Consumption and demand comparisons of HVAC systems

Transforming Source Energy
© 2015 SEG,LLC www.SEGcorporation.com
 Model Building with Energy Usage in Various Locations
 HVAC Size 160 tons
 Educational Facility
 Two Stories
 Stipulated Design Using Trane Trace 700 at Five(5) Locations
 Tulsa, Oklahoma
 Panama City, Florida
 Vandenberg AFB, California
 Colorado Springs, Colorado
 Austin, Texas
1

 Demonstrate varying energy needs for an identical model
building at diverse locations.
 Quantify the reduced energy consumption and demand needs
for a geothermal HVAC system at diverse locations.
 Compare demand reductions at diverse locations
 Compare varying bore length requirements at diverse
locations for the identical model building.
2

 6 Graphs per location comparing
 Electronically Commutated Motor (ECM) Geothermal System
 Traditional Split System (Gas heat and electric cooling)
 Electric Heat Pump System
3

 Graph Set Includes:
 Average Monthly Consumption (kWh)
 Average Monthly Consumption (kWh) with Average Outside Air
Temperature (OAT)
 Average Monthly Consumption (kWh) Reduction using a
Geothermal System
 Average Monthly Electric Peak Demand (kW)
 Average Monthly Electric Demand (kW) with Average Outside Air
Temperature (OAT)
 Average Monthly Electric Demand Reduction (kW) using a
Geothermal System
4

5
Gas converted to kWh

6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
AveragemonthlyTemperature(degF)
Consumption(kWh)
Energy Consumption with Average OAT (Tulsa, OK)
ECM Geothermal System Air to Air Heat Pump Baseline Split System Average Monthly OAT (deg F)

7
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
Consumption(kWh)
Ground Source Consumption Reduction vs Split and HP
Tulsa, Oklahoma GEO vs Split Tulsa, Oklahoma GEO vs HP

8
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
January February March April May June July August September October November December
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand (Tulsa, OK)
ECM Geothermal System Baseline Split System Air to Air Heat Pump

9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
AverageMonthlyTemperature(degF)
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand with Average OAT (Tulsa, OK)
ECM Geothermal System Baseline Split System Air to Air Heat Pump Average Monthly OAT (deg F)

10
0
50
100
150
200
250
DemandReduction(kW)
Ground Source Electric Demand Reduction vs HP and Traditional Split

11
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Consumption(kWh))
Energy Consumption (Panama City, Florida)
ECM Geothermal System Air to Air Heat Pump Baseline Split System

12
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Consumption(kWh)
Energy Consumption with Average OAT (Panama City, Florida)

13
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Consumption(kWh)
Panama City, Florida GEO vs split Panama City, Florida GEO vs HP

14
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand (Panama City, Florida)

15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand with Average OAT (Panama City, Florida)

16
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
DemandReduction(kW)
Panama City, Florida GEO vs split Panama City, Florida GEO vs HP

17
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
Consumption(kWh)
Energy Consumption (Colorado Springs, Colorado)

18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Consumption(kWh)
Energy Consumption with Average OAT (Colorado Springs, Colorado)

19
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
Consumption(kWh)
Colorado Springs, Colorado GEO vs split Colorado Springs, Colorado GEO vs HP

20
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand (Colorado Springs, Colorado)

21
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand with Average OAT (Colorado Springs, Colorado)

22
0
50
100
150
200
250
DemandReduction(kW)
Colorado Springs, Colorado GEO vs split Colorado Springs, Colorado GEO vs HP

23
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
Consumption(kWh)
Energy Consumption (Vandenberg AFB, California)

24
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
Consumption(kWh)
Energy Consumption with Average OAT (Vandenberg AFB, California)

25
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
Consumption(kWh)
Vandenberg AFB, California GEO vs split Vandenberg AFB, California GEO vs HP

26
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand (Vandenberg AFB, California)

27
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand with Average OAT (Vandenberg AFB, CA

28
0
50
100
150
200
250
DemandReduction(kW)

29
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Consumption(kWh)
Energy Consumption (Austin, TX)

30
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Consumption(kWh)
Energy Consumption with Average OAT (Austin, Texas)

31
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Consumption(kWh)
Austin, Texas GEO vs. split Austin, Texas GEO vs HP

32
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand (Austin, Texas)

33
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
PeakDemand(kW)
Peak Electric Demand with Average OAT (Austin, Texas)

34
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
DemandReduction(kW)
Austin, Texas GEO vs split Austin, Texas GEO vs HP

35
0
50
100
150
200
250
Panama City, Florida Colorado Springs,
Colorado
Vandenberg AFB,
California
Tulsa, Oklahoma Austin, Texas
Demand(kW)
Ground Source Peak Electric Demand Reduction vs HP and Split
Peak Split Delta
Peak HP Delta
July
July
July
February
September
September
July
February
July
January

36
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
Tulsa, Oklahaoma Panama City,
Florida
Colorado Springs,
Colorado
Vandenberg AFB,
California
Austin, Texas
Feet
Total Required Bore Feet For Each Location (Two Pass HDPE U-Bend)
Total bore feet
*63 oF
*77 oF
*51 oF
*62 oF
*71 oF
* DEEP EARTH TEMPERATURE

 Significant reductions in Consumption (kWh) and Demand (kW)
by using Geothermal sourced HVAC systems
 Energy usage is vastly different at various locations in an
identically modeled building
 Bore length requirements vary considerably depending on
location
 Difference in energy usage and bore length is influenced by
 Latitude
 Elevation
 Climate
 Deep earth temperature
 Geology (conductivity)
 Efficient design using equipment and control programs with site
source energy selection should be employed to shorten bore
length requirements
37

Consumption and demand comparisons of HVAC systems

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Similar to Consumption and demand comparisons of HVAC systems

Recently uploaded

Consumption and demand comparisons of HVAC systems

Editor's Notes