Geothermal handbook: PlanninG and Financing power Generation t e c h n I c a L r e p o r t 2 / 2

T A B L E 1 . 1 0
Screening Curve Data: Total Annual Capital and Operating Costs (US$/kW-year) as 
a Function of the Capacity Factor
CAPACITy FACTOR
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
MSD HFO
304
445
586
727
868
1,008
Steam Turbine HFO
355
537
720
902
1,085
1,267
Steam Turbine Coal
323
406
490
574
658
742
Combustion Turbine NG
109
220
330
441
552
663
Combined Cycle NG
217
276
335
394
453
512
Combined Cycle LNG
217
319
422
524
627
729
Combined Cycle FO# 4
217
362
508
653
799
944
Combustion Turbine FO# 4
120
395
670
944
1,219
1,494
Small Wind Turbine
337
344
358
Large Wind Turbine
247
250
257
Small Hydropower
324
331
345
366
Large Hydropower
352
354
358
363
Geothermal
409
412
419
430
444
461
Source | Fernando Lecaros.
25
The LDC is a normalized representation of the system load curve by which loads are ‘stacked’ according to how many hours they are 
present in the system.

---

46
G e o t h e r m a l H a n d b o o k : P l a n n i n g a n d F i n a n c i n g P o w e r G e n e r a t i o n 
F I g u r E 1 . 1 9
Screening Curve for Selected Technologies 
Notes Upper part | Total annual capital and operating costs per 1 kW as a function of the capacity factor and its reflection on the LDC Lower part | Possible dispatch.
Source | Magnus Gehringer.
Large Wind Turbine
Combustion
Turbine NG
Combined Cycle NG
Geothermal
Large / Small Hydro
Large / Small Hydro
Load Duration - % of Annual Time
Cost 
US
$ 
/ kW - 
Year
MW
Capacity Factor
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
MSD HFO
Steam Turbine HFO
Steam Turbine Coal
Combustion Turbine NG
Combined Cycle NG
Combined Cycle LNG
Combined Cycle FO#4
Combustion Turbine FO#4
Small Wind Turbine
Large Wind Turbine
Small Hydropower
Large Hydropower
Geothermal
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
The resulting distribution of capacity may not be feasible (e.g., there may not be enough geothermal 
capacity available to cover the whole generation band assigned to it) whereas there may be excess 
capacity from other technologies. Detailed production costing and optimization programs are required 
to tailor plant size to specific conditions to deal with these complexities, but the screening curve 
approach provides a first approximation of the prioritization of different resources. Following this 
approach shows how geothermal can be competitive and complement other sources of generation, 
despite its high upfront cost.

---

47
C h a p t e r 1
Another option for analyzing the data is to examine the average cost per kilowatt hour for different 
capacity factors (Table 1.11).
In Figure 1.19 and the corresponding Table 1.11, geothermal has a high cost for low capacity factors. 
However, the cost decreases and becomes the lowest cost per kWh when the capacity factor 
becomes higher than around 80 percent.