Aplicación Práctica / Practical Issues
Recibido: 07-11-2025, Aprobado tras revisión: 14-01-2026
Forma sugerida de citación: Simbaña, I.; Guilcaso-Molina, C.; Tipantocta, F. (2026). “Energy and Environmental Assessment of a
Solar-Assisted Heat Pump for Water Heating”. Revista Técnica “energía”. No. 22, Issue II, Pp. 95-103
ISSN On-line: 2602-8492 - ISSN Impreso: 1390-5074
Doi: https://doi.org/10.37116/revistaenergia.v22.n2.2026.725
© 2026 Autores Esta publicación está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento –
No Comercial 4.0
Energy and Environmental Assessment of a Solar-Assisted Heat Pump for
Water Heating
Evaluación Energética y Ambiental de una Bomba de Calor Asistida por
Energía Solar para el Calentamiento de Agua
I. Simbaña1
0000-0002-3324-3071
C. Guilcaso2
0000-0003-4745-8951
F. Tipantocta3 0000-0002-4880-8725
1Instituto Superior Universitario Sucre, Grupo de Investigación en Ingeniería Mecánica y Pedagogía de la Carrera de
Electromecánica (GIIMPCEM), Quito, Ecuador
E-mail: isimbana@tecnologicosucre.edu.ec
2Universidad Técnica de Cotopaxi, Latacunga, Ecuador
E-mail: cristian.guilcaso6706@utc.edu.ec
3Instituto Superior Universitario Sucre, Carrera de Electrónica, Quito, Ecuador
E-mail: ftipantocta@tecnologicosucre.edu.ec
Abstract
The study analyzes the performance of a solar-assisted
heat pump for residential water heating, aiming to
demonstrate its feasibility as a sustainable and energy-
efficient alternative while contributing to CO₂ emission
reduction in step to the Sustainable Development Goals.
The research combined hands-on experimentation with
energy analysis, monitoring operational parameters,
heating time, and calculating the coefficient of
performance for 10 liters of water under varying solar
radiation conditions. Additionally, the environmental
impact of photovoltaic panels and battery storage was
evaluated, alongside operating costs and estimated CO₂
emissions. The results revealed a maximum coefficient
of performance of 6.2 and a minimum of 3.3, with
heating times ranging from 30 to 35 minutes, indicating
stable and efficient performance. The system consumes
just 2.33 kW·h per year for active components,
producing only 9.6 kg of CO₂, far below conventional
electric or LPG heaters, whereas solar integration
further lowers its carbon footprint. Overall, the findings
highlight that this solar-assisted heat pump is
technically effective, economically competitive, and
environmentally responsible.
Resumen
La investigación evaluó la eficiencia energética y el
rendimiento de una bomba de calor asistida por energía
solar para el calentamiento de agua, validando su
viabilidad como alternativa sostenible, que se alinea con
los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible. El estudio
combinó experimentación práctica y análisis energético,
midiendo parámetros operacionales, tiempo de
calentamiento y calculando el coeficiente de
rendimiento en un volumen de 10 litros de agua en
diferentes condiciones de radiación solar, además de la
estimación de emisiones de CO₂ y costos de operación,
incluyendo la contribución ambiental de paneles
fotovoltaicos y baterías de almacenamiento. El
coeficiente de rendimiento máximo fue 6.2 y un mínimo
de 3.3, con tiempos de calentamiento de 30 a 35
minutos, con un rendimiento eficiente y estable. El
sistema consume 2.33 kW·h anuales para sus
componentes, generando 9.6 kg de CO₂, inferiores a
alternativas eléctricas o a GLP, y reduce la huella de
carbono mediante la integración de energía solar. Por lo
que este sistema es una solución técnica, competitiva
económicamente y ambientalmente responsable para la
calefacción de agua residencial.
Index terms— Solar-assisted heat pump, Energy
efficiency, Renewable energy, Sustainable development
goals, Carbon emissions.
Palabras clave— Bomba de calor asistida por energía
solar, Eficiencia energética, Objetivos de desarrollo
sostenible, Energía renovable, Emisiones de carbono.
95
Edición No. 22, Issue II, Enero 2026
1. INTRODUCTION
Ecuador still depends heavily on conventional energy
sources, reflected in a per capita electricity consumption
of approximately 1629 kW·h for 2024, with fossil fuels
accounting for around 63 % of the country’s primary
energy supply [1]. For the housing sector, electricity
demand has increased over the past decade at annual rates
of 4 to 6 %, reaching 6428 GW·h. This trend is influenced
by regulated energy prices and substantial subsidies for
fuels such as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), which
promote intensive fossil fuel use for domestic water
heating and other household needs. Globally, the
transition to renewable energy sources, such as solar, has
proven critical for decarbonizing electricity systems [2],
emphasizing the need for Ecuador to accelerate the
adoption of cleaner and more efficient energy solutions
in the residential sector.
Despite a seemingly renewable energy matrix, with
hydroelectric power providing 90% of electricity
generation due to strategic investments in water
resources [3], other renewables, such as solar, wind, and
biomass, contribute only marginally, at 0.6, 0.7, and 1 to
2 %, respectively [4]. Although solar potential is high
across several regions, its exploitation remains limited by
installation and storage costs. This highlights the
necessity of integrating complementary renewable
technologies to strengthen energy security and reduce
CO₂ emissions. Residential energy consumption,
particularly through LPG and electricity from fossil fuels,
directly affects the national carbon footprint, with the
energy sector responsible for up to 69% of total
greenhouse gas emissions [5].
According to Yildiz et al. [6], globally, water heating
accounts for roughly 26 % of building energy use. In
Ecuador, conventional electric and LPG water heaters
significantly contribute to emissions without optimizing
efficiency. This situation exacerbates environmental
impacts, such as climate change, and increases household
energy costs and dependence on imported fuels.
Consequently, there is a pressing need for alternative
solutions that reduce carbon intensity while enhancing
the efficiency and sustainability of domestic hot water
services, particularly in urban and residential contexts
where equitable energy access is important.
Lu et al. [7] examined the energy performance of
various solar-assisted heat pump (SAHP) configurations
for water heating across 39 cities in China. The study
compared parallel and series arrangements, incorporating
auxiliary heat sources, such as air, water, or electric
resistance, while accounting for solar irradiance, ambient
temperature, and auxiliary system efficiency. The results
showed that the parallel configuration, in which the solar
collector and heat pump operate simultaneously,
generally achieves better energy performance, especially
with air-to-water heat pumps under irradiance above
500 W/m². Conversely, the series configuration, where
the solar collector preheats the water before the heat
pump, performs more efficiently only in colder climates
or when the auxiliary system reaches a coefficient of
performance (COP) above 6.9 with supply temperatures
exceeding 45 °C. These findings highlight the
importance of adapting SAHP design to local climatic
conditions, providing practical guidelines for integrating
hybrid solar systems into residential buildings.
SAHP systems combine solar thermal energy with the
vapor compression cycle, using solar radiation as the
primary heat for the evaporator. Over the past decade,
research has highlighted their potential to replace electric
and LPG water heaters in households. Hai et al. [8]
demonstrated that an optimized SAHP system can
significantly reduce electricity consumption, operational
costs, and CO₂ emissions, making it a promising solution
for urban areas with high hot water demand. Similarly,
Abbasi et al. [9] reported that a dual-source solar/air
SAHP system can achieve COP values between 2.4 and
3.94, cut electricity use by 25%, and lower annual CO₂
emissions by 1,450 kg, offering a stable and efficient
operation despite solar variability, though with a payback
period of about 19 years.
Meena et al. [10] directed an experimental study on
the energy performance of SAHP systems aimed at water
heating and improving building energy efficiency. Their
setup featured a heat pump coupled with a single flat-
plate solar collector with a transparent cover and copper
absorber, capable of heating 60 liters of water from 15 to
45 °C in approximately 70 minutes under an average
solar irradiance of 700 W/m², achieving a maximum
COP of 6. The study showed that system efficiency
scales with solar irradiance, reaching COP values above
5.6 under optimal conditions and dropping to around 2
when irradiance falls below 450 W/m². Energy
consumption was only 0.3 to 0.4 kW·h, resulting in
savings of up to 2.5 kW·h compared to conventional
electric water heaters and estimated payback period of six
years, four months.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),
recognized in 2015 by the United Nations 2030 Agenda,
present a framework for global efforts to eradicate
scarcity, protecting the environment, and indorse
prosperity for all [11]. Yumnam et al. [12] highlighted
that research on SDGs has grown exponentially,
particularly in areas, as renewable energy, weather
action, impartial access to resources, and sustainable
urban development. While developed nations remain the
primary contributors, emerging economies are
increasingly producing impactful scientific research,
reflecting the global and interdisciplinary nature of
sustainability challenges.
Olabi et al. [13] review recent progress in solar
thermal systems and their potential as sustainable
alternatives for water heating, emphasizing goals beyond
simple energy efficiency. The study examines different
solar collector types, including flat-plate, evacuated tube,
and photovoltaic-thermal (PV/T) hybrid systems, and
96
Simbaña et al. / Energy and Environmental Assessment of a Solar-Assisted Heat Pump for Water Heating
evaluates their performance under changing climatic
conditions. It also identifies practical applications for
residential, industrial, and agricultural contexts, such as
zero-energy buildings, greenhouses, water pumping, and
solar cooling. By effectively harnessing solar radiation
and integrating thermal storage, these systems can
provide a continuous hot water supply, enhance energy
self-sufficiency, support environmental sustainability,
and generate social and financial benefits, including job
conception and reduced dependance on fossil fuels.
Prolonged dependence on unrenewable energy
sources, as fossil-fuel electricity and LPG, leads to
significant environmental and economic impacts,
including higher CO₂ emissions, fuel import dependence,
and vulnerability to market fluctuations [14]. As
highlighted by Singh et al. [15], this situation relates
directly to SDG 7, ensuring admittance to reasonably
priced, unfailing, sustainable, and modern energy, and
SDG 13, which emphasizes urgent climate action.
Furthermore, adopting clean and efficient technologies
boosts responsible consumption and sustainable
production in line with SDG 12, optimizing energy use
while reducing environmental impact. In this context,
hybrid solar-based systems emerge as key strategies to
improve energy efficiency, mitigate climate change, and
foster sustainability in residential and urban settings,
supporting global sustainability commitments.
Mercedes-Garcia et al. [16] investigate the
enhancement of energy efficiency and the incorporation
of renewable technologies in water heating systems to
promote sustainability and advance the SDGs. The study
evaluates 61 optimized water pumping and distribution
systems that incorporate clean energy and energy
recovery strategies, assessed through energy, economic,
and environmental indicators. Findings show that more
than 70 % of the systems achieved significant efficiency
gains, with solar energy integration notably reducing
fossil fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.
These improvements contribute to SDG 7, reasonable
and clean energy, and support other SDGs, considering
scarcity reduction, hunger, economic growth, and
responsible consumption.
The present study aims to assess the performance of
the SAHP system for water heating, validating its
feasibility as a sustainable and energy-efficient solution.
By optimizing energy use and integrating renewable
sources, the work addresses SDGs related to clean
energy, water sustainability, and emission reduction. The
paper is organized as follows: the Methodology section
details the SAHP system and the mathematical models
used for analytical evaluation. The Results section
presents comparative figures representing experimental
and analytical outcomes. The Discussion section
contrasts these results with existing literature to validate
the findings and highlight potential innovations. Finally,
the Conclusions summarize the key contributions and
insights obtained from the study.
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 SAHP System
A heat pump works on a thermodynamic refrigeration
cycle, which transfers heat from a low-temperature
source to a higher-temperature sink [17]. In this process,
the evaporator absorbs heat either from the surrounding
environment or from a solar collector, causing the
refrigerant to vaporize. The vapor is subsequently
compressed by the compressor, raising its pressure and
temperature, then the stored energy is released to water
in the condenser as the refrigerant condenses. The
expansion valve drops the pressure of the liquid
refrigerant, completing the cycle and allowing
continuous operation. The SAHP system integrates these
four main components: compressor, condenser,
expansion valve, evaporator, into a coordinated system
designed for efficient water heating. To monitor
performance, pressure gauges (P) and thermocouples (T)
are installed at the inlet of each component. Fig. 1
presents a schematic of the SAHP system and its
instrumentation setup.
Figure 1: Schematic Representation of the SAHP System [18]
2.2 Thermodynamic Analysis
The thermodynamic cycle of the SAHP system was
quantitatively analyzed using the heat transfer equation,
which allows estimation of the thermal energy delivered
to the water (Qwater) during the heating process. This
analysis accounts for variations in the operating
conditions of the working fluid, particularly the
temperature difference between its initial and final states
(ΔT ) [19]. Following the first law of thermodynamics,
which asserts energy conservation in a system according
to equation (1), the energy absorbed or released by the
refrigerant at each stage of the cycle can be expressed as:
,
(1)
where mwater represents the water mass, assumed
constant during operation, and cp is the water specific
heat water. The rate of heat transfer from a system
component to the surrounding medium () can be
considered as the product of the working fluid’s mass
flow rate ( ) and the enthalpy difference between
inlet and outlet (Δh) [20]. This formulation is useful for
processes where energy changes cannot be described
solely by temperature differences, incorporating both
internal energy variations and flow work. Equation (2),
97
Edición No. 22, Issue II, Enero 2026
therefore, provides a practical representation of the
system’s real energy behavior and allows for the precise
calculation of heat transfer at each stage of the cycle:
(2)
The electrical power supplied to the compressor
(
) represents the effective energy input to the
system, which is converted into mechanical work to
compress the working fluid. This can be calculated using
equation (3), accounting for the applied voltage (V ),
current (I ), and motor efficiency (η) [21]:
(3)
The coefficient of performance (COP) is an important
parameter for evaluating the energy efficiency of a heat
pump, as it relates the useful thermal energy delivered to
the fluid () to the electrical power consumed [22]. A
higher COP indicates a more efficient system,
transferring more thermal energy per unit of electricity.
In solar-assisted heat pumps, COP can be notably
enhanced because solar input preheats the refrigerant in
the evaporator, reducing the compression work required.
Equation (4) provides the calculation of this parameter:
(4)
2.3 Energy Analysis
The thermal energy released by LPG combustion
(ELPG) is calculated using equation (5), by considering the
lower heating value (LHVLPG), which represents the
energy available from complete combustion without
including the latent heat of water vapor in exhaust gases,
with a LHV of 11860 kcal/kg for LPG [23]:
,
(5)
where mGLP is the mass of fuel consumed. The
associated CO₂ emissions (Eemission) are estimated with
equation (6), using the emission factor (EFLPG), which
reflects both the fuel composition and combustion
efficiency, and for LPG, has a value of 2.96 kg CO₂
per kg fuel [24]:
(6)
2.4 Cost Analysis
Data from the National Institute of Statistics and
Censuses (INEC) [25] indicate that the average
electricity consumption in urban areas of Ecuador is
approximately 155 kW·h per month, with an average
monthly cost of USD 18.52 in Quito, one of the cities
with the highest electricity tariffs in the country. From
these values, the unit electricity cost can be estimated at
USD 0.0904 per kW·h. For a typical 5 kW electric
shower used 20 minutes per day, the monthly energy
consumption reaches roughly 55 kW·h, corresponding to
an energy cost of about USD 17. When additional
charges, such as distribution, public lighting, fire
services, and waste collection, are included, the total
monthly cost rises to USD 30, resulting in an effective
cost (ckW·h) of USD 0.33 per kW·h consumed. The
operational price of the SAHP system (Cost) is calculated
applying equation (7), which evaluates the economic
feasibility of the prototype in comparison with
conventional water heating systems relative to the energy
consumed (Econsume) [26]:
(7)
LPG represents another common energy source for
Ecuadorian households, with prices heavily subsidized
by the government. The market cost of a 15 kg cylinder
is USD 12. However, due to a 650 % subsidy, the
consumer price is reduced to just USD 1.60 [27].
Considering the lower heating value of 11860 kcal/kg,
the actual cost per unit of energy is approximately USD
1.05 × 10⁻⁴ per kcal, equivalent to USD 0.0906 per kW·h.
Without subsidies, LPG is comparable in cost to
electricity, but the subsidized rate makes it a far more
economical option for domestic water heating.
3. RESULTS
The analyzed SAHP system incorporates a solar
collector that functions directly as the evaporator. In
addition, a photovoltaic power source supplies 12 V of
direct current to operate the digital display meters and the
variable-speed compressor. The compressor’s estimated
monthly energy consumption is approximately
2.33 kW·h, which is fully provided by solar energy. Fig.
2 illustrates the experimental SAHP prototype, where a
flat-plate aluminum collector serves as the evaporator,
and a copper coil submerged in the storage tank
performances as the condenser.
Figure 2: SAHP System Prototype
The experimental data, shown in Fig. 3, present the
variation in the system’s COP as a function of water
temperature during the heating process. As the water
temperature increases from its initial range of 16 to 17
°C, a gradual decline in COP is observed. This behavior
results from the higher workload imposed on the
compressor and the reduced thermal gradient between the
evaporator and the condenser. To meet domestic hot
98
Simbaña et al. / Energy and Environmental Assessment of a Solar-Assisted Heat Pump for Water Heating
water requirements of approximately 30 °C, the
thermostat was adjusted to automatically switch off the
system once the water temperature reached 45 °C, taking
into account thermal losses along the distribution pipes
before reaching the point of use.
Figure 3: COP Analysis of the SAHP System
Under favorable solar conditions, with irradiance
levels exceeding 700 W/m², the system achieved peak
COP values of around 5.5, reflecting a strong energy
performance due to the additional thermal input from the
solar collector. This efficiency notably surpasses that of
conventional heat pump systems, which typically operate
with average COP values near 3. Conversely, when solar
radiation dropped below 500 W/m², the COP ranged
between 3.6 and 6.2, highlighting the direct influence of
solar availability on system performance. Overall, these
findings confirm that integrating solar energy with heat
pump technology is a real-world and effective solution
for domestic water heating, enabling significant
reductions in electrical energy consumption.
Domestic water heating accounts for approximately
60 to 70 % of total household energy use in urban areas,
equivalent to about 17.40 m³ of water per month from an
average total consumption of 26 m³. Considering that
heating 1 m³ of water requires 41.84 kW·h, the monthly
cost of heating this volume is roughly USD 3.80 using
LPG and USD 3.20 using electricity, excluding subsidies.
With government subsidies applied to LPG, however, the
monthly cost drops dramatically to USD 5.50, compared
to USD 66.03 without subsidies. While the intrinsic
energy costs of LPG and electricity are comparable,
subsidies distort their real competitiveness, underscoring
the need to explore sustainable alternatives, such as solar-
assisted or hybrid systems, which can reduce both costs
and emissions while minimizing reliance on government
support.
Fig. 4 illustrates the cost of heating one cubic meter
of water using different technologies. The analysis
highlights the economic advantage of the SAHP system
compared to conventional methods. Electric showers
incur an average cost of USD 0.90 per m³, while LPG
heaters cost USD 3.80 per m³ without subsidy, and
USD 0.24 per m³ with subsidy. By contrast, the proposed
SAHP system significantly lowers operational expenses
by leveraging both photovoltaic and thermal solar
energy, demonstrating its potential as a cost-effective
solution.
Figure 4: Comparative Cost of Heating per m3 of Water
Fig. 5 presents a comparative evaluation of energy
consumption, monthly costs, and annual CO₂ emissions
across different water-heating systems, emphasizing
their environmental and economic impacts. Conventional
systems, such as electric showers and LPG heaters,
exhibit the highest energy consumption and emissions,
55 kW·h/month and 226.55 kg CO₂/year for electric
showers, and up to 1,065.6 kg CO₂/year for LPG systems.
Although LPG subsidies reduce monthly costs, from
USD 66.03 to USD 5.50, emissions remain significant.
Figure 5: CO₂ Emissions and Energy Consumption for Different
Water-Heating Systems
Conversely, the SAHP system, both in its standalone
configuration and when assisted by photovoltaic panels
and batteries, eliminates direct electricity use and reduces
CO₂ emissions dramatically to only 9.6 and 110 kg/year,
99
Edición No. 22, Issue II, Enero 2026
respectively, confirming the system’s efficiency,
sustainability, and economic viability for residential
water heating.
While the solar heat pump generates no direct
operational emissions, the manufacturing of photovoltaic
panels and energy storage components contributes
indirectly to its carbon footprint. Solar panel production
typically releases 30 g CO₂ per kW·h generated over a
25-year lifespan, whereas gel batteries emit
approximately 170 kg CO₂ per unit, with a 6-year
lifespan. Distributed across their operational life, this
results in an annual contribution of around 43.8 kg CO₂
from the panels and 56.7 kg CO₂ from the batteries,
substantially lower than the emissions from conventional
water-heating technologies.
4. DISCUSSION
Quitiaquez et al. [28] provided an important
experimental foundation for understanding the thermal
behavior of SAHP systems, emphasizing how the tilt
angle influences the heat transfer coefficient (HTC) of an
aluminum flat-plate collector/evaporator using R600a as
the working fluid. Building on this principle, the present
study also harnesses solar radiation as the primary
thermal energy source for refrigerant evaporation,
enhancing overall energy efficiency through improved
COP. Unlike the earlier work, which focused on
statistical analysis and two-phase flow transitions based
on collector inclination, this research evaluates the
practical performance of a photovoltaic-assisted SAHP
system for sustainable water heating. Moreover, it
incorporates a more integrated perspective by connecting
thermal performance with environmental and economic
outcomes, quantifying reductions in energy consumption
and CO₂ emissions.
Similarly, Yi et al. [29] reviewed technological
developments in SAHP systems, highlighting gains in
energy efficiency and limitations at low temperatures. In
line with these findings, this study implements a
photovoltaic-assisted SAHP that enhances COP and
reduces electrical dependence through the combined use
of solar thermal and photovoltaic energy. Distinct from
primarily theoretical studies, this work integrates
experimental and multidisciplinary analysis in the
Ecuadorian context, evaluating system performance,
operational costs, and emissions under real conditions.
The results confirm the technical, environmental, and
economic feasibility of the system as a sustainable
alternative for residential hot water, supporting SDGs 7
and 13 while aligning with global trends in energy
transition and decarbonization.
Obura et al. [30] emphasize the importance of
renewable energy technologies to improve water
resource management and decrease reliance on
conventional energy sources. This research addresses
similar challenges, aligning with multiple SDGs.
Specifically, it supports SDG 7 – Affordable and Clean
Energy by demonstrating a solar-assisted heat pump that
reduces conventional electricity and LPG consumption
while promoting efficient renewable sources. It
contributes to SDG 13 – Climate Action by showing that
hybrid renewable systems can significantly lower CO₂
emissions from domestic energy use. Additionally, it
addresses SDG 6 – Clean Water and Sanitation by
improving heating processes and reducing energy waste
associated with water usage, and SDG 12 – Responsible
Consumption and Production by encouraging the
adoption of sustainable, low-impact technologies that
integrate efficiency, economic viability, and
environmental responsibility. Fig. 6 illustrates the
sequential relevance and overall feasibility of
implementing clean energy-based solutions, positioning
the proposed system as a practical contribution toward
the SDGs of the 2030 Agenda.
Figure 6: Relationship and Significance of the SDGs with the
Proposed SAHP System
Manesh and Liu [31] highlight the importance of a
multidisciplinary approach for advancing innovative
energy technologies that consider technical, economic,
and environmental dimensions. This research
demonstrates that SAHP systems improve thermal
performance through higher COP and solar efficiency,
improving electricity consumption and reducing CO₂
emissions. Fig. 7 depicts the integrated approach,
combining Mechanical Engineering, Renewable Energy,
Environmental Engineering, and Economics to empower
a comprehensive evaluation of the SAHP system.
Thermodynamic analysis guided the design and
assessment of thermal performance, while environmental
evaluation addressed life-cycle impacts and emission
reductions. Economic and energy assessments
determined financial feasibility and operational
efficiency. Collectively, these findings show that the
proposed solution is technically sound, environmentally
responsible, and economically viable, reinforcing its
scientific relevance and alignment with the SDGs.
100
Simbaña et al. / Energy and Environmental Assessment of a Solar-Assisted Heat Pump for Water Heating
Figure 7: Multidisciplinary Framework for Evaluating the SAHP
System
5. CONCLUSIONS
The solar-assisted heat pump revealed adequate
thermal performance, achieving a maximum coefficient
of performance (COP) of 6.2 and a minimum of 3.3 for
heating 10 liters of water from 17 °C to 45 °C under
varying solar radiation conditions. The integration of an
aluminum flat-plate solar collector as the evaporator
helped raise the refrigerant’s evaporation temperature,
improving heat transfer and ensuring stable operation
across a solar irradiance range of 500 to 700 W/m². These
findings confirm the technical feasibility of the system
and highlight its economic advantage, as it reduces
operating time and enhances energy efficiency compared
to conventional water heating methods.
Energy consumption analysis exposed that the solar
heat pump system requires only about 2.33 kW·h per year
to power the compressor and digital components,
resulting in 9.6 kg of CO₂ emissions annually. In
comparison, a conventional electric shower emits
226.55 kg/year, and an LPG water heater emits
1,065.6 kg/year. Considering the lifecycle emissions of
photovoltaic panels and batteries, indirect CO₂ emissions
range from 43.8 to 56.7 kg/year, demonstrating a
substantial reduction in household carbon footprint.
These results establish the SAHP system as an
environmentally sustainable option capable of
significantly lowering greenhouse gas emissions while
reducing residential electricity consumption.
The adoption of the SAHP system aligns with the
SDGs, supporting reasonable and clean energy (SDG 7),
climate action (SDG 13), sustainable water management
(SDG 6), and responsible consumption and production
(SDG 12). The verified reductions in energy use and CO₂
emissions illustrate that such hybrid renewable systems
can be effectively integrated into local sustainability
strategies, promoting cleaner energy transitions and
contributing to climate change mitigation in line with the
2030 Agenda.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Hernández-Ambato, R. Fernández, A. Mora, and
J. Alvarado, “Evaluación de la Huella de Carbono de
Vehículos con Motor Eléctrico y de Combustión
Interna según la Matriz Energética de Ecuador: Caso
de Estudio KIA Soul vs KIA Soul EV,”
Novasinergia, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 58–75, 2022. doi:
https://doi.org/10.37135/ns.01.10.04
[2] S. Meraj, S. Yu, M. Rahman, K. Hasan, M. Hossain
Lipu, and H. Trinh, “Energy Management Schemes,
Challenges and Impacts of Emerging Inverter
Technology for Renewable Energy Integration
Towards Grid Decarbonization,” Journal of Cleaner
Production, vol. 405, p. 137002, Jun. 2023, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137002
[3] J. Chamorro and E. Mera, “Estudio de la Crisis
Energética en el Ecuador por la Dependencia en la
Generación de Energía Hidráulica,” Revista
Científica INGENIAR: Ingeniería, Tecnología E
Investigación, vol. 8, no. 15, pp. 168–186, 2025, doi:
https://doi.org/10.46296/ig.v8i15.0240
[4] M. Lozano-Rojas and E. Sandoval-Sandoval, “The
Biomass as a Source of Electrical Energy Generation
in Ecuador,” Revista Científica Multidisciplinar G-
nerando, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 194–223, 2024. doi:
https://doi.org/10.60100/rcmg.v5i1.189
[5] J. Borja-Patiño, A. Robalino-López, and A. Mena-
Nieto, “Breaking the Unsustainable Paradigm:
Exploring the Relationship Between Energy
Consumption, Economic Development and Carbon
Dioxide Emissions in Ecuador,” Sustainability
Science, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 403–421, 2024. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-023-01425-x
[6] B. Yildiz, J. Bilbao, M. Roberts, S. Heslop, J. Dore,
A. Bruce, I. Macgill, R. Ega, and A. Sproul,
“Analysis of Electricity Consumption and Thermal
Storage of Domestic Electric Water Heating
Systems to Utilize Excess PV Generation,” Energy,
vol. 235, p. 121325, 2021. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121325
[7] J. Lu, Y. Tang, Z. Li, and G. He, “Solar Heat Pump
Configurations for Water Heating System in China,”
Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 187, p. 116570,
2021. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.1165
70
[8] T. Hai, N. Delgarm, D. Wang, and M. H. Karimi,
“Energy, Economic, and Environmental (3 E)
Examinations of the Indirect-expansion Solar Heat
Pump Water Heater System: A Simulation-oriented
Performance Optimization and Multi-objective
Decision-making,” Journal of Building Engineering,
vol. 60, p. 105068, 2022. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.105068
101
Edición No. 22, Issue II, Enero 2026
[9] B. Abbasi, S. Li, and A. Mwesigye, “Energy,
Exergy, Economic, and Environmental (4E)
Analysis of SAHP Water Heaters in Very Cold
Climatic Conditions,” Renewable Energy, vol. 226,
p. 120391, 2024. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2024.120391
[10] C. Meena, A. Prajapati, A. Kumar, and M. Kumar,
“Utilization of Solar Energy for Water Heating
Application to Improve Building Energy Efficiency:
An Experimental Study,” Buildings, vol. 12, no. 12,
p. 2166, 2022. doi:
https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12122166
[11] C. Anderson, M. Denich, A. Warchold, J. Kropp,
and P. Pradhan, “A Systems Model of SDG Target
Influence on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development,” Sustainability Science, vol. 17, no. 4,
pp. 1459–1472, 2022, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-01040-8
[12] G. Yumnam, Y. Gyanendra, and C. Singh, “A
Systematic Bibliometric Review of the Global
Research Dynamics of United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals 2030,” Sustainable Futures, vol.
7, p. 100192, 2024, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2024.100192
[13] A. Olabi, N. Shehata, H. Maghrabie, L. Heikal, M.
Abdelkareem, S. Rahman, S. Shah, and E. Sayed,
“Progress in Solar Thermal Systems and Their Role
in Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals,”
Energies, vol. 15, no. 24, p. 9501, 2022. doi:
https://doi.org/10.3390/en15249501
[14] Y. Zhu, D. Taylor, and Z. Wang, “The Role of
Renewable Energy in Reducing Residential Fossil
Energy-related CO2 Emissions: Evidence from
Rural China,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol.
366, p. 132891, 2022. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132891
[15] D. Singh, D. Singh, V. Mishra, J. Kushwaha, R. Dev,
S. Patel, R. Shankar, and B. Giri, “Sustainability
Issues of Solar Desalination Hybrid Systems
Integrated with Heat Exchangers for the Production
of Drinking Water: A Review,” Desalination, vol.
566, p. 116930, 2023. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2023.116930
[16] A. Mercedes-Garcia, P. López-Jiménez, F. Sánchez-
Romero, and M. Pérez-Sánchez, “Objectives, Keys
and Results in the Water Networks to Reach the
Sustainable Development Goals,” Water, vol. 13, no.
9, p. 1268, 2021. doi:
https://doi.org/10.3390/w13091268
[17] W. Quitiaquez, I. Simbaña, R. Caizatoa, C. Isaza, C.
Nieto, P. Quitiaquez, and F. Toapanta, “Análisis del
Rendimiento Termodinámico de una Bomba de
Calor Asistida por Energía Solar Utilizando un
Condensador con Recirculación,” Revista Técnica
“Energía,” vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 111–125, 2020, doi:
https://doi.org/10.37116/revistaenergia.v16.n2.2020
.358
[18] I. Simbaña, W. Quitiaquez, J. Estupiñán, F.
Toapanta-Ramos, and L. Ramírez, “Evaluación del
Rendimiento de una Bomba de Calor de Expansión
Directa Asistida por Energía Solar Mediante
Simulación Numérica del Proceso de
Estrangulamiento en el Dispositivo de Expansión,”
Revista Técnica “Energía,” vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 110–
119, 2022, doi:
https://doi.org/10.37116/revistaenergia.v19.n1.2022
.524
[19] A. Kijo-Kleczkowska, P. Bruś, and G.
Więciorkowski, “Economic Analysis of Heat Pump
Exploitation – A Case Study,” Energy, vol. 280, p.
128184, 2023. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.128184
[20] X. Liu, X. Peng, Y. Yang, X. Qin, D. Wang, G.
Wang, and D. Wang, “Energetic Analysis and
Performance Improvement Algorithm of
Transcritical CO2 Heat Pump Water Heater
System,” Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 236, p.
121823, 2024. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2023.1218
23
[21] K. Tomczuk and P. Obstawski, “Analysis of the
Cooperation of a Compressor Heat Pump with a PV
System,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 9, p. 3797,
2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093797
[22] S. Zhang, S. Liu, J. Wang, Y. Li, and Z. Yu,
“Analysis of a Solar-assisted Heat Pump System
with Hybrid Energy Storage for Space Heating,”
Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 231, p. 120884,
2023. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2023.1208
84
[23] R. Song, V. Terzija, T. Hamacher, and V. S. Perić,
“Integrating Air-Source Heat Pumps into the
Demand-Side Fast Frequency Response Service: A
Study Based on Thermal Dynamic Uncertainty,”
IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 16,
no. 1, pp. 323-335, 2025, doi:
http://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2024.3456068
[24] P. Valdiserri, V. Ballerini, and E. di Schio,
“Interpolating Functions for CO2 Emission Factors
in Dynamic Simulations: The Special Case of a Heat
Pump,” Sustainable Energy Technologies and
Assessments, vol. 53, p. 102725, 2022. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2022.102725
[25] S. Naranjo-Silva, D. Guerrero, and J. del Castillo,
“Costo Comparativo por Kilovatio de los Últimos
Proyectos Hidroeléctricos en Ecuador,” Revista
InGenio, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 22–34, 2022. doi:
https://doi.org/10.18779/ingenio.v5i1.473
102
Simbaña et al. / Energy and Environmental Assessment of a Solar-Assisted Heat Pump for Water Heating
[26] M. Farghali, A. Osman, Z. Chen, A. Abelhaleem, I.
Ihara, I. Mohamed, P. Yap, and D. Rooney, “Social,
Environmental, and Economic Consequences of
Integrating Renewable Energies in the Electricity
Sector: A Review,” Environmental Chemistry
Letters, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1381–1418, 2023. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01587-1
[27] S. Peña-Murillo, J. Ochoa-Celi, F. Torres-Córdova,
and E. Zambrano-Nevárez, “Subsidios de
Combustibles en Ecuador: Análisis Bibliográfico de
su Costo y Sostenibilidad,” Revista Iberoamericana
de Educación, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 55–72, 2025. doi:
https://doi.org/10.31876/rie.v9i1.288
[28] W. Quitiaquez, I. Simbaña, A. Herrera, P.
Quitiaquez, C. Nieto-Londoño, E. Pilataxi, A.
Andrade., and. Y. Retirado-Mediaceja, “Statistical
Analysis of Heat Transfer Effects on Flow Patterns
Maps in a Flat-Plate Collector/Evaporator with
R600a Under Variable Tilt Angles,” Processes, vol.
13, no. 11, p. 3419, 2025, doi:
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13113419
[29] Y. Fan, X. Zhao, Z. Han, J. Li, A. Badiei, Y.
Akhlaghi, and Z. Liu, “Scientific and Technological
Progress and Future Perspectives of the Solar
Assisted Heat Pump (SAHP) System,” Energy, vol.
229, p. 120719, 2021. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120719
[30] D. Obura, D. Kimera, and D. Dadebo, “Application
of GIS and Hydraulic Modeling for Sustainable
Management of Water Supply Networks: A Pathway
for Achieving Sustainable Development Goal
(SDG) 6,” Process Integration and Optimization for
Sustainability, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1017–1034, 2024.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41660-024-00410-w
[31] A. M. Manesh and H. Liu, “Thermo-environ-
economic Analysis of a Novel Solar-assisted Heat
Pump System; Comparison with Conventional
Single Stage and Cascaded Air Source Heat Pumps,”
Energy, vol. 322, p. 135647, 2025. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.135647
Isaac Simbaña.- Nació en Quito,
Ecuador, en 1990. Recibió su título
de Ingeniero Mecánico, de
Magíster en Métodos Matemáticos
y Simulación Numérica en
Ingeniería, de Magíster en
Educación, Mención Desarrollo
del Pensamiento, de la Universidad
Politécnica Salesiana, en 2018, 2022 y 2024,
respectivamente, y de Magíster en Administración y
Dirección de Empresas, en la Universidad Bolivariana
del Ecuador, en 2025. Actualmente, es egresado de la
Maestría en Industria 4.0, de la Escuela de Posgrados
Newman, y en agosto del 2024 inició sus estudios de
Doctorado en Ciencias. Trabaja como Docente en el
Instituto Superior Universitario Sucre y es Director del
Grupo de Investigación en Ingeniería Mecánica y
Pedagogía de la Carrera de Electromecánica
(GIIMPCEM). Tiene más de 6 años de experiencia en
campo, 4 años de experiencia en docencia universitaria y
más de 7 años de experiencia en investigación científica.
Sus campos de investigación están relacionados al
Análisis Numérico Computacional y Estadístico, así
como a la Termodinámica, Eficiencia Energética,
Procesos de Manufactura, Ciencia de Materiales,
Logística, Gestión de Operaciones, y Educación
enfatizando en innovación, pedagogía, didáctica e
integración de TICs.
Cristian Guilcaso-Molina.- Nació
en la ciudad de Latacunga, en
1987. Graduado en la Universidad
Técnica de Ambato como
Ingeniero Mecánico en el año
2011, de Magíster en Mecánica
Mención en Diseño, de la
Universidad Técnica de Ambato,
en 2020, El campo de investigación al que se dedica es
diseño de máquinas, simulación y mantenimiento
industrial.
Fabricio Tipantocta.- Recibió su
título de Ingeniero en Electrónica y
Control de la Escuela Politécnica
Nacional, en 2008, de Magister en
Diseño, Producción y
Automatización de la Escuela
Politécnica Nacional, en 2017. Es
Docente en el Instituto Superior
Universitario Sucre, de la Carrera en Tecnología Superior
en Electrónica por más de 7 años. Es el Coordinador de
Investigación, Desarrollo Tecnológico e Innovación
(CIDTI). Es Investigador registrado en SENESCYT, y es
Revisor de Artículos Científicos. Ha realizado varias
publicaciones científicas y su campo de investigación es
en Inteligencia Artificial, Robótica, Sistemas de
Rehabilitación, Electrónica e IoT.
103
