Technoeconomic Analysis of Air Based Solar Assisted Heat Pump Water Heaters for Canadian and American Cities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat pump water heaters (HPWHs) have limited market share in Canada and the United States largely due to their space cooling effect which increases heating costs throughout winters in these countries.Coupling a HPWH with solar collectors lessens the space cooling effect during cold-climate heating seasons while also improving HPWH performance year-round in cold and moderate climates.This study experimentally and numerically examined air-based solar collectors and their impact on HPWHs with the objective of determining the feasibility of solar assisted HPWHs in residential detached dwellings in Canada and the United States.An air-based solar collector was added to an experimentally validated HPWH model, and different configurations of solar-assisted HPWH (SAHPWH) were analyzed to determine their energy performance, greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), and various economic parameters.The results indicate that the space cooling effect of HPWHs can be mitigated by coupling the HPWH with a solar collector in all configurations studied.The three configurations of SAHPWHs were analyzed to minimize water heating electricity consumption for each Canadian and American city, and a correlation was found between climate zone and the configuration with minimum electricity consumption.The maximum electricity reductions from an electric water to a SAHPWH were realized near the Canada and US border, and with a 5% transition to SAHPWHs, Canadian residential energy for water heating can be decreased by 3.1%.The HPWHs and SAHPWHs were compared against electric water heaters (EWHs) and natural gas water heaters (NGWHs).The greatest GHG reductions were found to occur in locations
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".