que3jxp
2007-02-09, 05:06 PM
I was asked to start a thread on GHPs and their associated costs and benefits so here we go...
For those that are unaware GHPs are basically giant air conditioners. Air conditioners are nothing more than a heat pump that is typically asked to do the impossible by way of pushing hot air into hot air.
Thanks to several laws of thermodynamics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics) and the physics of heat transfer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_transfer), if you use a heatpump with greater temperature extremes on either side of the process, the effectiveness/efficiency of the process goes up very quickly.
In a nutshell, heat energy seeks to be in a state of equilibrum (Entropy) and if there is a greater temperature variance between to areas, the rate of exchange between these areas is greatly increased.
So now that we know this, how does it benefit us?
Most people are very familiar with air conditioners and to a lesser degree, air to air heatpumps. We are all also very familiar with the fact that in the wicked heat of the summer, the A/C in the car seems to barely get the job done and that the A/C in our house seems to make the 'ole electricity meter spin like a frisbee on a caffeine rush. What has happened here is that in laymens terms, there is little or no more "space" for the heat to go and the compressor system struggles to accomplish anything at all.
How do we fix this?
Stop using the air as our heatsink/heatsource.
The ground below us at a depth below 4 feet runs an average of 40 to 60 degrees F all the time. Some areas are closer to 40 and some are even above 60. Regardless, the temperature is signifigantly lower than the ambient air temperature in the summer and is signifigantly higher than the ambient air temperature in the winter.
And this means what to me?
What it means is that heating or cooling your house or structure is FAR easier when the ground is where you get your heat from or where you move your heat to.
Even the oldest of the modern GHPs are easily capable of 250% efficiency (2.5 COP in the HVAC business). These older systems are based on having two open ended water wells that draw ground water up into a compressor system that either extracts heat or dumps it back to the ground water. The best news is that the majority of modern GHPs are typically rated no less than a COP of 3, so 300% efficient. Some are even as high as 3.6 - 3.8 COP.
So how does all of this COP and percentage business help me?
Lets look at it in the most understandable way possible....
All hydrocarbon and wood based heating systems will NEVER reach 100% efficiency. If they did or could, they would never need a chimney/exhaust pipe. Electricity, as the direct source of heat, can never exceed 100% efficiency.
Now, rather than MAKING heat, heatpumps seek to MOVE the heat around to where we actually want it. Because of this, much less effort is involved if we are dealing with reasonably large temperature differences. So for heating purposes (Cooling is a slight bit more "mathy"), if you have a COP of 3.5, for every Dollar of electricity you use, you get 3.5 Dollars of heat.
Well, that is all fine and dandy, tell me how it really helped someone...
I chose to build my house in 2000 with a "Direct Expansion" (DX) GHP. A DX-GHP is a unit that eliminates having water wells or a closed loop of ethelyne glycol that then passes to a compressor stage. The "Direct" in DX is in reference to the compressor stage being in direct contact with the ground. Physically, it is a series of vertical loops of copper pipe that contain R22 (Or the current choice in its place) vaporous coolant and pass the heat directly to/from the ground to the compressor. It is generally the least troublesome to install as it is not dependant on having ground water available (For open loop systems) and it does not risk groundwater pollution if it ruptures.
The costs involved have changed but at the time of construction, the total HVAC installation cost in my house was $11,500. This covered 3 vertical "wells", the heatpump, a backup electric element, an HRV and all of the associated ductwork. Because the system does not draw a lot of electricity, there is also no need for anything larger than a 200 amp entrance and there is a HUGE amount of wiring and baseboard installation that does not need to be done.
I did not to direct comparative pricing at the time, but due to the code requirements on HRVs and their associated ductwork, I figured that the cost difference could not have been more than $8000. At that amount, it only took me 3 years to get my "Return on Investment".
How do you know that this was the case?
Well, I was lucky enough to have my parents in the same subdivision and in a house that was built to similar construction requierments. The extra nice benefit (In this case) was that being in the same subdivision means that the temperatures are the same.
Their house is electric BB only and was built in 1993. The basement is totally finished and they make it a habbit of turning the temperatures back in unused rooms in the winter. They have also changed 70-80% of their lights to CFL. The house is a 44 x 28 Bungalow.
My house is an L shaped "raised ranch" (Stupid bedrock) that has an outer dimension of 53 x 36 and an actual square footage on the main floor of 1,648 sq/ft. At the time of the power consumption, the basement was not finished, but the 2 x 6 walls that are above the concrete were insulated and vapor barriered. I have about the same % of CFL bulbs and where the whole house is on one system, all rooms are heated the same.
The final numbers rolled out such that the KWh per sq/ft for my house was less than 50% that of my parents house. Another way to look at it is via our equalized power bills. At the time of comparison, mine was $175 per month and my parents was $249. To the sq/ft, that is $0.106 per month for me and $0.202 for my parents. If I applied their costs to my house, the bill would have been $333. So in one year, the savings would roughly be $1900.
Because this comparison was back in 2001, there is an ever increasing amount of savings due to the annual 3% increase courtesy of NB Power. With all of the increases since, the current savings is more on the order of $2500 annually.
Now for the bad news...
The costs have gone up for installation, of course.
Some municipalities do not allow even DX-GHPs to be installed. (Fredericton is one)
They have a more lengthy ROI when put in after constrution.
On the upside...
They have a VERY long life expectancy (100 years on the "wells" and 20 years on the compressor)
They are a great alternative if you already have forced air.
They suplement over 60% of your hot water.
They are the single largest thing you can do to reduce your energy "footprint" and not go bankrupt.
For maintenance, I have had to do no more than replace a fan belt in all of the 6.5 years in the house so so far, awesome!!!
For those that are unaware GHPs are basically giant air conditioners. Air conditioners are nothing more than a heat pump that is typically asked to do the impossible by way of pushing hot air into hot air.
Thanks to several laws of thermodynamics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics) and the physics of heat transfer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_transfer), if you use a heatpump with greater temperature extremes on either side of the process, the effectiveness/efficiency of the process goes up very quickly.
In a nutshell, heat energy seeks to be in a state of equilibrum (Entropy) and if there is a greater temperature variance between to areas, the rate of exchange between these areas is greatly increased.
So now that we know this, how does it benefit us?
Most people are very familiar with air conditioners and to a lesser degree, air to air heatpumps. We are all also very familiar with the fact that in the wicked heat of the summer, the A/C in the car seems to barely get the job done and that the A/C in our house seems to make the 'ole electricity meter spin like a frisbee on a caffeine rush. What has happened here is that in laymens terms, there is little or no more "space" for the heat to go and the compressor system struggles to accomplish anything at all.
How do we fix this?
Stop using the air as our heatsink/heatsource.
The ground below us at a depth below 4 feet runs an average of 40 to 60 degrees F all the time. Some areas are closer to 40 and some are even above 60. Regardless, the temperature is signifigantly lower than the ambient air temperature in the summer and is signifigantly higher than the ambient air temperature in the winter.
And this means what to me?
What it means is that heating or cooling your house or structure is FAR easier when the ground is where you get your heat from or where you move your heat to.
Even the oldest of the modern GHPs are easily capable of 250% efficiency (2.5 COP in the HVAC business). These older systems are based on having two open ended water wells that draw ground water up into a compressor system that either extracts heat or dumps it back to the ground water. The best news is that the majority of modern GHPs are typically rated no less than a COP of 3, so 300% efficient. Some are even as high as 3.6 - 3.8 COP.
So how does all of this COP and percentage business help me?
Lets look at it in the most understandable way possible....
All hydrocarbon and wood based heating systems will NEVER reach 100% efficiency. If they did or could, they would never need a chimney/exhaust pipe. Electricity, as the direct source of heat, can never exceed 100% efficiency.
Now, rather than MAKING heat, heatpumps seek to MOVE the heat around to where we actually want it. Because of this, much less effort is involved if we are dealing with reasonably large temperature differences. So for heating purposes (Cooling is a slight bit more "mathy"), if you have a COP of 3.5, for every Dollar of electricity you use, you get 3.5 Dollars of heat.
Well, that is all fine and dandy, tell me how it really helped someone...
I chose to build my house in 2000 with a "Direct Expansion" (DX) GHP. A DX-GHP is a unit that eliminates having water wells or a closed loop of ethelyne glycol that then passes to a compressor stage. The "Direct" in DX is in reference to the compressor stage being in direct contact with the ground. Physically, it is a series of vertical loops of copper pipe that contain R22 (Or the current choice in its place) vaporous coolant and pass the heat directly to/from the ground to the compressor. It is generally the least troublesome to install as it is not dependant on having ground water available (For open loop systems) and it does not risk groundwater pollution if it ruptures.
The costs involved have changed but at the time of construction, the total HVAC installation cost in my house was $11,500. This covered 3 vertical "wells", the heatpump, a backup electric element, an HRV and all of the associated ductwork. Because the system does not draw a lot of electricity, there is also no need for anything larger than a 200 amp entrance and there is a HUGE amount of wiring and baseboard installation that does not need to be done.
I did not to direct comparative pricing at the time, but due to the code requirements on HRVs and their associated ductwork, I figured that the cost difference could not have been more than $8000. At that amount, it only took me 3 years to get my "Return on Investment".
How do you know that this was the case?
Well, I was lucky enough to have my parents in the same subdivision and in a house that was built to similar construction requierments. The extra nice benefit (In this case) was that being in the same subdivision means that the temperatures are the same.
Their house is electric BB only and was built in 1993. The basement is totally finished and they make it a habbit of turning the temperatures back in unused rooms in the winter. They have also changed 70-80% of their lights to CFL. The house is a 44 x 28 Bungalow.
My house is an L shaped "raised ranch" (Stupid bedrock) that has an outer dimension of 53 x 36 and an actual square footage on the main floor of 1,648 sq/ft. At the time of the power consumption, the basement was not finished, but the 2 x 6 walls that are above the concrete were insulated and vapor barriered. I have about the same % of CFL bulbs and where the whole house is on one system, all rooms are heated the same.
The final numbers rolled out such that the KWh per sq/ft for my house was less than 50% that of my parents house. Another way to look at it is via our equalized power bills. At the time of comparison, mine was $175 per month and my parents was $249. To the sq/ft, that is $0.106 per month for me and $0.202 for my parents. If I applied their costs to my house, the bill would have been $333. So in one year, the savings would roughly be $1900.
Because this comparison was back in 2001, there is an ever increasing amount of savings due to the annual 3% increase courtesy of NB Power. With all of the increases since, the current savings is more on the order of $2500 annually.
Now for the bad news...
The costs have gone up for installation, of course.
Some municipalities do not allow even DX-GHPs to be installed. (Fredericton is one)
They have a more lengthy ROI when put in after constrution.
On the upside...
They have a VERY long life expectancy (100 years on the "wells" and 20 years on the compressor)
They are a great alternative if you already have forced air.
They suplement over 60% of your hot water.
They are the single largest thing you can do to reduce your energy "footprint" and not go bankrupt.
For maintenance, I have had to do no more than replace a fan belt in all of the 6.5 years in the house so so far, awesome!!!