| Summary: | In the transition towards a sustainable world with a “green horizon” (something that is also of great importance to the policy of energy self-sufficiency in housing and self-consumption), geothermal energy is seen as quite a feasible alternative for single-family homes. This article focuses on a comparison between the environmental impact and life cycle analysis of three alternatives and provides a base case for the replacement of a conventional type of boiler with a geothermal one for a typical house located in a Mediterranean climate. The first alternative (A) consists of a horizontal catchment system through a field of geothermal probes. The second alternative (B) is a shallow water catchment system, open type, with the return of water to a nearby river. The third option studied (C) is also a shallow water catchment system but with the water, return injected into a well downstream to the underground water flow. The study shows that alternatives A and B have the least environmental impact in most of the categories studied. The total amortization periods for the three alternatives and the base case differ by almost two years, with alternative A taking 6.99 years and alternative C costing 8.82 years.
|
|---|