ᐅ Comparison of Groundwater, Ground Source, and Air Source Heat Pumps

Created on: 17 Apr 2021 15:38

Hello everyone,
I am planning a new build (two-story single-family house, approx. 140 m² (1507 sq ft) of living space) and definitely want to use a heat pump for heating. This will be combined with a photovoltaic system and a storage battery. I do not want cooling in the house; I only need the heat pump for heating and hot water. The house will not have a mechanical ventilation system. I have received many different opinions from various experts regarding the heat pump, so I have not reached a clear conclusion yet. Maybe you can help me get a better idea?

Here is a rough summary of the pros and cons I have gathered:

Water-to-Water Heat Pump

Highest energy yield and efficiency
High initial costs due to groundwater drilling
Costs are difficult to estimate in advance; depend on groundwater level and soil conditions

Air-to-Water Heat Pump (recommended by the construction manager)

Moderate costs
Low space requirements
Supposedly sufficient for the house (I am not sure about this)
The fan is audible (although relatively quiet), which could potentially disturb neighbors or myself

Ground Source (Brine-to-Water) Heat Pump

Longest lifespan (possibly irrelevant, since after 10–20 years newer technology may be worthwhile anyway)
Lower initial costs
High space requirement for ground collectors (not an issue; the garden is large enough)

Based on my non-expert assessment, I would choose the water-to-water heat pump and accept the additional cost of about €10,000. Are there any arguments I might have overlooked? What are the long-term experiences regarding maintenance work, repair, and upkeep costs?

Thanks in advance!

pagoni202019 Apr 2021 00:02

#13

sub-xero schrieb:

From this, I conclude that the decision is not simple and depends on the circumstances.

Mostly, it will depend on your preferences as well. You can spend days reading, and in the end, you’ll find that diesel advocates recommend diesel cars, and petrol advocates recommend petrol cars. In the end, they are all right because the car takes them from A to B.
It’s the same with heating systems – they all provide warmth, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
The question is more about which option best meets your requirements. Are you the type of person who doesn’t want to deal with it much, or do you prefer to engage with it more deeply, and so on?

sub-xero schrieb:

The suggestion about the gas connection wasn’t serious, was it?

Of course it was serious, I’m quite sure about that, because here you’ll find many users who heat reliably, affordably, and comfortably with gas—circumstances that not every heat pump owner enjoys 😀.
Maybe you have a preferred technology, and if so, you’ll also find supporters and helpers for it—there are advocates for every heating technology.
Note: "Links" are not allowed here; that causes complaints.

nordanney19 Apr 2021 07:28

#14

Bookstar schrieb:

Heat pumps are still very expensive and often prone to faults.

However, heat pumps are currently the most commonly installed heat generators in Germany. Not bad for an expensive and fault-prone technology.

@TE: Don't listen to Bookstar. He's just annoyed about his own (poorly designed) heat pump system ;-)

Bookstar19 Apr 2021 08:08

#15

nordanney schrieb:

Currently, the heat pump is the most commonly installed heat generator in Germany. Not bad for an expensive and error-prone technology.

Yes, but only thanks to past subsidies, KfW targets, and CO2 penalties.

Certainly not because of the reliable technology 😀

Strahleman19 Apr 2021 08:22

#16

Bookstar schrieb:

Certainly not because of the solid technology 😀

Why would a principle/technology that has been used for decades in HVAC systems (air conditioning) suddenly no longer be considered reliable?

nordanney19 Apr 2021 08:51

#17

Strahleman schrieb:

Why should a principle/technology that has been used in HVAC systems (in air conditioners) for decades suddenly no longer be reliable?

Because the technology, which has been mass-produced for over 100 years, still doesn’t work properly. That’s why it’s also applied to, for example, clothes dryers and vehicles—to have even more testing environments.
And the approximately 14 million units (heating systems only) installed in Europe since the mid-1990s are still not enough to finally eliminate all the mistakes made by heating system installers...
That’s how it goes with pointless technological gimmicks. Just marketing talk, nothing else.
*Irony off*

netuser19 Apr 2021 09:18

#18

tomtom79 schrieb:

Then a modulating one that qualifies for BaFa.

So a COP of 4.0.

BaFa requires a minimum COP of over 4.5!?

From an economic perspective, given the current state of technology and available subsidies, the air-to-water heat pump would probably be the winner!
And 140 sqm (1,507 sq ft) can certainly be heated well even by the smaller units. Especially since, as mentioned, they become more efficient year after year and are now where ground-source heat pumps were 5–10 years ago.

In principle, I have been a fan of ground-source heat pumps for 20 years, but for the current house, I was convinced to go with an air-to-water heat pump. See the above-mentioned advantages.

ᐅ Comparison of Groundwater, Ground Source, and Air Source Heat Pumps

Reaktionen