Science – Society – Technology
Table 10 Comparison of the most important parameters defining the ATES system of the Klina hospital in Belgium and the ATES system of the present study
From: Techno-economic and environmental analysis of an Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES) in Germany
| Â | Parameter | ATES present study | ATES Klina hospital |
|---|---|---|---|
General | Capital costs (k€) | 1258 (± 80) | 695 |
Capacity (MW) | 3.0 | 1.2 | |
Number of wells | 6 | 2 | |
Well depths | 35 | 65 | |
∆T (K) | 4 | ~ 10 | |
|  | Electricity costs (ct/kWh) | 16.5 (± 0.5) | 11.0 |
Heating | Energy demand (MWh) | 3685 | 1335 |
Efficiency | 3.6–4.4 (COP) | 5.9 (SPF) | |
Reference technology [heating costs (ct/kWh)] | District heating (8.83 (± 1.26)) | Gas boiler (3.50) | |
Energy savings (%) | 75.0 | 85.6 | |
Cooling | Energy demand (MWh) | 4800 | 1335 |
Efficiency | 29 (COP) | 26 (SPF) | |
Reference technology (COP) | Compression chillers (COP 5.0–7.0) | Cooling machines (SPF 3.5) | |
Energy savings (%) | 80 | 87 |