Technical and economic feasibility of a geothermal facility for air conditioning of an intensive piggery

J. Lampurlans Castel (1), C. Flament Maci(1), Ll. Puigdomench Franquesa(1)

(1)

E.T.S. dEnginyeria Agraria, Av. Rovira Roure, 191. 25198-Lleida (Spain) Phone Number: ++34 973 70 25 37 e-mail: jlampur@eagrof.udl.es

1.

Introduction In his last report (2007), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [1] predicted an increase of 0.5 to 1.5 C in the mean temperature in the European area for the period 2020-2029. Recently [2], conventional technologies used today for air conditioning intensive piggeries were tested under a 2 C temperature increase scenario. This rise of temperature resulted in an increase of the cooling needs that were not sufficiently covered with natural ventilation. Accordingly, a shift to the use of forced ventilation and evaporative panels was predicted for the near future. As an alternative, in this study we evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of a very low temperature geothermal facility.

2.

Methodology To develop this study we selected a representative intensive piggery for piglet production in the Ebros Valley. The piggery is situated at Candasnos with mean extreme temperatures of -3 C in January and 34,6 C in July. Mean relative humidity was 84.2% in January and 57,4 % in July. The piggery has three buildings (Fig. 1): one for sows waiting for service (Mounting), another for gestating sows (Gestation), and a third one for the sows and their piglets (Maternity).

Maternity (582 m2)

Gestation (540 m2)

Mounting (378 m2)

Fig. 1. Piggery buildings with the enclosures considered for thermal loads calculation.

The external walls are made with triple hollow ceramic brick externally coated with white cement and internally insulated with polyurethane foam (overall coefficient of heat transmission, U = 0.53 Wm-2C1 ). The cover consist of corrugated fiber cement roofs insulated with polyurethane foam (U = 0.64 Wm2 C-1). There are polyester doors (U = 4.72 Wm-2C-1) and polyester or glass windows (U = 5.75 Wm-2 C-1) on the walls. The surfaces of each element are shown in Table 1. Table 1. Surface of the different elements at every building.
Building Mounting Gestation Maternity External walls (m2) 276 351 258 Cover/roofs (m2) 473 675 675 Doors (m2) 8 6.4 8 Windows (m2) 23.9 11.5 11.5

Air was conditioned by natural ventilation with manual operated windows in Mounting and Gestations buildings. In the Maternity building, with the highest environmental requirements, forced ventilation and evaporative coolers were used. For the piglets, heating elements were also installed. Mean temperatures inside de buildings obtained with these systems in winter and summer are shown in Table 2. Table 2. Mean air temperature inside the buildings.
Building Mounting Gestation Maternity Inside winter temperature (C) 10 14 21 Inside summer temperature (C) 32 32 31

For the design of the new geothermal facility, the environmental animal needs in every building were defined to assure its comfort (Table 3). Table 3. Environmental conditions to be attained in every building.
Building Mounting Gestation Maternity Inside winter temperature (C) 15 15 20 Inside summer temperature (C) 28 28 25 Relative humidity (%) 70 70 60 Air velocity (m/s) 0.2-0.7 0.2-0.7 0.2-0.5

According to the meteorological data, mean of maximum air temperatures was the highest in July (34.6 C) and mean of minimum was the lowest in January (-3.0 C). Mean air relative humidity was 57.4% at 24.1 C in July, and 84.2% at 4.2 C in January. Heating needs (Qheating) in winter were computed as Qheating = Qenclosures transmission + Qventilation - Qanimals In summer, the cooling needs (Qcooling) were determined Qcooling = Qenclosures transmission + Qsolar radiation + Qanimals Qventilation Thermal animal loads were calculated according to animal condition and number at every building (Table 4). Minimum weight and number were considered to determine heating needs and maximum to determine cooling needs. Table 4. Minimum and maximum weight and number of animals at every building.
Building Mounting Gestation Maternity Minimum weight (kg) 180 210 195 Maximum weight (kg) 190 220 220 Minimum number of animals 120 214 50 Maximum number of animals 138 216 60

To reduce the thermal loads due to ventilation, needs of ventilation were computed as the minimum necessary to maintain relative humidity below the established limits (Table 3). Once the maximum heating and cooling loads were determined geothermal air conditioning system were designed for every building including fan-coils inside the buildings, water-water heat pumps and vertical geothermal proves. Fan-coils worked with 50 C water in winter and 7 C in summer. Head pumps were designed to work between 50 and 2 C in winter and between 7 and 30 C in summer. The vertical geothermal proves (double U) were designed following the ASHRAE manual (1995) [3] assuming a constant soil temperature of 15 C (the mean in Spain below 5 m) and a thermal gradient of 10 K. Proves were installed in 100 m wells.

Finally, an investment analysis was conducted to ascertain the economical feasibility of the new installation. As the new installation improved the inside environmental conditions, and increase on the productivity was expected. The productivity increase that made the investement profitable was calculated according to the Net Present Value, the Internal Rate of Return and the Payback Period, considering 40% of the investment being subsidised by the government.

3. Results and Discussion Air conditioning needs varied with building type and year season. In winter (Table 5), the highest needs were in Maternity and Gestation buildings. In Mounting and Gestation buildings, ventilation loads were the highest whereas in Maternity enclosures transmission loads were the most important. In summer (Table 6), the most important thermal loads were produced by the animals inside de buildings. Cooling needs were the highest in Gestation building. Heating needs were higher than cooling needs, especially in the Maternity building, and determined the power of the geothermal facility.

Table 5. Winter thermal loads and heating needs at every building.

Building Enclosures transmission (kW) 29.2 41.6 52.7 Ventilation (kW) 42.5 89.7 30.8 Animals (kW) -34.1 -72.1 -23.5 Heating needs (kW) 37.6 59.2 60.0

Mounting Gestation Maternity

Table 6. Summer thermal loads and cooling needs at every building.

Building Enclosures transmission (kW) 2.5 2.8 5.2 Solar radiation (kW) 4.1 2.1 2.2 Animals (kW) 40.9 75.3 30.0 Ventilation (kW) -12.6 -23.2 9.2 Cooling needs (kW) 34.9 57.0 46.6

Mounting Gestation Maternity

The unit power and number of fan-coils need in every building are shown in Table 7. As the Maternity building was subdivided in 5 parts, the number of fan-coils had to be a multiple of 5. Table 7. Fan-coils power and number at every building.
Building Mounting Gestation Maternity Unit power (kW) 5.00 9.50 6.99 Number 9 7 10 Total power (kW) 45.0 66.5 69.9

Table 8 shows the heating and cooling power and the efficiencies of the head pumps for every building. The highest powers were needed for the Gestation and Maternity buildings. The efficiencies fall in the typical range for heat pump in geothermal facilities. Table 8. Head pump heating and cooling powers and efficiencies at every building.
Building Mounting Gestation Maternity Heating power (kW) 37.6 59.2 60.0 Power consumption when heating (kW) 11.4 18.8 19.1 COP 3.3 3.1 3.1 Cooling power (kW) 34.9 57.0 46.5 Power consumption when cooling (kW) 8.0 14.2 10.6 EER 4.4 4.0 4.4

COP, Coefficient of Performance EER, Energy Efficiency Ratio

The pipe length and the number of geothermal double U proves (wells) needed at every building are shown in Table 9.

Table 9. Length and number of geothermal double U proves at every building.

Building Mounting Gestation Maternity Pipe length (m) 685 1057 1072 100 m wells (number) 4 6 6

The total investment was of 311,455 . The 40% of them was considered to be subsidized by the government. The effect of the piglet production increase on the investment evaluation indexes is shown in Table 10. Table 10. Piglet production increase effect on investment evaluation indexes.
Piglets production increase (%) Net Present Value (x1000 ) Internal Rate of Return (%) Payback Period (years) 3 18 3.2 14 4 75 6.9 11 5 133 10.3 9 6 191 13.3 7 7 249 16.3 6 8 307 19.1 6 9 365 21.8 5 10 422 24.4 5

According to these results, the inversion is profitable with production increases above 3%. A 5% increases can be expected due to the improvement of the environmental conditions which would justify the investment with an Internal Rate of Return of 10.3%. However, these results are very dependent on the government subside which can be suppressed, especially in the current crisis context. 4. Conclusions The geothermic air conditioning of an intensive piggery is technically possible obtaining high efficiency indexes. Provided the 40% government subsidy persists and a 5% increase of production or more is achieved, it is also economically feasible. 5. References [1] IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth AssessmentReport of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A.(eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp. [2] V. Valio, A. Perdigones, C. Porras and D. Alcal, 2009. Efectos del calentamiento global: viabilidad futura de los actuales equipos de refrigeracin para naves ganaderas. V Congreso Nacional y II Congreso Ibrico Agroingenieria. Lugo 28-30 september. [3] ASHRAE, 1995. Commercial/Institutional GSHP Engineering Manual.