2026 heat-pump market index: Denmark vs Ireland vs Norway

The three-market scorecard: where Denmark, Ireland and Norway stand on running-cost fundamentals

Taken as a three-way structure test rather than a country guide, Norway appears the most naturally supportive heat-pump market of the group, Denmark sits between the two, and Ireland remains the most constrained on household running-cost fundamentals.

A compact scorecard makes the ordering clear:

On electricity, Ireland is the most expensive of the three at €0.4042/kWh, Denmark is second at €0.3312/kWh, and Norway is lowest at €0.1922/kWh, leaving a highest-to-lowest spread of €0.2120/kWh between Ireland and Norway (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). On gas, only Denmark and Ireland have recorded values in the corpus, with Ireland slightly higher at €0.1300/kWh versus Denmark at €0.1257/kWh, a spread of €0.0043/kWh (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). Norway’s gas tariff is simply not recorded in the registry, so no three-way gas ranking is available (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester).

Climate and grid conditions widen the gap further. Norway posts 5039.96 heating degree days, ahead of Denmark’s 3447.07 and Ireland’s 3010.73, indicating the largest heating load of the three (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). Yet it also has by far the cleanest electricity, at 18.0 gCO₂/kWh versus 142.0 in Denmark and 287.0 in Ireland (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). Readers can compare those broader national baselines in the 32-country comparison dashboard, alongside the country pages for Denmark, Ireland and Norway.

Subsidies do not reverse the picture. Ireland is the only one of the three with a recorded maximum household subsidy, at €6,500.0, while Denmark and Norway have no active national subsidy recorded in this dataset (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). That matters less than it may seem when the underlying electricity price signal is this different. For buyers testing real project economics, the payback calculator and subsidy index are more useful than headline grant numbers alone.

What the tariff ratio says about heat-pump competitiveness versus gas

The simplest competitiveness screen is the household electricity-to-gas tariff ratio. Relative to the approximate break-even threshold of 3.7 for a SCOP 4 heat pump specified in the brief, Denmark sits at 2.63 and Ireland at 3.11, while Norway cannot be placed because household gas pricing is not recorded for it in the source table (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester).

That gives a clean ranking among the two countries with gas data: Ireland is closer to the 3.7 threshold than Denmark, and Denmark is further away. Ireland is 0.59 points below 3.7, while Denmark is 1.07 points below 3.7, using the recorded ratios of 3.11 and 2.63 respectively (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). Put differently, Ireland’s tariff structure is less favourable than Denmark’s for heat pumps competing directly with gas, even before installation quality or emitter temperature are considered.

The corpus does not provide a gas tariff for Norway, so it does not permit a proper electricity-to-gas ratio there (price_ratio / Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester). What can be said is narrower: Norway combines the lowest household electricity price in the trio at €0.1922/kWh with the highest heating demand at 5039.96 HDD and the lowest grid intensity at 18.0 gCO₂/kWh, which is a structurally strong combination for electrified heating even without a gas comparison figure (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register).

For readers who want the raw market-wide benchmark rather than just this trio, the market index snapshot and the EU’s own EPREL registry provide the underlying product context, while Eurostat is the tariff source family cited in the corpus.

Maturity versus momentum: EPREL model count, brand count and efficiency benchmark

The broad European product universe is large enough in 2026 to act as a maturity benchmark in its own right: 60,989 heat-pump models from 777 manufacturers are listed in the current snapshot, with an average SCOP of 4.55, average capacity of 9.3 kW, and average outdoor noise of 61.3 dB (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API).

Those are market-wide figures rather than country-specific ones. The corpus does not provide Denmark-, Ireland- or Norway-specific EPREL model counts or brand counts, so it cannot directly quantify national assortment depth or local manufacturer presence from listings alone (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). Any claim that one of the three has more listed models available nationally would go beyond the data.

Even so, the three countries can still be placed relative to the benchmark by structural conditions. Norway’s low electricity price, extreme heating load and very low-carbon grid point to the most mature operating environment of the three at €0.1922/kWh, 5039.96 HDD and 18.0 gCO₂/kWh respectively (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). Denmark looks intermediate, with colder-zone conditions, 3447.07 HDD, and a mid-pack grid intensity of 142.0 gCO₂/kWh, but a materially higher electricity price at €0.3312/kWh (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register). Ireland combines the highest electricity price at €0.4042/kWh, the highest grid intensity at 287.0 gCO₂/kWh, and the mildest heating load of the three at 3010.73 HDD, which is a weaker natural footing despite the €6,500.0 subsidy cap (country_compare / Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register).

For the underlying product universe behind these comparisons, the live EPREL heat-pump catalog and the manufacturer directory are the relevant internal references.

Who controls the market: manufacturer concentration and average brand efficiency

European heat pumps are not a fragmented long tail in practice. The largest single manufacturer in the current EPREL universe is Daikin Europe N.V., with 14,668 models and 24.05% share (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). Number two is Mitsubishi Electric Europe B.V. at 5,575 models and 9.14% share (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation), followed by JOHNSON CONTROLS HITACHI AIR CONDITIONING EUROPE SAS, SUCURSAL EN ESPAÑA at 5,207 models and 8.54% share (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation).

The top five manufacturers together account for 51.93% of the listed model universe: Daikin 24.05%, Mitsubishi Electric 9.14%, Johnson Controls Hitachi 8.54%, Bosch Thermotechnik GmbH 5.91%, and Ariston SpA 4.29% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). Extending to the top ten brings the cumulative share to 60.88% after adding ATLANTIC SOC FRANCAISE DEVELOP THERMIQUE at 2.49%, Vaillant GmbH at 1.96%, BDR Thermea Group B.V. at 1.52%, GENERAL HVAC Solutions Euro GmbH at 1.51%, and Panasonic Marketing Europe GmbH at 1.47% (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation).

Average SCOP differs enough to matter. Among the top five by share, Bosch posts the highest average SCOP at 4.69, ahead of Ariston at 4.66, Mitsubishi Electric at 4.51, Daikin at 4.44 and Johnson Controls Hitachi at 4.18 (brand_share / EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation). Scale does not automatically mean top efficiency.

That is one reason the overall leaderboards and brand-specific profiles are more useful than brand size alone when specifying equipment.

Which product types define the market mix: efficiency, capacity and noise by heat-pump type

The current model universe is defined mainly by two categories. Air-water heat pumps lead with 30,452 models, while air-air units follow with 21,065 models; HP water heaters contribute 9,228 models, ground-water 213, and water-water 31 (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation).

As shares of the 60,989-model universe, that means air-water accounts for roughly half the catalog and clearly dominates the market mix by count, while air-air is the second major block and HP water heaters form a substantial third segment (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API; type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation). Readers can inspect the live filtered sets for air-water heat pumps, air-air heat pumps, ground-water heat pumps, water-water heat pumps and heat-pump water heaters.

Performance averages differ sharply by type:

The most efficient type in the dataset is water-water at SCOP 6.15, and it is also the quietest at 42.0 dB and the largest by average capacity at 35.65 kW (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation). Air-air units are the noisiest type at 64.1 dB and the smallest by power at 5.41 kW (type_efficiency / EPREL Public API · type aggregation). So the most efficient segment does align, in this dataset, with quieter and larger-capacity units rather than smaller or louder ones.

For model-level extremes rather than type averages, Househeating Pulse maintains the top SCOP leaderboard, the air-water SCOP ranking, the ground-source SCOP ranking and the quietest heat-pump leaderboard. The present corpus, however, does not include named model records for those top segments, so it cannot identify individual leading models, their exact refrigerants, or whether a specific quiet model is also a top-efficiency model.

Refrigerants as a market signal: low-GWP adoption versus legacy gases

Refrigerant use in EPREL listings remains highly concentrated. R32 appears on 13,935 models, making it the dominant declared refrigerant in the corpus, while R410A appears on 1,896 models and the lower-case variant R410a on 49 models; R410 appears separately on 10 models (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). R290 appears on 537 models, with small variant spellings R290A on 2 models and R290a on 1 model (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes).

That leaves low-GWP natural options present but still numerically small in the declared universe. The market snapshot puts the natural refrigerant share at 3.27% overall (market_index_snapshot / Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API). In absolute declared counts, propane-coded entries are far behind R32: 537 models for R290 versus 13,935 for R32 (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). The platform’s refrigerants reference and filtered catalogs for R32 heat pumps and R290 heat pumps make the contrast visible.

The regulatory context also matters. In the reference table, R32 is listed with GWP 771 and an F-gas phase-out date of 2027-01-01, while R410A is listed at GWP 1924 with a phase-out date of 2025-01-01, and R134a at GWP 1300 with a phase-out date of 2026-01-01 (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). By comparison, R290 is classed as natural with GWP 0 and no listed phase-out date, while R744 is natural with GWP 1 (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). The governing legal frame is EU Regulation 2024/573.

The declared EPREL codes also show some data-hygiene noise: upper- and lower-case variants such as R410A and R410a, plus stray one-off codes, remain in the raw listing universe (refrigerant_universe / IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes). That is useful as a market signal in itself. The transition to low-GWP refrigerants is under way, but the installed product language of the catalog is still overwhelmingly shaped by incumbent HFC families.

Sources

• Eurostat · NASA POWER · EEA · Househeating Pulse subsidy register — snapshot 2026-07-05
• Eurostat household band DC (electricity) / D2 (gas), latest semester — snapshot 2026-07-05
• Househeating Pulse · Market Index v1, computed from EPREL Public API — snapshot 2026-07-05
• EPREL Public API · brand-share aggregation — snapshot 2026-07-05
• EPREL Public API · type aggregation — snapshot 2026-07-05
• IPCC AR6 GWP table; EU Reg. 2024/573 phase-out schedule; EPREL declared codes — snapshot 2026-07-05

Continue reading

• How to compare heat pumps using SCOP, noise and refrigerant — A practical framework for screening listings without relying on brochure shorthand.
• How to size a heat pump before requesting quotes — Why capacity, climate and emitter temperatures matter more than brand reputation.
• What EPREL can and cannot tell buyers — A plain-language read on registry strengths, blind spots and data quirks.
• Heat-pump subsidies in Europe: how to read the fine print — Grants can help, but tariff structure and system design still drive outcomes.