Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ScienceDirect
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/issn/15375110
Research Paper
article info
The use of low-impact energy sources for greenhouse cultivations is growing quickly due to
Article history:
market demand for low cost greenhouse production, and need for air pollution reduction.
30 May 2014
compared to a conventional hot air generator using liquefied petroleum gas (LPG-HG). The
tests were carried out in twin experimental greenhouses in the Mediterranean area
(Valenzano-Italy). In order to evaluate the environmental performance of a heat pump
Keywords:
system with electricity supplied from the national grid, a scenario (GHP Geothermal Heat
Pump) was realised. The microclimatic conditions in the two greenhouses, the thermal
energy produced, and the electricity consumption were analysed. Furthermore, in order to
using life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, carried out according to standard UNI EN
ISO 14040. The interpretation of the results using method CML2001 (Centre of Environmental Science, Leiden, Netherlands) showed that neither system is more advantageous
from an environmental point of view and that the GHP scenario has the higher environmental burdens. Limiting the analysis to the emissions responsible for the greenhouse
effect, the plant with the geothermal heat pump and photovoltaic panels reduces carbon
emissions by 50%. In order to assess the sustainability of the geothermal heat pump plant,
the estimated payback-time for energy and for carbon emissions were 1 year and 2.25
years, respectively.
2014 IAgrE. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
The contribution to the execution of this article was equally divided by the Authors.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 39 080 5442955, 39 080 5442977; fax: 39 080 5442955.
E-mail address: a.s.anifantis@agr.uniba.it (A.S. Anifantis).
1
Tel./fax: 39 080 5442955.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2014.08.002
1537-5110/ 2014 IAgrE. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
12
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
Nomenclature
LCA
LPG
FU
GHP
PV-GHP
1.
Introduction
Recently, the relationship between agriculture and the environment has changed radically. Most of the change has been
caused by use of energy and synthetic materials (fertilisers,
agrochemicals, plastics) in agro-processes (Bozzini, Pizzichini,
& Leone, 2011; Johnson, Franzluebbers, Weyers, & Reicosky,
2007) and by increasing agro-industry incentives for ecological innovations, sustainable food production, and growing
customer demand.
In Italy, agricultural activity is associated with 60% of water
consumption, 25% of particulate air pollution (Campiotti,
Viola, & Scoccianti, 2011), 10% of greenhouse gas emissions
(APAT, 2004), 1.8% of energy consumption (Campiotti et al.,
2011), and 0.3% of the special waste production (ISPRA,
2011). Greenhouse cultivations, although involving a limited
portion of land (in Italy, about 42,000 ha, 3% of the total utilised agricultural area), have adverse effects on the landscape
and environmental matrices (Picuno, Tortora, & Capobianco,
2011; Russo, Scarascia Mugnozza, & De Lucia Zeller, 2008;
Scarascia Mugnozza, Pascuzzi, Anifantis, & Verdiani, 2011),
and contribute to the environmental load of the Italian agroindustrial sector. Worldwide, the area of greenhouse production is rapidly expanding and they can be defined as factories
for the plant production. Greenhouses protect crops from
adverse meteorological conditions, improve productivity and
Ac
DT
b
tsolar
S0
Af
li
li
qc
EPT
PEDinn
PEDref
Ey
EMPT,i
EMinn,i
EMref,i
EMS,i
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
13
14
2.
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
Two different greenhouse heating systems, PV-GHP and LPGHG, were installed and powered up in the winter of 2012 to
provide heat to two small twin greenhouses (Fig. 1) located on
the experimental farm at the Agricultural and Environmental
Sciences Department of the University of Bari in southern
Italy (41 02 0 0000 N latitude, 16 53 0 0000 E longitude).
2.1.
Methodologies to assess the energy performance
and microclimatic conditions
The two experimental greenhouses were built with the
following geometrical and structural characteristics: tunnel
form using galvanised steel frame with a tubular section; ridge
height of 3.5 m; covering plastic film made of ethylene vinyl
acetate (EVA) with a thickness of 200 mm; surface area of 48 m2;
orientation EasteWest (Fig. 1). All the factors that influence
the thermal exchanges (soil radiation, external air temperatures, wind velocity, geometry and orientation of the greenhouses, covering material, and soil moisture) were therefore
identical for both greenhouses during the tests performed.
The distance of 12 m between the greenhouses avoids mutual
shading. Also there were no objects or vegetation in close
proximity are absent that might obstruct solar irradiation.
The difference between the two greenhouses is the heating
systems, which differ in the energy source used and the
thermal distribution inside the greenhouses: hot water distribution through plastic pipes for the PV-GHP plant and a hot
air generator for the LPG-HG plant (Fig. 3). The total heating
power requirement of the greenhouse (Qh) has been used for
size the two thermal plants. With this value, the heat pump
and its two circuits of heat exchange with the subsoil and
greenhouse have been sized, as has the hot air generator. Qh
was calculated by means of the following equation of the
energy balance of greenhouse (Bakker, Bot, Challa, & Van de
Braak, 1995):
Qh UAc DT 1 btsolar S0 Af
(1)
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
15
calcarenites, and clay surface (ENEL, 2012). The ground thermal conductivities, necessary to calculate the thermal resistances of each layer, were calculated during the drilling test
and are reported in Table 1. The ground primarily comprises
limestone and large clay layers and crevices.
The geothermal probe was designed based on data with
respect to the thermodynamic equilibrium between the probe
and the ground and the sustainability and reliability of energy
production in the long term (Rybach, 2010). In fact, the rate of
heat extraction from the subsoil must not exceed the natural
dynamics of the thermal conduction of the ground that surround the probe, and the extraction of heat should not result
in changes in the thermal characteristics of the soil in the long
term. The geothermal probe has been placed inside a specially
realised drilling, and the heat transfer circulating fluid was
water. Climatic conditions in the Apulia region and the altitude of the site (130 m asl) do not create a risk of freezing of the
fluid. The exclusion of other heat transfer antifreeze fluids,
such as ethylene glycol or propylene glycol, avoids possible
contamination that can cause aquatic toxicity if the probe was
broken, flammability, and chemical compatibility with the
materials of the system. The refrigerant fluid circulating inside the circuit of the heat pump is R410a.
The electricity demand of the heat pump is covered on an
annual timescale by photovoltaic panels (area 12 m2) connected to the Italian electricity distribution network, which
serves as a reservoir with infinite capacity of energy storage
and which avoids the installation of batteries.
The conventional heating system comprises a hot air
generator with a power of 7 kW (company Tecnoclima model
DGP20) powered by LPG. For the total consumption of LPG, a
net calorific value equal to 46.2 MJ kg1 was assumed.
Aubergine (Solanum melongena L.) was grown in the two
greenhouses. The experimental tests were carried out from
November 2011eMarch 2012. For climate parameters, measurements of the air temperature and relative humidity inside
the greenhouse, and the air temperature and solar radiation
outside were measured. The outside and inside air temperatures of the two experimental greenhouses were measured by
means of ventilated Pt100 probes. The temperature data,
relative humidity, and solar radiation detected were collected
by means of two data loggers, CR10X Campbell and Campbell
CR1000 Wireless, set with a sampling time of 10 s and a data
storage time lag of 15 min; the SIEMENS model Qheat probe
measured the thermal energy produced by the heat pump; a
digital multimeter measured heat pump electricity consumption; and a Pt100 probe measured the temperature for
each hydraulic circuit (flow and return of geothermal probe
temperature, inlet and outlet heat pump temperature, input
and output greenhouse heating water temperature). The energy performance of the hot air generator was monitored by
analysis of the daily consumption of LPG; its energy efficiency
was considered 100% because the hot air generator is located
inside the experimental greenhouse.
Based on the temperature data of water circuits, the heat
pump COP was calculated by means of the following
expression:
COP
Q2
T2
Q2 Q1 T2 T1
(2)
16
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
Fig. 3 e Schematic diagrams of the GHP, PV-GHP, and LPG-HG thermal plants. 1 Heat pump, 2 hot water tank, 3 greenhouse,
4 hot water pipe, 5 electric grid, 6 geothermal probe, 7 connection to electric grid, 8 inverter, 9 solar PV panels, 10 hot air
generator, 11 LPG tank, 12 LPG pipes.
2.2.
Methodology for the analysis and comparison of the
environmental performance of the tested heating systems
The environmental performance of the two heating systems,
PV-GHP and LPG-HG, was evaluated and compared using the
environmental LCA analysis standardised by ISO 14040/
44:2006. The LCA analysis was carried out based on the technical characteristics of the plants (secondary data) and
experimental data on the gathered flows of matter and energy
(primary data). This analysis is at present the most appropriate instrument for assessing the sustainability of the
Table 1 e Thermal conductivity (li) and linear power extraction (qc) of different ground lithology in function of depth (li).
Depth
From
m
To
m
0
1
6
8
14
20
25
40
42
50
54
83
96
97
105
107
1
6
8
14
20
25
40
42
50
54
83
96
97
105
107
120
li (m)
li (W m1 K1)
qc (W m1)
Ground lithology
1
5
2
6
6
5
15
2
8
4
29
13
1
8
2
13
0.7
2.5
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.5
2.8
2.5
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.8
2.2
5.0
7.0
2.2
15
55
50
55
50
55
65
55
50
55
50
65
50
60
70
50
Ground
Earthy limestone
Claystone
Earthy limestone
Claystone
Earthy limestone
Compact limestone
Earthy limestone
Claystone
Earthy limestone
Claystone
Compact limestone
Claystone
Fissured claystone, water
Claystone and water flow
Claystone
17
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
2.2.3.
2.2.1.
Aim
2.2.2.
Functional unit
System boundaries
In the context of the LCA study, all the constructive components of the heating plants were taken into account, which
represent the boundaries of the analysed system. The materials for the construction of greenhouses and agronomic
management of crops were not taken into account because
this study evaluated only the heating systems of the two
greenhouses.
For HG-LPG, the following items were considered: boiler,
LPG production, LPG transport for a distance of 80 km, tank for
LPG storage and relative transport, and the end of life of plant
components. The lifetime assumed for this plant is 20 years,
according to Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (VDI)'s 2067/6
directive.
For PV-GHP, the following items related to installation,
operation, transport, and disposal were considered: drilling
and disposal of excavated earth, bentonite slurry used for
cementing of drilling, photovoltaic modules and related supporting structures, electrical equipment (inverter, transformer, cables, control panels), heat pump with R410a
refrigerant fluid, geothermal probe (PEX, crosslinked polyethylene, pipes), galvanised steel boiler for hot water storage,
PE-HD (High Density Polyethylene) pipes for heating in
greenhouse, electricity produced by the solar panels used by
the system during the test, and recovery/disposal of the elements of the system in accordance with lifetime.
The PV-GHP plant refers to electricity supplied entirely by
solar panels also connected to the electrical grid for net
metering of electricity. The surface of the panels assigned to
the plant was 4.5 m2, the surface strictly necessary to meet, on
an annual scale, the electricity demand for the plant
(945 kWh 3402 MJ).
For the GHP scenario, all the above items were considered
except PV modules and the electrical components, such as the
inverter.
The lifetime of the heat pump, photovoltaic panels, and
electrical and structural components was assumed to be 20
years, while the lifetime of the borehole drilling and cementitious coating was assumed to be 50 years (Chiavetta, Tinti, &
Bonoli, 2011; Rawlings, 1999). For both plants, testing and
maintenance operations (washing of the panels) were
excluded from the analysis.
Thermal energy
production
Input requirements
13,150.8 MJ
3402 MJ (electricity)
15,503.9 MJ
18
2.2.4.
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
Impact categories
2.2.5.
Inventory
2.3.
Evaluation of energy payback time and emissions
payback time
In order to evaluate the efficiency of innovative plants that use
renewable energy sources such as solar and geothermal energy, the EPT (energy payback time) and EMPT (emissions
payback time) were calculated (Beccali et al., 2012; Streicher,
Heidemann, & Muller-Steinhagen, 2004). The EPT is the
period (y) in which the system has to be in operation to save
the amount of primary energy that has been spent for production, maintenance, and disposal of the plant. In other
words, the EPT can be defined as the necessary time of use, for
a plant, to save as much energy (valued as primary) as that
consumed during all the lifecycle phases of the system itself,
except for the use phase:
EPT PEDinn PEDref
Ey
where PEDinn (MJ) is the global energy requirement of innovative technology; PEDref (MJ) is the global energy requirement
of reference technology. Ey is the net yearly PE savings due to
the use of the innovative system (MJ y1). PED index is
expressed in terms of MJ FU1 (functional unit) of primary
energy. The emission payback time (EMPT,i) is defined as the
time during which the cumulative emissions avoided, due to
EMS;i
3.
3.1.
Microclimate conditions in experimental
greenhouses
During the tests, the two heating systems under comparison
maintained similar nighttime microclimate conditions inside
the two experimental greenhouses with a set point of 10 C as
the minimum indoor air temperature for the two plants. The
trend of external and internal temperatures recorded on eight
consecutive days is representative of the winter season within
the Mediterranean climate, as shown in Fig. 4.
From the experimental data, it can be observed that the
two plants had similar temperatures during the day for the
whole period. We point out minimal differences due to heat
loss from the opening of the doors of the greenhouses in the
middle of the day in order to perform operations on agricultural crops as well as for ventilation. During the night phase, it
is observed that the two plants are switched on and off a
different number of times due to the different thermal inertia
of the air (greater number of starts for the LPG-HG plant) and
water (lower number of starts for PV-GHP plant). Both plants
have maintained the minimum air temperature at 10 C during the night.
3.2.
During the experimental tests carried out in the period between November 2011 and March 2012, the geothermal heat
pump produced an average of 87.1 MJ day1 of thermal energy
with an average consumption of 22.5 MJ day1 of electricity.
During the entire duration of the test, the heat pump produced a total of 13,150.8 MJ of thermal energy and consumed
3402 MJ of electricity; therefore providing an average coefficient of performance (COP) equal to 3.9 (see Table 2, Fig. 5).
A summary of the monthly consumption of electricity, COP,
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
19
Fig. 4 e Indoor air temperatures of the two experimental greenhouses and outdoor air temperatures Text between the
periods of January 14, 2012 and January 23, 2012.
system. The electricity produced by photovoltaic panels during the testing period amounted to 2124 MJ and was therefore
insufficient to cover the needs of the system (3402 MJ), due to
the reduced solar radiation that characterises the winter
months.
For this reason, the electricity produced by solar panels and
used to supply the heat pump must be stored, both seasonally
and daily. In general, this can be done with accumulators or
with a connection to the national electricity grid, which exchanges energy with the plant according to the functioning of
Fig. 5 e Monthly consumption of electricity and geothermal energy absorbed by heat pump, thermal energy produced by
LPG and coefficient of performance of heat pump (secondary axes).
20
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
3.3.
Environmental performance of the two greenhouses
heating systems and GHP scenario
The environmental indices, expressed as absolute values, are
relative to the production of thermal energy LPG-HG, PV-GHP
plants and scenario GHP, as reported in Table 3. The environmental indices, related to the components of the plant PVGHP and scenario GHP and expressed in percentages, are
shown in Tables 4 and 5.
From the results of LCA analysis, it is observed that the
primary energy demand for PV-GHP plant is about half that of
the LPG-HG plant and about one-fifth of that for the GHP
scenario. This is due to the geothermal and solar renewable
energies used.
The GHP scenario has the greatest environmental load for
the environmental indices of ADPfo, AP, GWP, and POCP, and
intermediate values in reference to the two plants for the
other indices; therefore this scenario has highest environmental burdens in comparison with the other two plants.
For the indices ADPfo., AP, GWP, POCP, this is due to the
environmental burden due to the use of the electricity mix,
because in Italy, the electricity is produced primarily by
thermal power plants supplied with fossil fuels, with high
amounts of atmospheric emissions (Table 4).
Heating plants
Scenario
Heat
pump
Drilling
Electricity
Italian grid mix
Other
98.54
8.78
42.08
70.16
10.17
96.87
36.07
0.83
8.92
10.99
24.69
16.84
3.09
16.85
0.62
81.95
46.85
5.14
72.86
0.04
46.88
0.00
0.36
0.09
0.01
0.12
0.00
0.19
8.08
82.68
0.28
For the EP index, drilling (25%) and heat pump (70%) cause
the greater environmental burden due to the spreading of
excavated material and the heat pump production,
respectively.
For the ODP index, the heat pump is primarily responsible
for the environmental burden; in particular, for the emissions
generated within the production of the gas R410a (Table 4). A
similar incidence of the components on the overall environmental load of the GHP plant has also been reported by Sanera
et al. (2010).
For indices ADPel., AP, EP, ODP, and POCP, the LPG-HG plant
appears to be the one with the lowest environmental burden
(Table 3). For all indices, the environmental loads are primarily caused by combustion and the production of LPG. For
indices ADPfo. and GWP, the plant PV-GHP appears to have a
lower environmental load (Table 3). The non-use of fossil fuels
justifies these results. For the GWP index in particular, the
environmental load is about half of that generated by the
plant LPG-HG. In contrast, for indices ADPel, EP, and ODP, the
PV-GHP plant has greater environmental loads (Table 3).
For the index ADPel., this is due to the complexity of the
plant which also includes the photovoltaic panels; for EP
index, to heat pump and drilling; for the ODP index this is
attributable to the emissions generated for the production of
R410a gas used for the heat pump (Table 5). From the results of
the PV-GHP plant, it is observed that the contribution of the
drilling is significant for indices ADPfo., AP, EP, GWP and POCP
(Table 5). Similar results were obtained from LCA studies on
the low-enthalpy geothermal systems, although it has been
LPG-HG
PV-GHP
GHP
Environmental
indices
0.022
1.213
0.150
0.016
0.087
0.001
21.115
3.572
0.470
0.479
0.554
0.063
64.473
39.280
3.056
2.308
0.841
0.552
0.217
63.702
67.120
1.223
0.622
3.148
0.71
43.78
19.28
24.61
57.70
3.06
28.80
14.98
11.40
6.77
5.43
7.00
1.23
9.23
0.00
1.74
0.15
0.01
0.43
0.00
0.33
40.90
12.36
1.42
21
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
3.4.
4.
Conclusion
Table 6 e PED and GWP values allocated between the stage: production-installation, use, and end-of-life for LPG-HG plant
(left) and PV-GHP plant (right).
LPG-HG
PED (MJ)
PV-GHP
PED (MJ)
3.522$102
1.187
2.186$104
1.223
2.934$103
8.431$102
1.478$105
8.725$102
0.6217
0
5.471$104
0.6222
6.340$102
0
3.940$105
6.344$102
22
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
The use of the PV-GHP plant leads to a significant environmental benefit for the GWP index and consequently reduces the carbon footprint of agricultural cultivations in the
greenhouse although the investment costs are very high for
full-size greenhouses. If energy policies for the promotion of
renewable sources in Italy have the reduction of greenhouse
gas emissions as their primary objective, the work highlights
the utility of the use of heat pump systems for greenhouse
heating.
references
Cellura, M., Longo, S., & Mistretta, M. (2012a). LCA applicata alle
e limiti
tecnologie alimentate da energia solare: peculiarita
metodologici. In Atti del VI Convegno della Rete Italiana LCA su
Dall'analisi del ciclo di vita allimpronta ambientale: Percorsi ed
esperienze a confronto (pp. 15e22). Bari, Italy.
Cellura, M., Longo, S., & Mistretta, M. (2012b). Life cycle
assessment (LCA) of protected crops: an Italian case study.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 28, 56e62.
Chai, L., Ma, C., & Ni, J. Q. (2012). Performance evaluation of
ground source heat pump system for greenhouse heating in
northern China. Biosystems Engineering, 111, 107e117.
Chiasson, A. (1999). Advances in modeling of ground-source heat
pump systems (Master of science theses). Graduate College of
Oklahoma State University.
Chiavetta, C., Tinti, F., & Bonoli, A. (2011). Comparative life cycle
assessment of renewable energy systems for heating and
cooling. Procedia Engineering, 21, 591e597.
Cho, H., & Choi, J. M. (2014). The quantitative evaluation of design
parameter's effects on a ground source heat pump system.
Renewable Energy, 65, 2e6.
CML Rep. 130. (2006). Leiden: Centre of Environmental Science
Leiden University (CML). UNI EN ISO 14040/44: LCA standards.
Cohen, S., & Fuchs, M. (1999). Measuring and predicting
radiometric properties of reflective shade nets and thermal
screens. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 73, 245e255.
Colangelo, G., Congedo, P., & Starace, G. (2005). Horizontal heat
exchangers for GSHP. Efficiency and cost investigation for
three different applications. In ECOS2005 e 18th International
conference on efficiency, cost, optimization, simulation and
environmental impact of energy systems. Norway.
Colangelo, G., Romano, D., De Risi, A., Starace, G., & Laforgia, D.
(2012). Un tool in Matlab e Simulink per la simulazione di
pompe di calore geotermiche. La Termotecnica, 4, 63e72.
Cui, P., Li, X., Man, Y., & Fang, Z. (2011). Heat transfer analysis of
pile geothermal heat exchangers with spiral coil. Applied
Energy, 88, 4113e4119.
Desideri, U., Proietti, S., Zepparelli, F., Sdringola, P., & Bini, S.
(2012). Life cycle assessment of a ground-mounted 1778 kWp
photovoltaic plant and comparison with traditional energy
production systems. Applied Energy, 97, 930e943.
Dickson, M., & Fanelli, M. (2004). What is geothermal energy? Pisa,
Italy: Istituto di Geoscienze e Georisorse, CNR.
ENEL. (2012). Guida al Geotermico (in Italian) http://www.enelsi.it/
it-IT/doc/eventi_news/guide_2012/Guida_Geotermico_12.pdf.
European Directive 2009/28/CE on The promotion of the use of
energy from renewable sources.
Fabrizio, E. (2012). Energy reduction measures in agricultural
greenhouses heating: envelope, systems and solar energy
collection. Energy and Buildings, 53, 57e63.
Florides, G. A., Pouloupatis, P. D., Kalogirou, S., Messaritis, V.,
Panayides, I., Zomeni, Z., et al. (2011). The geothermal
characteristics of the ground and the potential of using
ground coupled heat pumps in Cyprus. Energy, 36, 5027e5036.
Fujii, H., & Ohyama, K. (2009). Application of ground source heat
pumps for air conditioning of greenhouses. IEA Heat Pump
Centre Newsletter, 27, 39e42.
chal, F. (2011). Defining optimal configurations
Gerber, L., & Mare
of geothermal systems using process design and process
integration techniques. Applied Thermal Engineering. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.11.033.
Hawlader, M. N. A., Chou, S. K., & Ullah, M. Z. (2001). The
performance of a solar assisted heat pump water heating
system. Applied Thermal Engineering, 21, 1049e1065.
International Standard ISO 14040:44. (2006). Environmental
management, life cycle assessment, principles and framework,
requirements and guidelines.
ISPRA. (2004). Geological map of Italy. http://www.isprambiente.
gov.it/Media/carg/index.html.
b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 2 7 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 1 e2 3
23