Geothermal Heat Pump Systems Being Green by using the Ground. Presented by: Warren (Trey) Austin, PE, CEM, CGD, LEED-AP Geo-Energy Services, LLC

Transcription

1 Geothermal Heat Pump Systems Being Green by using the Ground Presented by: Warren (Trey) Austin, PE, CEM, CGD, LEED-AP Geo-Energy Services, LLC 1

2 Geothermal 101 Terminology Geothermal/Ground Source Heat Pump /GeoExchange General term that groups all aspects of the technology and industry together COP- Coefficient of Performance; Rating for Heating Mode- Typical Range Output Btu/hr divided by Input Btu/hr (Unitless) Heating Btu / hr Energy Input Btu / hr 2

3 Ton- Capacity of Equipment (Htg or Clg) by dividing Output (Btu/hr) by 12,000 Btuhr/ton 3 Geothermal 101 Terminology EER- Energy Efficiency Ratio; Rating for Cooling Mode- Typical Range Output Btu/hr divided by Input kw Cooling Btu / hr Energy Input kw

4 Geothermal 101 Terminology Continued Borehole HDPE Grout Ground Thermal Conductivity q k ground dt dt 4

5 How do we move energy? Remember Science or Chemistry Class? PV nrt As Pressure Increases, Temperature Increases As Pressure Decreases, Temperature Decreases 5

6 Geothermal Heat Pump Heating Mode 6

7 Geothermal Heat Pump Cooling Mode 7

8 Geothermal Heat Pump Heating Mode w/dhw 8

9 Geothermal Heat Pump Cooling Mode w/dhw 9

10 Space Atmosphere Passive geothermal gradient U.S. Dept. of Energy 45% absorbed by ground Earth The earth is like a solar battery absorbing nearly half of the sun s energy. The ground stays a relatively constant temperature through the seasons. 10

11 It s a Heat Source in Winter It s a Heat Source in Winter 0 F in winter 0 F in Winter 70 F 70 F Space Temperature Sinusoidal temperature layer Insulating of earth layer of earth F A Geothermal Heats System the building cools the ground in winter by winter & transfers absorbing the heat into from the the building ground 40 F-60 F 2. How Does It Work? Ground Temperature 11

12 It s It s A a Cool Source Place to to Reject Dump Heat Heat in in Summer Summer 98 F in Summer 95 F in summer 70 F 70 F Space Temperature Sinusoidal temperature layer Insulating of earth layer of earth F and cool the Cools building the in building summer in summer by by rejecting heat rejecting to the ground heat to the ground 40 F-60 F 2. How Does It Work? Ground Temperature 12

13 Applications Majority of Use Space Heating & Cooling DHW (Desuperheater or Dedicated) Mountain Regions Radiant Floor Heating (Hydronic Units) Snowmelt (Be Careful!) May Triple system requirements Special Use Process Load Water (Hot/Chilled) 13

14 Fossil Fuels 10-20% of heat up the flue 1 Unit of purchased fossil fuel (therm or ccf) 80-90% of heat to the building 14

15 Electric Resistance Heat 1 Unit of purchased electricity (100%) kwh 100% heat to the building Appears efficient, but will cost more than NG Energy Cost = $0.061/kWh 1 kwh = 3,412 Btu 100,000 Btu = therm Result: $0.061/kWh = $1.79/therm 15

16 Free, Renewable Energy From the Earth (Ground Source) 1.0 Unit of purchased electricity kw 3.5 Units of energy to the building for water to air, 4.5 for water to water Plus 2.5 Units of free energy from the earth for water to air, 3.5 for water to water 16

17 Thermal Conductivity Testing Obtain: Local Ground Temperature Formation Thermal Conductivity Formation Thermal Diffusivity Not Necessary on all projects Systems >20,000 ft 2 or >30 tons Can save 15-25% on installation cost 17

18 18

19 Thermal Conductivity Values TC Map 19

20 E\M Difficult Easy M/D E/M 20

21 Internal Component of GeoExchange Systems Air Units Horizontal HP Vertical Console Rooftop Vertical Stack Split Hydronic Units WW 22

22 Internal Component of GeoExchange Systems Two-Stage Compressors ECM Fans Multi-Function Dual Circuit High Temperature 23

23 Project Considerations Know the Design Parameters Space Heating/Cooling Air Distribution Radiant Floor Heating Hot Water/Chilled Water Integrated Systems Other Auxiliary Loads DHW Snowmelt- Heat Rejection Refrigeration Thermal Conductivity Test 24

24 Project Considerations Loop Fields Performance indifferent when properly designed at the same EWTs Efficiency of equipment directly correlated to EWT Pond/Lake Loops or Plates Be cautious about Icing or Overheating Horizontal Loops Sizing loop must account for frost depths, surface snow, seasonal amplitude temperature changes 25

25 Project Considerations Loop Fields (continued) Vertical Boreholes Least site restrictive due to greater depths for heat transfer Accounts for majority of all installation (>80%) Typical 2 and 3 header lines 2 = 4-7 boreholes per header 3 = 6-12 boreholes per header Generally like to be the lowest utility 26

26 Project Considerations Loop Fields (continued) Hybrid Configuration Combine any of three traditional loop field designs to help reduce cost Combine with condensing boiler/solar heating technologies in heating load dominant situations Combine with fluid coolers/cooling towers in cooling load dominant situations Due to increasing use, further research is underway 27

27 Project Considerations Loop Fields (continued) In certain situations, a retrofit may be site prohibitive. Combine energy efficiency improvements Previous energy efficiency improvements may PROHIBIT a feasible retrofit Consider electrical service upgrades 28

28 Internal Construction No Different that any other HVAC system Piping ½ Insulation only for condensation HDPE pipe for interior as potential a cost saving measure Ductwork Flex duct collars to isolate vibration Circulating Pumps Primary/Secondary Lead/Lag 29

29 Construction Internal (continued) Equipment Location important for sufficient access Filter Replacement Fan Motor/Housing Compressor Maintenance Mfr s Recommended Clearance- Specific Areas P/T Ports at Unit- can be integrated with hose kits Equipment Cx- Flow and Capacity 30

30 Additional Considerations Efficiencies of COP and EER are dependent of EWT from Loop Field EWT typically range from 30 F to 100 F Typical Operation Pressures are 25 psig to 60 psig P/T ports are critical for diagnosis & troubleshooting Use qualified/certified professionals for design and/or installation 31

31 Additional Considerations Service annually with filter changes every 3-6 months Suggestion for no auto-water makeup with glycol systems (residential). 32

32 Benefits of GSHP System 30%-60% Lower Operating / Energy Cost 40%-70% reduction in Green House Emissions 100% Site Reduction Longer life span Greater Comfort Less Maintenance, Simplified Controls Better Aesthetics (no exposed outdoor equipment) 33

33 Economic Feasibility Life Cycle Cost Analysis is best way to account for all variables. What are they? Installation Costs Maintenance Costs Utility Rates Escalation Factors Cost of Capital Depreciation 34

34 Economic Feasibility Simple Payback calculation misses so many critical factors GHEX installation cost is often % of installation cost differential If TC Test is completed, use information to obtain preliminary installation cost of GHEX Eliminate Rule of Thumb when possible 35

35 Economic Feasibility More upfront initial work by consultant/engineer/designer will have a significant return on investment cost down the road. Pay me now or pay them later! Who s going to be cheaper? Complexity of system integration(s) increase 36

36 Economic Feasibility Pre-ARRA of 2009 LCCA Installation cost ranges $18.00 to $22.00 / ft 2 Operating costs $0.45 to $0.85 /ft 2 -yr Paybacks Average: 5-8 years Can be immediate to 5 years Some systems were 8-12 years Rebates/Tax Credits Depend on local utilities- special utility rates $2000 cap Federal Tax Credit on System cost 37

37 Economic Feasibility Post-ARRA of 2009 LCCA Installation cost ranges $18.00 to $22.00 / ft 2 Operating costs $0.45 to $0.85 /ft 2 -yr Paybacks Average: 2-5 years Can be immediate to 2 years Some systems were 6-10 years Rebates/Tax Credits Depend on local utilities- special utility rates 30% Federal Tax Credit on System cost 38

38 39

39 40

40 Integration with Renewables Integration with other renewable technologies, mostly: Solar Photovoltaic/Geothermal/Wind/Biomass Solar Thermal Enhancing and merging technologies to maximize performance and reduce combined economic impacts 41

41 New Trends Old way of thinking no longer can meet project expectations Traditional solutions cannot apply and often creates uninspiring solutions What do I mean? 42

42 Traditional Approach Space Cooling Space Heating Ground Loop Heat Exchanger 43

43 New Trends However, biggest advances with other non-renewable technologies have opened to door to evaluating synergies if a given project 44

44 Heat Rejection/Absorption Synergies Space Heating Ground Loop Heat Exchanger Space Cooling Refrigeration Rejection Hot Water Heating Load Rainwater Reclaim Fluid Cooler Shallow Heat Rejection Slab Greywater Reclaim 45

45 New Trends These synergies now allow for larger projects without necessarily increasing the needs of a GHEX Or realizing different load profiles over a day/week/month/year can share energy in both heating and cooling modes 46

46 Urbanized Areas New Trends Small Market Penetration Old Concept/New Approach Non-Potable Water or Other Plate/Frame HX separation Constant F All Year 47

47 48

48 Vertical Loop Installation Equipment Drill Rig Flushing Pipe Vertical Ground Loop Fusion Equipment Grout 49

49 Vertical Loop Field 50

50 51

51

52 53

53 54

54 Horizontal Slinky (Pit) Loop 55

55 Horizontal Slinky Loop 56

56 Centralized Slinky 57

57 Pond/Lake Loop 58

58 Pond Loop- Plate Heat Exchanger 59

59 Special Application 60

60 Vault 61

61 62

62 63

63 64

64 Commercial Heat Pump Installation 65

65 66

66

67 Multi-family Installation 68

68

69 Case Study 1 PSD Facility Services Building Footprint 8,900 ft 2 Installed Capacity Number of Units Total Number of Boreholes Depth Total Feet of Boreholes 25 Tons 12 Heat Pump Units ,400 70

70 5/1/02 9/1/02 1/1/03 5/1/03 9/1/03 1/1/04 5/1/04 9/1/04 1/1/05 5/1/05 9/1/05 1/1/06 5/1/06 9/1/06 1/1/07 5/1/07 9/1/07 1/1/08 Energy (kwh) Demand (kw) Case Study 1 PSD Facility Services Building Energy (kwh) Demand (kw)

71 Case Study Model FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 kbtu/sqft-yr 72

72 Case Study Model FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 $/sqft-yr 73

73 Case Study 1 PSD Facility Services Building Operation and Performance E-Star Benchmark Actual Score Energy Intensity: Site (kbtu/ft 2 -yr) Source (kbtu/ft 2 -yr) Emissions: CO 2 (1000 lbm/yr) SO 2 (1000 lbm/yr) 3 2 NO x (1000 lbm/yr) 3 1 Energy Cost: Annual ($) Annual ($/ft 2 -yr) $6, $0.77 $3, $0.40 * 74

74 Case Study 2 USPS Shawnee, OK Retrofit Existing Post Office 100-Ton Air-Cooled Chiller 650 mbh Boiler 2 Multi-zone Constant Volume AHUs with Hot Deck/Cold Deck Heating Only in several private offices including Postmaster 75

75 Case Study 2 USPS Shawnee, OK Total Number of Boreholes 35 Depth 360 Total Feet of Boreholes 12,600 Htg/Clg Plant AHU CVMZ Resize CHW Coil Load Side- CV Pumping 4-20 Ton GSHP Units AHU VAVMZ CHW/HW Source Side- VS Pumping 76

76 3/1/98 6/1/98 9/1/98 12/1/98 3/1/99 6/1/99 9/1/99 12/1/99 3/1/00 6/1/00 9/1/00 12/1/00 3/1/01 6/1/01 9/1/01 12/1/01 3/1/02 6/1/02 9/1/02 12/1/02 3/1/03 6/1/03 9/1/03 12/1/03 3/1/04 6/1/04 9/1/04 12/1/04 3/1/05 Energy Use (kwh) Case Study 2 USPS Shawnee, OK Htg/Clg Baseline 77

77 3/1/98 6/1/98 9/1/98 12/1/98 3/1/99 6/1/99 9/1/99 12/1/99 3/1/00 6/1/00 9/1/00 12/1/00 3/1/01 6/1/01 9/1/01 12/1/01 3/1/02 6/1/02 9/1/02 12/1/02 3/1/03 6/1/03 9/1/03 12/1/03 3/1/04 6/1/04 9/1/04 12/1/04 3/1/05 Energy Demand (kw) Case Study 2 USPS Shawnee, OK Htg/Clg Baseline 78

78 Case Study 2 USPS Shawnee, OK Pre- Post- Retrofit Change Retrofit Peak Electric Demand (kw) % Electric Usage (kwh) 87,840 65,700-25% Gas (Therms) 2, % Yearly Electric Usage (kwh) 705, ,320-12% 79

79 Case Study 2 USPS Shawnee, OK 80

80 Internet and Literature Resources Geo-Energy Services Colorado Geo-Energy Heat Pump Association International Ground Source Heat Pump Association Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium 81

81 Questions? 82