Abstract
Decarbonisation of heat is essential to meeting net zero carbon targets; however, fluctuating renewable resources, such as wind or solar, may not meet peak periods of demand. Therefore, methods of underground thermal energy storage can aid in storing heat in low demand periods to be exploited when required. Borehole thermal energy storage (BTES) is an important technology in storing surplus heat and the efficiency of such systems can be strongly influenced by groundwater flow. In this paper, the effect of groundwater flow on a single deep borehole heat exchanger (DBHEs) was modelled using OpenGeoSys (OGS) software to test the impact of varying regional Darcy velocities on the performance of heat extraction and BTES. It is anticipated that infrastructure such as ex-geothermal exploration or oil and gas development wells approaching the end of life could be repurposed. These systems may encounter fluid flow in the subsurface and the impact of this on single well deep BTES has not previously been investigated. Higher groundwater velocities can increase the performance of a DBHE operating to extract heat only for a heating season of 6 months. This is due to the reduced cooling of rocks in proximity to the DBHE as groundwater flow replenishes heat which has been removed from the rock volume around the borehole (this can also be equivalently thought of as “coolth” being transported away from the DBHE in a thermal plume). When testing varying Darcy velocities with other parameters for a DBHE of 920 m length in rock of thermal conductivity 2.55 W/(m·K), it was observed that rocks with larger Darcy velocity (1e-6 m/s) can increase the thermal output by up to 28 kW in comparison to when there is no groundwater flow. In contrast, groundwater flow inhibits single well deep BTES as it depletes the thermal store, reducing storage efficiency by up to 13% in comparison to models with no advective heat transfer in the subsurface. The highest Darcy velocity of 1e-6 m/s was shown to most influence heat extraction and BTES; however, the likelihood of this occurring regionally, and at depth of around or over 1 km is unlikely. This study also tested varying temporal resolutions of charge and cyclicity. Shorter charge periods allow a greater recovery of heat (c. 34% heat injected recovered for 1 month charge, as opposed to <17% for 6 months charge).