Analytically estimating the efficiency of high temperature aquifer thermal energy storage

Journal Article (2025)
Authors

David Geerts (Universiteit Utrecht)

Alex Daniilidis (TU Delft - Reservoir Engineering)

Gert Jan Kramer (Universiteit Utrecht)

Martin Bloemendal (TU Delft - Water Resources, TNO - Geological Survey of the Netherlands)

Wen Liu (Universiteit Utrecht)

Research Group
Reservoir Engineering
To reference this document use:
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40517-025-00343-8
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
Reservoir Engineering
Issue number
1
Volume number
13
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40517-025-00343-8
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Abstract High-Temperature Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (HT-ATES) can be used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from heating. The thermal recovery efficiency is the main parameter indicating the performance of an HT-ATES system and it is influenced by multiple aquifer properties and storage characteristics. This study presents a method for estimating recovery efficiency through numerical modeling, data analysis, and curve fitting. This method shows the relation between the recovery efficiency and various storage conditions, such as aquifer properties and storage temperature. In addition, this research explores an analytical relationship between energetic efficiency and recovery efficiency and verifies that relationship with the generated data. The proposed method can be used for the purpose of initial screening to estimate the performance of an HT-ATES system and for efficiently using HT-ATES as a component in larger energy system models. This method uses the modified Rayleigh number in combination with aquifer thickness and injected volume and has a R^2 of 85%. The analytical relation between energetic efficiency and recovery efficiency was shown to be accurate for all calculated energetic efficiency values above 60% and is less accurate with lower calculated energetic efficiency values.