raw · papers · ingested 2026-06-26
Comparison of a Solar-Driven Absorption Chiller and PV Compression Chiller Under Different Demand Profiles
Source: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/20/5334
Source: Caferra et al., Energies (MDPI), 2025, DOI 10.3390/en18205334 (open access). Credibility: High (peer-reviewed, open access, direct head-to-head). Confidence: high.
Key points
- Direct comparison, both ~500 kW: Fresnel-driven single-effect absorption (COP ~0.75) vs PV-powered compression chiller (COP ~3).
- The ~4x COP gap is decisive: techno-economic comparison favors PV-compression for most demand profiles.
- Absorption competitive only when driven by an already-existing/waste heat source or under steady high-load conditions (peak July-Aug; uses only ~7% of capacity in electrical consumption).
- Absorption needs a gas-boiler backup to maintain inlet temperature → hurts emissions and economics.
- General pattern: PV-compression favors variable/intermittent demand + grid export; absorption + thermal storage favors continuous loads.
Relevance
The cleanest recent quantified head-to-head crystallizing the central trade-off. Core evidence for solar-cooling-pv-vs-thermal.