the total mass flow rate; see Eq. (1) and Figure 5. Moreover, the inlet temperature of the geothermal resource also has a great effect on plant performance. At possible NEP for a site from the red and for some from the orange group is about 4 ± 0.5 MW, depending on a total mass flow rate of 25 ± 5 kg/s and a geothermal inlet temperature of about 130 ± 5°C (see also [33]). Thus, the calculation of generated power with a total mass flow of 25 kg/s lies within the expected range. A net power output of 4 ± 0.5 MW can be compared with the first geothermal plant at Apas Kiri project in Malaysia, [34, 35]. The project is set to have an installed capacity of 30 MW and will be feeding its electricity into the grid of Sabah Electricity, a private limited company (www.sesb.com.my). Relative to this power plant, a geothermal power plant in Southern Thailand would be rather small and considered electricity for local scale development [36]. However, this estimate is based on theoretical and pilot plant results, and it still has to be proven commercially by drilling exploratory geothermal wells, which will provide data for mass flow rate and the water inlet temperature.
6.1 State of geothermal power in Southern Thailand
The revised power development plan of 2018 aims to decrease for 2037 the share for coal-fired power from previously 23% down to 12% [37]. Natural gas was and still will be the main source of electricity generation, up from 30–53% share of overall power generation. Renewable energy sources including hydro power will increase to 29%. Nuclear power dropped out of the revised PDP as Thailand before aimed for a nuclear power plant. Some electrical energy will be imported from neighboring countries, mainly Myanmar and Laos. Geothermal energy is not listed in the PDP 2018 [34]. In the 2017 Renewable Energy Outlook for Thailand IRENA [38], it was written that “the development of geothermal has since [1989] then been stagnant due to very little resource availability” and further … “Thailand has quite modest geothermal resources with a temperature range of 40-60 °C, with some spots reaching about 80 °C. Even though the current installation of 300 kW [Fang geothermal power plant in Northern Thailand] can be upgraded or expanded to the magnitude of MW in the future, it would nonetheless remain insignificant.” The temperatures presented in the outlook are incorrect and therefore misleading, as first, they indicate exit temperatures and not reservoir temperatures, and second, the exit temperatures, for example, in Northern Thailand, are much higher than stated in [38]. For the Fang geothermal power plant cited there, for example, fluid inlet temperatures are 110–115°C, with some wells reaching 130°C. The associated hot springs reach exit temperatures of 90–99°C, [39], in other areas even beyond.
Results of this study show that in Southern Thailand, there is a potential for geothermal electrical energy production, although for each site it has to be confirmed through well data. The main areas as shown in Figure 3 are in Surat Thani (ST), Ranong (RN), and Phang Nga (PG), as well as Yala (YL) in the far south. However, other factors for geothermal power plants also have to be considered, for example, infrastructure, national parks, and others (see [40]). Small-scale geothermal power plants with approximately 4–5 MW to potentially 10 MW net power output would be able to provide electrical energy without any dependence on wind or solar radiation and thus would be able to provide base load to the electrical grid. Although the overall contribution would be comparable small geothermal power plants can provide stable electrical energy in rural areas where most of the hot springs are located, and it would be also in line with the Ministry of Energy’s project “Energy for All,” [41]. According to Energy Policy and Planning Office (EPPO) deputy secretary-general Wattanapong Kurovat, “the 2018 PDP’s main objective is to ensure that each region has enough power and stable sources. It was thus important for every region to have its own base-load power plants as reliable sources,” he said [17].
6.2 Renewable energy scenario for Southern Thailand
Currently, EGAT International, a subsidiary of the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand, and fully owned by it, is building in Vietnam a coal-fired power plant with 1320 MW [42]. For Thailand, around 30% of the total energy comes from renewable sources means that almost 70% is still coming from conventional sources, mainly gas, but also lignite and coal, which will contribute to a continuous increase in CO2 gas emissions, thus to still rising Earth temperatures. The 1.5°C limited defined in the Paris Agreement is far from achievable, as other countries also continue on Thailand’s path. Although man-made climate change is scientifically proven, already in the last 20 years, seemingly many countries, including Thailand, believe that there is still enough time to act and also believe that their (30%) renewable energy share is sufficient [16]. The effects and consequences of a continuous CO2 emission are clearly outlined in detail in recent IPCC reports, [4], as well as from other organization, for example, the World Meteorological Organization [43]. In Southern Thailand, the temperatures will rise to some degree that for certain time periods, it will be too hot outside (heat waves); similar conditions can recently be observed in Australia, for example, [44].
Hundred percent of renewable energy share for electrical power is possible according to [45], also for a country like Thailand. Mainly solar energy and to a lower extent, wind energy can provide the majority of the energy demand if policy frameworks are provided; both are already cheaper than conventional coal power plants [46]. As the availability of both sources is subject to changes over time energy storage systems are required. Here, dams play a key role, as well as batteries.
Recent analysis by Bloomberg NEF (BNEF) has shown that the levelized costs of electricity (LCOE) for battery storage (utility-scale lithium-ion battery storage system with four-hour duration running at a daily cycle and including charging costs) have fallen to $153/MWh in the second quarter of 2022, much lower than in 2018 with around $270, but with 8.4% slightly up compared with first quarter of 2021, due to volatilities in commodity prices [47]. According to a study from 2019 [48], solar or wind projects with added batteries capacity could already compete with coal- and gas-fired power plants over “dispatchable power,” which is power whenever it is needed it can be delivered. However, despite the current increase in costs for renewable energy sources, which can be seen as a temporality, the differences in costs compared with fossil fuel power generation continue to get wider because fuel and carbon prices rise even faster [47]. According to [47], for the first half of 2022, the cost for new-built utility photovoltaic systems (with fixed axis) is lower than that for new-built coal and gas-fired power plants.
Natural gas-fired power plants are also significant contributors to CO2 emissions, and a number of investment banks even stopped or will stop in the near future the financial support even for gas-based energy infrastructures [49]. Geothermal power plants, however, can produce electricity around the clock. The low-enthalpy system here might not be able to replace large coal or gas-fired power plants but small-scale CO2 emission-free units can be installed at many locations, even close to a national park as shown with Fang geothermal plant in Northern Thailand [39], and with additional solar power their efficiency could be significantly increased. These plants can provide electrical power locally, and they can be connected via a decentralized or distributed grid, so that they can act as one of the backbones of a renewable energy system, for example, [50, 51]. The levelized cost of electricity for geothermal energy was in 2021 in the same range of coal or gas combined cycle [51], but might today be more completive due to the increase in fossil fuel prices (see above).
Further, geothermal resources can be used beyond electricity production, as direct heat use for industrial processes and also for cold generation used in storage facilities for seafood and other cold products. All such applications are based on well-established technologies and all of them having the advantage of no CO2 emissions as well as no environmental pollution [21], when compared with coal or gas-fired power plants.
Finally, the Earth is a closed system where almost no matter comes in or goes out. In such systems, there is no waste as all systems are cyclic. Since the beginning of carbon-rich energy sources CO2 was a waste product but not treated as one. A significant number of research studies show that CO2 emission at all levels and in all sectors have to be taxed in order to decarbonize them [52].
Southern Thailand has geothermal resources that can and need to be tapped as part of a renewable energy mix in order to achieve zero CO2 emissions in a foreseeable future, where every ton of CO2 not emitted in to the atmosphere counts, and therefore to keep the global warming as low as possible. Although the geothermal resources are not of high temperature like in other countries, medium enthalpy binary technological systems are available, and further innovations and increased productions will make them also cheaper in the coming future, a trend that has been seen already in other areas, for example: in solar PV, wind turbines, and batteries. The production of energy from renewable sources will be decentralized as outlined above; geothermal is here a good example. However, these decentralized sources then will be connected via data and electricity lines to customers and other renewable energy sources in order to ensure energy availability for everyone as well as spatial and temporal energy security. Solar PV will be the main source of renewable energy for Thailand, with wind being the second one. This energy scenario is possible for Southern Thailand, and also for the whole country, technologically and also economically [50]. Changes in the Power Development Plan PDP 2018 Revision 1 compared with the previous one have shown that the Thai government adheres its commitment to reduce the CO2 emission, but only as far as it is not significantly affecting the current electricity production system, which would require a major transformation of EGAT and related companies. The latest Power Development Plan with its Revision 1 shows quite clear that among the current government and energy leadership there is not enough political will to go a path with larger CO2 emission reduction as such a decarbonized energy system would require much more decentralization. For example, in 2026, a 600 MW lignite-fired power plant is due to replace older ones in Lampang Province, Northern Thailand [53]. Even current geopolitical (Ukraine war in 2022) and geo-economic (COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions) factors leading to higher gas prices and recent cost advantages of renewable energy sources (see above, [44]), have not really impacted the general political course. For a global perspective, staying on the current policies means a likely increase of the global average temperatures (land and ocean) of roughly 3.0°C, according to [54], by the end of the century, and not 1.5°C, with all the consequences, especially climate tipping points [55].
The author highly acknowledges the support from W. Ngansom and also all other members of the Geothermal and Groundwater Group at Geophysics@PSU. Part of this work has been presented at the International Conference on Sustainable Energy and Green Technology 2019 11-14 December 2019, Bangkok, Thailand [56].
1.Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Latest CO2 Reading. 2022. Available from: https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
2.NASA GISS. GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP v4). 2020. Available from: https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
3.Bonfils CJW, Santer BD, Fyfe JC, Marvel K, Phillips TJ, Zimmerman SRH. Human influence on joint changes in temperature, rainfall and continental aridity. Nature Climate Change. 2020;10:726-731. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-020-0821-1
4.IPCC. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2022. Available from: https://www.ipcc.ch/. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
5.Global Carbon Project. Carbon budget and trends 2020. 2022. Available from: https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
6.The Energy Policy and Planning Office. Thailand 2015 Energy Statistics of Thailand 2015. EPPO, Ministry of Energy; 2020. Available from: http://www.eppo.go.th/info/cd-2015/EnergyStatistics of Thailand 2015.pdf. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
7.TUBS, Globe with CC BY-SA 3.0 permission by TUBS, commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Thailand_on_the_globe_(Asia_centered).svg
8.Ramsar. Ramsar Sites Information Service: Krabi Estuary. 2020. Available from: https://rsis.ramsar.org/ris/1100. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
9.Bangkok Post. Protesters Rejoice after Coal ‘victory’. 2018. Available from: https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/1415079/protesters-rejoice-after-coal-victory. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
10.Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. Power Plants and Dams. 2020. Available from: http://www.egat.co.th/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=92&Itemid=117. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
11.Clean Development Mechanism. 2012, Project 2620: Srijaroen Palm Oil Wastewater Treatment Project in Krabi Province Thailand. 2020. Available from: http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/DB/JQA1244008061.03/view. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
12.Khaokoon International. GULF Commences the Operation of 25MW “Gulf Chana Green Biomass Project”. 2020. Available from: https://www.kaohoon.com/content/344793. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
13.Energy Absolute. Wind Power Plant Production. 2020. Available from: https://www.energyabsolute.co.th/windpower.asp. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
14.Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. 300 MW Thailand-Malaysia HDVC Interconnection System 2020. Available from: https://www2.egat.co.th/hvdc/INTRODUCTION.HTML. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
15.Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. EGAT’s Power Projects. 2016. Available from: https://www.egat. co.th/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=317&Itemid=137 [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
16.Energy Policy and Planning Office (EPPO), Ministry of Energy, Thailand, Power Development Plan 2018. Revision 1 (PDP2018 Revision 1). 2018. Available from: http://www.eppo.go.th/images/Infromation_service/public_relations/PDP2018/PDP2018Rev1.pdf. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
17.The Nation. Power Plan ‘A Setback for Sustainable Energy’. 2018. Available from: https://www.nationthailand.com/ national/30360098. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
18.The Nation. Cabinet Nods to Plan for Bt18.7 bn Economic Zone in Songkhla. 2020. Available from: https://www.nationthailand.com/business/30380887. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
19.IEA. Thailand 2017 Electricity Generation by Fuel. International Energy Agency (IEA). 2017. Available from: https://www.iea.org/stats/WebGraphs/THAILAND2.pdf. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
20.EEC. Eastern Economic Corridor. 2020. Available from: https://eng.eeco.or.th/en. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
21.Stober I, Bucher K. Geothermal Energy. 2nd ed. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2021. p. 390. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-71685-1
22.Praserdvigai S. Geothermal development in Thailand. Geothermics. 1986;15(5/6):565-582. DOI: 10.1016/0375-6505(86)90066-0
23.Kaczmarczyk M, Tomaszewska B, Operacz A. Sustainable utilization of low enthalpy geothermal resources to electricity generation through a Cascade system. Energies. 2020;13:2495. DOI: 10.3390/en13102495
24.Frick S, Kranz S, Kupfermann G, Huenges E. Making use of geothermal brine in Indonesia: Binary demonstration power plant Lahendong/Pagolombian. Geotherm Energy. 2019;7:30. DOI: 10.1186/s40517-019-0147-2
25.Department of Mineral Resources. Hot Springs in Thailand. Report. 2012. Available from: https://www.dmr.go.th/. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
26.Huang W-J, Wang Y, Cai W-J. Assessment of sample storage techniques for total alkalinity and dissolved inorganic carbon in seawater. Limnology and Oceanography: Methods. 2012;10:711-717. DOI: 10.4319/lom.2012.10.711
27.Arnórsson JO, Bjarnason N, Giroud N, Gunnarsson I, Steffánsson A. Sampling and analysis of geothermal fluids. Geofluids. 2006;6:203-216. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-8123.2006.00147.x
28.Fournier RO, Rowe JJ. Estimation of underground temperatures from the silica content of water from hot springs and wet- steam wells. American Journal of Science. 1966;264:685-697. DOI: 10.2475/ajs.264.9.685
29.Raksaskulwong M. Thailand geothermal energy: Development history and current status. In: Proceedings of the 8th Asian Geothermal Symposium; 9-12 December 2008; Hanoi. Vietnam. 2008. pp. 39-46
30.Zarrouk SJ, Moon H. Efficiency of geothermal power plants: A worldwide review. Geothermics. 2014;51:142-153. DOI: 10.1016/j.geothermics.2013.11.001
31.Bertani R. Geothermal power generation in the world 2005-2010 update report. Geothermics. 2012;41:1-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.geothermics.2011.10.001
32.DiPippo R. Ideal thermal efficiency for geothermal binary plants. Geothermics. 2007;36:276-285. DOI: 10.1016/j.geothermics.2007.03.002
33.Ngansom W. Geothermal Resources in Southern Thailand: Integrated Geoscientific Investigations and Assessments [Thesis]. Hat Yai: Prince of Songkla University; 2018
34.Barnett PR, Mandagi S, Iskander T, Abidin Z, Armaladdoss A, Raad R. Exploration and development of the Tawau geothermal project, Malaysia. In: Proceedings of the World Geothermal Congress; 19-25 April 2015; Melbourne, Australia.
35.Chong LHH, Mohd ND. Tawau Hill Park springs, Sabah, Malaysia. GHC Quart Bull. 2000;21(4):3-4
36.Rubio-Maya C, Ambríz Díaz VM, Pastor Martínez E, Belman-Flores JM. Cascade utilization of low and medium enthalpy geothermal resources – A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015;52:689-716. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.162
37.The Diplomat. Having a renewable energy transition is a critical step to realize Thailand 4.0. 2019. Available from: https://thediplomat.com/2019/03/thailands-renewable-energy-transitions-a-pathway-to-realize-thailand-4-0/. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
38.IRENA. Renewable Energy Outlook: Thailand. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). 2017. Available from: https://www.irena.org/publications/2017/Nov/Renewable-Energy-Outlook-Thailand. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
39.Wood SH, Kaewsomwang P, Singharajwarapan FS. Geologic framework of the fang Hot Springs area with emphasis on structure, hydrology, and geothermal development, Chiang Mai Province, northern Thailand. Geothermal Energy. 2018;6:3. DOI: 10.1186/s40517-017-0087-7
40.Ngansom W, Duerrast H. Assessment and ranking of Hot Springs sites representing geothermal resources in southern Thailand using positive attitude factors. Chiang Mai Journal of Science 2019;46(3):592-608. DOI: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/66035
41.Bangkok Post. Energy for All Scheme to Open at End of the Month. 2020. Available from: https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/1931012/energy-for-all-scheme-to-open-at-end-of-the-month. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
42.Bangkok Post. EGAT International Builds Coal-Fired Power Plant in Vietnam. 2019. Available from: https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/1799979/egat-international-builds-coal-fired-power-plant-in-vietnam. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
43.WMO. State of the Global Climate in 2021. World Meteorological Organization; 2022. Available from: https://public.wmo.int/en/our-mandate/climate/wmo-statement-state-of-global-climate. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
44.ABC News. Heatwave update: Temperatures are expected to peak over the coming days. 2019. Available from: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-16/summer-heatwave-expected-across-australia/10719356. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
45.Ram M, Bogdanov D, Aghahosseini A, Gulagi A, Oyewo AS, Child M, Caldera U, Sadovskaia K, Farfan J, Barbosa LSNS, Fasihi M, Khalili S, Dalheimer B, Gruber G, Traber T, De Caluwe F, Fell H-J, Breyer C. Global Energy System Based on 100% Renewables. Power, Heat, Transport and Desalination Sectors Study by LUT University & Energy Watch Group (Lappeenranta, Berlin). 2019. Available from: http://energywatchgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/-EWG_LUT_100RE_All_Sectors_Global_Report_2019.pdf. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
46.The Two-Way. Peabody Energy, a Giant in the Coal Industry, Files for Bankruptcy. 2016. Available from: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/13/474059310/u-s-coal-giant-peabody-energy-files-for-bankruptcy. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
47.BloombergNEF. Cost of New Renewables Temporarily Rises as Inflation Starts to Bite. 2022. Available from: https://about.bnef.com/blog/cost-of-new-renewables-temporarily-rises-as-inflation-starts-to-bite/. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
48.BloombergNEF. Battery Power’s Latest Plunge in Costs Threatens Coal. Gas. 2019. Available from: https://about.bnef.com/blog/battery-powers-latest-plunge-costs-threatens-coal-gas/. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
49.European Investment Bank. EU Bank Launches Ambitious New Climate Strategy and Energy Lending Policy. 2019. Available from: https://www.eib.org/en/press/all/2019-313-eu-bank-launches-ambitious-new-climate-strategy-and-energy-lending-policy.htm. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
50.Jacobsen MZ. The cost of grid stability with 100% clean, renewable energy for all purposes when countries are isolated versus interconnected. Renewable Energy. 2021;179:1065-1075. DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.07.115
51.Lazard. Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis – Version 15.0. 2021. Available from: https://www.lazard.com/media/451881/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-150-vf.pdf. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
52.Carbon Tax Center. Recommended Policy Journals and Papers. 2019. Available from: https://www.carbontax.org/contact-us/recommended-policy-journals-and-papers/. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
53.EGAT: 23 September 2021 NEB greenlights Mae Moh Power Plant Replacement Project and Surat Thani Power Plant Project. 2021. Available from: https://www.egat.co.th/en/news-announcement/news-release/neb-greenlights-mae-moh-power-plant-replacement-project-and-surat-thani-power-plant-project. [Accessed: July 1, 2022]
54.Hausfather Z, Peters GP. Emissions – The ‘business as usual’ story is misleading. Nature. 2020;577:618-620
55.McKay DIA, Staal A, Abrams JF, Winkelmann R, Sakschewski B, Loriani S, et al. Exceeding 1.5°C global warming could trigger multiple climate tipping points. Science. 2022;377:6611. DOI: 10.1126/science.abn7950
56.Duerrast H. Geothermal resources in southern Thailand – Part of a renewable energy mix. In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, International Conference on Sustainable Energy and Green Technology 2019; 11-14 December 2019. Bangkok, Thailand: IOP 463; 2020. p. 012146
Written By
Helmut Duerrast
Submitted: 09 July 2022Reviewed: 14 September 2022Published: 17 October 2022
Open access peer-reviewed chapter
