Skip to main content

Science – Society – Technology

Geothermal Energy Cover Image

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

  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