processes

Article
The Use of Geothermal Energy for Heating Buildings as an
Option for Sustainable Urban Development in Slovakia
Andrea Senova * , Erika Skvarekova , Gabriel Wittenberger and Jana Rybarova

Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Institute of Earth’s Resources,
Technical University of Kosice, Park Komenskeho 19, 040 01 Kosice, Slovakia; [email protected] (E.S.);
[email protected] (G.W.); [email protected] (J.R.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +421-55-6022985

Abstract: The use of geothermal energy (GE) and the green economy in the environment of Slovak
municipalities and towns is significant, due to the reduction in the negative influences and impacts
of human society’s constant consumer lifestyle. The authors highlight the use of modern scientific
knowledge, practical experience, and ever-improving technologies in the field of renewable energy
sources RES. The aim of this contribution is to draw attention to the under-utilization of GE’s
potential in Slovakia. Given the country’s commitment to meeting emission limits under EU carbon
neutrality agreements by 2050, the use of this resource is very pertinent. Slovakia has significant
geothermal resources that are not currently sufficiently utilized. The article suggests using GE to heat
housing units of the housing estate near the geothermal source. Three scenarios (60 ◦ C (pessimistic),
65 ◦ C (conservative), and 70 ◦ C (optimistic)) were considered in our energy balance and economic
advantage calculations. The green economy offers a sustainable way of using the earth’s resources.
The financial calculations regarding the amount of investment, the expected financial return and the



possible values of the saved emissions confirm the possibility of the further use of GE technology.


The information under consideration can be used in other significant territories, which may be a
Citation: Senova, A.; Skvarekova, E.;
theme for further research in this field.
Wittenberger, G.; Rybarova, J. The
Use of Geothermal Energy for
Keywords: geothermal energy; renewable technology; thermal energy; investment
Heating Buildings as an Option for
Sustainable Urban Development in
Slovakia. Processes 2022, 10, 289.
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10020289
1. Introduction
Academic Editors: Sergey Zhironkin,
The necessity of achieving net zero global CO2 emissions by 2050, to achieve the
Radim Rybar and Kody Powell
target set in the Paris Agreement, has stimulated interest in the use of low-carbon energy
Received: 16 December 2021 technologies, including geothermal energy. The constant exploitation of natural resources,
Accepted: 28 January 2022 excessive waste generation, the emission of harmful substances into the atmosphere (COx,
Published: 31 January 2022 SOx, NOx, etc.), seas, oceans, and soils lead to negative and often permanent changes.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral Climate change is manifested by an increase in average temperatures, changes in the nature
with regard to jurisdictional claims in of the climate, more frequent occurrences of extreme weather (melting of glaciers and
published maps and institutional affil- permafrost, landslides, extreme drought and heatwaves, torrential rains, sudden flooding,
iations. and others). There are changes in biodiversity, the migration of animal species, extinc-
tion, excessive deforestation, changing soil composition, and the contamination of water
resources (increasing the acidity of the oceans). Population migration is another important
manifestation of these changes [1]. However, despite various climate agreements, CO2
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. emissions reached an all-time high of 35 billion tons per year in 2019. The unprecedented
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. nationwide COVID-19 crisis that began in China at the end of 2019 has rapidly frozen
This article is an open access article
emissions growth. All these reasons, among others, have led to increased interest in the
distributed under the terms and
research and development of sustainable and renewable energy (RES) technologies.
conditions of the Creative Commons
Man, through his anthropogenic activity, significantly influences conditions on the
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
planet. At present, the greatest emissions are generated by the burning of coal; for instance,
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
more than 14 billion tons were burned in 2018. Emissions from this source totaled more
4.0/).

Processes 2022, 10, 289. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10020289 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/processes

Processes 2022, 10, 289 2 of 17

than 12 billion tons in 2018. This ranking is followed by natural gas and its increasing
consumption level of almost 8 billion tons, as well as cement production. The EU is the
world’s largest importer of energy, relying on imports for 50% of its energy needs. With
an energy demand forecast to grow 1–2% a year, this figure will rise, within the coming
20–30 years, up to 70%. Europe’s energy needs are growing relatively fast compared
to other parts of the world. Climate change has encouraged the inclusion of modern
RES technologies in the program, to mitigate the negative impacts of fossil fuel energy
production. Europe is being forced to invest in new technologies [2,3]. The overall EU
average of RES production in 2019 was 20%, meeting its target for 2020. Iceland has the
largest share of RES energy at almost 80%, thus meeting the target above the set limit.
This was mainly helped by the geographical relief and nature of the landscape and the
wide use of energy from geothermal and water sources—geothermal power plants and
hydroelectric power plants. Norway meets about 73% of its energy needs from RES
especially due to the hydroelectric power plants made possible by the mountainous profile
of the landscape, offering a bountiful supply of rivers with a high falling gradient. Of the
other EU countries, Sweden’s share is almost 60%, Finland’s, about 43%, and Latvia’s, 40%,
followed by Denmark, Austria, etc. Included in the leading countries that have not (yet)
met their commitments is Slovenia, which produced more than 20% of its energy from
RES in 2019, but the target for 2020 is 25%. Other such countries are Ireland, Belgium, the
Netherlands, Luxembourg, the United Kingdom, and Poland. Poland relies mainly on coal
production and, therefore, has long had a problem with air pollution. In 2019, Slovakia
produced almost 20% of its total energy from RES, thus meeting its 2020 target [4].
Geothermal energy, as a renewable energy source, can be an important resource for
numerous regions of Europe. The development of geothermal energy facilities gives people
the potential to gain better control of their own local energy resources and take advantage
of a secure, environmentally friendly and domestic source of energy. This energy from
within the Earth can be used for different purposes to improve environmental quality
and protect public health and safety. The technological and sustainable development of
this type of energy will help to solve the world’s energy needs and the requisite chal-
lenges [5]. For geothermal electricity production, the highest concentration of resources on
the European continent is located in Italy, Iceland and Turkey; the present exploited value
is only 0.3% of the whole renewable market. The possibilities for geothermal energy to
expand its penetration in Europe are mainly from using the enhanced geothermal system
(EGS). Some areas have been critically investigated regarding geothermal resource base
assessment, recoverable EGS estimates, in-depth research on EGS technologies and the
current performance, the designing of suburb-facing systems, drilling technology eco-
nomics, the conversion of energy using enhanced geothermal systems, the effect of this
technology on the environment, and the analysis of enhanced geothermal systems and
their sustainability [6,7].
Slovakia should take advantage of the potential geothermal resources it has, which
are currently used to a minimal extent. It is important to use energy resources efficiently
because the price of energy, in general, is rising [8].
Is geothermal energy renewable? Geothermal energy has often been described as a
renewable energy resource. However, on the time scale normally used in human society,
geothermal resources are not, strictly speaking, renewable. They are renewable only if the
heat extraction rate does not exceed the reservoir replenishment rate. Exploitation through
wells, sometimes using down-hole pumps in the case of non-electrical uses, leads to the
extraction of very large quantities of fluid, and consequently to a reduction or depletion
of the geothermal resources that are in place [9]. Geothermal localities can be subdivided
into two categories: springs and deep boreholes. Springs are locations where geothermal
water naturally flowed out or is still flowing out from the aquifer onto the earth’s surface.
The category of deep boreholes accounts for all the localities where there are not, nor have
there ever been any natural springs, but where geothermal waters have been found during
hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation [10,11].
Processes 2022, 10, 289 3 of 17

The drilling works enable geologists to establish the rock composition of an investi-
gated area, along with other data that are connected to the tasks needed in the eventuality
of a geothermal energy plant [12]. Geothermal fields, as opposed to hydrocarbon fields,
are generally systems with a continuous circulation of heat and fluid, where fluid enters
the reservoir from the recharge zones and leaves through discharge areas (hot springs,
wells) [7]. Heat production from GE is widespread in many countries of the world. The
largest geothermal central heating systems are in the USA and China; in Europe, it is mainly
found in France, Germany, Iceland or Turkey [13]. Slovakia has the greatest potential for
GE in Central and Eastern Europe [3].
The aim of this article is to demonstrate how to carry out an analysis of an area
examined in terms of the availability of a site suitable for GE domestic heating systems, the
availability of distribution networks, and energy needs. We provide a case study of how
a GE system can be used from the perspectives of investment efficiency, environmental
impact, and meeting user needs. Practical information and advice on procedures can help
other cities in terms of future perspectives.

2. Materials and Methods

This article addresses the issue of obtaining and using a renewable energy source
(RES) for heating purposes, district heating (DH), and domestic hot water (DHW). With this
energy-clean technology, it is possible to minimize the production of emission substances
and replace the combustion of natural gas during heating.
Data that is publicly available and at the same time processed by us in the case study
have been used for the processing of this contribution. The procedures and methods are
summarized as follows:
• Based on the available information, we analyzed the possibilities of using geother-
mal energy in the environment of towns and villages in the area of the High Tatras
(Podtatranská basin). To design a model of geothermal energy use for heating, we
considered a mining well to serve a housing estate of 5500 households.
• We created a methodology for determining the profitability of a geothermal well using
a flow chart. We designed a technology setup for the use of geothermal well energy.
The energy potential and energy balance were calculated. The complexity and return
on investment were assessed. The volume of emissions of harmful substances that
can be saved by using this clean energy was calculated. Based on the findings, we
assessed the usability of a geothermal well for the purpose of heating apartments.

2.1. Hydrogeological and Hydrogeothermal Conditions in Slovakia

Due to its natural conditions, the Slovak Republic has significant potential geothermal
energy. Based on research and surveys to date, the energy potential of GE is important in
Slovakia, and its value is at 5538 MWt. Geothermal energy sources are mainly represented
by geothermal waters, which are tied to hydrogeological collectors located at depths of
200–5000 m. In Slovakia, the average temperature increase is 3–3.8 ◦ C for every 100 m of
the borehole; at a depth of 3 km, the temperature is about 100 ◦ C. Geothermal sources are
divided according to temperature (◦ C), into:
• Low temperature—from 20 ◦ C to 100 ◦ C: these are geothermal sources with a moderate
temperature, suitable only for heating and recreational purposes;
• Medium temperature—from 100 ◦ C to 150 ◦ C: these are suitable for heating and using
binary cycles, and for electricity generation;
• High temperature—above 150 ◦ C: these are geothermal sources suitable for electricity
generation (using water vapor).
In terms of well yield, geothermal sources are distinguished as follows:
• With minimum yield—up to 1.0 L·s−1 ;
• With very little yield– from 1.0 to 5.0 L·s−1 ;
• With a small yield—from 5.0 to 10.0 L·s−1 ;
Processes 2022, 10, 289 4 of 17

• With medium yield– from 10.0 to 25.0 L·s−1 ;

• With great yield—from 25.0 to 50.0 L·s−1 ;
• With very high yield—above 50.0 L·s−1 [14].
The wells that have been carried out so far (at depths of 92–3616 m) have verified
temperatures at the wellhead of 18–129 ◦ C. The yield of free-range wells ranged from tenths
of a liter to 100 L·s−1 , with a predominantly Na-HCO3 -Cl, Ca-Mg-HCO3 and Na-Cl water
type, with mineralization of 0.4–90 g·L−1 [15].
Slovakia, considering its small surface area (49,000 km2 ), is very rich in mineral and
thermal waters. There are 1200 springs registered on its territory, the equivalent of one
spring for every 40 km2 . The rich physicochemical diversity of waters and their even spread
throughout the territory is conditioned by the favorable geological–tectonic construction of
the territory and its geothermal activity.
From north to south, mineral and thermal waters are linked to sediments of the Flysch
zone and the Klippen belt of the Paleogenic and Mesozoic eras, the crystalline rocks of the
Paleozoic and Mesozoic, the dolomites and limes of the Mesozoic, and Flysch sediments
of Inner Carpathian Paleogene and Neogene origin. The temperature of the waters of
the springs is between 15 and 70 ◦ C. Mining works carried out in some areas obtained
water with temperatures in the range of 40–130 ◦ C. The yield of natural springs varies
between 1 and 40 L·s−1 . The well yield is from 5 to 90 L·s−1 [16,17]. From the point of
view of geothermal water sources, we can only consider as a possibility the Paleogene
subsoil in the area of interest, which consists mainly of Triassic carbonates of Krížna Nappe
and Choč Nappe, with Karst-fissure permeability. Overall, the geothermal activity of
the area of interest can be assessed in terms of the density of the earth’s heat flow as
average geothermal output (65–70 mW·m−2 ). Temperatures at the depth of storage of the
collectors (1400–3000 m below the surface) are about 45–95 ◦ C. Mineral waters reflect the
hydrogeological, hydrological, geological, and structural conditions in the monitored area.
The nature of the waters indicates that Triassic structures correlate well with the appearance
of Triassic carbonate rocks on the surface around the basin. The nature of the waters in the
Paleogene subsoil may have been obviously marine in origin, i.e., waters that have been
preserved after the transgression of the Paleogene Sea but are now more or less infiltrated
surface waters from the peripheral parts of the basin. The total mineralization of the waters
in the Mesozoic subsoil, based on the results of the pumping tests in the surrounding wells,
can be expected in the range of 3–5 g·L−1 . Information on the hydrogeological conditions
of the territory comes mainly from the quaternary sediments of Poprad, where several
exploration wells were created. Several deeper wells were created in the Poprad Basin, the
results of which provided valuable data on groundwater properties in individual geological
units. From this point of view, valuable information can be drawn from the wells in the
areas of Stará Lesná (FGP-1), Poprad (PP-1) and Vrbov (VR-1, 2, 2A, 3) and the latest from
the area of Vel’ká Lomnica. Since the PP-1 borehole (Poprad) is relatively close to the site
under examination, its results may be analogous to those of the projected well. At the
PP-1 well in Poprad, the geothermal waters, of a significantly calcium-magnesium-sulfate-
sulphate-hydrogen carbonate type, were verified as having an average mineralization value
of 2.88 g·L−1 , with a pH value of 6.21. The water is over-gassed with CO2 . The increased
sulfuret content is due to the dissolution of plaster stone and anhydrite. The incidence of
sodium is low because it is released due to the low pH [18].
Groundwater resources and reserves in Slovakia vary not only depending on the
location and time but also in terms of their quality. Although they are regularly renewed,
they are not unlimited and only proper use can ensure their relative inexhaustibility.
Groundwater, which is a source of quality drinking water, is the most important natural
wealth in Slovakia. Therefore, the most fundamental task is getting to know the laws of
groundwater creation and flow as well as its protection. This requires very close monitoring,
documenting and registering their basic characteristics and parameters. The total usable
amounts of groundwater in Slovakia, as documented in 2018 in all categories, represent
77,175.07 L·s−1 .
 Processes 2022, 10, 289 5 of 18

Processes 2022, 10, 289 5 of 17

groundwater creation and flow as well as its protection. This requires very close
monitoring, documenting and registering their basic characteristics and parameters. The
total Those
usable amounts
usable ofquantities
groundwater in Slovakia,
also includeasusable
documented in 2018ofinthermal
amounts all categories,
water as an integral
represent 77,175.07 l.s−1.
part Those
of groundwater and, for the sake of completeness, part of the
usable quantities also include usable amounts of thermal water as an integral
mineral waters, in
particular the usable
part of groundwater and,quantities ofofmineral
for the sake waters
completeness, approved
part by the
of the mineral Hydrogeological
waters, in Com-
mission
particular[19]. Figurequantities
the usable 1 showsofthe prospective
mineral areas of by
waters approved geothermal waters in the Territory of
the Hydrogeological
Commission
the [19]. Figure 1 shows the prospective areas of geothermal waters in the
Slovak Republic.
Territory of the Slovak Republic.

Figure 1. Prospective areas of geothermal waters in Slovakia [19]. 1) 10/4; 2) Klippen belt; 3)
Figure 1. Prospective
prospective areas of geothermal
areas where hydrogeothermal evaluation waters
has been in Slovakia
carried out; 4) [19]. (1) 10/4;
prospective areas (2) Klippen belt;
(3) prospective areas where hydrogeothermal evaluation has been carried out; (4) prospective areas
where hydrogeothermal evaluation is being carried out; 5) prospective areas where
hydrogeothermal evaluation has not yet been carried out.
where hydrogeothermal evaluation is being carried out; (5) prospective areas where hydrogeothermal
evaluation has
In order tonot yetthe
create been
bestcarried
possibleout.
conditions for the use of geothermal energy, re-
gional hydrogeothermal evaluations are carried out by determining the quantity of geo-
In order
thermal watersto create
and the best
geothermal possible
energy in theconditions for the use ofareas
defined 27 hydrothermal geothermal
or struc- energy, regional
tures of Slovakia [20].evaluations
hydrogeothermal Current geothermal conditions
are carried out in
bySlovakia are mapped
determining out and of geothermal
the quantity
waters and geothermal energy in the defined 27 hydrothermal areasbeen
reviewed in detail. There are currently 27 prospective geothermal areas that have or structures of Slo-
defined (Figures 1 and 2).
vakia [20]. Current geothermal conditions in Slovakia are mapped out and reviewed
in detail. There are currently 27 prospective geothermal areas that have been defined
Processes 2022, 10, 289 (Figures 1 and 2). 6 of 18

Figure2.
Figure 2. Partial
Partialmap
mapof geothermal wells in
of geothermal Slovakia.
wells in Slovakia.
A large proportion of geothermal reservoirs provide water with a temperature of up
A large proportion of geothermal reservoirs provide water with a temperature of
to 135 °C, which is optimal for use for heating buildings or for recreational purposes.
to 135 ◦ C,
upGeothermal which
energy (GE)isisoptimal for use
not primarily used for heating
for efficient buildings
electricity or for Modern
generation. recreational purposes.
technologies also make it possible to generate electricity using a binary cycle [13].

2.2. Technological Description of Geothermal Well Utilization

The proposed geothermal well is GTK-1 Kežmarok, with an estimated depth of 2800
m; the relevant technological and piping equipment for the purpose of using geothermal
energy for DH production and the preparation of DHW in existing block boiler rooms on
Processes 2022, 10, 289 6 of 17

Geothermal energy (GE) is not primarily used for efficient electricity generation. Modern
technologies also make it possible to generate electricity using a binary cycle [13].

2.2. Technological Description of Geothermal Well Utilization

The proposed geothermal well is GTK-1 Kežmarok, with an estimated depth of 2800 m;
the relevant technological and piping equipment for the purpose of using geothermal
energy for DH production and the preparation of DHW in existing block boiler rooms
on the housing estate. Currently, housing estate boiler rooms are used for the supply
of DH and DHW to apartment buildings, civic facilities, and other buildings in the city.
Thermally treated geothermal water will be discharged into a nearby surface flow system.
The physicochemical properties of geothermal water and its impact on the material of
the pipes are also fully taken into account. Geothermal energy is expected to be used in
an open system, with the newly proposed GTK-1 geothermal well serving as a drilling
(pumping) well.
The exploitation of geothermal water by free flow has been considered, with water
from the well estuary (mouth) entering the separation and storage vessel, where it will be
relieved of free gases. Consequently, it will be pumped (if there is not enough pressure
at the mouth of the well) and overdrawn in the ground to the isolated pipelines, then
carried to an heat exchanger station situated close to the well. In the heat exchanger station,
geothermal water transmits its heat to the secondary treated heating system water, by
which method geothermal heat will be distributed in a closed and hydraulically separated
circuit to 3 boiler rooms, in a ground-stored isolated pipe. Heat exchangers will be added
in existing boiler rooms to heat the returning heating water and the preheat/heating of
the DHW. After thermal use, geothermal water from the heat exchanger station will be
Processes 2022, 10, 289 transported under the ground by stored pipes without thermal insulation to a nearby 7 of 18
surface stream (see Figure 3).

Figure 3. Scheme of district heating using geothermal energy.

Figure 3. Scheme of district heating using geothermal energy.

2.3. Methodology for Determining the Suitability of Geothermal Well Usage in the Monitored Area
(Podtatranska Basin)
Hydrogeologically, the projected well is situated in explored territory in the Poprad
River Basin. It has a left-hand tributary from the High Tatras and the right-hand tributary
is mainly from the Levoča Hills. Water management is important in the area since the
surface waters of the tributary of Poprad and the groundwater from its alluvia are often
used for drinking water supply. Water quality in the river is influenced by industrial
enterprises and local agglomerations. The area of the Sub-Tatran Basin under
Processes 2022, 10, 289 7 of 17

2.3. Methodology for Determining the Suitability of Geothermal Well Usage in the Monitored Area
(Podtatranska Basin)
Hydrogeologically, the projected well is situated in explored territory in the Poprad
River Basin. It has a left-hand tributary from the High Tatras and the right-hand tributary is
mainly from the Levoča Hills. Water management is important in the area since the surface
waters of the tributary of Poprad and the groundwater from its alluvia are often used for
drinking water supply. Water quality in the river is influenced by industrial enterprises
and local agglomerations. The area of the Sub-Tatran Basin under investigation offers
the use of several types of RES in different locations of the territory, in order to reduce
negative environmental impacts, especially in terms of reducing emissions or replacing the
combustion of fossil fuels. Fossil fuel heating is one of the largest sources of CO2 emissions.
The best solution is the use of thermal energy from geothermal sources.
Geothermal energy is an available local, strong energy source that is characterized
by stability of supply, regardless of current climatic conditions. Geothermal energy is
a long-term and sustainable energy source. Based on the geological construction of the
surrounding area and the conditions of geothermal wells that have already been realized, it
is possible to expect a well yield in the range of 20–30 L·s−1 , with a total mineralization of
about 3–5 g·L−1 and a water temperature at the surface of 60–70 ◦ C. One definite point of
uncertainty, according to the study, may be the depth of the collectors; therefore, the study
recommends counting on the final mining depth being 2800 m [21].
Based on analyses of the available data, we assume that there is potential for the
practical use of GE in the monitored Podtatranska Basin. GE may replace the combustion
of natural gas in the supply of housing units under the current model. This creates ideal
conditions for:
• Limiting the use of energy derived from fossil and conventional fuels;
• Reducing CO2 emissions, (NOx, CO, SO2 , TZL)
• Stabilizing heat prices,
• Obtaining a stable, green, and renewable energy source.
The aim of the methodological procedure (Figure 4) is to choose the appropriate
technology to cover the energy needs of the chosen location—a housing estate—based
on sustainability, local availability, and affordability, and with a positive impact on the
environment, as an exemplary model of energy independence for towns and villages.
The methodology begins with the search for theoretical knowledge in the field of RES
energy. This draws attention to the call for a transition to renewable and sustainable energy
sources within the European Union, which aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.
Following a subsequent evaluation and the selection of appropriate information, the
individual available RES technologies were evaluated for:
• The area of energy coverage of household needs;
• The types and principle of operation; and
• A large-scale and stable supply for the population throughout the year.
From the information found, geothermal energy appears to be the most suitable
form of energy. With the subsequent selection of the site and the examination of existing
technologies covering the energy needs of the housing estate, it is possible to proceed
with an evaluation of the most appropriate RES technology. Our research has shown that
the technology used has the best potential and the appropriateness of the subsequent
investment is confirmed by further calculation.
Processes 2022, 10, 289 8 of 18

The aim of the methodological procedure (Figure 4) is to choose the appropriate

technology to cover the energy needs of the chosen location—a housing estate—based on
Processes 2022, 10, 289 8 of 17
sustainability, local availability, and affordability, and with a positive impact on the
environment, as an exemplary model of energy independence for towns and villages.

Figure4.4.Flowchart
Figure Flowchartmethodology
methodologyfor
forthe
thework
workof
ofdetecting
detectingaasuitable
suitableGE
GEsource.
source.

Theprocessing
The methodology begins
of the with the
geothermal search for was
contribution theoretical
based on knowledge
data frominthe
the field of
technical
Processes 2022, 10, 289 RES energy.
study This drawswell
of the geothermal attention
GTK-1,towhich
the call for a transition
is publicly availableto [21].
renewable andsite
A specific sustainable
(GTK-1,
9 of 18
Figure
energy5)sources
has been designated
within in which Union,
the European to carrywhich
out theaims
geothermal wellcarbon
to achieve under investigation.
neutrality by
Residential
2050. houses (in a housing estate with a population of 5500) were selected that met the
requirements
Followingforathe use of geothermal
subsequent evaluationenergy from
and the the borehole.
selection To determine
of appropriate the yieldthe
information, of
To determine
aindividual the yield
geothermalavailable
source for of a
heatinggeothermal source
the estimated for heating
capacity needed the estimated capacity needed
RES technologies were evaluated for: for the source was compared
for the
with thesource
heatingwas compared
volume of 3 with the
boiler heating
rooms in volumeyears
previous of 3 boiler rooms
(average in previous
of years years
2015–2017).
•(average
The area of energy
of years coverage of household needs;
2015–2017).
• The types and principle of operation; and
• A large-scale and stable supply for the population throughout the year.
From the information found, geothermal energy appears to be the most suitable
form of energy. With the subsequent selection of the site and the examination of existing
technologies covering the energy needs of the housing estate, it is possible to proceed
with an evaluation of the most appropriate RES technology. Our research has shown that
the technology used has the best potential and the appropriateness of the subsequent
investment is confirmed by further calculation.
The processing of the geothermal contribution was based on data from the technical
study of the geothermal well GTK-1, which is publicly available [21]. A specific site
(GTK-1, Figure 5) has been designated in which to carry out the geothermal well under
investigation. Residential houses (in a housing estate with a population of 5500) were
selected that met the requirements for the use of geothermal energy from the borehole.

Figure 5. Location of the proposed GTK-1 well area under investigation [21].
Figure 5. Location of the proposed GTK-1 well area under investigation [21].

The calculation of the energy potential of the geothermal source was based on the
following parameters: yield, mineralization, and water temperature at the surface. Given
that it is not possible to determine the exact temperature of geothermal water on the basis
of current knowledge, three variants of geothermal water temperature (60 °C, 65 °C and
70 °C) have been considered when calculating the energy potential.
Processes 2022, 10, 289 9 of 17

The calculation of the energy potential of the geothermal source was based on the
following parameters: yield, mineralization, and water temperature at the surface. Given
that it is not possible to determine the exact temperature of geothermal water on the basis
of current knowledge, three variants of geothermal water temperature (60 ◦ C, 65 ◦ C and
70 ◦ C) have been considered when calculating the energy potential.

2.4. Procedure for Calculating the Chosen Technology’s Potential Using Geothermal Energy
A methodological procedure was used to evaluate the use of the suggested possi-
bilities regarding suitable RES technology with the best potential and lowest subsequent
investment, with a recalculation, determination, and proposal as to whether the given
system (investment) is suitable. The procedure for calculating the investment technology
chosen, using geothermal energy, is as follows:
• Calculation of the Return on Investment (ROI)
ROI is the most frequently used parameter for the assessment of the economic effi-
ciency of investments. It is the total income that results from concrete investments, divided
by the amount of investment funds. This indicator is completely time-independent [22].

cumulative incomes
Return on Investment ROI = (1)
total investments

• Calculation of Cash Flow (CF)

Calculation of the annual cash flow is carried out on the basis of the following rela-
tionship [22]:
CF = incomes investments − production costs (2)
CF, or annual cash flow (annual income), is the product of the unit price of natural gas
(EUR 0.0219/kWh, for 2021) and the amount of heat produced (DH and DHW) in kWh
(MWh) with a difference in estimated annual operating costs (EUR).
The cash flow of a project is the sum of positive and negative items, incomes and costs,
connected with a certain activity. The sum of all financial flows, which results from the
investment into a project, is called the cash flow produced by capitalized investments.
• Calculation of Net Present Value (NPV)

n n o
NPV = ∑ (−I + CF i ) /(1 + a)i (3)
i=1

where:
NPV—net present value;
I—investments;
CF—cash-flow;
a—update rate;
i—current year;
n—project duration.
If the NPV of the first project is higher than the NPV of the second project, and
vice versa—the ROI of the first project is smaller than the ROI of the second project
(NPV1 > NPV2; ROI1 < ROI2). In this case, there is no precise mathematical formula
defining which of the two projects is better. The volume of investments and the risk level
of the project will probably play the most important role. The intuition and experience of
the project evaluator, as well as other arguments, can influence investment decisions.
• Calculation of Payback Period (pBp)
A payback period is the project’s duration, from its beginning until the point when
the cumulative cash flow becomes positive. Although in the case of some projects, the
assessment results based on the payback period may seem interesting, this indicator does
Processes 2022, 10, 289 10 of 17

not say anything about the project’s future course from the viewpoint of its cash-flow
development. This could be either positive or negative.
• Calculation of Emission Values for Natural Gas Heating
The CO2 emission factors needed to calculate CO2 emissions from the operation
of buildings (heating, hot water preparation and the operation of other appliances) are
country-specific or operational (and also different for each IPCC1 category) and are derived
from specific fuel characteristics. Average CO2 emission factors are used for natural gas,
hard coal, lignite by region of origin (Slovak, Ukrainian and Czech), and coke. Due to these
reasons, emission factors should be revised each year [23,24].
The values of the weighted arithmetic mean of the qualitative parameters of natural
gas, distributed in the territory of the Slovak Republic by SPP—distribúcia, a.s, were used
according to the method followed in [25]. Density, calorific value, combustion heat and
Wobbe number are given for the business unit, i.e., m3 at 15 ◦ C, pressure 0.101325 MPa,
and relative humidity ϕ = 0. The formula used for the conversion of units: 1 kWh = 3.6 MJ.
Annual consumption of MNG NG at a calorific value of 34,848 MJ/m3 [26]:

annual heat consumption

MNG = (4)
calorific value ·boiler efficiency

• Calculation of Energy Potential

The energy potential is an elementary indicator of the possibility of using geothermal
water. The energy potential of water, which is heated by the action of the earth’s core, is its
heat output [27].
Pt = m·cv ·∆t (5)
where:
Pt—thermal power (kW)
m—weight (kg·s−1 )
cv —specific water heat (m−3 ·K−1 )
∆t—temperature difference (K)
• Determination of the Energy Balance
Three variants of geothermal water temperature (60 ◦ C, 65 ◦ C and 70 ◦ C) were con-
sidered when determining the energy balance. Natural gas savings were assessed by
comparing the average natural gas consumption for 2015–2017 and the energy balance of
geothermal energy as a percentage; thus, it was also possible to assume an approximate
reduction in CO2 production.
When processing the energy balance of the GTK-1 geothermal source, we will take
into account the following assumptions:
• Geothermal energy will be used for heating the housing estate of the DH and for the
preparation of DHW.
• Heat loss or a temperature drop of 4 K due to the use of heat exchangers is considered.
• The daily operating time of boiler rooms is assumed to be 16 h.
• A maximum heating water temperature of 70 ◦ C is assumed.
• A reduction factor in the use of geothermal energy for each whole 1 ◦ C rise in the
external temperature, which takes into account differences in outdoor temperatures
during the day and resulting fluctuations in the temperature of the heating water. The
reduction factor varies for different geothermal water temperatures.
• Thermally used geothermal water will be discharged into a nearby stream.
The energy balance will be processed for individual scenarios: the pessimistic scenario
(geothermal water temperature of 60 ◦ C), the conservative scenario (geothermal water
temperature of 65 ◦ C) and the optimistic scenario (geothermal water temperature of 70 ◦ C).
To process the energy balance, it is necessary to know the following values:
Processes 2022, 10, 289 11 of 17

• Number of days of temperature duration from 13 ◦ C to −16 ◦ C;

• Temperature of the supply and return heating water;
• Average heat output per DH;
• Amount of heat produced per DH;
• Amount of heat produced per DHW;
• Usable thermal output of the geothermal source for DH;
• Reduction factor for the use of geothermal energy for DH.

3. Results and Discussion

In the context of rising energy (heat/electricity) prices and societal pressure on
environmental impacts in terms of the green economy, the interest of business own-
ers/population/society in ecological sources of energy production (heat/electricity) is
increasing. The design of a GE system for heating towns and villages is problematic, due to
several of the input parameters of the calculation. The timing mismatch, the suitability of
site selection in terms of the time optimization of production, the capacity of the distribu-
tion network, daily consumption, and the possibility of using GE as an energy source for
building heating systems are data that has to be mutually optimized when dimensioning a
balanced energy system.

3.1. Determination of the Parameters of the Proposed Geothermal Well

The predicted physicochemical properties of geothermal water from the proposed
GTK-1 borehole are similar to geothermal boreholes already created in the vicinity of the
Podtatranska Basin (wells Vr-1 and Vr-2 Vrbov, VL-1 Vel’ká Lomnica).
The mineralization type of Ca-Na-HCO3 -SO4 is assumed, i.e., a composition similar
to Vrbov; the dominant cationic components will be calcium (up to 600 mg·L−1 ), sodium
(up to 300 mg·L−1 ) and magnesium (about 150 mg·L−1 ), with anionic components of
bicarbonate concentrations (about 2000 mg·L−1 ) and sulfites (up to 700 mg·L−1 ). Total
mineralization is estimated to be up to 3 g·L−1 . The concentration of strontium (approx. 10
mg·L−1 ) and potassium (80 to 100 mg·L−1 ) will also be increased. Radioactivity will also
be slightly increased compared to the natural background. Trace amounts of sulfide can
also be expected. The expected phase ratio (dissolved gas content) will be up to 1 m3 .m−3
of geothermal water, the main component being carbon dioxide (95 to 98% by volume), the
remainder is mainly nitrogen and methane, with a small admixture of ethane, propane,
isobutene, etc. [22].
Table 1 shows the predicted parameters of the geothermal borehole in the explored
site of the Podtatranska Basin, based on an analogy of geothermal wells located nearby.

Table 1. Predicted parameters of the proposed geothermal well.

Scenario Pessimistic Conservative Optimistic

Geothermal water temperature at the mouth of the well(◦ C) 60 65 70
Yield geothermal well (L·s−1 ) 25 25 25
Mineralization (g·L−1 ) 3–5 g·L−1
Usable amount of geothermal water per year (L·s−1 ) 788,400 788,400 788,400
Theoretically usable energy potential (kW) 4710.4 5233.8 5757.1
Theoretically usable annual amount of heat (MWh) 41,262.9 45,847.7 50,432.4

Table 2 shows the values of total annual heat production and NG consumption for the
years 2015 to 2017.
Processes 2022, 10, 289 12 of 17

Table 2. Total heat production and consumption of natural gas in the selected location, (source:
elaborated by authors).

Year 2015 2016 2017

Type of DH DHW DH DHW DH DHW
(MWh) 17,964 9565 19,084 9565 18,975 9290
Total DH + DHW (MWh) 27,529 28,649 28,264
Total consumption (NG) Total DH + DHW (kWh) 15,021,319 15,558,809 15,474,532
Total consumption (NG) DH + DHW (m3 ) 1,398,633 1,448,678 1,440,831

• Calculation of saved emission values using geothermal energy

Table 3 shows the specific values of individual emission substances that pollute the
environment by burning natural gas. The recalculation was carried out according to
the literature [23]; these pollutants would be eliminated by using the thermal energy
of the geothermal well. The replacement of NG with geothermal energy minimizes the
greenhouse effect.

Table 3. Calculation of emissions from natural gas heating.

Annual Emissions from Natural Gas Heating (kg)

TZL 270.8
SO2 32.5
NOx 5958
CO 1997
TOC 253.9
Total emissions (kg) 8512.2

These pollutants would be eliminated annually for a housing estate with about 5500 res-
idents. The calculation of emissions in NG heating was recalculated according to the
literature [23] (see Table 3).
• Energy balance of geothermal well
Geothermal wells offer a number of positive options in terms of reducing negative
environmental impacts in the long term. The presumed energy potential of the well could
supply the housing estate with hot water intended for heating and hot service water
preparation in full coverage, but a certain amount of natural gas usage is still envisaged by
heating, to cover possible failures of the energy system.
We considered the following values:
- The specific weight of salt water of 1025 kg·m−3;
- Specific water heat cv = 4.18 MJ m−3 K−1 ;
- Temperature difference (for pessimistic, conservative, and optimistic scenarios) ∆t = 42,
45 and 55 K.
The energy balance of a geothermal well at 3 different geothermal water temperatures
was determined as shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Energy balance of geothermal well GTK–1.

Geothermal Water Temperature 60 ◦ C 65 ◦ C 70 ◦ C

Annual amount of heat produced for DH (MWh) 8538.8 8538.8 8538.8
Annual amount of heat produced for DHW (MWh) 4676.5 4676.5 4676.5
Annual production of heat TOTAL (MWh) 13,215.3 13,215.3 13,215.3
- geothermal energy (MWh) 9763.1 11,070.3 12,091.4
- geothermal energy (%) 74 84 91
- natural gas (MWh) 3452.2 2,45 1123.9
- natural gas (%) 26 16 9
Annual average efficiency of geothermal energy (%) 24 24 24
Processes 2022, 10, 289 13 of 17

The energy potential of geothermal water from the proposed well has been calculated.
Since the energy potential of water heated by the earth’s core is its heat output, the heat
output formula has been used (2). The energy potential has been calculated for three
temperature scenarios. Table 4 shows that as the geothermal water temperature rises, the
energy potential and annual amount of thermal energy increase. Due to the large range
of processed data, the evaluation of the energy potential by the authors in a conservative
scenario of the implementation of a geothermal well with a water temperature of 65 ◦ C is
given in Table 5.

Table 5. Evaluation of the energy potential of a geothermal well in a conservative scenario with a
water temperature of 65 ◦ C.

Geothermal Water Temperature (◦ C) 65

Amount of heat produced annually from
7939.75
geothermal energy for DH (MWh)
Amount of heat produced annually from
4275.25
geothermal energy for DHW (MWh)
Total amount of annual heat produced from
12,215
geothermal energy (MWh)
Natural gas savings (m3 ) 1,136,279
Natural gas savings (kWh) 12,215,000
Price of saved natural gas (EUR/year) 354,235

The results of Tables 4 and 5 clearly show how the energy potential and the annual
amount of thermal energy increase with increasing geothermal water temperature. Using
data from the technical study of the geothermal well, the energy balance of the geothermal
source GTK-1 was calculated for three temperature scenarios (pessimistic, conservative,
and optimistic) of geothermal water.

3.2. Assessment of the Economic Feasibility of Using GE and the Payback Period of the
Implemented Project
The assessment of economic profitability was recalculated by calculating the net
present value, and the return-on-investment method was used. We considered two
variants—a pessimistic and an optimistic scenario.
In the calculations, we considered the following input data:
1. Quantity delivered to GE per year;
2. Credit financing up to 90% of the realized investment;
3. Interest rate—0.75%;
4. Loan maturity—12 years;
5. Annual increase in operating costs—by 1% per year;
6. Discount rate—7.5%.
In Table 6, the recalculation of the evaluation of the economic efficiency of the imple-
mented geothermal project for the pessimistic scenario is shown.
Based on the economic assessment, and assuming Tables 6 and 7 have the considered
inputs, we came to the following partial conclusions:
- The project would achieve a return of 16.4 years in a pessimistic scenario.
- The project would achieve a negative cash flow in the years 2022 to 2025 until, in 2026,
the cash flow would reach a positive value, which would increase in subsequent years.
- The project would achieve a return of 7.4 years in an optimistic scenario.
- In an optimistic scenario, the project would achieve a high positive cash flow from the
beginning, which would increase in subsequent years.
Processes 2022, 10, 289 14 of 17

Table 6. Calculation of the evaluation of the economic efficiency of the implemented geothermal project for the pessimistic scenario.

Pessimistic Scenario
1. Total Investment Costs (EUR) 2,459,687
2. Credit Share of Total Investment 90%
3. Credit Amount (EUR) 2,213,718
4. Interest Rate 0.75%
5. Credit Payment Period (Years) 12
6. Annual Operating Costs (EUR) 29,129
7. Annual Savings on NG (EUR) 228,843
8. Discount Rate 7.5%
9. Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2031
10. Number of Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11. Year Annual Sales/Operating CF (EUR) 228,843 228,843 228,843 228,843 228,843 228,843 228,843 228,843 228,843 228,843
12. Annual Increase in Operating Costs - 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
13. Operating Costs (EUR) 29,129 29,421 29,715 30,012 30,312 30,615 30,921 31,231 31,543 31,858
14. Annual Depreciation (EUR) 187,252 187,252 187,252 187,252 187,252 187,252 128,745 128,745 90,307 90,307
15. Credit Repayment (EUR) 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477
16. Credit Balance (EUR) 2,213,718 2,029,242 1,844,765 1,660,289 1,475,812 1,291,336 1,106,859 922,383 737,906 553,430
17. Annual Interest on the Credit (EUR) 16,603 15,219 13,836 12,452 11,069 9685 8301 6918 5534 4151
18. CF (EUR) −4141 −3049 −1960 −873 210 1291 60,876 61,950 101,459 102,527
19. NOPAT (CF–Income Tax 19%) (EUR) −4141 −3049 −1960 −873 170 1046 49,310 50,180 82,182 83,047
20. Discounted FCF (EUR) −1270 −236 657 1425 2052 2476 −3871 −3113 −6253 −5397
21. NPV (EUR) −247,239 −247,475 −246,818 −245,393 −243,341 −240,865 −244,736 −247,849 −254,102 −259,498
22. Payback Period (Years) 16.4
Processes 2022, 10, 289 15 of 17

Table 7. Calculation of the evaluation of the economic efficiency of the implemented geothermal project for the optimistic scenario.

Optimistic Scenario
1. Total Investment Costs (EUR) 2,459,687
2. Credit Share of Total Investment 90%
3. Credit Amount (EUR) 2,213,718
4. Interest Rate 0.75%
5. Credit Payment Period (Years) 12
6. Annual Operating Costs (EUR) 29,129
7. Annual Savings on NG (EUR) 283,420
8. Discount Rate 7.5%
9. Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
10. Number of Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11. Year Annual Sales/Operating CF (EUR) 283,420 283,420 283,420 283,420 283,420 283,420 283,420 283,420 283,420 283,420
12. Annual Increase Operating Costs - 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
13. Operating Costs (EUR) 29,129 29,421 29,715 30,012 30,312 30,615 30,921 31,231 31,543 31,858
14. Annual Depreciation (EUR) 187,252 187,252 187,252 187,252 187,252 187,252 128,745 128,745 90,307 90,307
15. Credit Repayment (EUR) 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477 184,477
16. Credit Balance (EUR) 2,213,718 2,029,242 1,844,765 1,660,289 1,475,812 1,291,336 1,106,859 922,383 737,906 553,430
17. Annual Interest on the Credit (EUR) 16,603 15,219 13,836 12,452 11,069 9685 8301 6918 5534 4151
18. CF (EUR) 50,436 51,528 52,617 53,704 54,787 55,868 115,453 116,527 156,036 157,104
19. NOPAT (CF-Income Tax 19%) (EUR) 40,853 41,738 42,620 43,500 44,378 45,253 93,517 94,387 126,389 127,254
20. Discounted FCF (EUR) 40,585 38,519 36,542 34,651 32,845 31,121 22,775 21,674 16,805 16,053
21. NPV (EUR) −205,384 −166,865 −130,323 −95,672 −62,827 −31,706 −8931 12,743 29,548 45,601
22. Payback Period (Years) 7.4
Processes 2022, 10, 289 16 of 17

The payback period of the project in the optimistic scenario is very attractive and
is advantageous for the specified parameters. A higher share of credit financing has a
significant effect on the payback period.
The presented data create a synergy for the final conclusion that the implementation
of this project will be an effective investment in the future.

4. Conclusions
Geothermal wells offer a number of positive options for reducing negative environ-
mental impacts in the long term. In theory, the projected energy potential of the well would
be able to supply the modeled housing estate with warm water intended for heating and
the preparation of hot service water. One of the most burdensome aspects of today’s society
is energy. In particular, energy in households, especially heating and cooling, contributes
significantly to negative impacts on the country as a whole. In the case of Slovakia, there is
currently a system of supported RES and limited use of fossil resources. In the case of the
specific location of the Podtatranska Basin, we propose to use the potential of geothermal
energy for heating domestic housing units (housing estates). This will help to limit the
combustion of natural gas and, in the long term, save money on the purchase of NG and
achieve increased energy security and stability. The use of geothermal energy for housing
estate heating will bring a number of benefits to this area. GE can also be used in a com-
bined way (heating and electricity production) for greenhouse heating for growing crops
and flowers, for fish farming, etc. Primarily, it will offer an ecological benefit in the form
of significant emission reductions in the combustion of processes (NOx, SO2 , CO, TZL).
Currently, the city’s thermal economy burns natural gas and coal. Geothermal energy is a
highly ecological source; immediately after heating use, it will be drained off to a nearby
surface stream. Another benefit will be that it will reduce dependence on the imports of
primary heat sources (NG and coal) and replace them with a renewable energy source.
Finally, the use of geothermal energy will lead to a lower heating bill for the inhabitants of
the housing estate.
Currently, the aim is to use RES technology that contributes as much as possible to
reducing the negative consequences of energy use on the global climate system. The topic
is vital, according to current developments in energy policy in the EU and around the
world. At the end of October 2021, the UN World Climate Summit was held in Glasgow;
it highlighted the need to address the issue of reducing emissions in energy production.
Our contribution, in terms of the use of geothermal energy, highlights a clean renewable
resource and is therefore highly relevant for future generations.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization: A.S. and E.S.; methodology: A.S. and E.S.; software:
G.W. and J.R.; validation: A.S. and E.S.; formal analysis: A.S. and E.S.; investigation and resources:
A.S. and G.W.; data curation: A.S. and E.S.; writing—original draft preparation: J.R. and G.W.;
writing—review and editing: A.S. and E.S.; visualization: A.S. and E.S.; supervision: A.S. and E.S.;
project administration and funding acquisition: G.W. and J.R. All authors have read and agreed to
the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data sharing is not applicable to this article.
Acknowledgments: This work is supported by the Scientific Grant Agency of the Ministry of Educa-
tion, Science, Research, and Sport of the Slovak Republic, project KEGA 048TUKE−4/2021, Universal
educational—competitive platform.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Processes 2022, 10, 289 17 of 17

References
1. IPCC. 2018: Global Warming of 1.5 ◦ C. An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 ◦ C above Pre-Industrial Levels
and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate
Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Skea,
J., Shukla, P.R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Péan, C., Pidcock, R., et al., Eds.; Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/
assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/06/SR15_Full_Report_High_Res.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2021).
2. Braunmiller, G.; Horbaj, P.; Jasminská, N. Geothermal energy and power generation in Germany. Communications 2009, 11, 64–66.
3. Rybár, R.; Kudelas, D.; Beer, M. Selected problems of classification of energy sources—What are renewable energy sources? Acta
Montan. Slovaca 2015, 20, 172–180.
4. Eurostat. Renewable Energy Statistics. 2020. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/
Renewable_energy_statistics (accessed on 10 September 2021).
5. Sowizdzal, A. Geothermal Energy Resources in Poland–Overview of the Current State of Knowledge. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2018, 82, 4020–4027. [CrossRef]
6. Wilberforcea, T.; Baroutajib, A.; ElHassana, Z.; Thompsona, J.; Soudane, B.; Olab, A.G. Prospects and challenges of concentrated
solar photovoltaics andenhanced geothermal energy technologies. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 659, 851–861. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Sliwa, T.; Sapinska-Sliwa, A.; Gonet, A.; Kowalski, T.; Sojczynska, A. Geothermal Boreholes in Poland—Overview of the Current
State of Knowledge. Energies 2021, 14, 3251. [CrossRef]
8. Koščo, J.; Tauš, P.; Taušová, M.; Jeňo, M. Geothermal energy—One of the resources of tourism expansion in Slovakia. Acta Montan.
Slovaca 2016, 21, 171–179.
9. Barbier, E. Geothermal energy technology and current status: An overview. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2002, 6, 3–65. [CrossRef]
10. Hudeček, V.; Zapletal, P.; Stoniš, M.; Sojka, R. Results from dealing with rock and gas outburst prevention in the Czech Republic.
Arch. Min. Sci. 2013, 58, 779–787.
11. Borovič, S.; Markovič, I. Utilization and tourism valorisation of geothermal waters in Croatia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,
44, 52–63. [CrossRef]
12. Cehlár, M.; Jurkasová, Z.; Kudelas, D.; Tutko, R.; Mendel, J. Geothermal Power Plant in Conditions of Geological and Hydrological
Characteristics. Adv. Mater. Res. 2014, 1001, 63–74. [CrossRef]
13. Ferenc, Š. Geotermálna Energia a jej Využitie, 1st ed.; Belanium Univerzity Mateja Bela v Banskej Bystrici: Banská Bystrica, Slovakia,
2015; p. 154.
14. STATISTA. Historical Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Global Fossil Fuel Combustion and Industrial Processes from 1758 to 2020.
2020. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/264699/worldwide-co2-emissions/ (accessed on 25 September
2021).
15. Rybár, P. Zdroje geotermálnej energie a možnosti ich využívania. Acta Montan. Slovaca 2010, 12, 31–41. Available online:
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/25941789.pdf (accessed on 25 September 2021).
16. Tometz, L.; Dugáček, D. Potenciál podzemných vôd Slovenska ako obnovitel’ných zdrojov energie. Acta Montan. Slovaca 2010, 15,
116–125. Available online: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/25955231.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2021).
17. Barbacki, A.; Miecznik, M.; Tomaszewska, B.; Skrzypczak, R. Assessment of the Lower Carboniferous-Devonian Aquifer as a
Source of Geothermal Energy in the Silesian–Kraków Region (Poland). Energies 2020, 13, 6694. [CrossRef]
18. Fendek, M.; Hanzel, V.; Bodiš, D.; Nemčok, J. Hydrotermálne Pomery Popradskej Kotliny. Manuskript.Archív Tatra Thermálu, a.s.;
Archív Tatra Thermál a.s. Poprad: Poprad, Slovakia, 1992; p. 99.
19. Franko, O.; Remšík, A.; Fendek, M. a kol. Atlas Geotermálnej Energie Slovenska, Bratislava: Štátny Geologický Ústav Dionýza
Štúra. 2010. Available online: http://apl.geology.sk/atlasge (accessed on 3 January 2022).
20. Slovenská Agentúra Životného Prostredia. Kjótsky Protokol k Rámcovému Dohovoru OSN o Zmene Klímy. Available online:
https://www.enviroportal.sk/dokumenty/medzinarodne-dohovory/dohovor/2 (accessed on 25 September 2021).
21. Enviroportál MŽP SR. Available online: file:///C:/Users/Erika/AppData/Local/Temp/soh_geotermalny_vrt_kezmarok_
optimised_asice_soh_geotermalny_vrt_kezmarok_optimised_redigovane-.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2022).
22. Rybár, P.; Drebenstedt, C.; Cehlár, M.; Domaracká, L.; Khouri, S.; Dietze, T. Mining Investment; Vydavatelství a nakladatelství Aleš
Čeněk: Plzeň, Czech Republic, 2019; 250p.
23. Kvantifikácia Emisií: Metodický Postup Pre Tvorbu Regionálnych Nízkouhlíkových Stratégií, Priatelia Zeme-CEPA. 2020.
Available online: https://cepa.priateliazeme.sk/images/publikacie/EVS_vystupy/M10_web.pdf (accessed on 28 September
2021).
24. Zloženie Zemného Plynu, Spal’ovacie Teplo a Výhrevnost’, Emisný Factor. Available online: https://www.spp.sk/sk/velki-
zakaznici/zemny-plyn/o-zemnom-plyne/emisie/ (accessed on 30 September 2021).
25. zlRESnie-zemneho-plynu-a-emisny-faktor. Available online: https://www.spp-distribucia.sk/dodavatelia/informacie/zlRESnie-
zemneho-plynu-a-emisny-faktor/ (accessed on 30 September 2021).
26. Všeobecné Emisné Závislosti a Všeobecné Emisné Factory. Available online: https://www.minzp.sk/ovzdusie/ochrana-
ovzdusia/zdroje-znecistovania-ovzdusia/novy-adresar/vseobecne-emisne-zavislosti-vseobecne-emisne-faktory.html (accessed
on 30 September 2021).
27. Specific Heat Formula. Available online: https://www.toppr.com/guides/physics-formulas/specific-heat-formula/ (accessed
on 3 January 2022).