A benefit to cost (B/C) analysis was performed on gel ponds based on experimental data collected from the circular demonstration gel pond (5 m dia × 1.25 m depth) located at UNM. The measured transmissivity, predicted temperature profile, and calculated surface heat losses with volumetric heat generation were used as physical data in the coded design model (GPDM) used for sizing the solar pond. These data were used in the coded economical analysis model (GPEA) to calculate capital, operation, life cycle, and cost of delivered energy for a specific pond. A general case study was considered to demonstrate the potential and economical feasibility of gel ponds as a source of hot water (45°C) for domestic use in five regions in the United States. An optimized gel pond showed B/C values as high as 1.35 for high insolation areas (Southwest, Puerto Rico) and as low as 0.45 for low insolation areas (Great Lakes, Atlantic NE) compared to 0.96 and 0.48 for salt gradient ponds of the same size and location. In a special case study to demonstrate industrial applicability of gel ponds as a source of hot water (65°C) for a textile mill (Cairo, Egypt), the optimized pond had a B/C value of 1.07 compared to 0.93 for an optimized salt gradient pond of the same load output. In general, for the same size (400 m 2 × 4 m deep), location (southwest) and extraction temperature (45°C), in gel and salt gradient ponds, the gel has higher capital cost (19%), lower operating cost (53%), lower delivered energy cost (26.4%), and higher extraction efficiency (32.5%). While, for the same load output (150 kW thermal) and location (Cairo), a gel pond has higher capital cost (21.5%), lower operating cost (63.5%), smaller surface area (21%), shallower depth (28.6%), and lower delivered energy costs (13%). Using GPDM (Gel Pond Design Model) and GPEA (Gel Pond Economic Analysis) computer programs, a sufficient engineering and economic analysis can be performed for gel and salt gradient ponds, respectively.