In a sad sign for Harvard and damaging to Decarbonization, this Harvard report presented in this Boston Globe article only shows that the authors have no idea how to analyze HVAC! It does not say who paid for the report, but I'd conclude the fossil industry because no sane researcher would produce it on their own.
First on pg 6 last paragraph, it gives geothermal "coefficient of performance ~4, compared with 2-3 for airsource heat pumps". However in the tables starting on pg 20 it gives example savings over existing electric strip heat of 2398 for ASHP and 2858 for GHP or a ratio of 2858/2398 = 1.19 -- there is ZERO rationality to that as even the minimum difference of COP 4 vs 3 gives a ratio of 1.33. Clearly they don't even understand how to calculate energy savings in an all electric comparison situation, so for sure they don't know how to do it for fossil vs electric! Second, their statement of how they calculated GHP's COP makes no sense -- I am an SME in this field and their statement of pg 15 is simply bogus: "For ground-source heat pumps, COP values were based on the relationship between ground temperature and COP at different inlet temperatures,17 assuming an inlet temperature of ~20°C above an inside air temperature of 20°C". You have to model the whole year to calculate GHP COP's and in all cases the savings will be significant over ASHP ... especially in MA!
This is sad for Harvard and damaging to Decarbonization. People with subscriptions should complain to the Globe and Harvard grads should complain to the school. As said above, I'd guess the fossil industry paid for this report from people who they knew didn't understand HVAC on purpose, but the paper does not say who paid for it so we don't know.
Harvard should withdraw it as irrational and clearly bogus!
On further look, this page[1] shows the report authors. The technical author is identified as "has worked on a range of issues in energy technology and policy, including advanced technologies for low-carbon transportation fuel, carbon capture and storage, and the risks and opportunities of shale gas". Exactly -- oil and gas industry!
These people clearly do not understand nor should have ever reported on heat pumps in my opinion. As I read the report further, it appears they mentioned in the Background section with one reference then completely ignored for all analyses the huge 30% residential and 40% commercial geothermal tax credits, and all utility heat pump rebates which are Huge in some MA cases. They also completely ignore that the cost of HVAC is NEVER the full cost, but always a relative cost because every HVAC system is replaced about every 20 years ... at least the ASHP "air conditioning" part which can be separately upgraded to a high efficiency heat pump even before the fossil is fully removed -- that makes the whole analysis bogus for all people who are upgrading because it's time or close to time to upgrade.
It is this sort of half backed myopic and factually vacuous analysis that is the hallmark of all fossil friendly reporting -- something I would think Harvard would not partake in any more! But alas, it has sadly been the Harvard's and MIT's of this world who have over and over disproportionately supported the fossil industry as others have shown[2]. This was also the subject of a very good ClimateOne podcast on NPR[3]. Thankfully, MIT seems to have now ended that bias which is a good sign for the planet and the institute[4].
And of course as is the rule for all fossil industry friendly reporting, the health and climate aspects of not rapidly decarbonizing are 100% ignored!
If I have overstated any of these conclusions then I give a half apology. But this is not a moment in history for this sort of negative, anchor-dragging, half-backed reporting on Decarbonization -- it is the time for all good scientists to step up to the plate and Make Decarbonization Happen ASAP in every way they can!
[1] https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/heat-pump-adoption-not-cost-effective-majority-ma-households-says-new-study [2] https://open.mit.edu/c/maca/5d3/mit-divest-student-group-requests-cosigners-on-an [3] https://open.mit.edu/c/maca/57q/climateone-exposes-the-infuriatingly-dishonest [4] https://open.mit.edu/c/maca/5cf/if-true-bravo-the-energy-initiatives-research
Others shared this report on Harvard: "BEYOND THE ENDOWMENT: UNCOVERING FOSSIL FUEL INTERESTS ON CAMPUS By Fossil Fuel Divest Harvard": https://www.divestharvard.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/BeyondTheEndowmentFFDH.pdf. A quote from that report: "According to one former Belfer Center researcher, leadership once held an all-staff meeting at which affiliates were instructed never to talk to any journalists who inquired about oil industry funding of Center initiatives." Not only liars but afraid to say who paid them to lie.
It is time we all go after the fossil industry paid spin doctors, and the Boston Globe absolutely should not have ever published such a clearly bogus fossil industry hit piece.