Fossil energy reduction for heating and cooling of buildings using shallow geothermal integrated ene

Abstract

Keywords: Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP); Shallow Geothermal Energy (SGE); GSHP Simulation; GSHP Feasibility; Refrigerant; Compressor

Introduction

Space heating is the major energy end-use sector compared to other appliances and half of the demand in the built environment occurs due to space heating systems [1]. The

growth of heating appliances leads to severe environmental and energy security challenges. The energy, economic and environmental analysis of different heating systems such as solar/biomass boiler, biomass boiler, coal-fired boiler, Air Source Heat Pump system (ASHP), and solar/electrical

*Corresponding author. *E-mail address: mr.kbalaj@gmail.com, balaji.kumar@vit.ac.in This paper was recommended for publication in revised form by Regional Editor Omid Mahian Published by Yıldız Technical University Press, İstanbul, Turkey Copyright 2021, Yıldız Technical University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

heating have been done. The biomass-based system achieves the best in the result with first and second position, while the coal-fired and electrical heating systems are the worst rural houses space heating [2]. The primary energy consumption for heating the building area of 4852.26 m2 has been analyzed using different heating techniques such as ASHP, WGH, DEH, RCH, LCH, and CHP [3]. The initial investment cost, Primary Energy Consumption (PEC), and CO2 emission of the above heating systems are shown in Table 1, From Table 1, it is concluded that the ASHP system has excellent potential for heating application compared to RCH, LCH, and DEH systems. However, the CO2 emissions from WGH and CHP are lower than ASHP because it is powered by natural gas. Intrinsic challenges for transitioning from carbon-based heating to electrically-based heating include efficient electrically-based systems such as air or ground source heat pumps (GSHP) is the need of the hour. Geothermal energy is one of the easily accessible and 24x7 available renewable energy sources, and it can be used for space heating and cooling application in the built environment [4]. The integrated ASHP system with SGE is called a GSHP, which consumes very little energy because of the stable ground temperature [5]. GSHP system can be classified as a surface water heat pump (SWHP) and Ground Heat Exchanger (GHE) heat pump based on the geothermal energy utilization. The pool, river, channel, and lagoon water act as a heat sink in the SWHP technique [6]. The dynamic growth of fouling characteristics due to the surface water in the heat exchanger is a significant drawback of the system [7]. Techno-economic analysis reveals that the GHE heat pump system has good effectiveness related to the SWHP because of a more stable temperature in the ground [8]. The ground temperature is higher than the atmospheric temperature during winter and vice versa in summer. The SGE can be used for the energy-efficient operation of the ASHP, and thereby the fossil energy in the built environment can be reduced [9]. A survey conducted in Greece mainly focuses to understand the knowledge about the GSHP system. The authors have concluded that the following four factors are the reasons for the market barrier, a) installation cost b) insufficient subsidies c) lack of awareness on the technology and its advantage d) economic recession [10]. The investment advantage of GSHP is

forecasted from 2019 to 2040 considering both investment and operational benefits [11]. The authors suggest various policies timeline including carbon trading mechanism (CTM), subsidy, and preferential taxation for the development of SGE. The experimental result shows that the GSHP system has better COP and seasonal performance factors (SPF) compared to a conventional ASHP [12–14]. The average SPF for GSHP and ASHP is 2.39 and 1.83, respectively, and it is estimated from the sample size of 49 for GSHP and 22 for ASHP systems [15]. Similarly, a comparative analysis has been done for ten different states in India, and the result shows that for heating and cooling applications, GSHP saves 13 to 48% power compared to ASHP [16]. The performance and financial details of the conventional heating system, such as electric resistance, gas-fired, oil, and liquid fired, are compared with GSHP. They inferred that the GSHP system is highly beneficial compared to the above conventional system in terms of energy and economics [17]. The unit energy cost of GSHP is relatively meager compared to the other conventional systems (Figure 1) [18]. Further, the performance enhancement of the GSHP by integrating solar thermal [19,20], natural gas-fired water heater [21] system plays a vital role in diminishing the peak demand, PEC and emission in the built environment. A study conducted to replace natural gas heating with GSHP heating in European Union, concluded that in 2050, 60% of the PEC and 90% of the CO2 emission could be saved [22]. According to another study, the GSHP system saves PEC by 43% for heating and 37 % for cooling, in European cities [23]. Similarly, a comparative analysis between ASHP and GSHP system has been experimentally investigated in Greece and the results confirmed that the GSHP system saves 25.7% of PEC compared to ASHP. Also, it reduces NOx and CO2 pollution by 99.6% and 22.7%, respectively. On the other hand, it increases the SO2 emission by 18.4% [24]. A feasibility study of the GSHP system has been carried out in Sweden to replace conventional district heating to save energy and the environment [25]. Due to space constrain for boreholes and market entry barriers, it is quite hard to retrofit in urban areas. Whereas it is a good competitor when there is a space.

Table 1. Energy consumption, CO2 emission and total investment cost for the various heating system [3]. Type of system

14281 million kg [16,32]. The yearly CO2 savings ranged from 24 to 54 % compared to ASHP. The above studies reveal that the practice of GSHP reduces the PEC and CO2 emission related to the ASHP, oil-fired, and gas-fired systems, and this system can be used for the space heating and cooling application in the built environment. The review aims at finding the various possible opportunities for the effective integration of shallow geothermal energy (SGE) to decrease the fossil energy in the built environment and to reduce emission associated with it. This is the first review addresses the development of ground source heat pumps (GSHP) in the global north and global south countries. Also, the punctual information of the results of various authors has been extensively summarized.

Figure 1. Energy consumption costs for the different heating system [18]. Table 2 shows a different heating system (OB, GB, LTGB, DEH, GSHP, and HGSHP) energy efficiency and CO2 emission [26]. Heating efficiency for heat pumps is indicated by the heating season performance factor (HSPF). The HSPF tells the ratio of the seasonal heating output divided by the seasonal power consumption in Watt-hours. From Table 2, it is concluded that the GSHP and HSHP have higher primary energy efficiency and lower CO2 emission. GSHP system avoids 45%, 33%, and 15% to 77% of CO2 emissions compared with OB, GB, and fossil fuel heating, respectively [27,28]. A building with an average heating demand of 0.55 kWh has been analyzed to replace the GB and OB using GSHP for ten years and the CO2 saving achieved 36.34 tons and 51.9 tons, respectively [29,30]. The CO2 saving potential of 0.88 million installed units for heating applications with an average size of 12 kW in European countries has been analyzed and found that 3.7 million tons of CO2 emission are protected per year using the GSHP system [31]. In another study, an 11 kW GSHP system for the heating application installed in Germany could save 1800 kg of CO2 per year [27]. The CO2 savings potential of the GSHP unit has been calculated for ten states in India, and the annual CO2 savings varied from 1248 to

Literature Details The data collected from Engineering Village shows that GSHP research has a total of 5913 documents as of 26 June 2020 as shown in Figure 2. The share of journal articles, conference articles, conference proceedings, and book chapters are 70, 26.5, 1.2, and 1.16, respectively. China and the USA have published more research articles with a contribution of 38% and 10.3%, respectively, as shown in Figure 3. The number of research articles published has significantly increased in recent years, as shown in Figure 4. This comprehensive review highlights more than 230 research articles that have been published in the last two decades to reduce the energy demand in the built environment. GSHP Background and Installation Status The GSHP system was introduced in 1904 in Italy, and in recent years, it is gaining attention due to its energy and environmental benefits. The direct utilization of SGE has been extensively reported based on the documents available in the World Geothermal Congress (WGC) [33,34]. Direct utilization includes various applications such as space heating and cooling, greenhouse heating, agricultural drying ([35,36]), etc. At the global level, the total installed capacity as of 2014 was 70885 MWt, and the average annual growth rate is 7.9% since 2010. In which, the GSHP system capacity alone contributes to 50,258 MWt. The annual installation of GSHP systems has been varying from 5 to 20% based on the incentives and government policies [37]. Worldwide more than one million GSHP systems have been installed,

Table 2. Comparison of efficiency and emissions of different heating systems [26] Type of system

Figure 2. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review (PRISMA).

and the system is prevalent in Europe, the Americas, and Asia (Table 3) [38,39]. The comprehensive data of research articles country-wise has been presented in Table 4. The percentage of installed systems (direct utilization) in the top five countries such as China, the USA, Sweden, Turkey, and Germany are 25.2, 24.5, 7.9, 4.14, and 4.0%, respectively, and it accounts for 65.8% of the world installed capacity (Figure 5). In the Americas, outstanding work is done in North America, especially in the USA and Canada. The USA and Canada contribute 88.8% and 7.4% in the total installed capacity in the sixteen countries of the Americas. In the USA, 90% of the installed systems are closed-loop systems. In which vertical loop and horizontal closed-loop account for 30% and 70%, respectively, for residential application. In USA, the installed power of heat sources is 7385 MWt from 2006, and it is anticipated to produce heat higher than 1,000,000 MWt by 2050 from

Table 3. Worldwide installed capacity and capacity factor data for direct use application [33] Region

Meteotest

GSHP systems [40]. 4.19 million GSHP systems have been mounted in the USA and western European homes as in 2012 [33]. In the European Union, including the UK, more than 0.6 million units of GSHP systems have been installed only in Sweden, Germany, and France [39,41]. Around 50000 GSHP systems have been installed in Sweden in which 10000 are open-loop, and the remaining systems are closed-loop systems. The horizontal GSHP systems are widespread in Germany, and the average capacity of the system varies from 10 kW to 14 kW for residential applications. It has been estimated that around 163000 GSHP units are installed in France. From the above review, it is concluded that most of the systems are installed for heating-dominated buildings in the global north. In the global

south, other than China, the utilization of GSHP for the cooling-dominated building is minimal. Asia contributes less than 5% in the global GSHP market even though it has a huge contribution in direct utilization, and the leading Asian countries are China, Turkey, Japan, and South Korea [42,43]. In China, more than 2537 GSHP systems have been installed as in 2005, and the GSHP market started in 1997 with two systems [44,45]. The average growth rate of the installed system has been reported as 46% between 2000 to 2013 [46]. Shenyang and Beijing provinces contribute 22.4% and 15.1%, respectively. The utilization of geothermal energy in Turkey for power generation, heating, and cooling application has increased, and Turkey is one of the top five nations based on GSHP installed units

Figure 5. Installed status of GSHP system for direct use application [33].

Figure 6. Load factor for GSHP system [33]. [47,48]. The cumulative installed capacity reached 99.92 MW in 2015, in which closed systems and energy pile systems have a contribution of 64.3% and 1%, respectively. In Japan, most of the systems have been installed at Hokkaido, and the contribution of open-loop and closed-loop systems are 15% and 84%, respectively. In South Korea, two GSHP

systems have been installed in 2000, and it crossed 550 installations in 2008 [49]. The total installed unit crossed 7000 in 2014, of which vertical, horizontal, and open-loop contribute 75%, 9%, and 16%, respectively. The average load factor of the globally installed system is 0.265, as shown in Table 3, which means only 2321 hours,

the system capacity is fully utilized in the year-round operation. In the southern part of the USA, most of the units are calculated for peak load, and it increases the capacity for the heating (Figure 6). Hence, the system becomes oversized with a capacity factor of 0.23. In Europe, including the UK, the GSHP system has been sized for the building baseload, and the peak demand has been met using fossil fuel. Hence the system capacity factor would be 0.68. The technical guidelines for the installation of the GSHP system in the top six European unions, including the UK, are presented [50]. These guidelines provide the details of system design and operation, and maintenance by considering the environmental factors. Shallow Geothermal Energy Availability The SGE potential and their assessment techniques have been reviewed in major cities around the world. The extensive geothermal availability mapping has been carried out in the global north for heating application. The review is based on the demand of the city and availability. From the review, it is found that enormous thermal energy is available at shallow depth, and the heat energy could be integrated at a large scale based on the local-specific factor. However, high installation costs, investors’ awareness, and lack of promotion affects effective utilization [51]. This article contains an introduction for conceptually enhancing comprehension in regions with minimal degrees of shallow geothermal energy penetration. It gives direction to project estimation and examines the institutional and social strategies to help SGE systems access [52]. The SGE potential has been carried out for different countries in the Americas (global north) such as the USA [53], South-Central USA [54], Canada [55]. Lowtemperature (maximum - 90 °C and minimum - 10 °C) geothermal potential assessment has been carried out in the USA [53]. Similarly, shallow temperature variation due to weather has been predicted using a data-driven approach for three different climates such as dry, warm, and cold [56]. This geological survey gives the details of the total energy available (71 GW for 30 years) in the USA. National Renewable Energy Laboratory studied the geothermal energy system feasibility for the different climatic conditions in the USA [40]. The system feasibility map has been drawn for the direct and indirect application of SGE. It is concluded that all the regions of the US territory are fit for the GSHP system. The temperature distribution has been mapped for various ground depths from 50 m to 250 m in Canada [55]. It has been found that global warming also plays a significant role in the ground surface temperature variation. From the above literature, the Americas has an excellent shallow geothermal energy potential. Hence there is good potential for energy and environmental saving. The SGE potential mapping has been carried out for different countries in the Europe (global north) such as North-Western Italy [57–59], Southern Italy [60], Spain [61], Switzerland [62], Southern Switzerland [63], Germany

[64], South-West Germany [65], Sweden [66], France [67], Poland [68], Croatia [69], Slovenia [70], Finland [71], Belgium [72], Denmark [73], Ireland [74], Cyprus [75], Turkey [76], Serbia [77] and Hungary [78]. The GSHP system potential in Barcelona, Spain, has been investigated with groundwater flow using the GIS technique for both open-loop and closed systems [61]. The authors claimed that the proposed methodology could be used for worldwide prediction. The SGE system potential in Ludwigsburg, Germany, has been investigated for both space and water heating applications [64]. Integrating all the available geothermal energy with existing buildings for space and water heating applications will reduce CO2 emissions by 29.7% in the city. The optimum borehole length for different locations based on groundwater availability in the city has been mapped. The borehole length is very high in the northeast, whereas the borehole length is shallow nearby the river since drilling is prohibited. The SGE potential in south-western Germany (the Black Forest, the Upper Rhine Valley, and SW-Germany) has been mapped using GIS [65]. The heat extraction potential differs according to the local condition. The maximum heat extraction per borehole is 3.5 kW and

Imst-Art

FlexPDE (Multi-Physics Finite Element Solution Environment for Partial Differential)

Iesve

and hybrid GSHP system, and it helps the users to analyze the performance and cost of the system for different applications [90]. A comparative analysis of GSHP and boiler integrated GSHP has been done using eQUEST to reduce the GTI [81]. The result reveals that the hybrid GSHP system reduces the GTI and borehole depth. The detailed research and development of the hybrid GSHP systems are presented in the comprehensive review part II [204]. Designer’s Simulation Toolkit (DeST) used for the building energy simulation has been developed by Tsinghua University, China [205]. The experimental setup of the GSHP system with 1000 kW capacity has been constructed in Shanghai, China, and the GSHP system has been simulated for four different climate cities using DeST [150]. The payback period of the higher capacity system is only two years, and only 55.8% of the operating cost has been reduced. It is inferred that the GSHP unit is highly appropriate for mild and cold climate regions, and other climate regions require a hybrid GSHP structure. GLHEPro, developed by Oklahoma State University, USA, is used to design the GHE. This program is operated based on Eskilson’s method [206]. The economic and environmental analysis of the hybrid GSHP system has been analyzed using GLHEPRO software. The results imply that the GSHP system operated using solar PV reduces global warming and acidification potential [144]. In terms of economic, the saving to investment ratio decreases while operating the GSHP system using 100% solar PV. Ground Loop Design (GLD) is used for coupling the ground thermal energy with the HVAC system, and it has been developed by GAIA Geothermal, LLC., USA [207]. The effect of borehole length has been analyzed by varying different operating parameters. The outcome of the study reveals that thermal conductivity and thermal resistance of the GHE are the deciding factors of the heat pump design [142]. When increasing the thermal conductivity from 2.0 to 3.2 W/mK, reduces the heat pump capacity by 19% for cooling and 16% for heating. In the same way, an increase in the thermal resistance by 6% increases the borehole length by 3%. Earth Energy Designer (EED) is used for the design of the GHE, and it has been developed by the Swedish Council of Building Research, Stockholm [208]. This program is operated based on g-functions. The research study predicts that the building envelope performance in 2050 will be simulated on an hourly basis using EED [128,170]. The influence of global climate change on the length of the borehole has been analyzed and the results imply that a higher borehole length is needed to achieve the same space heating and cooling demand of the building in 2050. The system COP is reduced by 10% when the global temperature increases by 1.5 °C. GeoHP-Calc tool is used to simulate the GHE system, and this simulation tool combines the CaRM-He model

[133]. This model considers the axial direction of heat conduction. The heat balance of the ground also considers the effect of weather parameters, including the long-wave radiation. FlexPDE is used to find a numerical solution based on FEM, and it has developed by PDE Solutions Inc. [209]. The effect of diameter, specific heat, thermal conductivity, grout, and HTF has been successfully analyzed and validated with experimental results [116]. The author concludes that bentonite could be used as grout material, and an increase in the U-tube size rises the heat dissipation to the soil. A finite Element subsurface FLOW and transport system (FEFLOW) is used to model the GHE, and it has been developed by MIKE POWERED BY DHI, Denmark [210]. Performance and emission of the GSHP unit have been experimentally investigated, and the model has been established to forecast the system performance for the next ten years using FEFLOW [135]. The results show that 20% of CO2 emission has been reduced using GSHP related to ASHP, and the maximum COP of the unit is 3.75 in year-round operation. The performance of the individual component of the vapor compression system can be analyzed using IMSTART, and this software is developed by the Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain [129]. The IMST-ART simulation result shows that the maximum SPF of 5.24 for the heat pump and 2.47 for the GSHP system has been achieved [98]. This simulation model considers the following independent variables, namely, speed of compressor and circulation pump, entry, and exit temperature of the GHE. ASPEN plus can be used for the heat exchanger design apart from the process engineering systems, and it has been developed by Aspen Technology, Inc., USA (Aspen Technology, 2000). The GSHP system COP has been simulated using ASPEN Plus software varies from

1. Most of the systems are installed for heating-dominated

buildings in the global north. The direct utilization of geothermal energy is very limited in the global south nations. China has extensively analyzed the shallow geothermal potential. Similarly, it has to be carried out for other global south countries.

2. The future work may be to describe more explicitly SGE

potential for both heating and cooling and to discuss important power densities when active resupply of thermal shortfalls is accounted for.

3. Further, research and developments are essential for the

effective utilization of SGE in global south countries. Development of the new database to represent the SGE conductivities and prospective (different length) and viability of GHE systems. Also, techno-economic mapping needs to be conducted.

4. The NH3 and CO2 refrigerants were studied to a greater

extent in the GSHP system. However, propane has been rarely investigated. The exploration of natural refrigerants in the GSHP is extremely less related to the convection heat pump.

5. Various types of studies were done on improving the

GSHP performance on the system side by perfecting various parameters. However, the potential impact of the indoor environmental (air) parameters has not been studied extensively. Design integration of the SGE and building with respect to optimal energy use and operational plan must be developed. 6. Very few comparative simulation studies are only available. Therefore, further comparative research is needed in order to find the best suitable software. There is a need to find the performance of the system according to the year-round local climatic conditions. 7. The future work may be to develop transparent and crucial evaluation plans for the data point and uncertainties, vulnerabilities, and essential modeling statements. Different design computer software must be further verified by data from the field and a detailed assessment is intensively required to examine their precision and feasibility for engineering practices. 8. There are some limitations because of the initial investment and complexity of the GSHP system. The extensive

review reveals that the payback period of the system is quite high. There are possibilities for technological advancements, which will help to reduce the investment cost.

9. The improper design would increase the installation

and maintenance costs. The oversizing of the system to meet the peak demand may also be the reason for the higher payback period. Incorporating the safety factor increases the GHE length. Also, considerable attention needs to be paid to grout, and this will significantly reduce borehole length and fitting cost. Hence, proper design standards and technology development are essential to reduce the cost.

10. The best design of the individual system dramatically

reduces the investment cost and energy consumption. Still, further research is necessary for the optimization and control strategy of the integrated system according to the climatic conditions, building demand, and GTI. The influence of building load on the thermal plumes must be investigated. The traditional approach to deciding on thermal plumes is insufficient.

11. Exergy analysis may be considered under a dynamic

approach, since the design running conditions could vary greatly, during a peak day and the season. The exergy optimization could be applied to a control algorithm

12. Available theories to review the economic possibilities

of SGE in urban areas, however, are still not ready. The economic barrier and emission reduction potential of retrofitting the GSHP system in a building could be estimated. Modernization studies need to be carried out for effective integration with the existing building.

13. Most of the earlier findings are taken into account GHE

heat transfer and ignore financial and environmental aspects.

14. The effects of the Carbon trading mechanism (CTM)

are limited because it is still in the early stage of growth and has little volatility. Hence, to progress further, the CTM and proper guidelines are also beneficial for the development of GSHP.

15. A greater part of the research work focused on heat

pump components’ fault detection. However, no research is available on GHE. Most of the fault diagnosis methods are established to find the hard faults precisely in ASHP systems. Hence, plenty of research is needed on soft fault detection in the GSHP system.

16. The strong guidelines and administration plans for the

intensified shallow geothermal energy use are still missing primarily due to the shortage of system insight and process experience. 17. The evolution of SGE in global south counties is inadequate due to factors such as rules and policies, as well as a lack of financial assistance from the government. If rules and policies become efficient and policy structures are introduced, the SGE growth can quickly accelerate in the country.

18. The dissemination plans need to be developed that can

help to access the technology, and it may be focused on governing and technology advancements, fiscal subsidies, and knowledge sharing activities, with tax benefits suitable for GSHPs, people’s awareness of the system and its advantages.

19. Explanation of the technical capabilities, and proof of

thriving SGE use theories for cities, is essential to foster the adoption. Social considerations as part of the adoption potential are rarely argued.

20. The system growth in the cities based on planning by

private owners is questionable to deliver practical future results, as the costs of the discovery and supervising are expected to go beyond the reasonable economic constraints. Hence, investor participation and dedication require to be supported so that a growth plan can be realized at the community and city scale.

Conclusion

Many more can be done to ensure GSHP is better, i.e. highly efficient, cheapest, simpler, preventing any threat to geothermal and groundwater, expanding the area of application on the existing building, industries, etc. In conclusion, SGE is a clean, trusted, and greener source, which can promote social sustainable growth and help protect the global environment. For this reason, state initiatives and efforts are critical to emphasize and promote the exploration, utilization, and evolution of SGE in the country.

Nomenclature

A Area ACOP Average coefficient of performance ASHP Air source heat pump ASVRF Air source variable refrigerant flow CHP Local fired cogeneration COP Coefficient of performance CTM Carbon trading mechanism DEH Direct electric heating DeST Designer’s simulation toolkit DSS Decision support system EAHE Earth air heat exchanger EAHP Earth air heat pump EED Earth energy designer EER Energy efficiency ratio EG Ethylene glycol eQUEST Quick energy simulation tool ES Energy storage/energy source FEFLOW Finite element subsurface flow GB Gas fired boiler GHE Ground heat exchanger GLHE Ground loop heat exchanger GLD Ground loop design GSHP Ground source heat pump GTI Ground thermal imbalance

Hgshp HTF

LCA LCH LTGB OB PB PE PEC PVC RCH Ref SCOP SPF SGE SWHP VGHE WGH

High-density polyethylene Horizontal ground heat exchanger Green electricity + GSHP Heat transfer fluid Life cycle analysis Large coal-fired heating Low temperature system + gas boiler Oil-fired boiler Polybutylene Polyethylene Primary Energy Consumption Polyvinyl chloride Regional coal-fired boiler Refrigerant Seasonal coefficient of performance Seasonal performance factor Shallow geothermal energy Surface water heat pump Vertical ground heat exchanger Wall hanging gas boiler

Acknowledgments

The author worked as a project fellow in a DST-EPSRC funded project title “Zero Peak Energy Building Design for India” (ZED-I) at the Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee. ZED-I is a collaborative research project lead by IIT Roorkee along with IIT Delhi and CSIR-CBRI from India and the University of Bath from the UK. Department of Science and Technology (DST) and Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) are jointly funding this research under the “Energy Demand Reduction in the Built Environment” program (Grant numbers: DST/ TMD/UK-BEE/2017/17(c) and EP/R008612/1). This project aims to eliminate peak energy demand and minimize mean energy demand from buildings, under a changing Indian climate, through a new science of zero peak energy building design. This review was carried out as a part of the development and demonstration of low-energy cooling and heating technologies. The part of the work was carried out at IIT Roorkee. Later, the author started working as Assistant Professor at Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, India, and the remaining part of the review work was carried out. The author would like to thank all the investigators and team members for their constant support.

Data Availability Statement

The authors confirm that the data that supports the findings of this study are available within the article. Raw

data that support the finding of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.

Conflict Of Interest

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethics

There are no ethical issues with the publication of this manuscript.

References

1. SCOP Seasonal coefficient of performance SPF Seasonal performance factor [1] Pérez-Lombard L, Ortiz J, Pout C. A review on SGE Shallow geothermal energy buildings energy consumption information. Energy SWHP Surface water heat pump Build 2008;40:394-398. [CrossRef] VGHE Vertical ground heat exchanger [2] Zhang X, Yang J, Zhao X. Optimal study of the WGH Wall hanging gas boiler rural house space heating systems employing the AHP and FCE methods. Energy 2018;150:631-641. Subscripts [CrossRef] h Heating [3] Zhang Q, Zhang L, Nie J, Li Y. Techno-economic c Cooling analysis of air source heat pump applied for s System space heating in northern China. Appl Energy 2017;207:533-542. [CrossRef]
2. Ghoniem AF. Needs, resources and climate change: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Clean and efficient conversion technologies. Progr The author worked as a project fellow in a DST-EPSRC Energy Combust Sci 2011;37:15-51. [CrossRef] funded project title “Zero Peak Energy Building Design [5] Safa AA, Fung AS, Kumar R. Comparative thermal performances of a ground source heat pump and a for India” (ZED-I) at the Indian Institute of Technology variable capacity air source heat pump systems for Roorkee. ZED-I is a collaborative research project lead by sustainable houses. Appl Therm Eng 2015;81:279- IIT Roorkee along with IIT Delhi and CSIR-CBRI from
3. Schibuola L, Scarpa M. Experimental analysis of the of Science and Technology (DST) and Engineering and performances of a surface water source heat pump. Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) are jointly Energy Build 2016;113:182-188. [CrossRef] funding this research under the “Energy Demand Reduction
4. Chen S, Zhang Q, Li H, Mclellan B, Zhang T, Tan Z. water heat pump system and an air to water heat Investment decision on shallow geothermal heating pump system for heating and cooling in typical & cooling based on compound options model: A case conditions of the European Mediterranean coast. study of China. Applied Energy. 2019;254:113655. Energy Convers Manag 2008;49:2917-2923. [CrossRef] [CrossRef] [24] Michopoulos A, Zachariadis T, Kyriakis N. Operation
5. de Swardt CA, Meyer JP. A performance comparison characteristics and experience of a ground source heat between an air-source and a ground-source revers- pump system with a vertical ground heat exchanger. ible heat pump. Int J Energy Res 2001;25:899-910. Energy 2013;51:349-357. [CrossRef] [CrossRef] [25] Åberg M, Fälting L, Lingfors D, Nilsson AM, Forssell
6. Schibuola L, Scarpa M. Ground source heat pumps A. Do ground source heat pumps challenge the in high humidity soils: An experimental analysis. dominant position of district heating in the Swedish Appl Therm Eng 2016;99:80-91. [CrossRef] heating market? Journal of Cleaner Production.
7. Hwang Y, Lee J-K, Jeong Y-M, Koo K-M, Lee D-H, 2020;254:120070. [CrossRef] Kim I-K, et al. Cooling performance of a vertical [26] Mustafa Omer A. Ground-source heat pumps sys- ground-coupled heat pump system installed in a tems and applications. Renew Sustain Energy Rev school building. Renew Energy 2009;34:578-582. 2008;12:344-371. [CrossRef] [CrossRef] [27] Blum P, Campillo G, Münch W, Kölbel T. CO2 sav-
8. Rees S, Curtis R. National deployment of domestic ings of ground source heat pump systems - A regional geothermal heat pump technology: Observations analysis. Renew Energy 2010;35:122-127. [CrossRef] on the UK experience 1995-2013. Energies (Basel) [28] Johnson EP. Carbon footprints of heating oil and 2014;7:5460-5499. [CrossRef] LPG heating systems. Environ Impact Assess Rev
9. Sivasakthivel T, Murugesan K, Sahoo PK. A study 2012;35:11-22. [CrossRef] on energy and CO2 saving potential of ground [29] Self SJ, Reddy B, Rosen MA. Geothermal heat pump source heat pump system in India. Renewable and systems: Status review and comparison with other Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014;32:278-293. heating options. Appl Energy 2013;101:341-348. [CrossRef] [CrossRef]
10. Esen H, Inalli M, Esen M. Technoeconomic appraisal of a ground source heat pump system for a heating ings of ground source heat pump systems - a regional season in eastern Turkey. Energy Convers Manag analysis. Renew Energy 2010;35:122-127. [CrossRef] 2006;47:1281-1297. [CrossRef] [31] Bayer P, Saner D, Bolay S, Rybach L, Blum P.
11. Pulat E, Coskun S, Unlu K, Yamankaradeniz N. Greenhouse gas emission savings of ground source Experimental study of horizontal ground source heat pump systems in Europe: A review. Renew heat pump performance for mild climate in Turkey. Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:1256-1267. [CrossRef] Energy 2009;34:1284-1295. [CrossRef] [32] Sivasakthivel T, Murugesan K, Sahoo PK. Potential
12. Mohanraj M, Belyayev Ye, Jayaraj S, Kaltayev A. reduction in CO2 emission and saving in electricity Research and developments on solar assisted com- by ground source heat pump system for space heat- pression heat pump systems - A comprehensive ing applications - A study on northern part of India. review (Part A: Modeling and modifications). Procedia Engineering. 2012;38:970-979. [CrossRef] Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;83:90-123. [CrossRef] [33] Lund JW, Boyd TL. Direct utilization of geother-
13. Dong X, Tian Q, Li Z. Experimental investigation on mal energy 2015 worldwide review. Geothermics heating performance of solar integrated air source 2016;60:66-93. [CrossRef] heat pump. Appl Therm Eng 2017;123:1013-1020. [34] Lund JW, Freeston DH, Boyd TL. Direct utiliza- [CrossRef] tion of geothermal energy 2010 worldwide review.
14. Li G. Parallel loop configuration for hybrid heat Geothermics 2011;40:159-180. [CrossRef] pump - gas fired water heater system with smart [35] Erbay Z, Hepbasli A. Exergoeconomic evalua- control strategy. Appl Therm Eng 2018;138:807-818. tion of a ground-source heat pump food dryer [CrossRef] at varying dead state temperatures. J Clean Prod
15. Carvalho AD, Mendrinos D, de Almeida AT. 2017;142:1425-1435. [CrossRef] Ground source heat pump carbon emissions and [36] Erbay Z, Hepbasli A. Application of conventional primary energy reduction potential for heating and advanced exergy analyses to evaluate the per- in buildings in Europe - Results of a case study in formance of a ground-source heat pump (GSHP) Portugal. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;45:755- dryer used in food drying. Energy Convers Manag
16. [CrossRef] 2014;78:499-507. [CrossRef]
17. Urchueguía JF, Zacarés M, Corberán JM, Montero [37 Aresti L, Christodoulides P, Florides G. A review of Á, Martos J, Witte H. Comparison between the the design aspects of ground heat exchangers. Renew energy performance of a ground coupled water to Sustain Energy Rev 2018;92:757-773. [CrossRef] J Ther Eng, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 1386−1417, September, 2023 1411
18. Wagner V, Blum P, Kübert M, Bayer P. Analytical approach to groundwater-influenced thermal geothermal potential in the South-Central United response tests of grouted borehole heat exchangers. States. Nat Resour Res 2008;17:227−243. [CrossRef] Geothermics 2013;46:22-31. [CrossRef] [55] Majorowicz J, Grasby SE, Skinner WR. Estimation of
19. Sanner B. Ground Source Heat Pumps - history , shallow geothermal energy resource in Canada: Heat development , current status , and future prospects. gain and heat sink. Nat Resour Res 2009;18:95−108. 12th IEA Heat Pump Conference 2017. 2017:1-14. [CrossRef]
20. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Geothermal: The energy under our feet. 2006. soil temperatures predictions for various climates
21. Majuri P. Ground source heat pumps and environ- in United States using data-driven model. Energy mental policy - The Finnish practitioner's point of 2018;160:430−440. [CrossRef] view. J Clean Prod 2016;139:740-749. [CrossRef] [57] Casasso A, Sethi R. Territorial analysis for the
22. Haehnlein S, Bayer P, Blum P. International legal sta- implementation of Geothermal Heat Pumps in tus of the use of shallow geothermal energy. Renew the Province of Cuneo (NW Italy). Energy Proced Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:2611-2625. [CrossRef] 2015;78:1159−1164. [CrossRef]
23. Goetzler W, Zogg R, Lisle H, Javier Burgos, Navigant Consulting Inc. Ground ‐ Source Heat Pumps : the shallow geothermal potential in the province Overview of Market Status , Barriers to Adoption , of Cuneo (Piedmont, NW Italy). Renew Energy and Options for Overcoming Barriers Final Report 2017;102:306−315. [CrossRef] Submitted to : Prepared By : Heather Lisle. US [59] Casasso A, Sethi R. G.POT: A quantitative method Department of Energy Energy 2009. for the assessment and mapping of the shallow
24. Gao Q, Li M, Yu M, Spitler JD, Yan YY. Review geothermal potential. Energy 2016;106:765−773. of development from GSHP to UTES in China [CrossRef] and other countries. Renew Sustain Energy Rev [60] Galgaro A, di Sipio E, Teza G, Destro E, de Carli M, 2009;13:1383-1394. [CrossRef] Chiesa S, et al. Empirical modeling of maps of geo-ex-
25. Geng Y, Sarkis J, Wang X, Zhao H, Zhong Y. change potential for shallow geothermal energy Regional application of ground source heat pump in at regional scale. Geothermics 2015;57:173−184. China: A case of Shenyang. Renew Sustain Energy [CrossRef] Rev 2013;18:95-102. [CrossRef] [61] García-Gil A, Vázquez-Suñe E, Alcaraz MM, Juan
26. Liu X, Lu S, Hughes P, Cai Z. A comparative study of AS, Sánchez-Navarro JA, Montlleó M, et al. GIS- the status of GSHP applications in the United States supported mapping of low-temperature geothermal and China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;48:558- potential taking groundwater flow into account.
27. [CrossRef] Renew Energy 2015;77:268−278. [CrossRef]
28. Kaygusuz K, Kaygusuz A. Geothermal energy in Turkey: The sustainable future. Renew Sustain ology to calculate long-term shallow geothermal Energy Rev 2004;8:545-563. [CrossRef] energy potential for an urban neighbourhood.
29. Hepbasli A, Ozgener L. Development of geother- Energy Build 2018;159:462−473. [CrossRef] mal energy utilization in Turkey: A review. Renew [63] Perego R, Pera S, Galgaro A. Techno-economic Sustain Energy Rev 2004;8:433-460. [CrossRef] mapping for the improvement of shallow geother-
30. Lee JY. Current status of ground source heat pumps mal management in southern Switzerland. Energies in Korea. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:1560- (Basel) 2019;12. [CrossRef] 1568. [CrossRef] [64] Schiel K, Baume O, Caruso G, Leopold U. GIS-based
31. Somogyi V, Sebestyén V, Nagy G. Scientific achieve- modelling of shallow geothermal energy potential ments and regulation of shallow geothermal systems for CO2 emission mitigation in urban areas. Renew in six European countries - A review. Renew Sustain Energy. 2016;86:1023−1036. [CrossRef] Energy Rev 2017;68:934-952. [CrossRef] [65] Ondreka J, Rüsgen MI, Stober I, Czurda K. GIS-
32. Bayer P, Attard G, Blum P, Menberg K. The geother- supported mapping of shallow geothermal potential mal potential of cities. Renew Sustain Energy Rev of representative areas in south-western Germany- 2019;106:17−30. [CrossRef] Possibilities and limitations. Renew Energy
33. Tsagarakis KP. Shallow geothermal energy under 2007;32:2186−2200. [CrossRef] the microscope: Social, economic, and institu- [66] Gehlin S, Andersson O. Geothermal Energy Use, tional aspects. Renew Energy 2020;147:2801−2808. Country Update for Sweden. European Geothermal [CrossRef] Congress 2016 Strasbourg, France, 19-24 Sept 201.
34. Marshall JR. Assessment of low-temperature geo- 2016:1-11. thermal resources of the United States. Geological [67] Boissavy C, Henry L, Genter A, Pomart A, Rocher Survey Circular 1982;892. P, Schmidlé-bloch V. Geothermal Energy Use, 1412 J Ther Eng, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 1386−1417, September, 2023 Country Update for France. European Geothermal heating under simulated occupancy conditions. Congress 2019 Den Haag, The Netherlands, 11-14 Appl Therm Eng 2015;89:192-203. [CrossRef] June 2019. 2019:11−14. [80] Han C, Yu XB. Performance of a residential ground
35. Ryżyński G, Żeruń M, Kocyła J. Estimation of source heat pump system in sedimentary rock for- Potential Low-temperature Geothermal Energy mation. Appl Energy 2016;164:89-98. [CrossRef] Extraction from the Closed-loop Systems Based [81] Wang S, Liu X, Gates S. Comparative study of con- on Analysis, Interpretation and Reclassification of trol strategies for hybrid GSHP system in the cooling Geological Borehole Dat... Estimation of Potential dominated climate. Energy Build 2015;89:222-230. Low-temperature Geothermal Energy Extraction. [CrossRef] Proceedings World Geothermal Congress 2020. [82] Khan MA, Wang JX. Development of a graph method 2020. for preliminary design of borehole ground-coupled
36. Soldo V, Boban L, Borović S. Vertical distribution heat exchanger in North Louisiana. Energy Build of shallow ground thermal properties in differ- 2015;92:389-397. [CrossRef] ent geological settings in Croatia. Renew Energy [83] Li G. Investigations of life cycle climate perfor- 2016;99:1202−1212. [CrossRef] mance and material life cycle assessment of pack-
37. Stegnar G, Staničić D, Česen M, Čižman J, Pestotnik aged air conditioners for residential application. S, Prestor J, et al. A framework for assessing the tech- Sustain Energy Technol Assess 2015;11:114-125. nical and economic potential of shallow geothermal [CrossRef] energy in individual and district heating systems: A [84] Ally MR, Munk JD, Baxter VD, Gehl AC. Exergy case study of Slovenia. Energy 2019;180:405−420. analysis of a two-stage ground source heat pump [CrossRef] with a vertical bore for residential space condi-
38. Link K, Rybach L, Wyss R. Geothermal Energy Use, tioning under simulated occupancy. Appl Energy Country Update for Finland. European Geothermal 2015;155:502-514. [CrossRef] Congress 2013:3-7. [85] Wu W, Skye HM, Lin L. Progress in ground-source
39. Petitclerc E, Dusar M, Declercq P, Hoes H, Laenen heat pumps using natural refrigerants. Int J Refrig B, Vanbrabant Y. Overview and perspectives on 2018;92:70−85. [CrossRef] shallow geothermal energy in Belgium. European [86] Liu X, Hong T. Comparison of energy efficiency Geothermal Congress 2013, Pisa, Italy, 3-7 June between variable refrigerant flow systems and 2013. 2013:3-7. ground source heat pump systems. Energy Build
40. Vangkilde-pedersen T, Ditlefsen C, Højberg AL. 2010;42:584-589. [CrossRef] Shallow geothermal energy in Denmark. Geologic [87] Marmaras J, Burbank J, Kosanovic DB. Primary- Survey Denmark Greenland Bullet 2012;26:37−40. secondary de-coupled ground source heat pump [CrossRef] systems coefficient of performance optimization
41. Allen A, Milenic D, Sikora P. Shallow gravel aqui- through entering water temperature control. Appl fers and the urban "heat island" effect: A source Therm Eng 2016;96:107-116. [CrossRef] of low enthalpy geothermal energy. Geothermics [88] Wang S. Energy modeling of ground source heat 2003;32:569−578. [CrossRef] pump vs. variable refrigerant flow systems in
42. Kalogirou SA, Florides GA, Pouloupatis PD, representative US climate zones. Energy Build Panayides I, Joseph-Stylianou J, Zomeni Z. 2014;72:222-228. [CrossRef] Artificial neural networks for the generation of [89] Shen P, Lukes JR. Impact of global warming on per- geothermal maps of ground temperature at various formance of ground source heat pumps in US cli- depths by considering land configuration. Energy mate zones. Energy Conversion and Management. 2012;48:233−240. [CrossRef] 2015;101:632-643. [CrossRef]
43. Bundschuh J, Chandrasekharam D. Geothermal Systems and Energy Resources. 2014. [CrossRef] features for conventional and hybrid GSHP simu-
44. Kljajić M, Anđelković AS, Hasik V, Munćan VM, lations in eQUEST 3.7. Energy Build 2015;105:368- Bilec M. Shallow geothermal energy integration in 376. [CrossRef] district heating system: An example from Serbia. [91] Zhu Y, Tao Y, Rayegan R. A comparison of deter- Renew Energy 2020;147:2791-2800. [CrossRef] ministic and probabilistic life cycle cost analyses of
45. Buday T, Buday-Bódi E, McIntosh RW, Kozák M. ground source heat pump (GSHP) applications in Geoinformatic background of geothermal energy hot and humid climate. Energy Build 2012;55:312- utilization and its applications in East Hungary. 321. [CrossRef] Landscape Environ 2016;10:145-152. [CrossRef] [92] Yin P, Pate M, Battaglia F. In-field performance eval-
46. Ally MR, Munk JD, Baxter VD, Gehl AC. Data, uation and economic analysis of residential ground exergy, and energy analyses of a vertical-bore, source heat pumps in heating operation. J Build Eng ground-source heat pump for domestic water 2019;26. [CrossRef] J Ther Eng, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 1386−1417, September, 2023 1413
47. Self SJ, Reddy B, Rosen MA. Ground source heat pumps for heating: Parametric energy analysis of tical ground-source heat pump performance eval- a vapor compression cycle utilizing an economizer uation for cold climate in Turkey. Appl Energy arrangement. Appl Therm Eng 2013;52:245-254. 2011;88:1257-1265. [CrossRef] [CrossRef] [107] Bakirci K. Evaluation of the performance of a
48. Alavy M, Nguyen H v., Leong WH, Dworkin SB. A ground-source heat-pump system with series GHE methodology and computerized approach for opti- (ground heat exchanger) in the cold climate region. mizing hybrid ground source heat pump system Energy 2010;35:3088-3096. [CrossRef] design. Renew Energy 2013;57:404-412. [CrossRef] [108] Bakirci K, Colak D. Effect of a superheating and
49. Muñoz M, Garat P, Flores-Aqueveque V, Vargas G, sub-cooling heat exchanger to the performance Rebolledo S, Sepúlveda S, et al. Estimating low-en- of a ground source heat pump system. Energy thalpy geothermal energy potential for district heat- 2012;44:996-1004. [CrossRef] ing in Santiago basin-Chile (33.5°S). Renew Energy [109] Akbulut U, Utlu Z, Kincay O. Exergoenvironmental 2015;76:186-195. [CrossRef] and exergoeconomic analyses of a vertical type
50. Simon F, Ordoñez J, Reddy TA, Girard A, Muneer ground source heat pump integrated wall cooling T. Developing multiple regression models from the system. Appl Therm Eng 2016;102:904-921. [CrossRef] manufacturer's ground-source heat pump catalogue [110] Ozgener O, Hepbasli A. A review on the energy and data. Renew Energy 2016;95:413-421. [CrossRef] exergy analysis of solar assisted heat pump systems.
51. Aira R, Fernández-Seara J, Diz R, Pardiñas Á. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2007;11:482-496. [CrossRef] Experimental analysis of a ground source heat [111] Dehghan BB. Experimental and computational pump in a residential installation after two years investigation of the spiral ground heat exchangers in operation. Renew Energy 2017;114:1214-1223. for ground source heat pump applications. Appl [CrossRef] Therm Eng 2017;121:908-921. [CrossRef]
52. Corberan JM, Finn DP, Montagud CM, Murphy FT, Edwards KC. A quasi-steady state mathematical heat exchangers in ground source heat pump system model of an integrated ground source heat pump for of a building for district heating/cooling purposes: building space control. Energy Build 2011;43:82-92. Comparison among different configurations. Appl [CrossRef] Therm Eng 2018;130:1489-1506. [CrossRef]
53. Cervera-Vázquez J, Montagud C, Corberán JM. In situ optimization methodology for the water cir- formance analysis of Bethe-Zeldovich-Thompson culation pumps frequency of ground source heat (BZT) fluids in geothermal heat pumps. Int J Refrig pump systems: Analysis for multistage heat pump 2011;34:1943-1952. [CrossRef] units. Energy Build 2015;88:238-247. [CrossRef] [114] Luo J, Rohn J, Bayer M, Priess A, Wilkmann L,
54. Cervera-Vázquez J, Montagud C, Corberán JM. In Xiang W. Heating and cooling performance analysis situ optimization methodology for ground source of a ground source heat pump system in Southern heat pump systems: Upgrade to ensure user com- Germany. Geothermics 2015;53:57-66. [CrossRef] fort. Energy Build 2015;109:195-208. [CrossRef] [115] Retkowski W, Thöming J. Thermoeconomic opti-
55. Romaní J, Pérez G, de Gracia A. Experimental eval- mization of vertical ground-source heat pump sys- uation of a heating radiant wall coupled to a ground tems through nonlinear integer programming. Appl source heat pump. Renew Energy 2017;105:520-529. Energy 2014;114:492-503. [CrossRef] [CrossRef] [116] Florides GA, Christodoulides P, Pouloupatis
56. Montagud C, Corberán JM, Ruiz-Calvo F. P. An analysis of heat flow through a borehole Experimental and modeling analysis of a heat exchanger validated model. Appl Energy ground source heat pump system. Appl Energy 2012;92:523-533. [CrossRef] 2013;109:328-336. [CrossRef] [117] Christodoulides P, Aresti L, Florides G. Air-
57. Montagud C, Corberán JM, Montero Á, Urchueguía conditioning of a typical house in moderate climates JF. Analysis of the energy performance of a ground with Ground Source Heat Pumps and cost compar- source heat pump system after five years of opera- ison with Air Source Heat Pumps. Appl Therm Eng tion. Energy Build 2011;43:3618-3626. [CrossRef] 2019;158. [CrossRef]
58. Szreder M. A field study of the performance of a heat pump installed in a low energy house. Appl Therm of ground source heat pumps in a residential area. Eng 2014;71:596-606. [CrossRef] Appl Energy 2013;102:591-600. [CrossRef]
59. İnallı M, Esen H. Experimental thermal perfor- mance evaluation of a horizontal ground-source siderations in the deployment of ground source heat heat pump system. Appl Therm Eng 2004;24:2219- pumps in older properties-A case study. Energy 2232. [CrossRef] Build 2018;159:54-65. [CrossRef] 1414 J Ther Eng, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 1386−1417, September, 2023
60. Garber D, Choudhary R, Soga K. Risk based life- time costs assessment of a ground source heat pump heat pumps fitted with frequency inverters for (GSHP) system design: Methodology and case part-load control. Appl Energy 2010;87:3507-3513. study. Build Environ 2013;60:66-80. [CrossRef] [CrossRef]
61. Luo Z, Asproudi C. Subsurface urban heat island and its effects on horizontal ground-source heat the performance of a large borehole ground source pump potential under climate change. Appl Therm heat pump for greenhouses in northern Japan. Eng 2015;90:530-537. [CrossRef] Energy 2013;63:387-399. [CrossRef]
62. Schibuola L, Tambani C, Zarrella A, Scarpa M. Ground source heat pump performance in case tests, numerical modeling and economic analysis of of high humidity soil and yearly balanced heat semi-open loop ground source heat pump system. transfer. Energy Convers Manag 2013;76:956-970. Geothermics 2018;71:34-45. [CrossRef] [CrossRef] [137] Genchi Y, Kikegawa Y, Inaba A. CO2 payback-time
63. del Col D, Azzolin M, Benassi G, Mantovan M. assessment of a regional- scale heating and cooling Energy efficiency in a ground source heat pump with system using a ground source heat-pump in a high variable speed drives. Energy Build 2015;91:105- energy-consumption area in Tokyo. Appl Energy
64. [CrossRef] 2002;71:147-160. [CrossRef]
65. lo Russo S, Boffa C, Civita M. Low-enthalpy geo- thermal energy: An opportunity to meet increas- a design and performance prediction tool for the ing energy needs and reduce CO2and atmospheric ground source heat pump system. Appl Therm Eng pollutant emissions in Piemonte, Italy. Geothermics 2006;26:1578-1592. [CrossRef] 2009;38:254-262. [CrossRef] [139] Naili N, Attar I, Hazami M, Farhat A. First in situ
66. Lucia U, Simonetti M, Chiesa G, Grisolia G. operation performance test of ground source Ground-source pump system for heating and cool- heat pump in Tunisia. Energy Convers Manag ing: Review and thermodynamic approach. Renew 2013;75:292-301. [CrossRef] Sustain Energy Rev 2017;70:867-874. [CrossRef] [140] Naili N, Hazami M, Attar I, Farhat A. Assessment
67. Karlsson F, Fahlén P. Capacity-controlled ground of surface geothermal energy for air conditioning source heat pumps in hydronic heating systems. Int in northern Tunisia: Direct test and deployment J Refrig 2007;30:221-229. [CrossRef] of ground source heat pump system. Energy Build
68. Kharseh M, Altorkmany L, Al-Khawaja M, Hassani 2016;111:207-217. [CrossRef] F. Analysis of the effect of global climate change on [141] Choi JM, Park Y, Kang SH. Heating performance ground source heat pump systems in different cli- verification of a ground source heat pump system mate categories. Renew Energy 2015;78:219-225. with U-tube and double tube type GLHEs. Renew [CrossRef] Energy 2013;54:32-39. [CrossRef]
69. Kharseh M, Altorkmany L, Nordell B. Global warm- ing's impact on the performance of GSHP. Renew design parameter's effects on a ground source heat Energy 2011;36:1485-1491. [CrossRef] pump system. Renew Energy 2014;65:2-6. [CrossRef]
70. Karampour M, Sawalha S. State-of-the-art inte- grated CO2 refrigeration system for supermarkets: in a ground source heat pump system. Energy Build A comparative analysis. Int J Refrig 2018;86:239- 2017;138:301-308. [CrossRef]
71. Koroneos CJ, Nanaki EA. Environmental impact analysis of a self-consumption strategy for building assessment of a ground source heat pump system in sectors focused on ground source heat pump sys- Greece. Geothermics 2017;65:1-9. [CrossRef] tems. J Clean Prod 2018;186:68-80. [CrossRef]
72. Partenay V, Riederer P, Salque T, Wurtz E. The influ- ence of the borehole short-time response on ground ground source heat pump with heat exchange meth- source heat pump system efficiency. Energy Build ods. Renew Energy 2014;71:651-657. [CrossRef] 2011;43:1280-1287. [CrossRef] [146] Shim BO, Park CH. Ground thermal conductivity
73. Paiho S, Pulakka S, Knuuti A. Life-cycle cost anal- for (ground source heat pumps) GSHPs in Korea. yses of heat pump concepts for Finnish new nearly Energy 2013;56:167-174. [CrossRef] zero energy residential buildings. Energy Build [147] Kim Y-J, Chang K-S. Development of a thermo- 2017;150:396-402. [CrossRef] dynamic performance-analysis program for CO2
74. Zarrella A, Emmi G, de Carli M. Analysis of operat- geothermal heat pump system. J Ind Eng Chem ing modes of a ground source heat pump with short 2013;19:1827-1837. [CrossRef] helical heat exchangers. Energy Convers Manag [148] Noorollahi Y, Gholami Arjenaki H, Ghasempour R. 2015;97:351-361. [CrossRef] Thermo-economic modeling and GIS-based spatial J Ther Eng, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 1386−1417, September, 2023 1415 data analysis of ground source heat pump systems [162] Pu L, Qi D, Xu L, Li Y. Optimization on the perfor- for regional shallow geothermal mapping. Renew mance of ground heat exchangers for GSHP using Sustain Energy Rev 2017;72:648-660. [CrossRef] Kriging model based on MOGA. Appl Therm Eng
75. Habibi M, Hakkaki-Fard A. Long-term energy and 2017;118:480−489. [CrossRef] exergy analysis of heat pumps with different types [163] Zhai XQ, Wang XL, Pei HT, Yang Y, Wang RZ. of ground and air heat exchangers. Int J Refrig Experimental investigation and optimization of 2019;100:414-433. [CrossRef] a ground source heat pump system under dif-
76. Zhai XQ, Yang Y. Experience on the application of ferent indoor set temperatures. Appl Therm Eng a ground source heat pump system in an archives 2012;48:105−116. [CrossRef] building. Energy Build 2011;43:3263-3270. [CrossRef] [164] Huang B, Mauerhofer V. Life cycle sustainability
77. Xi J, Li Y, Liu M, Wang RZ. Study on the thermal assessment of ground source heat pump in Shanghai, effect of the ground heat exchanger of GSHP in the China. J Clean Product 2016;119:207−214. [CrossRef] eastern China area. Energy 2017;141:56-65. [CrossRef] [165] Sivasakthivel T, Murugesan K, Sahoo PK. Study
78. Hu P, Hu Q, Lin Y, Yang W, Xing L. Energy and exergy of technical, economical and environmental via- analysis of a ground source heat pump system for bility of ground source heat pump system for a public building in Wuhan, China under different Himalayan cities of India. Renew Sustain Energy control strategies. Energy Build 2017;152:301-312. Rev 2015;48:452−462. [CrossRef] [CrossRef] [166] Sivasakthivel T, Murugesan K, Sahoo PK.
79. Deng Y, Feng Z, Fang J, Cao SJ. Impact of ventilation Optimization of ground heat exchanger parameters rates on indoor thermal comfort and energy effi- of ground source heat pump system for space heat- ciency of ground-source heat pump system. Sustain ing applications. Energy 2014;78:573−586. Cities Soc 2018;37:154−163. [CrossRef] [167] Xia L, Ma Z, McLauchlan C, Wang S. Experimental
80. Yu X, Zhai XQ, Wang RZ. Design and performance of investigation and control optimization of a ground a constant temperature and humidity air-condition- source heat pump system. Appl Therm Eng ing system driven by ground source heat pumps in 2017;127:70−80. [CrossRef] winter. Energy Convers Manag 2010;51:2162−2168. [168] Holmberg H, Acuña J, Næss E, Sønju OK. Deep [CrossRef] Borehole Heat Exchangers, Application to Ground
81. Luo J, Zhao H, Jia J, Xiang W, Rohn J, Blum P. Study Source Heat Pump Systems. 2015:19−25. on operation management of borehole heat exchang- [169] Lu Q, Narsilio GA, Aditya GR, Johnston IW. ers for a large-scale hybrid ground source heat pump Economic analysis of vertical ground source system in China. Energy 2017;123:340−352. [CrossRef] heat pump systems in Melbourne. Energy
82. Zhang S, Zhang L, Wei H, Jing J, Zhou X, Zhang X. 2017;125:107−117. [CrossRef] Field testing and performance analyses of ground [170] Kharseh M, Al-Khawaja M, Suleiman MT. Potential source heat pump systems for residential appli- of ground source heat pump systems in cool- cations in Hot Summer and Cold Winter area in ing-dominated environments: residential buildings. China. Energy Build 2016;133:615−627. [CrossRef] Geothermics 2015;57:104−110. [CrossRef]
83. Yu X, Wang RZ, Zhai XQ. Year round experimen- tal study on a constant temperature and humidity Huang Q, et al. Performance analysis of an R744 air-conditioning system driven by ground source ground source heat pump system with air-cooled and heat pump. Energy 2011;36:1309−1318. [CrossRef] water-cooled gas coolers. Int J Refrig 2016;63:72−86.
84. Zhao L, Zhao LL, Zhang Q, Ding GL. Theoretical [CrossRef] and basic experimental analysis on load adjustment [172] Tsagarakis KP, Efthymiou L, Michopoulos A, of geothermal heat pump systems. Energy Convers Mavragani A, Anđelković AS, Antolini F, et al. A Manag 2003;44:1−9. [CrossRef] review of the legal framework in shallow geother-
85. Liu Z, Xu W, Qian C, Chen X, Jin G. Investigation mal energy in selected European countries: Need on the feasibility and performance of ground source for guidelines. Renew Energy 2020;147:2556−2571. heat pump (GSHP) in three cities in cold climate [CrossRef] zone, China. Renew Energy 2015;84:89−96. [CrossRef] [173] Hein P, Zhu K, Bucher A, Kolditz O, Pang Z, Shao
86. Yang J, Xu L, Hu P, Zhu N, Chen X. Study on inter- H. Quantification of exploitable shallow geother- mittent operation strategies of a hybrid ground-source mal energy by using Borehole Heat Exchanger cou- heat pump system with double-cooling towers for hotel pled Ground Source Heat Pump systems. Energy buildings. Energy Build 2014;76:506−512. [CrossRef] Convers Manag 2016;127:80−89. [CrossRef]
87. Yan L, Hu P, Li C, Yao Y, Xing L, Lei F, et al. The perfor- mance prediction of ground source heat pump system S, Boon DP, Abesser C, et al. Governance of shal- based on monitoring data and data mining technology. low geothermal energy resources. Energy Policy Energy Build 2016;127:1085−1095. [CrossRef] 2020;138:111283. [CrossRef] 1416 J Ther Eng, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 1386−1417, September, 2023
88. Bertermann D, Klug H, Morper-Busch L. A pan-Eu- ropean planning basis for estimating the very shal- and the Himalayas. Workshop for Decision Makers low geothermal energy potentials. Renew Energy on Direct Heating Use of Geothermal Resources 2015;75:335−347. [CrossRef] in Asia, Organized by UNU-GTP, TBLRREM and
89. Perego R, Pera S, Galgaro A, Santa GD, Cultrera M, TBGMED, in Tianjin, China 2008:11-18. Carli M de, et al. Economic, geological and technical [189] Shah M, Sircar A, Shaikh N, Patel K, Thakar V, potential mapping test for GSHP systems in Europe. Sharma D, et al. Groundwater analysis of Dholera 2019:10. geothermal field, Gujarat, India for suitable appli-
90. Bertermann D, Klug H, Morper-Busch L, Bialas C. cations. Groundwater Sustain Develop 2018;7:143- Modelling vSGPs (very shallow geothermal poten- 156. [CrossRef] tials) in selected CSAs (case study areas). Energy [190] Shah M, Sircar A, Patel K, Shaikh N, Thakar V, 2014;71:226−244. [CrossRef] Vaidya D, et al. Comprehensive Study on Hybrid
91. Shrestha G, Uchida Y, Yoshioka M, Fujii H, Geothermal-Solar Cooling Systems With Special Ioka S. Assessment of development potential of Focus on Gujarat, Western India. Proc West Mark ground-coupled heat pump system in Tsugaru Plain, Ed Assoc Conf 2018. Japan. Renew Energy 2015;76:249−257. [CrossRef] [191] Lebbihiat N, Atia A, Arıcı M, Meneceur N.
92. Hamamoto H, Miyashita Y, Tahara D. Evaluation Geothermal energy use in Algeria: A review on the of the Shallow Geothermal Potential for a Ground- current status compared to the worldwide, utiliza- Source Heat Exchanger: A Case Study in Obama tion opportunities and countermeasures. J Clean Plain, Fukui Prefecture, Japan. The Water-Energy- Prod 2021;302. [CrossRef] Food Nexus, Glob Environ Stud 2018:69−84. [CrossRef] [192] Lim H, Kim C, Cho Y, Kim M. Energy saving poten-
93. Nam Y, Ooka R. Development of potential map tials from the application of heat pipes on geothermal for ground and groundwater heat pump sys- heat pump system. Appl Therm Eng 2017;126:1191- tems and the application to Tokyo. Energy Build 1198. [CrossRef] 2011;43:677−685. [CrossRef] [193] ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE/ISO 13256-2, Water-source
94. Seward A, Prieto A, Climo M. Thermal Properties Heat Pumps - Testing and Rating for Performance of New Zealand ' S Rocks and Soils. New Zealand - Part 2: Water-to-water and Brine-to-water Heat Geothermal Workshop 2013 Proceedings 17 -20 Pumps, ANSI/AHRI/ASHRAE/ISO. 1998. November 2013 Rotorua, New Zealand 2013:1-8. [194] Park H, Lee JS, Kim W, Kim Y. The cooling seasonal
95. Aditya GR, Narsilio GA, Johnston IW, Disfani MM. performance factor of a hybrid ground-source heat Full-Scale Instrumented Residential Ground Source pump with parallel and serial configurations. Appl Heat Pump Systems in Melbourne, Australia. In: Energy 2013;102:877-884. [CrossRef] Ferrari A, Laloui L, editors. Energy Geotechnics, [195] Arat H, Arslan O. Exergoeconomic analysis of dis- Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019, p. trict heating system boosted by the geothermal heat 185-191. [CrossRef] pump. Energy 2017;119:1159-1170. [CrossRef]
96. Roth P, Georgiev A, Busso A, Barraza E. First in situ determination of ground and borehole ther- heat pump systems. J Therm Eng 2016;2:748-753. mal properties in Latin America. Renew Energy [CrossRef] 2004;29:1947-1963. [CrossRef] [197] Ozgener O, Ozgener L. Modeling of driveway as
97. Alves ABM, Schmid AL. Cooling and heating poten- a solar collector for improving efficiency of solar tial of underground soil according to depth and soil assisted geothermal heat pump system: a case surface treatment in the Brazilian climatic regions. study. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;46:210-217. Energy Build 2015;90:41-50. [CrossRef] [CrossRef]
98. Zhu J, Hu K, Lu X, Huang X, Liu K, Wu X. A review of geothermal energy resources, development, and Environment Using Shallow Geothermal Integrated applications in China: Current status and prospects. Energy Systems-A Comprehensive Review: Part I. Energy 2015;93:466-483. [CrossRef] Design Consideration of Ground Heat Exchanger.
99. Su C, Madani H, Palm B. Spatial data assisted ground ASME J Eng Sustain Build Cities 2021;2. [CrossRef] source heat pump potential analysis in China, a case [199] Li HQ, Kang SS, Yu Z, Cai B, Zhang GQ. A feasi- of Qingdao city. Energy Procedia, vol. 158, Elsevier ble system integrating combined heating and power Ltd; 2019, p. 6099-6104. [CrossRef] system with ground-source heat pump. Energy
100. Wang G, Wang W, Luo J, Zhang Y. Assessment of 2014;74:240-247. [CrossRef] three types of shallow geothermal resources and [200] Lamarche L, Kajl S, Beauchamp B. A review of ground-source heat-pump applications in provincial methods to evaluate borehole thermal resistances capitals in the Yangtze River Basin, China. Renew in geothermal heat-pump systems. Geothermics Sustain Energy Rev 2019;111:392-421. [CrossRef] 2010;39:187-200. [CrossRef] J Ther Eng, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 1386−1417, September, 2023 1417
101. Zheng X. Long-term Effects of Ground Source Heat in the Republic of Korea. Energy 2012;47:77−82. Pumps on Underground Temperature. 2013:1−6. [CrossRef]
102. Sel. Trnsys 16 Manual. 2006;1.
103. Hirsch J. eQUEST introductory tutorial. Equest performance: An investigation into a single ground- Introductory Tutorial. 2009;3,63:174. source heat pump system in the context of 10 similar
104. Kumar B, Sharma V. Energy demand reduction in systems. Energy Build 2012;49:536−541. [CrossRef] the built environment using shallow geothermal [220] Zhang S, Zhang L, Zhang X. Performance eval- integrated energy systems: Part II - Hybrid ground uation of existed ground source heat pump sys- source heat pump for building heating. ASME J Eng tems in buildings using auxiliary energy efficiency Sustain Build Cities 2021;2:1−37. [CrossRef] index: Cases study in Jiangsu, China. Energy Build
105. Zhu Y, Jiang Y. DeST - A Simulation Tool in HVAC 2017;147:90−100. [CrossRef] Commissioning. 2003:1-11. [221] Cai B, Liu Y, Fan Q, Zhang Y, Liu Z, Yu S, et al. Multi-
106. IGSHPA. GLHEPro 4.1: Users' Guide. Oklahoma source information fusion based fault diagnosis of State University. 2014. ground-source heat pump using Bayesian network.
107. Manual U. User ' S Manual. 2001:1−29. Appl Energy 2014;114:1−9. [CrossRef]
108. Hellström G, Sanner B. Earth Energy Designer. Database. 2000:4. Experimental study of a stand-alone earth to air heat
109. FlexPDE 7. 2018. exchanger for heating and cooling in arid regions. J
110. DHI WASY. Feflow 7.1 ®. 2017. Therm Eng 2021;7:1206−1215. [CrossRef]
111. Hadjadj A, Atia A, haoua B ben, Arıcı M, Naili N, Aspen Technology, Inc. 2000:936. Kaddour A. Energy and exergy analyses of a heli-
112. Comsol. Comsol Multiphysics User's Guide. Heat coidal water to air geothermal heat exchanger for Transf Branch 2012:709−745. arid regions. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery,
113. RETScreen International. RETScreen® Software online Utilization, and Environmental Effects. 2021:1−16. user manual, Photovoltaic project model. 2005. [CrossRef]
114. Cho S, Ray S, Im P, Honari H, Ahn J. Methodology for energy strategy to prescreen the feasibility of [224] Edwards KC, Finn DP. Generalised water flow rate Ground Source Heat Pump systems in residential control strategy for optimal part load operation of and commercial buildings in the United States. ground source heat pump systems. Appl Energy Energy Strategy Rev 2017;18:53−62. [CrossRef] 2015;150:50−60. [CrossRef]
115. Cho S, Ray S, Im P, Honari H, Ahn J. Application priority of GSHP systems in the climate conditions of ground heat exchangers for space heating and of the United States. Advances in Building Energy cooling applications using Taguchi method and util- Research. 2019;13:1−17. [CrossRef] ity concept. Appl Energy 2017;190:421−438. [CrossRef]
116. Nguyen H, Law YLE, Alavy M, Walsh PR, Leong WH, Dworkin SB. An analysis of the factors affecting hybrid and carbon reduction potentials from residential ground-source heat pump installation potential in ground source heat pumps considering spatial and North America. Appl Energy 2014;125:28−38. [CrossRef] economic barriers. Energy Build 2016;128:287−304.
117. Kikuchi E, Bristow D, Kennedy CA. Evaluation of [CrossRef] region-specific residential energy systems for GHG [227] Galgaro A, Dalla Santa G, de Carli M, Emmi G, reductions: Case studies in Canadian cities. Energy Zarrella A, Mueller J, et al. New tools to support Policy 2009;37:1257−1266. [CrossRef] the designing of efficient and reliable ground source
118. Aikins KA, Choi JM. Current status of the perfor- heat exchangers: the Cheap-GSHPs databases and mance of GSHP (ground source heat pump) units maps. Adv Geosci 2019;49:47−55. [CrossRef]

Share and Cite