IEA SHC Task 42 / ECES Annex 29 – A Simple Tool for the Economic Evaluation of Thermal Energy Storages

Rathgeber, Christoph; Hiebler, Stefan; Lävemann, Eberhard; Dolado, Pablo; Lazaro, Ana; Gasia, Jaume; Gracia Cuesta, Alvaro de; Miró, Laia; Cabeza, Luisa F.; König-Haagen, Andreas; Brüggemann, Dieter; Campos-Celador, Álvaro; Franquet, Erwin; Fumey, Benjamin; Dannemand, Mark; Badenhop, Thomas; Diriken, Jan; Nielsen, Jan Erik; Hauer, Andreas

doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.06.203

View/Open

025088.pdf (1.117Mb)

Issue date

2016

Author

Rathgeber, Christoph

Hiebler, Stefan

Lävemann, Eberhard

Dolado, Pablo

Lazaro, Ana

Gasia, Jaume

Gracia Cuesta, Alvaro de

Miró, Laia

Cabeza, Luisa F.

König-Haagen, Andreas

Brüggemann, Dieter

Campos-Celador, Álvaro

Franquet, Erwin

Fumey, Benjamin

Dannemand, Mark

Badenhop, Thomas

Diriken, Jan

Nielsen, Jan Erik

Hauer, Andreas

Abstract

Within the framework of IEA SHC Task 42 / ECES Annex 29, a simple tool for the economic evaluation of thermal energy storages has been developed and tested on various existing storages. On that account, the storage capacity costs (costs per installed storage capacity) of thermal energy storages have

been evaluated via a Top-down and a Bottom-up approach. The Top-down approach follows the assumption that the costs of energy supplied by the storage should not exceed the costs of energy from the market. The maximum acceptable storage capacity costs depend on the interest rate assigned to the capital costs, the intended payback period of the user class (e.g. industry or building), the reference energy costs, and the annual number of storage cycles. The Bottom-up approach focuses on the realised storage capacity costs of existing storages. The economic evaluation via Top-down and Bottom-up approach is a valuable tool to make a rough estimate of the economic viability of an energy storage for a specific application. An important finding is that the annual number of storage cycles has the largest influence on the cost effectiveness. At present and with respect to the investigated storages, seasonal heat storage is only economical via large sensible hot water storages. Contrary, if the annual number of storage cycles is sufficiently high, all thermal energy storage technologies can become competitive.

Note

Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Solar Heating and Cooling for Buildings and Industry (SHC 2015)

URI

http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/57844

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.06.203

Is part of

Energy Procedia, 2016, vol. 91, p. 197-206

Collections

The following license files are associated with this item:

Creative Commons

Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as cc-by-nc-nd (c) Christoph Rathgeber et al., 2016