Geothermal Heating and Cooling is 'The Real Deal'
Last Post 06 Apr 2009 01:53 PM by geodean. 12 Replies.
Printer Friendly
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Author Messages
Bill NeukranzUser is Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Send Private Message
Posts:1103

--
13 Mar 2009 01:31 PM
I had a request this morning to write the attached.  I'm a member of Rotary International, an organization focused on making a difference to local communities.  We meet weekly, and the subject of sustainability programs for the city I live in was the topic for this morning.  In the course of discussion, I was asked to create a summary (attached) on my (real) experience with geothermal heating and cooling and send it out to the membership.

Here's a copy of what I submitted, primarily to help those of you who are still wondering if geothermal-based heating and cooling is 'the real deal' (it is).

Keep in mind that I live in what can be a blistering hot climate here in Dallas, and as such, my GSHPs don't get challenged until summer time, which is the reverse for most of you.

Best regards,
 
Bill


From: Bill Neukranz
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 12:18 PM
Subject: Geothermal Heating and Cooling Is 'The Real Deal'

Thank you for your questions this morning on my geothermal heating and cooling system for my residence.
 
My family lives in a 3400 sf single story house near Bob Woodruff Park.  The structure has a big (hot in the summer) attic where the heating & cooling equipment is, and has a standard composition roof.  It has average insulation, poor air-tightness (windows, doors and over 50 recessed light fixtures ventilating direct to the attic), and a lot of unshaded glass (considerable solar gain).
 
We generally keep the thermostats set at 76° when cooling, and 68° when heating, with a 3° setback at night.
 
We made the decision to improve the energy efficiency of our home after the hot summer in 2006.  Our bill got close to $1000 for just one month's worth of electricity.  We had a 120 KBTU/hr gas furnace and a 2-stage 5-ton air conditioner that was 14 years old.  (At the time it was near the best energy efficiency available.)
 
Of the many energy improvement possible actions available, we've completed two so far: converting to geothermal and replacing every incandescent light bulb with a Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL).
 
Here's the summary on why geothermal is 'the real deal.'
 
On an apples-to-apples basis, looking at Kilowatt-Hour (KWH) consumption (what is read from your electric meter), we've reduced it from 146 (Jul. '06) to 82 (Feb. '09) KWH per day, on a 12 month rolling average basis.  This is a 44% reduction in electricity energy consumption.  (Of the 64 KWH/day reduction, 12 of it is due to CFL replacement - the rest is due to geothermal.)  Here's a chart showing KWH usage since year 2000:  http://www.pbase.com/neukranz/image/110158907 .
 
Continuing to look at actual consumption before looking at costs, for natural gas we've reduced from 0.27 to 0.13 MCF per day, again on a 12 mo. rolling avg. basis.  This is a 52% reduction in gas energy consumption.  All of this is due to geothermal (removal of the gas furnace).  Here's a chart showing NG usage since 2006: http://www.pbase.com/neukranz/image/110158982 .
 
Turning to the cost picture, you have to take into account individual utility rates.  For us, we've reduced the monthly electric bill from a high of $925 (Jul. '06) to a low of $216 (Oct. '08).  In fact, we have to go back to Feb. '04 to find a lower monthly bill ($202).  Here's a chart: http://www.pbase.com/neukranz/image/110159025 .
 
A broader picture of what's been accomplished is available by looking at 12 mo. rolling avg. cost.  Here our avg. monthly bill, each month, has declined $270/mo., dropping from $602 (Feb. '07) to $332 (Feb. '09).  This is almost a reduction in half of the electric bill, on avg., every month.
 
On an annualized basis, this is a $3240 per year savings.
 
For the monthly gas bill, we've reduced our 12 mo. rolling cost by $35/mo., dropping from $95 (Nov. '07) to $60 (Feb. '09).  This is slightly more than a one-third reduction (37%).  Annualized, this is about $420 additional savings.
 
Putting the two utility savings together, total annual savings is near $3700.
 
After converting to the geothermal system, I installed a monitoring system to record our progress toward energy reduction, and to illustrate energy guzzling areas that can be cost-effectively attacked.  If you're interested in a lot of detail for how our geothermal system is working, both real time and historically (and for what the weather's been like for the past year here in East Plano), take a look here: http://welserver.com/WEL0043/ .
 
One of the many things this implementation shows is energy consumption separated out just for heating and cooling.  Our electricity consumption for heating and cooling was just $28 last month (Feb. '09).  Our lowest consumption since putting in geothermal was $18 for Apr. '08.  Our high for this past summer was $190 (Jul. '08).
 
Here's a chart of monthly electricity cost for just heating and cooling using geothermal, for our house:  http://www.pbase.com/neukranz/image/110159212 .
 
If you have any questions, or would like further information, please don't hesitate to ask.
 
Best regards,
 
Bill

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy reduction & monitoring</br>
American Energy Efficiencies, Inc - Dallas, TX <A
href="http://www.americaneei.com">
(www.americaneei.com)</A></br>
Example monitoring system: <A href="http://www.welserver.com/WEL0043"> www.welserver.com/WEL0043</A>
MasoudUser is Offline
Basic Member
Basic Member
Send Private Message
Posts:180

--
13 Mar 2009 07:51 PM
On reduction in average daily electricity use, "On an apples-to-apples basis, ... we've reduced it from 146... to 82... KWH per day,... This is a 78% reduction in electricity energy consumption."

It seems to me that the reduction is 44%, as in [(146-82)/146] x 100 = 43.8.

Regards, Masoud
Bill NeukranzUser is Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Send Private Message
Posts:1103

--
13 Mar 2009 08:32 PM
Masoud, thanks very much for catching this error.  I fixed the orginal text above to state 44%, not 78%.

Best regards,

Bill
Energy reduction & monitoring</br>
American Energy Efficiencies, Inc - Dallas, TX <A
href="http://www.americaneei.com">
(www.americaneei.com)</A></br>
Example monitoring system: <A href="http://www.welserver.com/WEL0043"> www.welserver.com/WEL0043</A>
Palace GeothermalUser is Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Send Private Message
Posts:1609

--
13 Mar 2009 08:36 PM
Very nice article Bill, thanks for sharing.
Dewayne Dean

<br>www.PalaceGeothermal.com<br>Why settle for 90% when you can have 400%<br>We heat and cool with dirt!<br>visit- http://welserver.com/WEL0114/- to see my system
gtoledoUser is Offline
New Member
New Member
Send Private Message
Posts:2

--
21 Mar 2009 02:05 PM

I live in Melbourne FL where the ground temperature is 72F and the ground is moist sand.  I am a mechanical engineer with a PE and I am interested in getting into the geothermal business. 

I took the geothermal installer and designer courses through IGSHPA so that I could start designing and installing these myself.  I later lost a little hope thinking that the savings in FL would not be significant because the ground temperatures are significantly higher than in the north where these systems seem to be more common plus the climate here is cooling dominated.  I just though it wouldn't be cost effective in FL.

However, ground and air temperatures in Melbourne, FL are not too different from Dallas so I still have hope that it is worth pursuing this.

I have a question for anybody out there with experience in geothermal systems:  Do you think a geothermal system would be cost effective in the tropics (i.e, the Caribbean) where the climate is totally cooling dominated (no need for heating)?

 

geo fanUser is Offline
Basic Member
Basic Member
Send Private Message
Posts:408

--
21 Mar 2009 04:12 PM
It would be dependent on the electric rate
if you pay 10 cents or less per kwh you would be right
if your paying 20 plus it would be a reasonable investment
The plus would be an apple to apple comparison unlike up here where we are busy converting 140k btu gal. 80% at this cost and geo at this
gtoledoUser is Offline
New Member
New Member
Send Private Message
Posts:2

--
21 Mar 2009 07:22 PM
Another question ignoring cost and purely looking at efficiency: In a cooling dominated climate where you are continually dumping heat to the ground and where the air temperature swing is very small (only +/-15 degrees or between 65F to 95F) as it is in the Caribbean, can these systems still work? I cannot find any information for geothermal in tropical areas but without getting into the calculations it seems you run the risk of heating the ground over the years since you never pull heat out of it. It is also kind of obvius that you would need longer pipe runs in a tropical climate since you operate in only one mode (ground as a condenser) whereas in the northern states your ground loop works as a condenser in the summer and an evaporator in the winter. This could make the system too expensive but I could be wrong since I don't know how much piping would be required. Does anybody have a good answer to this question?
geo fanUser is Offline
Basic Member
Basic Member
Send Private Message
Posts:408

--
21 Mar 2009 07:37 PM
I would try my best for a pump and dump system in that situation
joe.amiUser is Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Send Private Message
Posts:4377
Avatar

--
21 Mar 2009 09:02 PM
Actually your situation is similar to Northern climates where there are few if any cooling days with 1 proviso....gas furnaces do not come close to geo while conventional air conditioners can. Geo can still save you a measurable percentage but the numbers are closer and you do need significant foot print in disparite climates making closed loop installation costs high.
Frankly it's a good place for DX where footprint is the same as everywhere else so it doesn't boost the install cost. Manufacturer's required soaker hose can give you the correction that many hot days might require.....call it closed loop with a booster.
Good luck,
Joe
Joe Hardin
www.amicontracting.com
We Dig Comfort!
www.doityourselfgeothermal.com
Dig Your Own Comfort!
dwakUser is Offline
New Member
New Member
Send Private Message
Posts:23

--
05 Apr 2009 05:29 PM
I've experimented with open loop systems in Canada where I took, essentially, cold water from a high capacity source (well) and extracted heat and returned the even cooler water to another well. Using a reuilt Waterfurnace. And it worked so well it paid for itself in it's first year heating an ancient farmhouse.
Now I live in the coastal tropics in Central America and wonder if the reverse is possible. Can I take warm water, extract cold, and send it back warmer as in above? As in refridgeration? Open looped? Leaving the environmental issues aside. Energy is very expensive here.

dwak
Palace GeothermalUser is Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Send Private Message
Posts:1609

--
05 Apr 2009 05:46 PM
dwak...you can do everything you want except "extract cold from the water" . You can however take heat from your house and add it to the water which will cool your house and warm the water.

Refridgeration is really moving heat, not cold. Good luck and let us know.
Dewayne Dean

<br>www.PalaceGeothermal.com<br>Why settle for 90% when you can have 400%<br>We heat and cool with dirt!<br>visit- http://welserver.com/WEL0114/- to see my system
dwakUser is Offline
New Member
New Member
Send Private Message
Posts:23

--
06 Apr 2009 01:16 PM
Thanks Deawayne.
How does that work in simple numbers? The ambient air is a very humid 90 F, let's say, and the water source is 75 to 80 F. Is this practical or is it similar to an air source heat pump
becoming inefficient at below freezing temps?
Sorry to be a pest but I am having a very hard time getting answers on this concept.

dwak
Palace GeothermalUser is Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Send Private Message
Posts:1609

--
06 Apr 2009 01:53 PM
IF you can do an open loop and have constant 75 - 80 ° water, then it makes sense. If you end up with a closed loop where temps would get above 90° then it is not as attractive.
Dewayne Dean

<br>www.PalaceGeothermal.com<br>Why settle for 90% when you can have 400%<br>We heat and cool with dirt!<br>visit- http://welserver.com/WEL0114/- to see my system
You are not authorized to post a reply.

Active Forums 4.1
Membership Membership: Latest New User Latest: HotnCold New Today New Today: 0 New Yesterday New Yesterday: 0 User Count Overall: 34723
People Online People Online: Visitors Visitors: 130 Members Members: 0 Total Total: 130
Copyright 2011 by BuildCentral, Inc.   Terms Of Use  Privacy Statement