1 / 35

BPA Pre-Pilot, Monmouth

BPA Pre-Pilot, Monmouth. 14 homes with installed DHP, single zone, single compressor. 11 Monmouth, 2 Moses Lake, 1 Tacoma Savings measured in 13 homes, over 40% space heat savings (on average) Total savings of 4442 kWh Large variation and a small sample. Monmouth Analysis.

myles-flowers
Télécharger la présentation

BPA Pre-Pilot, Monmouth

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BPA Pre-Pilot, Monmouth 14 homes with installed DHP, single zone, single compressor. 11 Monmouth, 2 Moses Lake, 1 Tacoma Savings measured in 13 homes, over 40% space heat savings (on average) Total savings of 4442 kWh Large variation and a small sample

  2. Monmouth Analysis

  3. Monmouth Analysis

  4. Comparison, Two Winter Weeks

  5. Comparison, two winter weeks

  6. Monmouth Cooling Offset • Analysis assumed cooling if temperature was above 65° • Cooling was calculated in base load to correspond the existing cooling equipment • Very minor offsets were apparent in the very mild year (2008) • No real evidence of substantial cool increase during cooling months

  7. Monmouth Lessons • Characteristics and full bill record is important • Occupant previous cooling behavior and supplemental heating behavior should be available • A signal to identify cooling in the DHP very important • Use of sub-metered data without a sub-metered base case is workable • Savings vary from 30-70 percent of heating load • Average Savings 45%

  8. Ecotope RTF Presentation November 9, 2009 Progress Report on Regional Ductless Heat Pump Evaluation

  9. Project Goals Provide a technical evaluation of DHP • Develop computational procedure • Extend and verify deemed savings tables Evaluate achieved energy savings • Using detailed metering to review the interaction with electric zonal heating and temperature control • Using Billing analysis to develop the net savings Develop cost/benefit analysis • Using cost from implementation • Savings generalized from metering and billing analysis Assess market response from customers distributors, and installers Evaluate program delivery and alternatives

  10. Field Monitoring Approach • Quad metering, DHP, DHW, Elect. Heat, Total use • Develop in situ measurement of Heat Pump COP • Recruit participants from targeted localities • Willamette, Puget Sound: random samples • Inland Empire, Boise/Twin Falls & Eastern Idaho: Engineering samples • Target about 100 sites • Pre-Bill screening for “wood” heat • Install heat pump COP measure on 35 sites • On site audit: age, type, heat loss, infiltration • Upload data daily, one year minimum

  11. Lab Testing & Analysis • Lab testing critical to assessing manufacturers’ ratings and to establishing air flow and COP • Testing underway at Herrick Labs, Purdue University • Initial data expected in December

  12. Billing Analysis • Develop realized savings from comparison with pre-installation energy use • Account for weather variation • Include impact of fuel switching, other occupant take-backs • Collect utility bills from participants and non-participants • Use a PRISM-like regression analysis • Results by climate zone, house type, etc. • Separate impacts of supplemental fuels

  13. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis • Develop cost and benefit matrix • Savings by climate, house type • Costs by DHP size, zones • Use ProCost model • TRC and utility cost/benefit analysis • Develop consumer economics analysis

  14. Market and Process Analysis • Surveys of consumers, installers, manufacturers, and project stakeholders • Data to augment impact evaluation findings • Two Waves: Early read, one year later

  15. Schedule Milestones • Field Monitoring • Complete Installs, Dec. 2009 • Complete data collection Spring 2011 • Billing Analysis • Begin utility coordination, Spring 2009 • Complete data collection, Fall 2011 • Lab Testing & Analysis: Fall 2010 • Process, Market Evaluation • Two waves, Spring 2009, Fall 2010 • Cost-Effectiveness Report, Spring 2012 • Final Report: Spring 2012

  16. Data collected: July to November, 2009 Data Summaries, Heating, Cooling Ductless Heat Pump Evaluation

  17. Current Data Summaries for Heating Operation • Early 2009 Heating data: Each Climate “Cluster” • Idaho Falls temperature similar to peak Portland temperatures. • Considerable diversity in mild temperature in DHP usage and heating fraction. • COP measurements for heating conditions show potential

  18. Puget Site, heating & cooling

  19. Puget Site: DHP heating

  20. Puget Site: shoulder heating

  21. Portland Site: 73% DHP Heating

  22. Boise Site 1: 57% DHP Heating

  23. Spokane Site: Heating

  24. Spokane Site: All Electric loads

  25. Idaho Falls Site: 38% DHP Heating

  26. Idaho Falls Site: DHP COP

  27. Current Data Summaries for Summer Operation • Summer 2009 very hot with a substantial cooling load • Several comparisons made between cooler summer weeks and the Portland “heat storm,” July 25-31 • Two different heat pumps are shown here a large Mitsubishi and a small Fujitsu. The Mitsubishi used in the initial runs two years ago (HSPF 8.2 EER 8.8) The Fujitsu released in mid 2008 (HSPF 10.0 EER 10.4)

  28. Newer Unit, More Aggressive Set-Points

  29. 2006 Model, EER: 8.8

  30. 2008 Model, EER: 10.4

  31. 2009 Model, EER: 12.8

  32. Contact Information: Poppy Storm Ecotope, Inc. 4056 9th Avenue NE Seattle, Washington 98105 PH: (206) 322-3753, FAX: (206) 325-7270 www.ecotope.com

More Related