Evaporative-Cooled vs.

Air-Cooled Chillers: Kirtland AFB Case Study

www.amec.com

DISCUSSION TOPICS

Brief Overview of Air-Cooled and Evaporative-Cooled Condenser

Technologies

Pros and Cons Scope and Results of Kirtland AFB Study Conclusions and Recommendations Q&A

AIR-COOLED CONDENSER BASICS

Refrigerant hot gas is cooled and condensed in Air-to-Refrigerant Heat Exchanger (coil). Air-Cooled Condenser efficiency depends on ambient air dry bulb temperature, i.e. the higher OAT is, the more power is required to compress hot gas in order to condense it into liquid.
3

EVAPORATIVE-COOLED CONDENSER BASICS

Treated water is sprayed over condenser coil. Part of water is evaporated thus lowering surface temperature of the condenser and the air drawn across it. Remaining water is collected in drain pan and recirculated back to sprayer. Make-up city water is added to replace evaporated water. Refrigeration system efficiency is increased by 25-50% compared to air-cooled due to lower vapor compression pressure, thus reducing compressors energy.
4

AIR-COOLED AND EVAPORATIVE-COOLED CONDENSER COMPARISON

PROS OF AIR-COOLED vs. EVAPORATIVE-COOLED:

Smaller cabinet Lighter weight No condenser water piping and treatment Lower equipment cost Lower maintenance cost No water consumption for condenser operation

PROS OF EVAPORATIVE-COOLED vs. AIR-COOLED:

20-40% lower electrical consumption of the chiller Quieter operation

KIRTLAND AFB ENERGY STUDY OBJECTIVE: Increase the energy efficiency of existing facilities on various Air
Force Bases in order to reduce the building annual operating cost.

STUDY SCOPE: Evaluate life cycle costs of replacement of existing Air-Cooled

Chillers with Evaporative-Cooled Chillers at seven (7) buildings. Life Cycle Cost Analysis compared costs associated with Evaporative-Cooled Chillers against Status Quo (air-cooled chillers), and included:
Capital Cost Estimate (material and labor) at +/-30% accuracy. Maintenance Cost analysis. Operating Cost Analysis (electricity and water).

KIRTLAND AFB ENERGY STUDY RESULTS

CAPITAL COST COMPARISON FOR EVAPORATIVE AND AIRCOOLED CHILLERS
BUILDING NO. 1005 20140 322 1017 20222 20361 472 CHILLER EVAPORATIVE-COOLED TONNAGE CHILLERS 60 60 70 90 100 165 250 $178,000 $178,000 $204,000 $262,000 $279,000 $389,000 $471,500 AIR-COOLED CHILLERS $74,000 $74,000 $84,000 $113,000 $130,000 $176,000 $235,000

KIRTLAND AFB ENERGY STUDY RESULTS

ANNUAL OPERATING COST COMPARISON FOR EVAPORATIVE AND AIR-COOLED CHILLERS
CHILLER TONS ELECTRICITY KWh x 1,000 / COST (chiller only)
AIR-COOLED EVAPCOOLED

CITY WATER AND SEWER (chiller only)

AIRCOOLED

MAINTENANCE (chiller only)

EVAPAIREVAPCOOLED COOLED COOLED

60 60 70 90 100 165 250

49 / $3,920 49 / $3,920 56 / $4,480 34 / $2,720 66 / $5,280

28 / $2,240 28 / $2,240 30 / $2,400 16 / $1,280 39 / $3,120

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$323 $323 $353 $196 $463 $665 $1,260

$1,600 $1,600 $1,600 $2,400 $2,400 $2,400 $2,400

$2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $3,200 $3,200 $3,200 $3,200

8

102 / $8,160 56 / $4,480 200 / $16,000 108 / $8,640

KIRTLAND AFB ENERGY STUDY RESULTS

10- YEAR LIFE CYCLE COST COMPARISON FOR EVAPORATIVE AND AIR-COOLED CHILLERS
BLDG NO. 1005 20140 322 1017 20222 20361 472 CHILLER TONNAGE 60 60 70 90 100 165 250 LCC OF EVAPORATIVECOOLED CHILLERS $301,000 $301,000 $350,000 $462,000 $513,000 $757,000 $1,386,000 LCC OF AIRCOOLED CHILLERS $201,000 $201,000 $233,000 $293,000 $335,000 $557,000 $1,191,000 COST RATIO OF AIR-COOLED / EVAP-COOLED CHILLERS 67% 67% 62% 64% 65% 74% 86%
9

KIRTLAND AFB ENERGY STUDY RESULTS

10- YEAR LIFE CYCLE COST COMPARISON FOR EVAPORATIVE AND AIR-COOLED CHILLERS

10

CONCLUSIONS
EVAPORATIVE-COOLED CHILLERS MAY NOT BE THE BEST OPTION, BECAUSE:

Mid-range (50-150 tons) Air-Cooled Chillers may cost less than Half of
Evaporative-Cooled Chillers, which require: Special corrosion resistant coatings on condenser coils. Water spraying equipment. Larger cabinet size to accommodate water spraying equipment. Water treatment equipment, water and sewer piping.

Air-Cooled Chillers are more available and its pricing is more

competitive than Evaporative-Cooled Chillers..

Evaporative-Cooled Chillers require a larger foundation, water and

drain piping, and water treatment equipment.
11

CONCLUSIONS (continued)
EVAPORATIVE-COOLED CHILLERS MAY NOT BE THE BEST OPTION, BECAUSE:

Evaporative-Cooled Chillers consume a significant amount of Potable

Make-Up Water, which is in short supply and is costly in high-desert dry and arid areas.

Additional Maintenance Cost to treat Make-Up Water and clean

condenser coils, which partially offsets energy savings.

Energy Consumption of mid-range chillers is only 10-15% of the Total

building energy consumption; therefore the 25-40% Energy Savings for Evaporative-Cooled Chillers amount to only 5-7% of the Total Energy bill reduction

12

RECOMMENDATIONS

Review and Evaluate All Costs related to installation and

operation of Evaporative-Cooled Chillers before making a decision.
Capital Energy Water Maintenance

13

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

THANK YOU!
Corry Freeman, CEM Staff Mechanical Engineer AMEC corry.freeman@amec.com

14

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

BACK-UP SLIDES

15

BRIEF HISTORY OF EVAPORATIVE COOLING

Records of Evaporation Cooling use for human comfort trace back to

2,500 BC.

In 16th Century, Leonardo Da Vinci is known to be first to design a

Mechanical Evaporative Cooler a hollow wheel moving through a water bath.

In early 20th Century, Willis Carrier developed a psychrometric chart

similar to ones in use today along with the development of a formula that linked the transformation of sensible heat into latent heat during the adiabatic (no external heat input or output) saturation of air.
16

TYPES OF EVAPORATION COOLING EQUIPMENT

Direct Evaporative Coolers

Simply draw air through a moistened wick material and delivers the cooled

Indirect Evaporative Coolers

(but more humid) air to the space to be conditioned. Supply air temperature is limited by outside air wet-bulb temperature.

Operate similarly to a direct evaporative cooler but uses a heat exchanger. Stream of outdoor air passes through the heat exchanger, gets cooled by the
heat exchanger cold surfaces, and then is delivered to the space. The benefit of this is that the cooled air does not pick up any humidity as it does in the direct evaporative process. The drawback is the delivered air does not get as cool as in a direct evaporative process because it is limited by the ambient wet bulb temperature and the heat exchanger efficiency.

Mechanical refrigeration

Uses Vapor Compression Cycle consisting of Compression, Condensing,

Expansion, and Evaporation stages. Water is sprayed on condenser coil to increase refrigerant condensing rate, thus saving AC system energy.
17