Document Type

Conference Paper

Rights

This item is available under a Creative Commons License for non-commercial use only

Disciplines

Civil engineering, Construction engineering, Environmental and geological engineering, Energy and fuels

Publication Details

Renewable Energy Research Conference 2010 Zero Emission Buildings NTNU, Trondheim, Norway,June 7th – 8th, 2010

Abstract

Buildings account for approximately 40% of energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in developed economies, of which approximately 55% of building energy is used for heating and cooling. The reduction of building-related GHG emissions is a high international policy priority. For this reason and because there are many technical solutions for this, these polices should involve significant improvements in the uptake of small-scale energy efficient (EE) systems. However the widespread deployment of many technologies, must overcome a number of barriers, one of which is a temporal (diurnal or seasonal) mismatch between supply and demand. Costeffective thermal storage solutions have the potential to improve financial performance, while simultaneously reducing associated GHG emissions. The aim of this paper is to identify existing thermal energy storage (TES) technologies and to present and asses the economic and technical performance of each for a typical large scale mixed development. Technologies identified include: Borehole Thermal Energy Storage (BTES) and Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES). A Heat transfer analyses and system simulations of a variety of BTES systems are carried out using a Finite Element Analysis package (ANSYS) and energy balance simulation software (TRNSYS) to determine the optimal system design. Financial models for each system are developed, including capital, installation, running and maintenance costs. Using this information the unit costs of energy recovered from the storage area are estimated. It was found that a deep BTES was the least economically attractive solution for daily storage and that a medium depth in the region of 50 meters was the most feasible with running costs of approximately €0.055 per kWh.