Open Collections

UBC Undergraduate Research

UBC transition from steam to hot water district energy : alternatives for addressing MacMillan’s steam… Castro, Brenda Scott Apr 17, 2013

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
18861-Castro_B_SEEDS_2013.pdf [ 1.56MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 18861-1.0108534.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0108534-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0108534-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0108534-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0108534-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0108534-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0108534-source.json
Full Text
18861-1.0108534-fulltext.txt
Citation
18861-1.0108534.ris

Full Text

UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report Disclaimer: UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.  UBC transition from steam to hot water district energy: alternatives for addressing MacMillan’s steam orphanage and UBC’s absorption chillers Brenda Scott Castro University of British Columbia CEEN 596 Final Project April 17, 2013   Abstract The current steam heating system will be replaced with a hot water distribution system that will reduce campus GHG emissions by 22%, energy use by 24%, and up to $4 million/year in operational and energy costs. Even though heating and domestic hot water are the main end uses of most buildings on campus, there are buildings that require steam for other processes; those buildings will become steam orphans. The purpose of this project is to identify alternatives for addressing the steam orphanage for MacMillan building’s steam equipment, as well as for the three UBC’s campus absorption chillers in three other buildings. The main objectives for this project are: to outline the specifications, operating hours, steam consumption, O&M costs, GHG impacts and life expectancy of MacMillan’s steam equipment and the three absorption chillers in CICSR, FSC, and Brimacombe. As well as to evaluate feasibility, costs and business case for different alternatives. Three indicators were chosen to identify the best option for each building: capital cost, net present value and GHG impacts.  However, from a simple environmental perspective, if the following options are implemented: MacMillan – New Autoclaves, CICSR – Heat Recovery Chiller, FSC – Electric Chiller, and Brimacombe – Electric Chiller. UBC can save up to 1,360 tonnes of GHG emissions, which is equal to 2.2% of total campus yearly emissions.  1  Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose and Objectives .................................................................................................... 2 2 Project Background ................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 MacMillan Building ........................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Absorption Chillers on Campus ........................................................................................ 5 2.3 Chiller Technologies ......................................................................................................... 6 2.3.1 Absorption Chillers .................................................................................................... 6 2.3.2 Electric Chillers .......................................................................................................... 7 3 Energy Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 MacMillan ......................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Absorption Chillers ......................................................................................................... 10 3.2.1 CICSR Steam Consumption ..................................................................................... 11 3.2.2 FSC Steam Consumption ......................................................................................... 16 3.2.3 Brimacombe Steam Consumption .......................................................................... 19 4 Replacement Alternatives ..................................................................................................... 23 4.1 MacMillan ....................................................................................................................... 24 4.1.1 Option 1: Distributed Electric-Steam Generators ................................................... 24 4.1.2 Option 2: Central Electric-Steam Generator ........................................................... 25 4.1.3 Option 3: New Autoclaves ...................................................................................... 26 4.2 Absorption Chillers ......................................................................................................... 27 4.2.1 CICSR ....................................................................................................................... 29 4.2.2 Forest Sciences Centre (FSC) ................................................................................... 32 4.2.3 Brimacombe ............................................................................................................ 35 5 Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 35 6 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 37 7 Recommendations for Future Work ..................................................................................... 37 8 References ............................................................................................................................ 39    2  Tables Table 1. MacMillan’s Building Information ..................................................................................... 4 Table 2 Autoclaves descrptions ...................................................................................................... 5 Table 3 Building Information – CICSR, FSC, and Brimacombe ........................................................ 5 Table 4 Characteristics of Typical Single-Effect, Indirect-Fired, Water/Lithium Bromide Absorption Chiller ........................................................................................................................... 6 Table 5 Replacement alternatives for all four buildings ............................................................... 23 Table 6 MacMillan Option 1 business case ................................................................................... 24 Table 7 MacMillan Option 2 business case ................................................................................... 25 Table 8 MacMillan Option 3 business case ................................................................................... 26 Table 9 Absorption chillers replacement alternatives .................................................................. 28 Table 10 CICSR Option 1 business case ......................................................................................... 30 Table 11 CICSR Option 2 business case ......................................................................................... 31 Table 12 CICSR Option 3 business case ......................................................................................... 31 Table 13 FSC Option 1 business case ............................................................................................ 33 Table 14 FSC Option 1 business case ............................................................................................ 34 Table 15 Brimacombe Option 1 business case ............................................................................. 35 Table 16 Summary of the evaluated options ................................................................................ 36 Figures Figure 1 Energy Use Intensities for all four buildings ..................................................................... 8 Figure 2 MacMillan energy consumption for 2012 ........................................................................ 9 Figure 3 MacMillan steam end uses ............................................................................................. 10 Figure 4 Peak cooling loads for absorption units during the hottest day over the past three years....................................................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 5 CICSR Monthly Energy Consumption .............................................................................. 12 Figure 6 CICSR Daily steam consumption vs. HDDs ...................................................................... 13 Figure 7 CICSR monthly consumption vs. HDD ............................................................................. 14 Figure 8 CICSR daily steam consumption by end use ................................................................... 15 Figure 9 CICSR’s Summer Cooling Load – KW ............................................................................... 15 Figure 10 Heat Recovery Potential – Avg Cooling and Heating Load ........................................... 16 Figure 11 FSC Monthly Energy Consumption ............................................................................... 17 Figure 12 Daily Consumption vs HDD and CDD ............................................................................ 18 Figure 13 FSC monthly consumption vs. HDD .............................................................................. 18 Figure 14 FSC monthly steam consumption by end use ............................................................... 19 Figure 15 Brimacombe monthly energy consumption ................................................................. 20 Figure 16 Brimacombe daily steam consumption vs. HDDs and CDDs ........................................ 21 Figure 17 Brimacombe monthly steam consumption vs. HDDs ................................................... 22 Figure 18 Brimacombe monthly steam consumption by end use ................................................ 23 Figure 19 Typical Lithium Bromide Absorption Chiller Performance Versus Temperature (ASHRAE, 2011) ............................................................................................................................. 28 Figure 20 Distribution losses for running DES at 90°C .................................................................. 29 Figure 21 Distribution losses for running DES at 115°C ................................................................ 331  1 Introduction The university’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) was born in 2010 as a result of UBC’s commitment to reduce its direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions. By the year 2015, the university would reduce its emissions 33% below 2007 levels, to 66% below by 2020, and finally the university would reduce its GHG emissions by 100% by 2050, and be a “net positive campus”.  The CAP outlines six areas as the key sources of UBC’s GHG emissions (UBC Campus Sustainability Office, 2010):   1) Campus Development and Infrastructure 2) Energy Supply and Management 3) Fleets and Fuel Use 4) Travel and Procurement 5) Food 6) Transportation Various strategies were developed, but in general to achieve these goals, the university would focus on reducing the first 33% through energy efficiency and conservation, the next 33% by switching from natural gas to renewable energy sources, and finally become net GHG positive by exporting surplus renewable energy to the surrounding community. To achieve its 2015 goal of reducing GHG emissions by 33% below 2007 levels, UBC has identified three main strategies. The first one is the Bioenergy Research and Demonstration Project. This plant was completed in September 2012 and is sized to reduce UBC’s greenhouse 2  gas emissions by 4,500 tonnes/year (Nexterra, 2012). The second strategy is participation in Power Smart’s Continuous Optimization program for 72 buildings on campus. This program attempts to minimize building energy use by optimizing the systems within the building. Finally, the third strategy which UBC chose to adopt is to upgrade the campus’ district energy system. The current steam heating system will be replaced with a hot water distribution system that will reduce campus GHG emissions by 22%, energy use by 24%, and up to $4 million/year in operational and energy costs; Phase 1 of this project has been completed (UBC Campus Sustainability Office, 2012).  The process of converting the district energy system from steam to hot water includes replacing the existing infrastructure (steam boilers, piping, and heat exchangers) with infrastructure for a hot water district energy system. Although heating and domestic hot water are the main end uses of most buildings on campus, there are buildings that require steam for other processes; for those buildings, onsite steam generation and other alternatives will need to be assessed. There are also three buildings on campus that use steam for cooling purposes through absorption chillers. For these buildings, replacement option will also need to be assessed.  The steam to hot water conversion project will be one of the largest hot water conversions in North America with 15 km of distribution piping, 131 energy transfer stations (ETS) in the buildings’ mechanical rooms, and a 52MW hot water plant. 1.1 Purpose and Objectives This project will focus on four buildings on campus: MacMillan, the Institute for Computing, Information and Cognitive Systems / Computer Science (also known as CICSR), the Forest 3  Sciences Centre (FSC), and the Brimacombe buildings. The purpose of this project is to identify alternatives for addressing the steam orphanage for MacMillan building’s steam equipment, as well as for the three UBC’s campus absorption chillers in the other three buildings. Objectives:  To outline the specifications, operating hours, steam consumption, O&M costs, GHG impacts and life expectancy of MacMillan’s steam equipment and the three absorption chillers in CICSR, FSC, and Brimacombe.  To evaluate feasibility, costs and business case for: o Providing an alternate source of steam (dedicated steam generators or steam boiler in mechanical room). o Replacing autoclaves with new autoclaves (electric or steam with built in steam generators).  To evaluate feasibility, costs and business case for: o Converting chillers to hot water.   o Replacing absorption chillers with electric chillers.  o Replacing absorption chillers with heat recovery chillers, for CICSR 4  2 Project Background Addressing steam orphanage is a priority for the UBC Project Services because the central steam plant is expected to be decommissioned in the near future. The four buildings that will be assessed in this report are described below. 2.1 MacMillan Building Addressing the steam orphanage of MacMillan is a priority for Project Services since the building is part of the conversion phase that is being currently designed by the engineering consultants. Project Services has recognised that MacMillan’s laboratories have equipment that is being serviced by the central steam plant. Table 1 shows additional information of the Macmillan Building.  Table 1. MacMillan’s Building Information Construction Year: 1967  Building Gross Area: 14,087m2  Structure: Concrete  Steam End Uses: Heating  Domestic Hot Water  Lab processes Steam Equipment: 4 autoclaves  Originally, the building had 15 pieces of equipment that would run on steam; seven autoclaves, two stills, two steam baths, one milk pasteurizer, one kettle, one retort, and one dishwasher. However, due to changes in the occupancy and technology, only four autoclaves remain in two different lab rooms in the building. Out of the four, only three are connected and only two are used on a regular basis. Table 2 shows information on each of these units. 5  Table 2 Autoclaves descrptions LOCATION SHAPE STATUS WIDTH HEIGHT DEPTH VOLUME (FT3) ROOM 240 Cylindrical Being repaired 16  24 2.5  ROOM 240 Rectangular Active 20 20 30 7.0  ROOM 302D Cylindrical Active 15  24 2.5  ROOM 302D Rectangular Not connected 18 18 24 4.5   2.2 Absorption Chillers on Campus The three absorption chillers on campus that currently run on steam (coming from the campus’ central plant) will need to be addressed and feasible alternatives will need to be analysed. These chillers are located in three different buildings: Brimacombe, the Institute for Computing, Information and Cognitive Systems / Computer Science (CICSR), and the Forest Sciences Centre (FSC). Table 3 Building Information – CICSR, FSC, and Brimacombeshows information on each of the three buildings that will be analysed.  Table 3 Building Information – CICSR, FSC, and Brimacombe  CICSR FSC BRIMACOMBE CONSTRUCTION YEAR: 1993  1998  1995  BUILDING GROSS AREA: 10,204.19 m2  22,717.94 m2  8,550.62 m2  STRUCTURE: Concrete  Concrete  Concrete  STEAM END USES: Heating Cooling Domestic Hot Water Heating Cooling Domestic Hot Water Heating Cooling Domestic Hot Water 6  STEAM EQUIPMENT: 365 Ton Absorption Chiller 580 Ton Absorption Chiller 300Ton Absorption Chiller  CICSR is hosts the Institute for Computing, Information and Cognitive Systems and it is primarily comprised of computer labs, data centres, and offices. FSC is home of the Faculty of Forest Sciences and is comprised of offices, class rooms, auditoriums, and labs. Lastly, the Brimacombe building consists of several materials and mechanical laboratories. All of these buildings were constructed from 1993 and 1998. 2.3 Chiller Technologies 2.3.1 Absorption Chillers Absorption chillers technologies can be single- or double-effect, fired by steam or direct-fired by gas, oil, or waste heat. They use a lithium bromide/water cycle in which water is the refrigerant and lithium bromide is the absorbent. Absorption chillers differ from compression chillers in that they use a source of heat to provide the energy needed to drive the cooling process, rather than mechanical energy. The heat source is often low pressure steam or hot water. Single-effect chillers have a typical coefficient of performance (COP) of 0.6-0.8. Table 4 lists the typical characteristics of a single stage absorption chiller (ASHRAE, 2011). Table 4 Characteristics of Typical Single-Effect, Indirect-Fired, Water/Lithium Bromide Absorption Chiller PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS Steam input pressure 9 to 12 psig Steam consumption 18.3 to 18.7 lb/ton · h 7  Hot-fluid input temp. 240 to 270°F, with as low as 190°F for for waste heat applications Heat input rate 18,100 to 18,500 Btu/ton · h Cooling water temp. in 85°F Cooling water flow 3.6 gpm/ton, with up to 6.4 gpm/ton for some smaller machines Chilled-water temp. off 44°F Chilled-water flow 2.4 gpm/ton, with 2.6 gpm/ton for some smaller international machines  2.3.2 Electric Chillers Liquid (usually water) is chilled by liquid refrigerant evaporating at a lower temperature. Then it’s drawn into the compressor, which increases the pressure and temperature of the gas. Then enters the condenser where the cooling medium is warmed in the process. The condensed liquid refrigerant then flows through an expansion valve before returning to the evaporator where heat is removed from the cycle. Coefficient of performance for these chillers vary, but proven technologies have COP as high as 6 for chillers from 150 to 300 tonnes (ASHRAE, 2007). 3 Energy Analysis Although steam consumption is the area of main focus of this study, electricity consumption is also important to understand the patterns of energy consumption of the buildings. Steam and electricity consumptions records for all four buildings were obtained from UBC Utilities. 2012 data was used to establish the baseline for the energy consumption. Due to lack of metered data from July to December 2012 for Brimacombe, data from July 2012 to June 2012 was used. All three buildings are equipped with PowerLogic ION 7330 meters that, according to UBC Utilities, are trending accurate data. Figure 1 shows the energy use intensities of all four 8  buildings. This information allows us to compare the buildings among themselves and we can quickly identify that CICSR is a very energy intense building.   Figure 1 Energy Use Intensities for all four buildings 3.1 MacMillan MacMillan is an academic building, home of the Faculty of Land and Food Systems, primarily comprised of research labs, class rooms and offices. Figure 2 shows MacMillan’s monthly energy consumption for 2012. Electricity consumption is relatively constant throughout the year, while steam consumption is high during the coldest months, and decreases with warmer weather.   - 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000MacMillan CICSR FSC BrimacombeKWh/m2 /yrElectricity EUI Steam EUI9   Figure 2 MacMillan energy consumption for 2012 MacMillan steam consumption consists of heating, domestic hot water (DHW) and process steam (autoclaves). Since there is no sub-metering in UBC’s buildings, some assumption were done to isolate each of these steam end uses. DHW is considered a constant load it is assumed that it represents 7% of the total energy consumption (DOE, 2012).  The autoclaves’ consumption was calculating doing some assumptions. According to the manufacturer, for a  25 minute cycle in a 200 l autoclave with a 17 lb instrument tray full of water tasks, a temperature difference of 200°F (from 70 to 270 °F), the steam consumption is 18 lb/cycle, which is equal to 55lb/hr and 7lbs/hr while on stand-by mode (STERIS, 2010). This consumption will be considered for the large autoclave in room 240. Assuming that the energy needed to fill up energy of steam used to purge and fill the free volume of autoclave is 4,028 BTU/ft3, the consumption of the smaller autoclave in room 302D is 37 lb/hr (Martynenko, N/A).  The consumption of the two autoclaves is then 92lb/hr plus 10 lbs/hr while on stand-by, assuming the smaller autoclaves uses 3 lbs/hr. According to the buildings Operations Manager,  - 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000eKWhElectricity Consumption Steam Consumption10  the large autoclave is used 6 hr/week, 8months/year which is equal to 210 hr. The smaller autoclave has a log where users write down the hours of use; during 2012 this autoclave operated for 113 hours. The total steam consumption of both autoclaves, including idle time, is 100,000lb/yr or 106 GJ/yr. Figure 3 shows the end use breakdown of the steam consumption of MacMillan building in GJ.   Figure 3 MacMillan steam end uses 3.2 Absorption Chillers The first step that was taken in this project was to assess the capacities of the three chillers. Usually chillers are designed for peak loads and allow room for increased building occupancy. However, it was suspected that these absorption units were significantly oversized. The first exercise was to determine the buildings peak consumption on the hottest day over the past three years. Figure 4 shows the peak loads for the three absorption units using weather data and steam consumption from the three buildings. The cooling loads were calculated on the  - 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000GJsDHW Autoclaves Heating11  hottest day of the past three years, which is August 15, 2010. Even though these buildings are only partially occupied during august, these peak loads exceed September loads.  Figure 4 Peak cooling loads for absorption units during the hottest day over the past three years The results show that the chillers are oversized. Brimacombe is only oversized by 15%, but CICSR is oversized by 58% and FSC by 40%. 3.2.1 CICSR Steam Consumption The first of the three absorption chillers that will be analysed is the one in the Institute for Computing, Information and Cognitive Systems / Computer Science Information (also known as CICSR). As expected, electricity consumption is fairly constant throughout the year (Figure 5), with slightly less consumption over the summer months, which is consistent with the fact that cooling is provided by steam. Steam, on the other hand shows to trends; there’s an increase in steam consumption over the winter months that slightly decreases when the days start to get warmer. The second trend is in the summer months, the steam consumption increases again in May and it decreases again in November. This indicates that the chiller is operating in free  - 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400TonCICSR FSC Brimacombe12  cooling mode from November to May and the steam consumption is due to heating needs. Then, the chiller is turned on in May and the majority of the steam consumption is due to the building’s cooling needs. Later on, a more in depth analysis on the steam consumption will be done.  Figure 5 CICSR Monthly Energy Consumption It is suspected that CICSR is a building with simultaneous cooling and heating needs due to the large computer science infrastructure consisting of consisting of core networking, common file servers, and shared computational resources. CICSR’s steam consumption shows an interesting trend, as mentioned before. Figure 6 explains the daily steam consumption and heating degree days (HDD) for 2012. As the graph shows, during the winter months, there is a correlation between steam consumption and HDD. Right on May 16 the data shows that the absorption chiller was turned on. Then the steam load is fairly constant until November 15 that it was turned off again and free cooling is used to meet the building’s cooling loads.   - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000eKWhElectricity Consumption Steam Consumption eKWh13   Figure 6 CICSR Daily steam consumption vs. HDDs In order to calculate the steam end uses for CICSR, a linear regression analysis during the heating months was applied and assuming that DHW accounts for 7% of the building’s energy consumption (Figure 7). According to the linear regression model, the steam consumption for a building is a function of the HDD and DHW is a constant load. Therefore, the following linear equation is used to calculate the steam consumption. Steam Consumption = 2,358.6(HDD) + DHW load, where DHW = 53,300 lb/month. 0510152025 - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,0001/1/20121/18/20122/4/20122/21/20123/9/20123/26/20124/12/20124/29/2012CHILLER ON6/2/20126/19/20127/6/20127/23/20128/9/20128/26/20129/12/20129/29/201210/16/201211/2/201211/19/201212/6/201212/23/2012HDDLb/day14   Figure 7 CICSR monthly consumption vs. HDD This equation can be applied to calculate the steam consumption for heating and DHW in the winter months. During the summer months, the heating loads must obey the same equation while the cooling loads will be the difference between the heating + DHW loads and the total steam consumption, as Figure 8 illustrates. According to the model, cooling steam consumption is 6,990,000 lbs/year or 7,400 GJ, which is equal to $71,000/yr in fuel costs.  y = 2358.6x + 53300R² = 0.9781 - 200,000.00 400,000.00 600,000.00 800,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,200,000.000 100 200 300 400 500Lbs of steam/monthHDDs15   Figure 8 CICSR daily steam consumption by end use According to the manufacturer, these absorption chillers use 19.6lb/hr to produce one ton of cooling, which is equal to 3.52MW. Now that the cooling steam consumption of the chiller is known, it is possible to calculate what the cooling load of the building is. Figure 9 shows the cooling load of CICSR for the summer of 2012.   Figure 9 CICSR’s Summer Cooling Load – KW  - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,0001/1/20121/15/20121/29/20122/12/20122/26/20123/11/20123/25/20124/8/20124/22/20125/6/20125/20/20126/3/20126/17/20127/1/20127/15/20127/29/20128/12/20128/26/20129/9/20129/23/201210/7/201210/21/201211/4/201211/18/201212/2/201212/16/201212/30/2012Domestic Hot Water Daily Heating Consumption Daily Cooling Consumption - 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450KW16  This information is useful to identify the average cooling load and also assess the heat recovery potential for this building. Figure 10 illustrates the heat recovery potential for this building. The area in red represents the cooling load, assuming there is a constant cooling need over the winter equal to 263 KW (which represents the average load over the summer). The line in blue represents the heating load and the area that falls under both loads represents the heat recovery potential, which is approximately 169 KW.  Figure 10 Heat Recovery Potential – Avg Cooling and Heating Load 3.2.2 FSC Steam Consumption The second chiller is located in the Forest Sciences Centre. Again, electricity consumption is fairly constant throughout the year. Steam consumption, on the other hand, is high when heating needs are high but also when the cooling needs are high (see Figure 11). However, the cooling period is shorter than in CICSR.  - 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 - 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 8001/1/20121/15/20121/29/20122/12/20122/26/20123/11/20123/25/20124/8/20124/22/20125/6/20125/20/20126/3/20126/17/20127/1/20127/15/20127/29/20128/12/20128/26/20129/9/20129/23/201210/7/201210/21/201211/4/201211/18/201212/2/201212/16/201212/30/2012KWAvg KW Cooling Heating KW17   Figure 11 FSC Monthly Energy Consumption Steam consumption in the Forest Sciences Centre (FSC) is different than CICSR. There is no simultaneous heating and cooling, instead, steam consumption is a function of HDDs during the winter, but also a function of CDD during the summer. Figure 12 illustrates how steam consumption decreases when HDDs decrease; this trend is sustained until July, when steam consumption increases as CDDs increase too.   - 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000 900,000 1,000,000eKWhElectricity Consumption Steam Consumption KWh18   Figure 12 Daily Consumption vs HDD and CDD A linear regression analysis with HDDs as a function of steam consumption (Figure 13) was done to identify the different steam end uses for FSC using the winter months. Assuming also a 7% for DHW load, the linear equation to determine steam consumption (during the winter months) is: Steam Consumption =5,684.1(HDD) + DHW load, where DHW = 196,960 lbs/month.  Figure 13 FSC monthly consumption vs. HDD 0510152025020,00040,00060,00080,000100,000120,000140,000160,000HDD/CDDLbs/dayDaily Steam Consumption HDD CDDy = 5684.1x + 196960R² = 0.96810500,0001,000,0001,500,0002,000,0002,500,0003,000,0000 100 200 300 400 500Lbs/monthHDDs19  Using this linear model, the heating and DHW end uses can be calculated, while the cooling end use is equal to the difference between the predicted Heating + DHW and the real consumption. Figure 14 shows an approximation of the monthly steam consumption by end use. According to this model, cooling steam consumption accounts for 5,000,000 lbs/year or 5300 GJ of steam, which equals to $51,000/year in fuel costs.   Figure 14 FSC monthly steam consumption by end use 3.2.3 Brimacombe Steam Consumption The third and last chiller is the one located in Brimacombe; the smallest of the three. Again, electricity consumption is constant throughout the year and the steam consumption varies with outdoor temperature (Figure 15). The bulk of the steam consumption occurs in the winter months too, and it goes down as the warmer days arrive. It reaches its lowest point in June, and we see an increase again in July.  - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500GJsDHW Heating Cooling20   Figure 15 Brimacombe monthly energy consumption Although, monthly energy consumption useful, these electricity and steam consumptions can tell a more detailed story if deeper analysis is done. Figure 16 shows the building’s daily energy consumption in orange; at the same time, on the secondary axis, HDDs and CDDs are plotted. Again, steam consumption correlates with HDDs during the winter months, and to a lower degree, it correlates with CDDs.   - 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000Electricity Consumption Steam21   Figure 16 Brimacombe daily steam consumption vs. HDDs and CDDs Again, a linear regression analysis is done with HDDs as a function of steam consumption for the winter months to identify the different steam end uses for Brimacombe; see Figure 17. Assuming also a 7% for DHW load, the linear equation to determine steam consumption (during the winter months) is: Steam Consumption =2,765.3(HDD) + DHW load, where DHW = 77,250 lbs/month.  0510152025 - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000HDD/CDDsLbs/dayDaily Cons HDD CDD22   Figure 17 Brimacombe monthly steam consumption vs. HDDs Using this linear equation we can isolate the different steam end uses: heating, DHW and cooling. Figure 18 shows the steam consumption from July 2011 to June 2012 by end use. Even though the majority of the steam consumption goes to heating, there is a substantial amount that goes to the absorption chiller. The chiller consumes 840,000 lbs/year or 884GJ of steam that is equal to $8,500/year in fuel costs. y = 2765.3x + 77250R² = 0.9349 - 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 1,600,0000 100 200 300 400 50023   Figure 18 Brimacombe monthly steam consumption by end use 4 Replacement Alternatives Different alternatives were evaluated for each of the buildings. Table 5 shows the different options analysed for each of the buildings Table 5 Replacement alternatives for all four buildings  MACMILLAN CICSR FSC BRIMACOMBE OPTION 1 Dedicated Steam Generators Conversion to Hot Water Conversion to Hot Water Conversion to Hot Water OPTION 2 Electric Steam Boiler Replacing with Electric Chiller Replacing with Electric Chiller Replacing with Electric Chiller OPTION 3 New Autoclaves Replacing with Heat Recovery       - 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000lbs/monthDHW Heating Cooling24  4.1 MacMillan The different alternatives for MacMillan’s autoclaves were evaluated. Two of the options consider providing on-site steam to the existing autoclaves and one option evaluates buying new autoclaves due to the advanced age of the existing equipment. The business cases are presented below. 4.1.1 Option 1: Distributed Electric-Steam Generators Option one for MacMillan’s autoclaves is to leave the existing equipment and installing dedicated steam generators. A Field Service Representative from Steris conducted a site visit to the building and assessed the existing autoclaves and the requirements to install three new steam generators. The steam generators quoted for each of the autoclaves have a rating of 30KW, and a max steam output of 95 lb/hr with 140 °F feed water. The steam generators lose up to 10 lbs/hr when fed with cool water. Table 6 shows the economic analysis for the purchase of three steam generators in the initial year. 5 years of remaining life was considered for the existing autoclaves. Also, the manufacturer could not warranty the work to be done for the installation of the steam generators due to the advanced age of the equipment. Table 6 MacMillan Option 1 business case ELECTRICITY USE (BASED ON TWO AUTOCLAVES)    Rating KW 30   Annual hours of operation Hours/year 323   Electricity consumption kWh/year 9,690   UBC Electrical cost  $/year 514  OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 2,500  TOTAL OPERATING COST $/yr 3,014    SUMMARY     CAPITAL COSTS    25   Steam Generators $/yr 39,954  Installation costs  3,280 TOTAL COSTS $/yr 46,248   5.75%    15 Year NPV -$116,734  4.1.2 Option 2: Central Electric-Steam Generator Option 2 is installing a new electric boiler in the mechanical room. A quotation was provided by Fulton for boiler model FB-L-75. It is a 75KW electric boiler with a steam output rating of 255 lb/hr, which allows for autoclaves peak consumption. Table 7 shows the economic analysis for the purchase of one electric steam boiler, at a 15 Net Present Value and a 5 year remaining life of the equipment.  Table 7 MacMillan Option 2 business case ELECTRICITY USE (BASED ON TWO AUTOCLAVES)    Rating kW 75   Annual hours of operation Hours/yr  323   Electricity consumption kWh/year 24,225   UBC Electrical cost  $/year 1,284  OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 5,000  TOTAL OPERATING COST PER YEAR INCL. WOOD FUEL $/yr 6,284    SUMMARY     CAPITAL EXPENSES     Electric Steam Boiler $ 17,000  VT-10 feed water/ condensate return system $ 3,000  Pre heat kit $ 2,500  Cooling kit $ 1,600  Installation costs $ 10,000 TOTAL COSTS $/yr 40,384   5.75%    15 Year NPV -$143,581  26  4.1.3 Option 3: New Autoclaves The third option for MacMillan is to purchase two new electric autoclaves to replace the existing four autoclaves, since only two run on a regular basis. A large 250L Steris autoclave for room 240 and a smaller bench top Tuttnauer autoclave for room 302D were quoted. The Steris LAB250 is a 250L steam sterilizer that comes with a 30KW steam generator; it is the same model that many labs in life science have. The smaller Tuttnauer 3870 is a manual sterilizer with capacity of 85L. It has 3KW electric elements that heat up a small water reservoir (Tuttnauer, N/A). Table 8 shows the economic analysis for the purchase of one electric steam boiler, at a 15 Net Present Value. Since they are not used all day long, additional sterilization services can be covered by these two autoclaves.   Table 8 MacMillan Option 3 business case ELECTRICITY USE    System Load Factor (average) % 100%  Rating kWe 33   Annual hours of operation Hours/yr 323   Electricity consumption Kwh/yr 10,659   UBC Electrical cost  $/year 565  OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 2,500  TOTAL OPERATING COST PER YEAR INCL. WOOD FUEL $/yr 3,065     SUMMARY     CAPITAL EXPENSES     AMSCO LAB 110 w/installation  46,682  Tuttnauer  3870M  14,307 TOTAL COSTS $/yr 64,054   5.75%    15 Year NPV -$91,959  27  4.2 Absorption Chillers Because running those chillers on steam is no longer an option, three different alternatives were assessed for each chiller. For all three buildings three options were assessed: converting chillers to hot water, replacing chillers with water cooled centrifugal chillers, and replacing chillers with modular heat recovery chillers. Based on the chillers peak loads and considering there is a 20% decrease in capacity when the supply temperature is below 112°C, according to the manufacturer. This assumption is backed up by Figure 19 Typical Lithium Bromide Absorption Chiller Performance Versus Temperature  which shows that a supply water temperature of 112°C equals to a capacity drop of 15% (ASHRAE, 2011). To be conservative, the 20% decrease in capacity will be considered and only CICSR and FSC are oversized enough to allow that drop in capacity. Brimacombe, on the other hand is already maxed out (peak load equals to 85% of chiller’s capacity) the chiller would not be able to provide enough cooling capacity. The maximum capacity that this 365 ton chiller could provide is 240 ton running on 115°C water from the steam plant, while the peak load registered in the warmest day of the past three years is 257 ton. Therefore, this option will not be considered for the Brimacombe building. 28   Figure 19 Typical Lithium Bromide Absorption Chiller Performance Versus Temperature (ASHRAE, 2011)  Only CICSR shows a representative year-round cooling load, therefore, it is the only chiller for which heat recovery will be assessed.  Table 9 shows the feasible alternatives when addressing steam orphanage for each one of the chillers. Table 9 Absorption chillers replacement alternatives  CICSR FSC Brimacombe Option 1 Conversion to Hot Water Conversion to Hot Water Conversion to Hot Water Option 2 Replace with Electric Chiller Replacing with Electric Chiller Replacing with Electric Chiller Option 3 Replace with Heat Recovery Chiller Replace with Heat Recovery Chiller Replace with Heat Recovery Chiller   29  4.2.1 CICSR 4.2.1.1 Option1: Convert Existing Chiller from Steam to Hot Water As discussed above, it is technically feasible to convert CICSR’s chiller to hot water. However, the capacity drops proportionally to the temperature of the water. In order to meet peak cooling loads, it is necessary to increase the temperature of the district energy from the average 75° to 90°C. This will result in distribution losses that are calculated by the Logstor Calculator 2.1. Figure 20 shows a screenshot of the calculator. Assuming the 90°C will be sustained for 30 days a year (to meet peak consumption during the warmest days of the year), the thermal losses account for 395,000 kWh.  Figure 20 Distribution losses for running DES at 90°C 30   Table 10 shows the business case for converting the CICSR chiller to how water. The performance of the absorption chiller will be affected by the reduced supply water temperature, with a 10% decrease in rated COP, according to Figure 19.  The calculations include annual energy consumption, a COP of 0.58, Logstor Calculator thermal losses, maintenance costs of $10,000/year, and $100,000 of capital costs of modifying the chiller. Over a period of 15 years, the net present value for this option is $-1,130,750. Table 10 CICSR Option 1 business case  THERMAL ENERGY USE     Annual Energy Consumption MMBTU/yr 7,859  Total Annual Energy Consumption  GJ's/yr  8,291  Thermal losses due to 90°C summer time DES  GJ's/yr  1,677   Thermal Energy Costs  $/year  88,682 OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 10,000  TOTAL OPERATING COSTS $/yr 98,682     SUMMARY     CAPITOL EXPENSES   100,000 TOTAL COSTS $/yr 198,682   5.75%    15 Year NPV -$1,130,750  4.2.1.2 Option 2: Replace Existing Chiller with new Electric Chillers Option 2 consists of replacing the absorption chiller with a new 200 ton SMARDT Water Cooled Chiller (oil-free magnetic bearing, centrifugal), considering that the current chiller is considerably oversized (as shown in Figure 4). Table 11 shows the business case for replacing the CICSR chiller with the electric chiller. The calculations include annual energy consumption, assuming conservative chiller COP of 4.5 (manufacturer’s data claims COPs higher than 6). It 31  also includes maintenance costs of $10,000/year, and $431,501 of capital costs for replacing the chiller. Over a period of 15 years, the net present value for this option is -$686,041. Table 11 CICSR Option 2 business case ELECTRICITY USE    Electricity consumption kWh/year 276,591  UBC Electrical cost  $/year 14,659 OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 10,000  TOTAL OPERATING COST PER YEAR  $/yr 24,659     SUMMARY     CAPITAL EXPENSES   431,501  TOTAL COSTS $/yr 456,409   5.75%    15 Year NPV -$686,041   4.2.1.3 Option 3: Replace Chiller with new Heat Recovery Chiller Option 3 consists of replacing the absorption chiller with a new 200 ton Water Cooled Modular Chiller with condenser return water temperature as high as 135°F, while simultaneously producing chilled water for the chiller system. Table 12 shows the business case for replacing the CICSR chiller with the simultaneous heating and cooling chiller. The calculations include annual energy consumption, assuming chiller COP of 4. It also includes maintenance costs of $10,000/year, and a capital cost of $462,000. Considering that CICSR has a heat recovery potential of 275 KW all year round, the heat recovery chiller can save up to 5,700 GJ in thermal energy equal to $50,280/year. Over a period of 15 years, the net present value for this option is -$207,009. Table 12 CICSR Option 3 business case ELECTRICITY USE   32   Electricity consumption kWh/year 304,250  UBC Electrical cost  $/year 16,125  THERMAL ENERGY SAVINGS     Total Annual Thermal Energy saved  GJ's/yr  5,652  Thermal Energy Savings $/year  50,280 OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 10,000  TOTAL OPERATING COST/SAVINGS $/yr (24,155)     SUMMARY     CAPITAL EXPENSES   462,000 COSTS LESS SAVINGS $/yr 437,845   5.75%    15 Year NPV -$207,009  4.2.2 Forest Sciences Centre (FSC) 4.2.2.1 Option 1: Convert Existing Chiller from Steam to Hot Water Option 1 for FSC also consists on converting the absorption chiller to run on hot water. According to the manufacturer, it is technically possible to make do so. However, as the capacity drops proportionally to the temperature of the water, it is necessary to increase the temperature of the district energy from the average 75° to 115°C. This will result in distribution losses also calculated by the Logstor Calculator 2.1. Figure 21 shows a screenshot of the calculator. Assuming the 115°C will be sustained for 30 days a year (to meet peak consumption during the warmest days of the year), the thermal losses account for 505,000 kWh. 33   Figure 21 Distribution losses for running DES at 115°C Table 13 shows the business case for converting the FSC chiller to hot water. The calculations include annual energy consumption, assuming the COP of the absorption chiller drops from 0.64 to 0.58. It also includes the Logstor Calculator thermal losses, maintenance costs of $10,000/year, and $100,000 of capital costs for modifying the chiller. Over a period of 15 years, the net present value for this option is -$924,278. Table 13 FSC Option 1 business case THERMAL ENERGY USE     Annual Energy Consumption MMBTU/year Hot Water 5,311  Total Annual Energy Consumption  GJ's/yr  5,604   Thermal losses due to 115°C summer time DES temps  GJ's/yr  2,139   Thermal Energy Costs  $/year  68,880 OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 10,000      34  TOTAL OPERATING COSTS $/yr 78,880     SUMMARY         CAPITAL EXPENSES   100,000 TOTAL COSTS $/yr 178,880   5.75%    15 Year NPV -$924,278 4.2.2.2 Option2: Replace Existing Chiller with new Electric Chillers Option 2 consists of replacing the absorption chiller with a new 387 ton SMARDT Water Cooled Chiller, considering that the FSC chiller is also considerably oversized (as shown in Figure 4). Table 14Table 11 shows the business case for replacing the CICSR chiller with the electric chiller. The calculations include annual energy consumption, assuming chiller COP of 4.5. It also includes maintenance costs of $10,000/year, and $580,250 of capital costs for replacing the chiller. Over a period of 15 years, the net present value for this option is -$783,908. Table 14 FSC Option 1 business case ELECTRICITY USE    Electricity consumption kWh/year 205,756  UBC Electrical cost  $/year 10,907 OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 10,000  TOTAL OPERATING COSTS $/yr 20,907     SUMMARY     CAPITAL EXPENSES   580,250 TOTAL COSTS $/yr 601,157   5.75%    15 Year NPV -$783,908  35  4.2.3 Brimacombe 4.2.3.1 Option 2: Replace Existing Chiller with new Electric Chillers Option 2 consists of replacing the absorption chiller with a new 300 ton SMARDT Water Cooled Chiller, which is the same capacity of the current absorption chiller. Table 15 shows the business case for replacing the Brimacombe chiller with the electric chiller. The calculations include annual energy consumption, assuming chiller COP of 4.5. It also includes maintenance costs of $10,000/year, and $522,500 of capital costs for replacing the chiller. Over a period of 15 years, the net present value for this option is -$744,723. Table 15 Brimacombe Option 1 business case ELECTRICITY USE    Electricity consumption kWh/year 46,049  UBC Electrical cost  $/year 2,345 OTHER O&M COSTS    Maintenance Costs (internal and contractor) $/yr 10,000      TOTAL OPERATING COSTS $/yr 22,345  SUMMARY        CAPITOL EXPENSES   522,500 TOTAL COSTS $/yr 534,845   5.75%  15 Year NPV  -$632,200 5 Recommendations By evaluating all the different alternatives for all four buildings, several conclusions can be drawn. Table 16 summarizes the results for each of the scenarios that were analysed. Three indicators were chosen to identify the best option for each building: Capital cost, Net Present Value, and GHG emissions. For MacMillan, the option with the lower initial capital cost is Option 2 – Installing an electric boiler in the mechanical room. However, existing autoclaves will 36  require to be replaced in the near term. Assuming a 5-year remaining life for the existing equipment, the NPV for these two options ends up being less attractive than investing in new autoclaves in the present term. For CICSR, Option 1 – Converting chiller to hot water has the lowest capital cost, but Option 3 – Replacing chiller with SHC chiller is the one with the best NPV, as well as a positive GHG impact, saving 925 tonnes of GHG emissions when compared to the business as usual scenario. FSC circumstance is similar to CICSR, Option 1 – Converting the chiller to hot water represents the best alternative in terms of capital cost. However, the NPV and GHG impacts are better in Option 2 – Replacing chiller with a water cooled chiller; this alternative will reduce GHG emissions by 393 ton when compared to current operations. Brimacombe does not have multiple options to choose from. The only feasible alternative is to replace the absorption chiller with a water cooled chiller.  Table 16 Summary of the evaluated options   Initial Capital Cost NPV Tonnes eCO2 MacMillan Steam Generators $43,234 -$116,734 0.2 Electric Boiler $34,100 -$143,581 0.6 New Autoclaves $60,989 -$91,959 0.2 CICSR Hot Water $100,000 $(1,095,978) 652 Electric Chiller $431,750 $(795,762) 7  Heat Recovery Chiller $462,000 $(391,205) (362) FSC Hot Water $100,000 $(1,158,447)  506  Electric Chiller $580,250 $(863,646)  5  Brimacombe Hot Water N/A N/A N/A Electric Chiller $522,500 $(632,200) 1  37  6 Conclusions The academic exercise done in this project is very useful to screen the different options to address the steam orphanage in different buildings at UBC. Even though the results presented in terms of capital cost, NPV, and GHG impact, there are other factors that may be taken into account. In the case of MacMillan, the three autoclaves that are currently operating in the building are 35+ years old, which means they are way past their useful life. Right now, one of these autoclaves is out of service. In this case, it is advised to consider the option of replacing the autoclaves with new electric autoclaves. The operation of these units is more efficient and the lifespan will be longer. As in for the absorption chillers scenarios, even though the options with the lowest capital cost seems attractive, it is worth looking at the long term scenario. Going for electric chillers saves 60% of operational costs per year, while lowering the GHG impacts by 99%. The simultaneous heating and cooling chiller seems a great candidate for CICSR, a building with large cooling loads all year round due to the large number of computer servers. From a mere environmental perspective, if the following options are implemented: MacMillan – Option 3: New Autoclaves, CICSR –Option 3: Replace Chiller with new Heat Recovery Chiller, FSC – Option2: Replace Existing Chiller with new Electric Chillers, and Brimacombe – Option 2: Replace Existing Chiller with new Electric Chillers. UBC can save 1,360 tonnes of GHG emissions.  7 Recommendations for Future Work More detailed engineering calculations or measurements must be conducted to refine most of the assumptions that were made for this project. Likewise, capital costs should also be refined; 38  due to lack of time, installation costs for most of the systems were also based on assumptions. Capital costs were provided by the manufacturers, meaning they should be accurate.  Still, this project is a helpful first step in the assessment of the different alternatives for addressing steam orphanage in these four buildings. It serves as an idea of what paths to follow.   39  8 References ASHRAE. (2007). Interpretation IC 90.1-2004-6 of ASHRAE standard 90.1-2004.  ASHRAE. (2011). ASHRAE handbook: HVAC Applications. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers. DOE. (2012). 2011 Buildings Energy Data Book. D&R International, Ltd. . Martynenko, V. (N/A). The influence of aerated concrete products technology on the energy consumption during autoclaving.  Nexterra. (2012). Nexterra, UBC and GE Celebrate the Opening of Groundbreaking Renewable Biomass CHP System – A First in North America. Vancouver, BC. STERIS. (2010). Amsco Lab 250 and Amsco Lab 110 Small Sterilizers Data Sheet.  Tuttnauer. (N/A). Autoclaves and Accessories for Healthcare Professionals Product Catalog.  UBC Campus Sustainability Office. (2010). Case Studies Series / Planning for Climate Action.  UBC Campus Sustainability Office. (2012). UBC Annual Operational Sustainability Report | 2011/2012. Vancouver, BC.   

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.18861.1-0108534/manifest

Comment

Related Items