Corrigendum to “Aquifer thermal energy storage for low carbon heating and cooling in the United Kingdom: Current status and future prospects” [Applied Energy 376 (2024) 124096]
File(s)
OA Location
Author(s)
Jackson, Matthew D
Regnier, Geraldine
Staffell, Iain
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
The authors regret that, when preparing the revised submission after review, old versions of Figs. 14 and 15 and associated text were retained in the revised manuscript. Results reported elsewhere in the manuscript are correct and refer to the revised figures and text outlined below. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. The first two paragraphs in section 6 of the manuscript, along with Figs. 14 and 15, should be replaced by: The results of our Monte-Carlo analysis show that ATES requires 0.12 - 0.36 kWhe per kWhth of heating delivered with a mode of 0.21 kWhe / kWhth, and 0.005 - 0.07 kWhe / kWhth of cooling delivered with a mode of 0.02 kWhe / kWhth (Fig. 14). The corresponding Monte-Carlo predictions of system COP (SCOP) range from 2.6 to 8, with a mode of 4.61 for heating, and from 11 to 176, with a mode of 40 for cooling (Fig. 15). The very low electricity consumption, and corresponding high SCOP of ATES for cooling, is a direct consequence of storing and re-using waste cool, which means that cooling can be provided directly without use of a heat pump. Uncertainty in predicted electricity consumption and SCOP for heating is primarily controlled by the temperature of the supply to the building, the heat pump COP, and the groundwater temperature change; uncertainty in predicted electricity consumption and SCOP for cooling is primarily controlled by the electrical energy for groundwater pumping, and the groundwater temperature change. Equivalent GWHC systems require 0.15–0.45 kWhe per kWhth of heating delivered, with a mode of 0.24 kWhe / kWhth, and 0.01–0.2 kWhe per kWhth of cooling delivered, with a mode of 0.07 kWhe / kWhth (Fig. 14; see Fig. 16A for a direct comparison). The corresponding SCOP ranges from 2.2 to 6.4 with a mode of 4.06 for heating, and from 5 to 93 with a mode of 10.34 for cooling (Fig. 15). ATES therefore offers significantly lower electricity consumption and higher SCOP than equivalent GWHC: our Monte Carlo analysis shows that ATES offers a 7–23 % reduction in electricity consumption with a mode of 13 % for heating; the corresponding increase in SCOP ranges from 7 to 30 % with a mode of 15 %. For cooling, ATES offers large reductions in electricity consumption: 18–93 % with a mode of 70 %; the corresponding increase in SCOP ranges from 22 to 1000 % with a mode of 221 %. We note that SCOP may also be impacted by system design, operation and maintenance practices for both ATES and GWHC systems; here, we assume the systems are properly operated and maintained. As we show later, this is not always the case in current UK ATES installations. SCOP may be increased by optimal system design and operation, which is an area of active research [e.g. 29,65–67].
Date Issued
2025-02-15
Date Acceptance
2024-12-01
Citation
Applied Energy, 2025, 380
ISSN
0306-2619
Publisher
Elsevier
Journal / Book Title
Applied Energy
Volume
380
Copyright Statement
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
License URL
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
124991
Date Publish Online
2024-12-04