Barack Obama set to receive ACR award– not really, but it pays to dream, sometimes!

There is an old saying that goes something like this:

‘When you wake from having a good dream, you have a choice; you can either go back to sleep and carry on dreaming, or, you can get up and try and make the dream come true’.

I am not sure what President Barack Obama was dreaming the other morning when he was awoken to be told that he had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, but when awake, he has been consistent in his ‘call for action’ for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21^st century.

The award, made to someone so early in office, would appear to be not so much for what he has done, but in faint hope that he will succeed in the future. It has been said that he has given people everywhere ‘permission to dream [of peace] again’. The award reflects the sincere hope that these dreams will not turn into nightmares.

Of course, the more cynical observers have claimed that the award has been made simply for not being George Bush, and they may have something in that too. A change was desperately needed, and when it came, it was welcomed in some quarters, simply for that; being a change.

Whatever, the true reason for the award, I like to think that it shows that this time the committee has been proactive and forward thinking by not only rewarding an action, but by aiming to be encouraging of future actions and directions. Rightly or wrongly, this controversial approach to awards has also been taken recently in our own ACR industry.

We are an industry in change, in a changing world; where the challenges of normal economic trading need to be balanced against the aims of reducing our industry’s environmental impact. Initiatives by individuals, companies, and associations, that reduce refrigerant leaks, improve energy efficiency, and reduce direct and indirect CO2 emissions are forward thinking and are rightly applauded. It is nice to see some dreams coming true and genuine improvements being made. The IoR’s Real Zero campaign is an excellent example.

Change is taking place, and there are no awards for carrying on as we were. We may not wish to be a ‘Barack Obama’, but being likened to a ‘George Bush’ really would be a nightmare!

Free cooling - an inconvenient truth

It is a little over two years ago that a lorry driver from Kent forced the UK Government to rewrite guidance for schools that wanted to show Al Gore’s Oscar-winning climate change film, An Inconvenient Truth. The high court action was brought against the screening of the documentary in schools, claiming that it was “politically partisan” and “sentimental”.

The High Court judge – Mr Justice Burton - said that the film contained nine statements that were not supported by mainstream scientific consensus and that distributing the film without guidance to counter its “one-sided” views would breach education laws.

The nine errors stated by the judge included: that a sea -level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of ice “in the near future”, and that the disappearance of snow on Mount Kilimanjaro in East Africa was expressly attributable to global warming. Neither of these or any of the other seven errors had scientific consensus according to the judge.

Were we really surprised by the information that a former US Vice-President had not strictly been telling the truth? However, when one considers the energy guzzling US audience that the film was primarily aimed at it, the sensationalist ‘shockumentory’ approach may be forgiven if it achieves the films goals. For while the ruling may have been mildly embarrassing for the Nobel prize winner Mr Gore, the judge did not dismiss the film’s main argument which is supported by the vast weight of scientific opinion, that climate change is mainly caused by man-made emissions of greenhouse gases and will have very serious consequences. Climate change costs lives, real human lives, and it is often the world’s poor that will suffer the most. To play politics with the lives of so many; to get tied up in games with semantics doesn’t help anyone in the long run.

Energy Consumption in Buildings

Whether as a consequence of Al Gore’s film or not, it does appear that public opinion in the US may be on the turn. On both sides of the pond (and every where else in the developed world for that matter), high energy consumption in buildings is a problem. Buildings world-wide consume enormous amounts of energy and the demand for new buildings continues relentlessly. Fortunately, global concerns regarding climate change, has created a sense of urgency for positive action. The path to global sustainability is forcing us to seek dramatic building energy performance improvements. By reducing building energy consumption we can help reverse the forecasted trends.

As engineers we are fortunate in that we find ourselves at a pivotal point in the history of the build environment - that is exciting, daunting and challenging. A period of change; when the old and new are forced to stand side by side to be compared; and when our accomplishments of the past will soon be replaced by the rich possibilities of the future.

The role of air conditioning in buildings will continue to be scrutinised with a leading UK Conservative politician warning the ACR industry that it is “on notice” regarding climate change and said it should not be surprised by Conservative proposals to ban new electric air-conditioning and cooling units in commercial buildings.

Free Cooling

There is not only considerable interest in challenging the concept of comfort that air conditioning delivers but also in examining ways and means that we can produce comfortable environments with minimal energy cost. One solution, passive cooling, could play a significant factor in building design in the future. By employing passive cooling techniques into modern buildings, it may be possible to eliminate mechanical cooling or at least reduce the size and cost of the equipment.

Passive cooling is based on the interaction of the building and its surroundings and can be achieved in several ways such as natural ventilation, high thermal mass with night ventilation, and evaporative cooling. This last one is well known to the ACR industry where it is better known as ‘free’ cooling.

There are a number of other free cooling systems that range from thermosyphonic cooling, to a dry cooler, which in simple terms is a free standing cooler over which outside air is drawn or blown.

The concept of free cooling is straight forward and has been used successfully for many years. It can produce attractive energy savings whenever the outside air conditions are suitable. The fact the free cooling is neither free to install nor completely free to operate is an inconvenient truth that may be overlooked as the end result of energy reduction is achieved. The fact that low energy consuming buildings are possible that incorporate ACR systems with free cooling is an inconvenient truth to those that question our ability to deliver energy efficient solutions.

How do I love thee? Let me count the ways’?

September is not traditionally the month associated with romance, so when I was given a lesson in the language of love recently, I was pleasently surprised.

On a short flight recently, I struck up a conversation with the man in the seat next who turned out to be a linguistics expert that had travelled all over the world and can speak more than a dozen languages fluently. Interesting, I thought, but unfortunately, I am sad to relate that he was in fact extremely dull, and I can only assume that he has nothing of any interest to say in any of the many languages he speaks. I couldn’t help but feel disappointed.

I was flying to meet a client and to receive a presentation from two contractors that are tendering for a new project. The first contractor had submitted an excellent proposal for the project and their presentation didn’t disappoint either. They, offered a natural refrigerant which they felt provided a better solution that an HFC, and had gone to great lengths to provide a good system COP. They also utilised some of the waste heat to be used by the client’s other processes. I was impressed.

After the presentation and the contractor had left the room, I was surprised by the client’s reaction; “That was dull wasn’t it?” he said. “I don’t think they understand what we want. We are not interested in HFCs, COPs, EERs, R717s or F-Gas Regs! Why would I want to pay extra for a higher COP?” he asked. He continued, “All I want to do is to store my product at the right temperature for as little as possible”

When I explained what all the jargon had meant in simple layman’s terms, the client was genuinely interested. “Ahhh…COP….hmmm….I like that, but why the hell didn’t they just say that they would save me money,” he moaned, “without subjecting me to all that tedious technical bull****?” “I want to save the planet as much as the next man, but if this contractor wants the job, he will have to ‘sweet-talk’ me better than that next time”.

We, in the ACR industry, have our own language, which works well enough between ourselves but can positively be a disadvantage when trying to communicate with those outside. Technical expertise and being fluent in “ACR language” is a good start, but it falls far short of the ‘sweet talking’ that the client wished for. A list of superior technical attributes is not exactly what Elizabeth Barrett Browning meant when she wrote ‘How do I love thee? Let me count the ways’!

‘COP’ may not exactly be the language of love, but when explained clearly, it may soften even the hardest end-user’s heart. Whether whispering sweet jargon is a 'transferable skill' that will work in the bed-room as the dark autumn nights start to draw in, however, is doubtful.

See: http://www.acr-news.com/blog/view_entry.asp?id=154

End-users and contractors working together are greater then the sum of the two parts

Two recent presentations, one to a group of end-users, and another in-house training session with a contractor opened my eyes to a number of energy issues.

At both presentations I asked the same questions and whilst the answers matched to some questions, they were very different for others.

For example, I asked those present that knew their car’s ‘miles per gallon’ consumption figures to put their hands up. Every one of them raised their hands. They all knew the fuel consumption of their vehicles even though most of them don’t actually pay the bill which is met by their company.

I then asked them to keep their hands up if they knew how much they paid over the total year to run their cars. Only one kept his hand up and explained that he ran his own car on a company mileage scheme and so he keep a log.

I then asked similar questions to both groups about energy consumption of refrigeration systems. By a similar simple show of hands method, we reached the following results:

The end users:

• Knew their total annual energy spend on their refrigeration systems (perhaps these were an enlightened few!),

• However, they did not the break-down of the total usage in terms of the system components and so didn’t know which items to tackle first.

• Several had new budgets allocated to spend on energy saving measures

• These budgets did not include any expenditure on maintenance as they were unaware that maintenance regimes can actually reduce energy consumption and improve efficiency.

For the contractor:

• They did not know the annual energy cost (or consumption figures) for any of the plants that they maintained or had installed

• When given an annual figure, they could calculate back (or forwards) to reach approximately the same figure from their knowledge of the components of the system. In other words, they knew which component used how much energy.

• They didn’t think that many end users had budgets for energy saving measures

• Even though they knew the energy saving advantages of a good maintenance schedule, they didn’t offer it, didn’t quantify it, and had never marketed the advantages to the client.

Whilst these answers from these two small different groups are not be entirely representative of the industry as a whole, they are interesting and thought provoking. They indicate two groups that each have certain knowledge that if shared could benefit each other.

The end user often knows the total energy bill, but doesn’t know how to break it down to identify the consumption of the individual components. On the other hand, the contractor/service provided often has the expertise to do these and to make sense of the results but may not have been given the overall consumption figures by the end user.

Perhaps the most disappointing is the lack of communication and effort in understanding the benefits of a rigorous and systematic, and more importantly, a regular approach to maintenance. It is well known that even small changes in certain parameters can have very large effects on energy consumption. For instance, a 1ºC increase in condensing temperature caused by a dirty condensing coil can increase energy consumption by 2 to 4%. Similarly, a 1ºC reduction in evaporating temperature possibly caused by heavily frosted or dirty cooling coils may increase costs by 2 to 4%.

The contractors all know this and can even demonstrate it physically if required but do not relay this message on to their customers, and when they do, the message often falls upon deaf ears, because the budget that the customer has (if they even have one) is for capital equipment, not maintenance.

If the contractor is made aware of the energy consumption figures for the plant they are maintaining, they can plan and implement a maintenance program that detects and rectifies efficient items that may other wise good unnoticed. End users may consider increasing the value of maintenance contracts if they can see that the increase is cost effective by reducing energy consumption of the system.

Finally, by having contact with these two groups, it soon becomes obvious that there are many common interests and shared goals, but that these are sometimes viewed from opposing perspectives. If the end-users and contractors/service providers learn to share the information together and take an holistic system approach, it is very possible that the significant energy savings that are evidently there to be made may actually be achieved.

Carbon offsetting – friend or foe?

In 1978, Ronald Higgins in his book ‘The Seventh Enemy: The Human Factor in the Global Crisis’ outlined the six major threats he saw facing the human race at that time. These ranged from environmental abuse to shortage of renewable resources. The seventh, and perhaps the deadliest he claimed, was apathy; our own inability to get off our backsides and do something about the problems facing us.

The ‘Seventh Enemy’ has now long been out of print and some thirty years later there is a real sense that we have moved on. Climate change issues are now openly discussed and are being tackled to some degree at both governmental and personal levels. In our industry, investment continues to be made in energy efficiency and it is encouraging that the need for training of staff and education of end-users are commonly debated topics.

The concept of carbon neutrality is probably at least a decade old but the interest by businesses in reducing and ultimately neutralising their carbon footprint has grown dramatically in the past couple of years. It is no longer just a few companies looking to improve their environmental credentials, there are also sound financial reasons for them to try and reduce their energy consumption given the instability of energy prices.

As the threats posed by climate change become more obvious, not only to scientists but also to the general public, the concept of being able to go ‘carbon neutral’ is an attractive one. Carbon neutrality offers individuals and companies the opportunity to take responsibility for the greenhouse emissions caused by their activities.

For users of refrigeration and air conditioning, it is natural that our industry should become a focal point and in response we continue to develop the tools and capabilities to rise to the challenges. We are in demand and our skills are an essential part of the solution. Or are they?

Before we get too carried away with a sense of our importance it would pay us to take a quick look over our shoulder at a new enemy lurking in the shadows. The sale of carbon neutral products and services is a rapidly growing market. Whilst the ACR industry gets caught up in arguing timetables for refrigerant phase-outs and training qualification start dates, the market for carbon neutrality is moving at a frightening pace; so fast in fact that an alternative ‘solution’ has been sought and found.

The new solution being considered by many is carbon offsetting. This solution offers individuals and companies a guilt free opportunity to consume as much as they want. Many companies, and particularly the ones that our industry deals with, have very little chance of easily becoming carbon neutral simply due to the nature of what they do. Therefore by acknowledging the damage they are causing and by paying to offset, they are seen to be doing something about it. Whether the motive is cynical or not, research has shown that being seen as green can be profitable.

The perceived advantages of carbon offsetting are so attractive to many that a multi-million pound industry has sprung up to service this requirement. A recent survey found that 73% of the British public would be willing to pay £5 of offset carbon emissions for a short-haul flight and £15 for long haul. It is only a matter of time before this willingness to pollute first and pay later reaches industrial users on a larger scale where the offsetting, and hence the figures involved are even greater.

However, when one looks closely at the carbon offset industry it is clear that these carbon experts do not agree on many things and that the carbon offset calculation itself is a guesstimate. Some experts even argue a very strong case that the whole concept of carbon offsetting fundamentally flawed and that it is impossible to state categorically that buying any carbon offset actually neutralises the damage made by greenhouse gas emissions.

The danger for the planet is that money spent on carbon offsetting is not being spent on reducing the damaging emissions in the first place. The danger for the ACR industry is that money could diverted away from projects that could genuinely reduce emissions. It may be cheaper to plant a few trees than to invest in new plant and for the ACR industry, herein lies the problem.

Is carbon offsetting a new enemy, albeit one with a smiling face? Time will tell.

Carbon is a cabaret, old chum.

“Money makes the world go around” sang Liza Minnelli in the musical ‘Cabaret’. Set in 1931 Berlin, a particularly dark and gloomy historical period with Germany polishing her guns in preparation for war, the story’s Kit Kat Klub is a decadent, seedy and immoral place where anything is for sale. Unperturbed by the growing unrest around them, the Kit Kat Klub-goers party on with raucous delight.

In 2008 London, the deepening low in the financial crisis inevitably prompted comparisons with the 1929 Wall Street crash, however the champagne parties that marked the end of the likes of Lehman Brothers had a more distinct ‘cabaret’ feel to them. The pattern of dishonesty and outright greed on the part of the financial institutions together with the staggering incompetence on the part of policy makers will make a great musical in a few years. As the FTSE-100 nosedived and British banks imploded, the Lehman Brothers PA system, known as the hoot, blared out the R.E.M. song as “It’s the End of the World as We Know It”; surely someone can choreography that into a great West-end finale?

Fun for the future perhaps, but rather depressing now, especial when one considers that similar models to these that are so spectacularly failing in the financial world form the basis of modern environmentalism. Cap and trade policies which involve putting limits on greenhouse-gas emissions and allowing companies to buy and sell the right to produce carbon is the equivalent of the sub-prime fiasco because at the end of the day no one will accept the high carbon prices that are required to make a significant dent in global warming.

Far from accepting that high fuel prices are a fair short-term trade for averting long term climate change, a little economic pain has been enough to quickly undo much of the good work done so far. The environmental movement may have made us care about global warming but they haven’t really made us willing to sacrifice anything financial tangible about it.

If the £37bn of taxpayers money to save the banks is seen as rewarding the irresponsible, what would you call the almost £7 million wasted every day by UK industry due to poor energy efficiency? This is not through lack of knowledge or awareness. As many as 80 per cent of all energy saving surveys that show significant energy savings are not being implemented even though they would produce very quick paybacks against any upfront investment. If greed fuelled the banking crisis, reticence, intransience, and let’s face it, incompetence by many energy wasting users will continue to pile on the pressure to the environment long after this current credit crisis is forgotten.

To help the money flow in the energy saving direction, the Carbon trust has announced it has doubled the maximum size of its interest-free Energy Efficiency Loans from £100,000 to £200,000 for small businesses. This will surely help those companies that are prepared to jump through the hoops to secure the loan and not worried about having them treated as ‘on balance sheet’ under statutory accounting rules and the resultant negative affect on certain key business indicators.

An alternative of funding energy saving projects is to rent the whole project from a leasing company. This allows net cost savings to be made right from the start and qualifies as an ‘operating lease’ and thus is accounted for ‘off balance sheet. For example, take a refrigeration project that can be shown to save electricity worth £30,000 a year but requires a capital investment of £60,000. The leasing company pays the £60,000 and rents the plant to the client over five years. The rental is £13,000 per annum which is more than covered by the energy saving of £30,000 per annum. So the project is cash rich from the start. Mary Poppins would perhaps see the £17,000 annual saving is the ‘spoonful of sugar that helps the medicine go down’; carbon reduction ‘in the most delightful way’.

Many organisations have trapped themselves into a dead-end by only considering payback periods of eighteen months or less. This is ‘cutting your nose off to spite your face’ when you consider that under some rental schemes, provided the project has a break even of four and a half years or less then the rental payments will be more than covered by the energy savings.

There is money available in the forms of loans and other financial schemes available to make significant energy reduction a possibility. Perhaps money really will 'help the world go around' after all.

Thermal Comfort versus energy efficiency – a dilemma

“Are you sitting comfortably? Then I’ll begin” so began ‘Listen with Mother’ every afternoon on the radio, just after lunch as I recall. With a full stomach and the prospect of stories, songs and nursery rhymes, I would sit and eagerly join over a million other under-fives for the fifteen minute programme in the comfortable environment of my family home.

Comfort then, as it is now, was far more than just room temperature. In fact there are several other factors (such as humidity, air movement and surface temperatures) which combine with personal factors (such as the clothing you are wearing and how physically active you are at that moment) to influence what is called your ‘thermal comfort’ in the home or workplace.

The term ‘thermal comfort’ is so important that it even has a definition in a British Standard (BS EN ISO 7730): ‘that condition of mind which expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment.’ More general definitions of comfort may include a sense of relaxation and freedom from worry or pain. It is therefore quite clear that thermal comfort is psychological and so in the workplace can affect staff morale and productivity. In extreme cases people may even refuse to work in the conditions.

Of course, there can never be an absolute standard for thermal comfort as humans live in a range from the tropics to high latitudes so it is hardly surprising that any definition, even if international agreed, is not easily convertible into physical parameters.

There are scientific methods used to measure thermal comfort and the ‘standard’ used in the UK for the assessment of comfort in an internal space (the CIBSE standard) is known as operative temperature with recommended summer and winter values being listed in CIBSE Guide A. This area of thermal comfort science is not without controversy however, with two different approaches (the heat-balance approach and the adaptive approach) dominating development.

The heat-balance approach

The heat-balance approach combines the theory of heat transfer with the human body’s own temperature regulation (which keeps the core temperature at about 37ºC) to establish a range of comfort temperatures which occupants will find comfortable. The range was determined by a ‘PMV’ (predicted mean vote) derived from studies of individuals in tightly controlled climate chambers. Based upon work by Fanger, the concept of PMV and ‘PPD’ (predicted percentage dissatisfied) have been internationally adopted and provide the narrow range of temperatures to which it is considered desirable for engineers to design air-conditioning and heating systems to achieve.

The adaptive approach

It has been argued that the heat-balance approach is limiting and by its very restrictive nature excludes the type of temperature control that could be obtained from opening windows for example. Whereas the adaptive approach, which is based upon field surveys of thermal comfort that demonstrate that people are actually more tolerant to temperature changes than the experiments used for the heat-balance approach suggest. It is thought therefore, that thermal comfort is experienced in a wider range of temperatures than previously predicted in the standards and that it is something that individuals achieve for themselves.

Adaptive variables are extremely important in ‘free running’ buildings (those buildings without heating or cooling systems) and BS EN ISO 7730 acknowledges that occupants who control their own environments (through opening windows, etc) will accept more severe conditions than those in controlled spaces.

Thermal comfort and energy efficiency

Balancing the need to provide thermal comfort on one hand and reduce energy consumption on the other is a dilemma faced by designers and operators.

It is well known that energy consumption of buildings can vary significantly depending upon the demands for the indoor environment. It is because of this relationship, that the indoor environment is mentioned several times in the EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD).

Studies show that indoor comfort temperature depends on the outdoor air temperature together with business culture, such as the nature of the activities, the dress code of the occupants etc, and that conventional fixed temperature set point as a concept is not always appropriate. Here is an opportunity to put greater emphasis on energy saving with whilst still considering the comfort of occupants.

Incidentally, research into comfort levels of sedentary individuals at home reveals that simply being ‘at home’ in an environment that is familiar and under control, is conductive to comfort and makes people less sensitive to temperature. Whether this research included toddlers, sitting wide-eyed, listening to the radio isn’t known.

Energy efficiency: is the tail wagging the dog?

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…”, so begins Charles Dickens’ ‘A Tale of Two Cities’, one of his very few historical novels with a plot that centres on the years leading up to the French Revolution. Circumstances today are very different of course and yet I have heard these same words used to describe the ACR industry’s predicament in today’s energy conscious, low carbon driven market.

There is little doubt that air conditioning and refrigeration systems consume an awful lot of energy. It has even been estimated that refrigeration systems could use as much as 15 percent of the total energy consumed world wide. For many end-users, their total energy cost is dominated by that consumed by ACR systems and with energy prices continuing to rise, it is hardly surprising that they are looking at energy saving schemes.

Energy efficiency is now widely regarded as not only making sound economic sense, but also as the most important first step in making a transition to a low carbon environmental policy. As a consequence, there is a general enthusiasm and interest shown by many end-users in improving energy efficiency and in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. So, it would seem natural to assume that as the experts in the systems that are amongst the largest consumers of energy, the air conditioning and refrigeration sector, should be set to reap the benefits of its expert knowledge and be achieving unprecedented demand for its services. It is true that we are often the first port of call for enquires of this nature but all too often this turns out to be an initial picking of our brains for ideas and then an ‘energy assessor or consultant’ or called in to provide a report.

The growth in the number of energy assessors and energy consultants is staggering. It is rare to find an end user who has not had an energy audit carried out by one of this growing breed. There are also ‘low carbon consultants’ and the very soon to be, ‘air-conditioning inspectors’, to meet the air conditioning inspections requirement of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD).

For the ACR industry, this raises a number of important questions, for whilst there is a role for these energy professionals, surely the best advice will come from ACR contractors and designers who know how to reduce the energy consumption of the systems, backed by the specialist industry knowledge of the many suppliers who are now able to deliver energy efficient components? Is the ACR industry not best placed to be carrying out these audits and carrying out the often lucrative modifications? Many end-users think not, but why is that?

Integrated Approach

Perhaps the EPBD holds one key to the answer to these questions. It covers all aspects of energy efficiency in buildings in an attempt to establish an integrated approach to reducing energy consumption and carbon footprint. It is intended that this integrated approach will take account of aspects such as heating and cooling installations, lighting, the position of the building, heat recovery, etc. Here in lies perhaps one answer as to why ACR professionals can only form one part of the solution that clients are now looking for. Energy assessors look at the whole site energy consumption of which the ACR system is always only a part, even if it is a large chunk.

Opportunity

However, very few energy assessors are air conditioning and refrigeration experts and all too often, reports are written in very general terms and concentrate on other energy consuming items; lighting is always a popular area for them, even when the refrigeration systems on the site is the largest energy consumer. To have an energy saving initiative driven in this way feels like the tail wagging the dog.

However, there is a quiet revolution taking place led by companies such as The Integrated Energy Partnership who will support air conditioning and refrigeration contractors in preparing a comprehensive energy audit complete with a detailed report and proposal which covers all site services. This puts the ACR contractor back in the driving seat and able to offer their clients the benefit of their unique site knowledge and expertise.

Charles Dickens’ tale ends with one of the main characters losing their head by Guillotine, and whilst nothing quite so drastic awaits the ‘heads’ of ACR companies who fail to move with the times, the ‘best of times’ surely awaits those that offer the integrated energy approach.

One small step for man......

A wise man was asked one day which was the more useful, the sun or the moon. “The moon is more useful of course” was his reply. “Why?” “Because we need the light more during the night than we do during the day!”

Ha- ha, the wise man in the story was of course Nasurdin, that legendary figure that I mentioned in my last blog. He gave his philosophical teachings in the form of funny stories, and he himself would always be the butt of the story himself. However, judging by the celebrations of the 40^th anniversary this month of the first moon landing one would be forgiven for thinking that many shared his view of the moon’s high status with one leading British scientist saying “The Apollo programme is arguably the greatest technical achievement of mankind to date.”

Greatest technical achievement or not, there is now awareness of the political agenda that was behind the landing. It was essentially a cold-war race with the Soviets against the backdrop of a difficult political situation in the USA, caused in large part by the worsening of the human and financial cost of the Vietnam War.

Times of have changed and forty years on the manned lunar space programme is seen by many as something of a ‘white elephant’ with billions on dollars spent for very little return. The talks by the current administration of manned travel to Mars haven’t been received so quite so enthusiastically with many wondering who will foot the bill. It is also viewed cynically in many quarters as a politically motivated tactic to divert public attention away from the real problems facing the country, and perhaps even mankind.

While interest in landing a man on the moon may have waned, interest in the fragile blue plant that the astronauts looked back upon has increased. Although ‘Spaceship earth’ was not a new phrase at the time, its significance grew with the unprecedented TV audience that the space programme attracted. The vulnerability of the astronauts was reflected by the beautiful sight of the earth with its own vulnerable cargo of living creatures.

The last forty years have also seen many changes in our own industry. It was shortly after the last foot print was left on the moon surface in 1972 that the effect of CFC’s upon the ozone layer became widely known, which in turn lead to their phase-out, the current phase-out of HCFCs. More recently, an awareness of the effects of green-house gases are now creating a long-term uncertainty for the future of HFC refrigerants, and now, people have more concerned with footprints of a different kind; their carbon ones.

Some in the industry are rising to the challenge and the announcement last week by Waitrose that they plan to eradicate HFCs form their stores and to move to more energy efficient solutions is to be welcomed and hopefully representative of an industry trend. Combine this with their commitment to reduce refrigerant leakage from their existing systems, something the IoR’s Real Zero campaign is also promoting and one can’t help be feel that we are genuinely making progress.

Forty years on from Neil Armstrong’s famous words on the moon, there is a feeling around the ACR industry that we are making small steps in the right environmental direction that may possibly prove to be of greater significance for mankind in the long term. Whether anyone will remember the name of the person at Waitrose, or even what he said, in forty years time, is extremely doubtful. However, it may prove to be just as an important step as that one made at Tranquillity Base all those years ago.

Sometime actions speak louder than words; one small step for man ……

(http://www.acr-news.com/blog/view_entry.asp?id=146)

Rain-drops keep failing on my head - why rainwater harvesting is important

“Into each life some rain must fall” noted the poet Longfellow, although with this years higher than average rainfall across the UK many may rightly feel that his observation was somewhat understated. Indeed, with the exception of the south-west, the whole country has experienced above average rainfall when compared with the average for the years 1961 to 1990. It is therefore hardly surprising that as a nation we are complacent about our water and possibly explains why our water prices are cheaper than many other countries.

Despite the fact that we appear to have plenty of rain, the UK is classified as a country with insufficient water. A growing population (8% since 1971) has meant that our water resources are actually under pressure and provide the rather surprising fact that Madrid and Istanbul have more water available per person than London.

Price Rise

The days of cheap water may also be about to change with water prices set to surge above the rate of inflation between 2010 and 2015 if regulator Ofwat allows. Thames Water, the UK’s largest water company, says it expects bills to rise by 3% above inflation a year and United Utilities plans to raise its process by 2.7% also above the rate of inflation. A decision from Ofwat is expected by November 2009.

Where does all the rainwater go?

Only some of the rainwater that runs off our roofs finds its way into the water table and thence into the source that the water companies draw from. The vast majority of rainwater flows off down rivers and into the sea. It was been estimated that as little as 1% is drawn out for mains water with the remaining 99% being ‘lost’ into the sea without ever being processed through the mains water system. If the rainfall levels reduce again in the coming years the 1% becomes an even smaller volume of water and the pressures upon the supply are increased.

Reduce pressures on water resources

Rainwater harvesting does not reduce the amount of water that is available to the water company, but it does of course, reduce the load on the mains supply and hence the total amount of water that the water company has to source, transport, clean, purify, stock and ultimately deliver. Consequently it reduces the amount of energy, electricity and fossil fuels that water companies consume to operate.

In addition to the pressures on water resources, there are concerns over rainwater drainage. The terrible consequences of flooding mean that our existing approach to rainwater drainage systems will have to change. The Environment Agency is promoting the use of sustainable drainage systems, including rainwater harvesting, to retain and control surface water.

Rainwater harvesting

The concept of rainwater harvesting is thousands of years old, although over the last century its use diminished with the availability of a clean, inexpensive and reliable water source through the mains supply. The practice has been kept alive by gardeners and many households with gardens have rainwater butts.

Modern domestic and commercial rainwater systems simply collect the rain which falls onto the roofs, stores it is a tank until it is required for use, when it is then pumped to the point of use which is typically services such as toilets.

Increase in interest

Although still not widely used in the UK, rainwater harvesting systems are increasingly being incorporated in multiple occupancy commercial and public-sector developments such as office buildings, schools, and hospital extensions where their use makes excellent financial sense with typical payback periods of three years.

Distribution centres with their requirement for fleet vehicle washing also are an excellent example of the cost-effective application of rainwater harvesting. In short, any building with a large roof and a high-demand for non-potable water can effectively use rainwater harvesting to help solve environmental storm-water management issues - and make very substantial savings on the use of mains water.

Why should the air-conditioning and refrigeration industry be interested?

The evaporative effect of water plays a significant part in the energy efficiency of many cooling systems by using water in the cooling towers or evaporative condensers. Such systems are frequently used on large buildings that would be very suitable for rainwater harvesting systems. By encouraging the use of such systems we can reduce the carbon footprint of the plant still further and be a proactive partner with the client in their drive for reducing their environmental impact as well as their operating costs.

Ella Fitzgerald added to Longfellow’s words when she sang “Into each life some rain must fall, but too much is falling in mine”. With a rainwater harvesting system, perhaps that is not such a bad thing.

The end is nigh for HFCs, or is it?

“The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated” famously joked Mark Twain after hearing that his obituary had been published in the New York Journal. Rather surprisingly, mistaken publications of obituaries aren’t as rare as you might expect and in fact, Mark Twain himself twice had the misfortune (or perhaps good fortune, given that he was still breathing!) of reading his obituary in the newspapers.

It also seems that it is not only celebrities who prematurely have their demise reported. This week saw a number of news reports claiming that the EU had issued a communication proposing the phase-out of HFCs. However, anyone that takes the time to actually read the document will find that the phrase ‘phase-out” is conspicuous in its absence in the actually EU communication and no ban is specifically proposed at all. Add to this, that the proposals have yet to be discussed and agreed by EU ministers and all of a sudden it becomes clear that predictions as to the possible measures to reduce green house gas emissions to be proposed by the EU at the international summit in Copenhagen later this year are just that ..predictions.

The long-term future of HFCs may be uncertain and it would appear that it is under discussion, but those that are quick to write them off immediately should perhaps show a little more caution.

(see: http://www.acr-news.com/blog/blog.asp?author=14)

Heat Pumps: one answer to global warming is right under our feet

An amusing story relates how Thales of Miletoes, the 6^th century BC Greek Philosopher said by some to be the father of science, fell into a well one night while observing the night sky. He had been so intent in observing the heavens that he failed to watch where he was walking. The attractive servant-girl, who answered his cries for help, mockingly asked him how he expected to know anything about the stars when he didn’t even know what was on earth under his own feet.

Thales’ mishap reminded me of a situation faced by the ACR industry today. We are so intent on ozone depleting and green house gases that we don’t notice positive environmental opportunities closer at hand. For well over a decade now, we have been made aware of the negative impact that the use of certain refrigerants have on the environment. Climate change is the greatest environmental challenge facing the world today and we are right to want to reduce our contribution to the causes. Global warming and rising fuel costs are also demanding a profound change in the way we generate and use energy and it is easy to see why the focus of our mind set has become one of ‘phase-outs’, ‘restrictions’ and ‘reduction’. We and others, view our activities as part of the problem.

However, an alterative view has never been far away. More than a hundred and fifty years ago, our own Lord Kelvin presented to the Glasgow Philosophical Society his idea for a double-piston machine that could both heat and cool air for domestic purposes, in other words a kind of heat pump, essentially the refrigeration cycle used today, and so needs no further introduction here. At the time, there wasn’t an energy shortage and it was not until considerably later that the heating and energy efficiency potential of his work was re-visited. Whereas a boiler releases heat, a heat pump transfers heat; it absorbs it at low temperature and releases it at a higher level.

Fortunately, we don’t have to have Kelvin’s knowledge of thermodynamics to appreciate the advantages of a heat pump although an understanding of energy is helpful. We all have an intuitive feel for what is meant by ‘energy’. However, of all the concepts of physics, it is easier to talk about its manifestations such as heat, and driving energy, e.g., electricity. We know that energy is something that we have to pay for if we want to get something done. If we want to drive to work, we have to pay for the petrol, if we switch on the light we have to pay for the electricity and if we heat the house we may have to pay for the gas, coal or oil that contains energy which is released as heat during combustion in a boiler.The huge advantage that a heat pump has when compared to an ordinary boiler, is that the out put is greater than 1. The amount of efficient usable energy at a higher temperature is great than the amount of driving energy necessary to keep the process going. In other words, a heat pump delivers more than 100% of the equivalent heat input supplied to drive it. In practise they actually typically deliver 400 times the equivalent heat input.

In environmental and energy terms, the potential attraction of heat pumps doesn’t end there. If a natural refrigerant, such as CO2 is used, and the electricity for the drive motors is from a renewable source, we have a product that makes an even greater reduction in carbon emissions. It makes use of an inexhaustible, freely available heat source to supply more than it consumes. It is tried and tested technology with a system at its heart that it familiar to all of us.

Unfortunately, it seems that more consultants, engineers and building owners are aware of the negative aspects of ACR systems than have a thorough knowledge of heat pumps and heat recovery. Sadly, a blinkered approach to heating and cooling is all too common and we need to work to change this focus of the debate. Using the Thales tumble as a metaphor; it may not exactly be that the ACR industry is likely to fall down a well as it is being led there and pushed. Yet, like Thales, perhaps one solution lies literally all around us and in the ground under our feet.

Lies, Damned lies and Statistics!

Have you ever heard the fact that if you eat peanuts the day before you fly you are 73% less likely to be involved in a plane crash, or that 27% of female lottery winners hid their winning ticket in their bras? Apparently wearing white socks will also reduce your chances of being involved in a traffic accident but not if you are carrying a chicken in the back.

Bizarre statistics such as these examples are taken as fun with very few people relying upon them in their daily lives. I have yet to hear of any one actually consuming peanuts to avoid a travelling catastrophe, and as for the lucky lottery winners, the term ‘wonder-bra’ takes in a whole new meaning.

Statistics have long been the playground for politicians and it is common to hear them trading figures to prove a point or to justify an action. We have come to accept that it is often simply a way of avoiding answering the question and annoying as it, this practise has become part of the political landscape.

The quote ‘lies, damned lies, and statistics’, is meant to signify that there are three degrees of falsehood. Facts are facts after all, but statistics are facts often used to influence of perception and it is very easy for the unwitting to be misled by them.

The ACR industry is currently awash with statistics regarding refrigerants. The imminent HCFC phase out, combined with a drive to improve efficiency, have brought with them a whole rash of ‘facts’ and claims.

Sure, R22 is rising in price, but only after it had reached a ten year low. Even after it has doubled in price it will still be incredibly cheap. Many of the retro-fit alternative replacements refrigerants are showing extremely attractive energy savings, that is, until the extent of the system modifications is examined more closely.

Accurate information is desperately needed at this time if the industry is to maintain its credibility and make the right decisions. Fortunately, many responsible suppliers are providing just that, however, unfortunately others are perhaps unwittingly, dressing it up so that it can only be viewed through smoke and mirrors.

No one wants to mislead or be misled, and with an open mind the relevant facts can be disentangled and presented quite easily for everyone’s benefit. So let’s do it, before we all end up sounding like politicians or insisting on service engineers wearing white socks.

(see: http://www.acr-news.com/blog/blog.asp?author=14)

Time to wake up

I heard a funny story the other day about a man who knocks on his son’s door:

“Jamie,” he says, “Wake up!” Jamie answers, “I don’t want to get up, Dad.” The father shouts, “Get up, you have to go to school.” Jamie says, “I don’t want to go to school.” “Why not?” asks the father. “Three reasons,” says Jamie: “First, because it’s so dull; second, the kids tease me; and third, no one listens to me. I really do hate school.”

The father answers, “Well, I am going to give you three reasons why you must go to school. First, because it is your duty; second, because you are forty-five years old, and third, because you are the headmaster! Wake up, wake up!

Ha-ha, funny isn’t it? What makes it all the more funny is that we can all probably identify ourselves as the headmaster and sympathise with him. After all, who hasn’t had a day when they would rather have stayed in bed than go to work?

Facing up to our responsibilities, and even facing reality is not all as simple as getting up in the morning. It is sometimes evident that even those walking around and talking may as well be asleep. They carry on doing and saying the same things day-in, day-out without giving it much thought. I had the misfortune recently to sit in a meeting between an end-user and their contractor. The contractor assured the end-user (their long time client), that there was nothing to worry about regarding supply of R22, that money spent on energy savings schemes were a false economy, and that only super-market systems leak (which theirs wasn’t) and even if they did release some refrigerant, it would only be a small amount and so have no impact on the environment; “It would be no worse than a fart” they proudly claimed, “and not as loud or as smelly” they added helpfully!

Wake-up! There is enough information from suppliers and manufacturers as well as consultants and contractors to point us all in the right direction and to improve system efficiency and environmental impact, together with reducing operational costs. If only we can get up each morning and be awake to the wealth of information available and put it to good use. It is time that we all woke up, and faced the real responsibilities this industry has. I can imagine the headmaster joke being slightly changed to ACR engineer, but then it doesn’t seem quite so funny.

(see: http://www.acr-news.com/blog/blog.asp?author=14)

Michael Jackson and the HFC debate

Do you enjoy music? Perhaps you have a favourite Michael Jackson song or may be you prefer classical music, perhaps even a symphony? Recent studies has shown that music stimulates brain function on the right-side of your brain, which is also the same side that enhances ones ability to solve logical and mathematical problems. However, while studies show a connection between musical inclination and the part of the brain that processes logical thoughts, there is still no concrete explanation for why so many engineers share an interest and some even a passion for making music.

Perhaps it is because both pursuits require a mix of technical prowess and creativity. In both engineering and music, there is a technical framework from which one needs a creative element to solve the problems and to interpret.

Or may be it is because, as engineers, we can relate to the progression that music has. Engineering is all about progress. We understand and seek progress. We appreciate the flow. All the great names in the history of engineering have been pioneers who have pushed boundaries forward. Michael Jackson, one of the biggest pop icons in modern history, who died recently, pushed the barriers in music during his peak years in the 80’s, especially in music performance on video and his influence will continue for a long while.

In music, when we hear a nice tune, we don’t hold onto a couple of notes. We let them pass, let them flow. The whole enjoyment of a good piece of music lies in our readiness to allow the notes to flow and pass. If a few notes in a piece of music took our fancy, we don’t shout up to the performer “Keep playing it, again and again,” it wouldn’t be music any more.

Are you familiar with those tales of Nasreddin, the old wise man? Sometimes the spelling of his name is different so you may have heard of him by another name. He’s a legendary figure who the Greeks, Turks and Persians all claim for themselves. He would give his philosophical teachings in the form of stories, generally funny ones, and the butt of the story was always old Nasreddin himself.

One day Nasreddin was strumming a guitar in the market place, playing just one note. After a while a crowd collected around him and one of the men sitting on the ground there said, “That’s a nice note that you’re playing , Mullah (a name for a wise man) but why don’t you vary it a bit the way other musicians do?” “Those fools,” Nasreddin said, “they’re searching for the right note but I’ve already found it!”

Ha-ha, old Nasreddin sounds just like some of the players in the current HFC debate; stuck in a grove. They seem unable to appreciate the wider implications and greater possibilities of the comments they are making or opinions they are expressing. The longer the industry clings to HFCs, the more like Nasreddin we will appear. HFCs play the part in the refrigerant symphony that is unfolding before us. Let’s appreciate them for what they are, and then, progress. We need to encourage and embrace change. Any musician will tell you that playing the same note for too long, without variation, will bring a premature end to even the best of performances.

(see: http://www.acr-news.com/blog/blog.asp?author=14)