Massive or wood / Drilling or trench collector

Hello superzapp

For the complete planning of the geothermal heating system, I had an expert who specializes in that. He collected all the data and planned everything. That’s where the numbers come from.

Steven

Hello maleba89 The collector is initially cheaper than a borehole. The borehole pays off quickly. Calculate this for yourself: How warm is it at 1 meter depth during frost? Of course, you have to consider that you are extracting heat from the ground for a longer period. After a short time, the compressor has to run constantly because nothing arrives anymore. Probably the heating rod switches on constantly. Cooling in summer? You can quickly forget that too. Then an open refrigerator door is more advantageous. Now about the borehole? Even if it is minus 20° for weeks, it is always the same temperature at depth. You cannot extract so much heat that nothing comes anymore. It is always cool in summer. For me, it is always 15° at 75 meters. You save a few thousand euros at first. But these are quickly used up by the higher electricity consumption (compressor, heating rod). Steven

Do you know the heat pump consumption database (if not, google it and compare)? That is probably the most objective source you can get for comparison. There are virtually no efficiency differences between borehole and trench collector. You never need a heating rod (and I really mean never…), not even during longer frost periods (of course, like with a borehole, it must be properly designed). The collector is already 100% regenerated in spring for the next cold period.

You know the heat pump consumption database

Hello Tego12

I relied on an expert. He was neutral and had no shares in any company.
Also, logic tells me that drilling is more effective than surface collectors.

Steven

Hello Tego12

I had relied on an expert. He was neutral and had no shares in a company.
Logic also tells me that boreholes are more effective than surface collectors.

Steven

Even modern air/water heat pumps hardly need an electric heater. So why should a brine/water heat pump, whose medium is "itself" significantly warmer than the outside air in the case of a trench collector, need an electric heater? By the way, the consumption database confirms this, as the seasonal performance factors between boreholes and trench collectors do not really differ.
It is true that boreholes have a theoretical efficiency advantage in winter due to the generally higher brine temperatures. However, a near-surface collector is more efficient for domestic hot water heating in summer... in practice, there is virtually no difference.

Even for cooling: You don’t want passive cooling with 14 degrees supply temperature in the underfloor heating, or your feet will freeze (and it’s simply not possible in summer due to the dew point, otherwise the water would condense on the floor). Constant 18-19 degrees, say 12-24 hours a day, constantly drawing energy from the building mass to avoid heating up the mass (concrete, screed, etc.) and thus keep the building cool.

If the space on the property is limited, it is possible, also to increase the efficiency of the ground source heat exchanger, to choose a deep trench collector. This involves using a slit trench with a width of 60 cm at a depth of 4.5 m for the brine trench. On the one hand, I have higher annual average temperatures of the brine and lower space consumption because the brine pipe loops are positioned vertically in the slit trench. The OK is 1.50 m below the ground surface. Even shrubs and shallow-rooted plants can still be planted there.

: Advertising and links are not welcome here and will lead directly to a ban.

EDIT: The post by Denk_Mal19 has already been edited.