STRATEGIC REFRIGERANT PLANNING

AN UPDATED, STEP-BY-STEP APPROACH TO REFRIGERANT DECISION MAKING FOR CHILLER OWNERS

By:

Jim Parsnow

Director of Environmental Systems Marketing

Carrier Corporation

"It's not easy being green." - Kermit the Frog

INTRODUCTION

With the current focus on correcting past wrongs against the environment, Kermit's familiar lament has a whole new meaning for building owners and managers. As we wade through the seas of new and ever-changing regulation and explore possible courses of action, one thing is certain: we must begin now to plan for a CFC-free future.

Today, chlorine-based refrigerants are the lifeblood of most air conditioning and refrigeration equipment. Since 1932, these stable compounds have provided a safe, economical medium for the transfer of heat. Air conditioning, once considered a luxury, has become a vital part of modern society, touching virtually every aspect of our daily lives.

Recent scientific studies have confirmed that chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) refrigerants are a source of ozone-depleting chlorine. Strict regulations mandate the phaseout of these refrigerants, and in 1992 former President Bush announced that the U.S. would unilaterally accelerate the phaseout of CFCs, terminating their production at the end of 1995. Other legislation around the globe - including the Montreal Protocol and the U.S. Clean Air Act - calls for the phaseout of alternative refrigerants (hydrochlorofluorocarbons or HCFCs). Not surprisingly, industry insiders and facilities managers alike are predicting that the refrigerants needed to service existing chillers will be both costly and in very short supply.

While there are no simple solutions to this complex challenge, there is a critical first step: Strategic Refrigerant Planning. This important process will ensure that your company's refrigerant-related decisions are firmly grounded in the facts about your particular situation. Like all strategic planning, Strategic Refrigerant Planning can be divided into three basic steps: Analyze, Organize & Plan, and Execute.

STEP 1:

ANALYZE YOUR SITUATION

While the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends assigning a Refrigerant Manager to handle refrigerant planning, large companies may find that this demanding job requires a team effort (although an individual may be designated as a coordinator). A Refrigerant Management Team should include representatives from throughout the company who deal with various aspects of the refrigerant issue, including upper management, facilities managers and technicians as well as legal, financial and purchasing personnel. An Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) should be assigned as a team member to supply up-to-date, in-depth expertise on refrigerant choices, containment options, equipment modification and so on.

Collect Data On Refrigerant Usage. Data collection is the first step in the analysis phase. Start by carefully reviewing your current refrigerant usage to determine how much is used annually and where it goes. Most refrigerant is "lost" through leaks, poor service practices and at equip-ment disposal; of these, the biggest culprit is servicing. It's useful to look at refrigerant losses on a percentage basis, so you can concentrate on the biggest problem areas first. Data should be recorded in a common Refrigerant Log (see example on page 13), which should also detail the quantities and storage locations of on-site refrigerant, including that which is in the equipment. Make sure you are diligent in this effort: a quick count of the refrigerant drums in storage is not enough; check to be sure they are still filled with refrigerant!

In reviewing refrigerant usage, begin with the equipment that's likely to have the greatest effect on your operation. It is recommended that you start with equipment that is 20 tons or larger. Log each unit's condition, age, refrigerant type and leak record. Also note its physical location: is the chiller easy to access for possible replacement, or is it obstructed by pipes? Any refrigerant recovery/recycling equipment you have should be included in the log as well. Document any unintentional venting that has occurred, and the reasons why. Use a common Refrigerant Log form for each unit to be sure you have all the information needed to make fair comparisons later.

Gather Information On Standards And Codes. While some team members collect data, others should gather information on the standards that relate to your operation. The American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) provides some excel-lent guidelines on properly installing, operating and upgrading equipment. A relatively new safety code for mechanical refrigeration equipment, ASHRAE 15-1994 will be reflected in the new building codes drafted as alter-native refrigerants are adopted. (Refer to Carrier publication 819-116 for an overview of ASHRAE 15.) ASHRAE Guideline 3 outlines several different approaches for low-ering refrigeration equipment emissions. In addition, several useful documents are available from the Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI). ARI 700 is the current standard required for adherence with the U.S. Clean Air Act. This will soon be replaced by a new standard summarized in document IRG-1: Handling and Reuse of Refrigerants in the United States (available from ARI). ARI 740-1993 is a certification document for recovery and recycling equipment, and is the guideline EPA will use when certifying this equipment for manufacturers. ARI 700-1993 deals with the quality of recycled refrigerant, specifying the purity standards that refrigerant resellers must meet. ARI Guidelines N and K include suggestions for storage containers for recovered refrigerants, and guidelines for assigning colors to containers for different types of refrigerants.

Of course, always consult local building codes, many of which are already being updated to reflect ASHRAE 15- 1994 and address existing facilities. For detailed information on refrigerant safety, the refrigerant manufacturers themselves are excellent resources.

Review Containment Equipment And Practices. Self-evaluation is another important component of the Analysis phase. This should include a complete review of the containment and recovery equipment on site and your organization's practices for handling refrigerant. According to federal law, company-owned recovery/containment devices must be registered with EPA. ARI 740 is an excel-lent reference on performance standards for this type of equipment.

EPA also mandates that any technician who handles refrigerant must be certified. Now is the time to be certain that you have a thorough training program in place, supported by an up-to-date Code of Service Practice (see example on page 11) which details the do's and don'ts of safe refrigerant handling in terms that everyone can understand. The ultimate objective is to upgrade your organization's service practices - particularly critical in light of new refrigerants, equipment and safety concerns.

Finally, look at your chillers with a critical eye. Are there existing recovery and/or containment devices in use, and if so, are they permanently installed (piped back into the unit) or portable? In your log, describe each unit's location, noting whether potential spills would be vented up a pipe or lost through a drain in the floor.

Then compare your findings to the latest standards avail-able. For example, most low-pressure equipment has a CFC-11 purge system for removing noncondensible gases, but it typically does not vent to the outdoors. This is now required under ASHRAE 15-1994. Note whether the unit has service valves. Most older equipment does not, which means a technician can not check fluid levels without affecting the refrigerant charge. And don't overlook the condition of the mechanical room itself. It is not unusual to find that equipment has been modified or upgraded over the years, but the room itself has not been brought up to date.

STEP 2:

ORGANIZE AND PLAN

Once the team has collected the critical data about refrigerant usage, it's time organize that data, consider your options, and prepare for the development of your Strategic Refrigerant Plan. One of your overriding concerns, of course, is to come into compliance with all current standards and codes.

At this point, it is highly recommended that a code inspector be invited in to review any changes in local code requirements. Depending on your situation, you may wish to consult with a local building code inspector, an ARI representative or a local member of ASHRAE. Once you're aware of the current standards, prepare to conduct in-house code/standard awareness training. Your OEM team member can be very helpful in this aspect of your planning, as he or she is involved with key codes and standards on a daily basis. Include refrigerant safety in your training program, to be certain that everyone who handles refrigerant knows what safe practices are, and what precautions to take. This is very important in light of the new refrigerants with very low exposure limits.

Explore Your Options. In your efforts to move away from CFC refrigerants, a viable option may be to maintain/ convert newer existing equipment. In this instance, a positive course of action is to develop a refrigerant agreement program in conjunction with the equipment manufacturer. Through a service contract, the manufacturer provides you with a guarantee of refrigerant availability and containment. This generally requires upgrading the equipment by adding containment devices to ensure compliance with the new emission standards outlined in ASHRAE Guideline 3. Your contract with the manufacturer should include an emission level guarantee to protect you from possible refrigerant losses. It should also ensure an adequate refrigerant supply over the life of the equipment, and a clear migration path to HFC (chlorine-free) refrigerants.

Consider Containment Systems. In its final ruling to enforce the U.S. Clean Air Act, EPA allows a 15% leakage rate for commercial chillers and a 35% leakage rate for industrial chillers. However, no one can afford to lose that much refrigerant given the shortages that are expected during the CFC phaseout. Containment is the first and least expensive option. Consider the following scenario: under the ASHRAE 15-1994 recommendations, you may store 330 pounds of refrigerant on site per system. If you reduce the leakage rate on a typical chiller (i.e., with 500 tons of cooling capacity and an operating charge of 1,200 lbs.) to 2%, you will have enough serviceable refrigerant for nearly 14 years (multiply 1,200 lbs. of refrigerant by a 2% per year leakage rate = 24 lbs; 330 divided by 24 = 13.75 years).

Ultimately, the key question is whether you can maintain a leakage rate of 2% in the areas of service and operations. The answer hinges on your on-site containment devices and practices. On-site refrigerant containment devices may be either permanently installed, such as large storage tanks, or portable. In both cases, careful attention to service practices is critical. Depending on the type of equipment installed, many excellent options are available for on-site containment:

Chillers that operate above atmospheric pressure typically do not require all of the add-on containment devices described above. Several reliable portable containment devices are also on the market today. Portable devices may offer an economic advantage in that they can be shared by many facilities. However, it's important to check local code requirements for portable refrigerant storage, along with local and federal transportation department requirements.

In addition to EPA certification, refrigerant recycling and recovery equipment that is transported between different sites is subject to additional federal and state Department of Transportation requirements.

Regardless of the types of containment devices you choose to install, it's vital that a Code of Service Practice be established for the safe handling, conservation and containment of refrigerant. Once the Refrigerant Management Team is well-versed in these new practice standards, a training pro-gram should be established to educate every employee involved with refrigerant.

Replacement vs. Conversion. The decision to replace or convert existing equipment should be made only after a careful look at the actual costs involved in both scenarios. Surprisingly, conversion costs can total as much as 90% of replacement unit costs. For example, consider the conversion of a negative-pressure chiller from CFC-11 to the nearest replacement refrigerant, HCFC-123. Significant costs are incurred in replacing the many chiller components (seals, o-rings, gaskets and more) not compatible with HCFC-123, a highly aggressive solvent. Add-on containment devices can easily add up to 25% of the cost of a new unit (see fig. 1). Machine room upgrades required for compliance with ASHRAE 15-1994 - refrigerant sensors, ventilation system improvements and more - must be considered. The new ASHRAE standard requires that any change in refrigerant be followed-up with an inspection by the local building code authority. Finally, the net result of a negative-pressure chiller conversion is usually reduced capacity and lower efficiency, which affect the building load and, hence, power costs.

CONTAINMENT COST

Reduce leak rate from 15% to less than 2% by the addition of the following:
EQUIPMENT
INSTALLED COST
Refrigerant Sensor$6,500
High-Efficiency Purge$5,500
Refrigerant Management System$7,000
Pressurizing / Alarm System$5,000
Backup Relief Valve$4,000
External Oil Filter and Isolation Valve $1,500
TOTAL INSTALLED COSTS$29,500

Fig. 1

When comparing conversion costs to replacement costs, specify replacement units with high-quality, built-in containment devices, to avoid the expense of adding them later. Look for devices that meet the stringent standards of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). ASME-certified vessels must be capable of performing under conditions seven times more demanding than typical operating conditions. The symbols "U" or "UM" are used to identify ASME-certified vessels.

As you compare non-CFC replacement equipment, care-fully consider the long-term ramifications of HCFC-based equipment. These chlorine-based refrigerants are also subject to a phaseout, though on a slower pace than other CFCs. Safety is the watchword in selecting new equipment: does your choice mitigate future safety risks? Since non-CFC equipment efficiencies have improved tremendously in recent years, be sure to factor in projected operating cost savings from performance gains.

Each Chiller Is A Separate Case. A general rule of thumb, and a helpful starting point for the containment/conversion/replacement discussion, is to consider the age of the chiller (see fig. 2). Typically, the preferred choice for "new" chillers (less than seven years old) is containment. Older chillers are best converted or replaced, depending on their age and condition.

The ultimate solution is never just a matter of age, of course. It depends in large part on the particular circumstances surrounding each chiller.

Factors to consider include:

Once you've looked at these specifics, step back and consider them in light of the broader issues. Consider the question of chiller replacement in view of any modernization programs planned for the facility. Control system upgrades, air distribution problems and indoor air quality programs may help tip the scales in favor of replacement now rather than later. Don't overlook your sound requirements; performance in this area varies greatly from one manufacturer to another. The same advice goes for manufacturers' service contracts.

Whether you're converting or replacing, switching from one refrigerant to another demands that you become an expert on the new refrigerant you're considering and fully understand its application in advance. A balance of safety, containment and performance must be carefully reviewed. To minimize your risk, request a performance guarantee from the chiller manufacturer, and preferably a certification to the ARI 550-1992 Standard for rotary and screw chillers. An ARI certification test can be conducted on your new chiller at the factory.

Finally, consider the long-term availability of various refrigerants (see fig. 3). As the graph indicates, HFC-134a is forecasted to be in great supply well into the next century due to its widespread use in a number of applications, including the auto industry. HCFC-123 is predicted to remain in short supply indefinitely due to its limited use by chiller manufacturers, and its legislated phaseout by the Montreal Protocol. Although HCFC-22 is also subject to a phaseout, a tremendous amount of serviceable refrigerant should remain available since legislation prohibits this refrigerant from being vented to the atmosphere.

fig. 2

fig. 3

STEP 3:

EXECUTE YOUR ACTION PLAN

Once your preliminary planning homework is done, the team can focus its efforts on formulating the Strategic Refrigerant Plan. At the core of this plan is your company's refrigerant position policy, which should be stated in writing and utilized as a benchmark for all decision-making. In essence, a refrigerant position policy answers the basic question: "How is our company going to address the phaseout of chlorine-bearing refrigerants?" An effective way to organize your refrigerant plan is by site, by building and/or by refrigerant type. In any case, the plan should address all facilities with refrigeration equipment.

In order to ensure that your plan is a vital, working document (versus merely a collection of commendable goals and objectives), include an Operation/Maintenance Schedule that clearly identifies the "who, what, where and when" of each strategic activity. Schedules and deadlines should reflect internal factors such as capital budgets, as well as external factors such as equipment availability.

Analyze Return On Investment. The plan should also include an analysis of the financial impacts of your action plan. In evaluating containment versus replacement, or replacement versus conversion, you'll need some quantitative data showing which course of action yields the best return on investment. To do this, you must consider the expected life of the chiller, service/ maintenance costs and the cost of any necessary building upgrades. Of course, an energy analysis should be critical supporting evidence for your decision to replace a chiller.

An example of costs for modifications and equipment purchases are shown in figure 4 for an at-a-glance comparison of investment, operating costs and life cycle estimates (see fig. 4):

Maintenance of the retrofitted machine would increase, since containment devices would be monitored and serviced. Operational costs would be modestly reduced, since refrigerant is contained. Utility bills remain constant.

COST ANALYSIS
CONTAIN CONVERT REPLACE
Equipment (installed0 $29,000 $63,000$125,600
Refrigerant Charge -5,400 6,400
Mech. Room Upgrade -19,500 19,500
Resale of CFCs -(4,500) (4,500)
Refrigerant
Leak Savings (2%, 1,920) (2%, 2,144) -
Operations:
Service and Maintenance 6,300 8,1003,300
Power, Per Year 180,400 184,800138,600
TOTAL FIRST YEAR
INVEST/OPERATE COST $214,280 $274,156 $288,900

fig. 4

LIFE CYCLE COST CONSIDERATION

Life cycle costs can be extrapolated for the three options to give the building owner a better idea of which strategy better fits long-term needs. The average age of the chillers is taken at 15 years, and cash outlays are given in thousands.
YEAR
CONTAIN
CONVERT
REPLACE
1$214 $274 $289
2180 185139
3-10 180185 139
11289 289139
12139 139139
13-25 139139 139
TOTAL OUTLAYS $4,208 $4,313 $3,764

fig. 5

New HCFC-123 refrigerant must be purchased at about $4.30/pound, and the same containment equipment as previously noted must be installed. The owner also earns money on the resale of CFC-11 (about $3.75/pound prior to reclaim). Operational costs go up slightly for power and maintenance (this may be significant on older chillers), but refrigerant leak reduction brings a small savings the first year.

New refrigerant would cost about $4/pound and the owner again earns cash on the CFC-11 aftermarket. Operational costs drop by about 40% based on service for a new unit, and a significant efficiency gain brings power draw to 0.63 kW/ton.

What the numbers mean. Building ownership strategies will dictate which of the three options makes the most sense. A number of external factors should be examined, including how long the owner wants to keep the property, and how the owner would like to deliver the building to a prospective buyer.

A critical item is the change in year 11, when replacement becomes vital for the containment and conversion routes. While this is a normal operational year for the replacement unit, the aging units would be replaced at about $289,000 in today's dollars.

The contain and convert options offer lower investments up front, but the owner who replaces saves operational dollars over years 2-11. Prospective tenants and buyers, depending on their needs and lease terms, may be interested in either lower operating costs or lower initial costs.

For the owner who plans to keep the building for-ever (or at least 25 years), a more aggressive CFC phaseout plan is recommended, based on the numbers. The replacement option works out very well in this analysis, but cash outlays are conveniently extrapolated over 25 years - precisely the assumed lifetime of the replacement chiller.

Risk/Liability Assessment. Another important component of your Strategic Refrigerant Plan is a Risk/Liability Assessment document which addresses how your approach mitigates risk and ensures safety. The safety issue is especially critical in light of new equipment and refrigerants. Companies shoulder an increased risk of liability when they adopt a particular approach or practice with the knowledge that other safer alternatives are avail-able. Ensuring that your company is in compliance with codes helps to mitigate risk. Even so, every plan should address the ramifications of a possible refrigerant spill - what the risks are, who will be exposed, how the area will be evacuated, where the refrigerant will go, and so on. With your legal counsel, review the risks and liabilities associated with refrigerant exposure in light of the exposure limits recommended in documents such as the Program for Alternate Fluorocarbon Toxicity Testing (PAFTT).

A proactive approach to the assessment of risk includes a careful examination of EPA's Section 114 letter, the document EPA sends to companies discovered intentionally venting CFC/HCFC refrigerants to the atmosphere. Based on the content of the violator's answers, EPA determines how much of a fine to assess (fines start at $25,000 per day). Ensuring that you have a solid plan and answers to the Section 114 questionnaire up-front is yet another way to reduce your company's risk. The intent of the U.S. Clean Air Act and EPA's enforcement rulings is to ensure that refrigerants are not vented to the atmosphere. Having a thorough refrigerant plan in place puts you on the path toward full compliance.

Code Compliance: A Moving Target. Wouldn't it be simple if companies could take a "set it and forget it" approach to code compliance? The fact is, codes are a moving target, ever-changing and typically becoming more stringent over time. That is why your plan must include an ongoing training program, and a strategy for maintaining facilities at set levels over the long term.

This requires a mechanism for staying abreast of new refrigerant legislation and other events that will impact the short- and long-term refrigerant supply. What hap-pens if refrigerants have earlier phaseouts than expected? Since a well-maintained chiller can have a useful life of 30 years or more, you must evaluate the long-term effectiveness of your solutions.

ONE COMPLEX ISSUE, THREE BASIC STEPS

The steps in the development of a Strategic Refrigerant Plan - Analyze, Organize & Plan, and Execute - are clear and straightforward. Yet the issue itself is undeniably complex. The prospect of giving up the "lifeblood" refrigerants that the industry has grown up with can be daunting even to the most experienced facilities managers. The financial and environmental impacts are profound - two excellent reasons to begin now to develop a sound, strategic plan for your company's chlorine-free refrigerant future. Your original equipment manufacturer stands ready to assist with this important task, providing unique expertise and an objective assessment of current conditions and their implications for your facility.

Starting your refrigerant management plan

CODE OF SERVICE PRACTICE FOR HANDLING, CONSERVATION & CONTAINMENT OF REFRIGERANT

Objective: To provide an industry-wide Code of Practice for the servicing of Air Conditioning/Refrigeration Equipment and Systems for the purpose of conserving refrigerant, improving personal safety, and preserving the environment.

DO:

DON'T:

REFRIGERANT LOG

Date:

Technician:

Machine Data

Manufacturer: Refrigerant Type:

Model Number: Design Refrigerant Charge:

Serial Number:

Unit Identification:

Location:

Leak Identification

Leak Location:

Leak Repaired: Yes No Why Not:

Leak Detector Used:

Status/Comments:

Amount of Refrigerant Added:

Recovery/Recycle

Equipment Used:

Amount Recovered: Recycled: Yes No .

Re-installed: Yes No .

Disposition:

Status/Comments:

Amount of Refrigerant Added:

Unintentional Venting:

Situation:

Approximate Amount Vented:

Amount of Refrigerant Added:

Summary:

Total of refrigerant added as a percent of design refrigerant charge:

General Comments:


ESSENTIAL REFERENCES

Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI)

4301 North Fairfax Drive

Suite 425

Arlington, VA 22203

Phone: (703) 524-8800

Fax: (703) 528-3816

ARI 550-92 Centrifugal And Rotary Screw Water Chilling Packages

ARI 740-93 Performance Of Refrigerant Recovery, Recycling, And/Or Reclaiming Equipment

ARI-700-93 Specifications For Fluorocarbon Refrigerants IRG-2 Handling And Reuse Of Refrigerants In The United States (Handling Recycling Guide)

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE)

1791 Tullie Circle, NE

Atlanta, GA 30329

Phone: (404) 636-8400

Fax: (404) 321-5478

ASHRAE 15- Safety Code for Mechanical Refrigeration 1994 (See Carrier Publication 819-116 for an overview)

ASHRAE Guideline-3 Reducing Emissions Of Fully Halogenated Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) Refrigerants In Refrigeration And Air Conditioning Equipment And Applications

ASHRAE Guideline 'K' Containers For Recovered Fluorocarbon Refrigerants

ASHRAE Guideline 'N' Assignment Of Refrigerant Containment Colors

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)

401 M. Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20460

EPA Hotline: 1-800-296-1996

Final Ruling of Section 608 of Clean Air Act, dated May 14, 1993