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)