An international research team has sought to quantify the techno-economic characteristics of solar-powered heat pump solutions for residential buildings in isolated areas without natural gas supply in cold climates, and has found that, by resorting to the electrified solution, homeowners may reduce costs by up to 20%.
“The majority of studies in North America compare heat pumps to natural gas, which is logical given [the latter’s] dominance as a heating fuel,” the scientists explained. “Rural customers relying on, more expensive fuel oil or propane, however, represent a better opportunity for heat pumps and no studies were found using these fuels as a baseline comparison.”
Their work considered, in particular, isolated areas in the U.S. Upper Midwest and the northeast of the nation, and archetypal buildings that were modeled under four levels of electrification, for each of which PV sizing analysis was conducted. The four levels are described as follows: A baseline case in which propane serves all heating needs; a case where a heat pump is used for producing hot water; full electrification of the building’s heating system; and a second fully electrified level that also provides cooling in the summer.
The economic performance of the four levels was evaluated through total life cycle cost (TLCC) and a self-consumption pricing model. The analysis also took into account the envelope efficiencies of residential buildings and the Midwestern generation mix available today. “Economic sensitivities are analyzed on capital costs, electricity and propane prices, and discount rates,” the scientists emphasized. “Climatic, construction, occupancy behavior, and economic boundary conditions are taken from Michigan but are considered representative of most buildings in North America’s cold climate zones.”
The technical analysis was carried out by identifying a project’s primary energy renewable fraction (PREF), which considers all energy sources used in the final supply of electricity and heat to the building. The maximum capacity of a PV system must be equal to a household’s electricity load over the year.
Through the analysis, the academics found that heat pumps are already economically competitive with propane in isolated areas in northern climates, regardless of whether a PV system is installed or not. The cost-optimal solution was found to be that of the second level, in which the solar-powered heat pump is used for hot water production, assuming that solar module costs will further drop in the future. “The high capital cost of PV remains a barrier, however past work has shown … the majority can still gain access to capital [and] take advantage of existing support programs and/or third-party business models,” the researchers explained.
According to their calculations, homeowners would face no lifecycle economic costs when heat pumps are a drop-in replacement. “Even with 50% higher capital costs than average market prices, the lower operational costs of heat pumps compensate,” they emphasized, noting that heating electrification solutions such as solar heat pumps may reduce cost by up to 20% and carbon emissions by 30%.
They also warned, however, that their conclusions are strictly dependent on the region’s electricity prices. “Lower retail prices benefit heat pumps but harm PV while higher sell-back prices help support PV even when electricity prices are lower, suggesting that a trade-off can be made with utilities, where lost revenues from distributed PV can be more than compensated by the increased demand from heat pumps,” they highlighted.
The model is described in the study Decarbonizing rural residential buildings in cold climates: A techno-economic analysis of heating electrification, published in Energy and Buildings. The research group includes scientists from the Michigan Technological University, in the United States, and the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, in Sweden.
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: email@example.com.
Heat pumps are ineffective for cold climates. The best temperature differential they can produce is 15 to 20 degrees. Mechanically heat pumps and air conditioners are the least reliable mechanical devices.
That hasn’t been true for years. My air-source heat pumps keep my house a perfectly comfortable 22°C even when it’s -18°C outside. I considered ground-source when building the house, but the cost-benefit favored air-source, and I haven’t been disappointed. Mine are rated to -25°C, though it’s never gotten that cold here. And all the local HVAC folks I’ve talked to say they almost never get service calls for them.
Stop posting nonsense.
Bro yes it is still true heat pumps are very ineffective in the cold it’s just the science .. please stop spreading garbage
Lol I know. Not sure where Alex got his information from.
Heat pumps can easily operate upto -4F (20C)
And that’s not even including the hyper heat pump models. An electric resistance as a backup would operatea few hours of the year.
Obviously having solar panels is the perfect combination. A water heater heat pump is great too.
Its absolutely effective. And the science proofs it. Heatpumps can operate at a 200% efficiency and really cold temperatures like -2F. And as you get away from-F and closer to like 32F you would operate at like 3 to 400%.
Please tell me where you see air source heat pumps are ineffective.
Check out LG LV181HV4 and thats the smallest unit they have, you can get 3x 4x that.
Follow the link to the actual study, the PDF is free.
At minus 20 C, the heat pumps tested had a C.O.P. of just 1.04. Basically a hair’s width from resistance heat.
In Canada’s North, they build solar arrays to cut down on imported fuel. Electricity is up to 89 cents per KWh, so it’s worth it.
In China, coal fired district heating systems outperform inefficient coal powerplants running heat pumps.
Cogeneration was not considered. It provides both electricity and heat, so it can outperform fossil fuel electric powered heat pump.
In most Canadian cities (the cold ones), a heat pump costs more to opetate, than a gas furnace.
Sweden has cold regions, but many Canadians would consider Stockholm a mild climate.
The solar doesn’t power the heat pump in winter, the idea is that you sell enough extra solar electricity in the summer, that you can afford to buy more electricity in winter. It’s not possible to get that deal everywhere.
The picture at the top is the reality of solar PV in winter. You’ll have to clear some of thr snow, because you’ll be melting it with 2 hours of December sunshine, not 16 hours of July sunshine.
We installed our ASHP to work with our PV and you can check out our installation experience fitting an air source heat pump and new water tank in our Victorian farmhouse: https://myhomefarm.co.uk/our-experience-installing-an-air-source-heat-pump
By submitting this form you agree to pv magazine using your data for the purposes of publishing your comment.
Your personal data will only be disclosed or otherwise transmitted to third parties for the purposes of spam filtering or if this is necessary for technical maintenance of the website. Any other transfer to third parties will not take place unless this is justified on the basis of applicable data protection regulations or if pv magazine is legally obliged to do so.
You may revoke this consent at any time with effect for the future, in which case your personal data will be deleted immediately. Otherwise, your data will be deleted if pv magazine has processed your request or the purpose of data storage is fulfilled.
Further information on data privacy can be found in our Data Protection Policy.