How can heat exchangers have COP>1

[Low-Q]

Hi,

I am building a new house. This house will be heated by a heat exchanger. I have been told that heat exchangers have a COP of 3-4 in practice (depending on inside and outside temperature, and the cooling medium).

What I do not understand, is the COP>1 part. In order to "charge" the house with heat, by extracting heat from outside air, it will require energy input to the pump. The house is leaking heat back to the outside air, so the heat exchanger must run in order to keep the same temperature in the house.

The house is insolated well, but that would also mean that a normal electric oven must add small portions of energy to keep the air inside at the same temperature....

I simply cannot understand how input energy is greater than output energy, and that heat exchangers does not require the same energy to sustain the temperature insde as a conventional electric oven does.

Can someone explain this in detail?

br.

Vidar

[russ_watters]

You mean a heat pump, not a heat exchangers.

Since a heat pump doesn't make heat directly, it just moves it from one place to another, it can have a COP (which is different than the efficiency) of greater than 1. Consider this: if you are pumping water, the energy input and efficiency are determined by flow rate and pressure. But what if you were more interested in the fact that the water was very warm compared to what you need. Then the energy you get out of the water and the pumping energy aren't directly related to each other anymore and you can get more heat energy out than mechanical energy put in. Same idea with a heat pump or air conditioner (which also has a COP of at least 3).

[Low-Q]

You mean a heat pump, not a heat exchangers.

Since a heat pump doesn't make heat directly, it just moves it from one place to another, it can have a COP (which is different than the efficiency) of greater than 1. Consider this: if you are pumping water, the energy input and efficiency are determined by flow rate and pressure. But what if you were more interested in the fact that the water was very warm compared to what you need. Then the energy you get out of the water and the pumping energy aren't directly related to each other anymore and you can get more heat energy out than mechanical energy put in. Same idea with a heat pump or air conditioner (which also has a COP of at least 3).OK, so the heat pump is just moving heat from the outside air to the inside at "no" cost except the energy required to maintain the pressure difference between hot and cold zone?
Is it correct to say that a heat pump is "focusing" the heat in the enormous volume of heat containing air at a small point (The heat pump itself)?

But wouldn't the potential difference in temperature be the same as the energy required to run the pump? If so, I am a little confused - still...


Vidar

[Andrew Mason]

OK, so the heat pump is just moving heat from the outside air to the inside at "no" cost except the energy required to maintain the pressure difference between hot and cold zone?
Is it correct to say that a heat pump is "focusing" the heat in the enormous volume of heat containing air at a small point It is taking some of the thermal energy of a larger mass of cooler matter (the ground) and transferring it to a smaller mass of warmer matter (the air in your house). If that is what you mean by "focusing", yes.

(The heat pump itself)?The heat pump does the work needed to transfer the thermal energy. The second law of thermodynamics says that heat only flows on its own from hotter bodies to cooler bodies. To make it flow the other way, you must do work.

But wouldn't the potential difference in temperature be the same as the energy required to run the pump? If so, I am a little confused - still...
The greater the temperature difference, the greater the work (input energy) that must be done in order to move a given quantity of heat from the outside to the inside.

Incidentally, if your heat pump has a COP of only 3 or 4, you are not going to be saving much energy or reducing CO2 emissions overall if you use electricity that is generated by burning fossil fuels. A coal fired power plant is about 1/3 efficient: one unit of electricity output for three units of heat from burning fossil fuel. And there are losses from transmission that reduce that electrical energy a little further in getting it to your house. So if your COP is 3 you will be getting heat in your house that is about the same as if you burned fossil fuel in a furnace. If you are getting your electricity from a hydro, wind or solar source it is a different matter.

AM

[Low-Q]

Does it exist "power plants" using heat pump technology? I mean, if it is possible to harness the heat from thin air and then "focus" that heat energy to make it more efficient for a heat-to-mechanical work engines (turbines or similar), wouldn't it be possible to generate electric power that is greater than the energy required to run the pump? In my mind, that should not be possible, but if the energy is present already in the air, it might be possible after all?

Vidar

[russ_watters]

No. Efficiency of a heat engine and heat pump are inverses of each other. So if a heat pump has a cop of 4, then the best a heat engine could do for converting back to mechanical power is 25%, for no net gain.

[Low-Q]

Ok. Thanks. Now I understand much better.