The information reported here summarizes actual energy studies that were performed. The same reductions in energy usage can be reasonably expected by ProTEC products of similar sizes and usages once humidity is brought under control. Humidity inside of refrigeration units are referred to as Latent Heat. It is this lagging load on the cooling system that must be reduced before it can then begin to do its work and reduce the temperature. The excess humidity that’s inside refrigerated units increases the load on the unit’s compressors. Therefore, reducing this latent heat load will cause the compressors to not run as long, or as often for cooling.
Once internal humidity is reduced, the refrigeration unit becomes much more efficient and will last longer. These example studies have proven that using ProTEC desiccant panels are a very cost-effective way to achieve this efficiency.
A typical 10′x12′ walk-in cooler costs about $141.00 per month of energy costs to operate. A freezer the same size usually costs about $406.00 per month in energy. These studies have proven that by reducing the latent load (humidity), an operating cost reduction of approximately 18% to 28% can be achieved. Therefore, potential savings can be significant; especially when scaled across multiple units.
The solution HumiTEC Corporation provides effectively solves these problems by using 100% natural desiccants to capture excess humidity inside these refrigerated units.
Additionally, since all of our panels are rechargeable / recyclable their lifespan is really immeasurable.
ProTEC Panels Create No Waste
When used, our desiccant panels create no waste byproducts. The captured moisture is contained and held within the panels by our blend of zeolite crystals, which have a tremendous internal surface area. A single gram of the HumiTEC Zeolites can have more than 500 square meters of surface area. A single ProTEC Natural Humidity Protection panel can have over 24 million square feet of surface area to capture moisture from the air!
Reduced Energy Use
Utility companies say that you can save about 5% for every degree you can increase the thermostat. By reducing moisture in any air conditioned environment, you are reducing “latent heat”. This latent load is additional heat your system must remove in order to cool. By reducing the latent heat load the system will run more efficiently and will use less energy. This is not theory, but a proven fact.
Laredo, Texas Independent School District January, 2008
Facility #1: Don Jose Gallegos School
Analysis based upon 5 ton cooler/freezer system producing 55,000 BTU
Average monthly kWh usage: 4,284.60kWh
Two compressor split system: add 15%
Total monthly usage: 4,927.29kWh
Average Compressor Run-time Reduction: 23.8%
Average Monthly Energy Savings: 4,927.29 kWh x 23.8% = savings of 1,172.70kWh
Average Monthly Cost Savings: 1,172.70 kWh x .10 cents per kWh= $117.27 per month, per school.
Based upon 32 Schools in the District: $3,752.64 per month, or $45,031.68 per year, in total electrical savings.
(Additional savings were obtained from less waste of fresh produce and less maintenance costs.)
Carrollton-Farmers Branch, Texas Independent School District November, 2011
Facility #1: Blanton Elementary School
A five week benchmark testing withouthumidity control (by Mr. Mark Lugge, Electrical Department Head at Carrollton ISD) revealed that from the period of 9/6/2011 thru 10/7/2011 the walk-in cooler compressor used 2,425.0kWh.
Another five week test WITH humidity control was conducted again by Mr. Mark Lugge on the same unit. This test (from the period of 10/25/2011 thru 11/28/2011) revealed the cooler compressor used only 1,689.8kWh.
Copyright HumiTEC Corporation, 2012Average Kilowatt Reduction: 735.2kWh, or 30.3% per month.
(735.2 x .10 per kWh = $73.52 per month savings)
Facility #2: Thompson Elementary School
A five week benchmark testing withouthumidity control (by Mr. Mark Lugge, Electrical Department Head at Carrollton ISD) revealed that from the period of 9/6/2011 thru 10/7/2011 the walk-in cooler compressor used a total of 3,415.0kWh.
Another five week test WITH humidity control was conducted again by Mr. Mark Lugge on the same walk-in unit. This test (from the period of 10/25/2011 thru 11/28/2011) revealed the cooler compressor used a total of only 2,398.35kWh.
Average Kilowatt Reduction: 1,016.65kWh, or 29.8% per month (1,016.65 x .10 per kWh = $101.67 per month savings)
Overall Results:
Studies have proven that reducing humidity inside the walk-in coolers produced a significant monthly savings from less compressor energy usage. Simply put, the compressors do not have to work as hard or run as long once the latent heat load (humidity) is reduced. Also, energy savings potentials are even greater with walk-in freezers because the freezers use approximately two or three times MORE energy (kWh) per month than a typical walk-in cooler.
Convenience Stores May – July, 2005
Purpose:
To determine the effectiveness of humidity control panels installed inside the walk-in cooler, and with regards to harsh Texas summer temperatures.
Test Site #1: High Traffic Location
A 39 degree walk-in cooler benchmark measured for 30 days without humidity control panels. The average increase in energy usage per degree of outside temperature rise was measured to be 0.1547 kW per degree in temperature increase. (Temperature range was 79 to 86 degrees.) With the humidity control panels installed, the average increase was only 0.0540 kW per degree, yet the temperature range increased from 91 to 100 degrees.
It was also discovered that even though the outside temperature was much hotter, the temperature inside the walk-in cooler actually dropped about 5 degrees without any thermostat adjustment. At 730.5 hours of usage per month, the total energy usage dropped from 4,284.6 kWh down to 3,347.9 kWh. This is a 21.9% reduction. Assuming 10 cents per kilowatt hour, the resulting savings for the one walk-in cooler was $93.68 per month.
Test Site #2: Medium Traffic Location
A 41 degree walk-in cooler benchmark measured for 30 days without humidity control panels. The average increase in energy usage per degree of outside temperature rise was measured to be
0.0884 kW per degree in temperature increase. (Temperature range was 82 to 89 degrees.) With the humidity control panels installed, the average increase was only 0.0334 kW per degree, yet the temperature range increased from 91 to 100 degrees. It was also discovered that even though the outside temperature was 19 degrees hotter, the temperature inside the walk-in cooler actually dropped about 4 degrees without any thermostat adjustment.
At 730.5 hours of usage per month, the total energy usage dropped from 3,933.45 kWh down to 3,308.0 kWh. This is a 15.9% reduction. Assuming 10 cents per kilowatt hour, the resulting savings for the one walk-in cooler was $62.55 per month.
Results:
The analysis, even with considering the effects of rising outdoor temperatures, proved that reducing humidity inside the walk-in coolers produced a significant monthly savings from less compressor energy usage. The average monthly savings for the two units was $78.12 per month, or about $937 per store, per year. Reducing the latent heat also produced an internal temperature drop of between 4 and 5 degrees without adjusting the thermostat. Adjusting the thermostat would afford even more energy savings.Idogaya Stores July – October, 2008
Purpose:
An energy study was performed on a group of very large walk-in coolers and walk-in freezers operating inside grocery stores in Japan. The purpose was to determine if reducing humidity inside these large units would result in a reduction of kilowatts consumed by the unit’s compressor. Since outdoor temperatures can directly influence operational efficiency, the energy usage was also compared to these temperatures.
Test Units: 3 Walk-in Coolers
The large walk-in coolers averaged 211.0 kWh per day without using humidity control. With control panels installed, the cooler’s average energy usage dropped to 169.7 kWh per day. The average reduction was 19.5%, or 41.3 kWh per day, 1,255.52 kWh per month. Using a rate of 10 cents per kWh, the estimated monthly savings would be $125.55 per month, per cooler. ($376.65 per month for the three coolers.)
Test Units: 3 Walk-in Freezers
The large walk-in freezers averaged 270.3 kWh per day without using humidity control. With control panels installed, the freezer’s average energy usage dropped to 228.3 kWh per day. The average reduction was 15.6%, or 42.0 kWh per day, 1,276.8 kWh per month. Using a rate of 10 cents per kWh, the estimated monthly savings would be $127.68 per month, per freezer.
($383.04 per month for the three freezers.)
Results:
The test confirmed there was an obvious reduction in kilowatt consumption for all the very large walk-in coolers and freezers involved in the evaluation. Therefore, reducing humidity inside the coolers and freezers proved that the compressor run-time was also reduced. The results were less energy consumption, less compressor wear-and-tear, and less maintenance costs, regardless of the outdoor temperature and relative humidity levels. For the six units in the test, the total monthly savings would be approximately $760 per month.