Life Cycle Optimization of Residential Air Conditioner Replacement

More documents

Recommendations

Info

List of TablesTable 1.1: Cooling Load of States with Fastest Population Growth (US Census Bureau, 2005;NCDC, 2002) .............................................................................................................................. 3Table 3.1: CAC Components and Designated NAICS Code ............................................................ 11Table 3.2: Component Weights (in kg) of Deconstructed Outdoor CAC Unit ............................... 12Table 3.3: Environmental Characteristics of CAC Refrigerants (Campbell & McCulloch, 1998;IPCC, 2007) .............................................................................................................................. 16Table 3.4: Major Residential Air Conditioner Manufacturing Locations ....................................... 17Table 3.5: Summary of Bin‐Based Methods to Calculate SEER (Henderson & Sachs, 2006)......... 21Table 3.6: SEER Adjustment Factors Derived from Bin Calculations ............................................. 21Table 5.1: LCO Results for Ann Arbor and San Antonio Using Process LCA Results ...................... 27Table 5.2: LCO Results for Ann Arbor and San Antonio Using EIO‐LCA Results a ........................... 28Table 5.3: Comparison of Optimal Replacements to Typical Replacement Scenario Using ProcessLCI Data ................................................................................................................................... 29Table 5.4: Comparison of Optimal Replacements to Typical Replacement Scenario Using EIO‐LCAResults ..................................................................................................................................... 29Table 5.5: LCO Results for Ann Arbor and San Antonio with an Updated 16 SEER Standard UsingProcess LCI Results .................................................................................................................. 31Table 5.6: LCO Results for Ann Arbor and San Antonio with an Updated 16 SEER Standard UsingEIO‐LCA Results a ...................................................................................................................... 32Table 5.7: Impact of Carbon Price on Cost Optimal Solution ........................................................ 33Table 6.1: Cost of Carbon Reduction from Incentives for Accelerated Replacement (in2009$/mton of CO 2 abated) ................................................................................................... 36Table 6.2: LCO Savings from Regional Standard Compared to Base Case Efficiency Scenario forSelect States and Initial Model Years. ..................................................................................... 37Table 6.3: Comparison of Impacts of Replacing with a Baseline Model (Assuming 16 SEERScenario) and an Energy Star Model Under Optimal Replacement in Ann Arbor for SelectYears ........................................................................................................................................ 39Table 6.4: Comparison of Impacts of Replacing with a Baseline Model (Assuming 16 SEERScenario) and an Energy Star Model Under Optimal Replacement in San Antonio for SelectYears. ....................................................................................................................................... 39
NomenclatureACCA Air Conditioning Contractors of AmericaAEO Annual Energy OutlookAER Annual Energy ReviewAHRI Air‐Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute [formerly AmericanRefrigerant Institute (ARI)]ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air‐Conditioning EngineersBTU British Thermal UnitCAC Central Air ConditionerCDD Cooling Degree Days (base 65 F)CLH Cooling Load HoursDOE Department of EnergyEER Energy Efficiency RatioEIO‐LCA Economic Input‐Output Life Cycle AssessmentEPA Environmental Protection AgencyGHG Greenhouse GasHFC HydrofluorocarbonHVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air ConditioningISO International Organization for StandardizationLCA Life Cycle AssessmentLCILife Cycle InventoryLCO Life Cycle OptimizationMECS Manufacturing Energy Consumptions SurveyNAICS North American Industry Classification SystemNERC North American Electricity Reliability CorporationSEER Seasonal Energy Efficiency RatioTEWI Total Environmental Warming ImpactTMY3 Typical Meteorological Year 3 Database
Page 4: Document DescriptionLIFE CYCLE OPTI
Page 8 and 9: 4.3 Energy Intensity ..............
Page 12 and 13: 1 IntroductionMechanical air condit
Page 14 and 15: The overall demand for space coolin
Page 16 and 17: Cooling is provided when the liquid
Page 18 and 19: 2 Methodology2.1 Life Cycle Assessm
Page 20 and 21: chart. Replacing a product with a m
Page 22 and 23: Each component was assigned to an a
Page 24 and 25: Indoor UnitThe indoor unit was assu
Page 26 and 27: Index (10 SEER =1)2.502.001.501.000
Page 28 and 29: Producer costs for higher and lower
Page 30 and 31: Figure 3.6: North American Electric
Page 32 and 33: Table 3.5: Summary of Bin‐Based M
Page 34 and 35: 3.5 End‐of‐LifeIt was assumed t
Page 36 and 37: RefrigerantsAs described in Section
Page 38 and 39: 5 Results and Discussion5.1 Model A
Page 40 and 41: 5.3 Comparing Optimal Replacement t
Page 42 and 43: 4500GHG Abated (kg CO2 eq.)40003500
Page 44 and 45: Table 5.7: Impact of Carbon Price o
Page 46 and 47: Ann Arbor GHG$676 $1,188 $1,188Ann
Page 48 and 49: emphasize sensible cooling capacity
Page 50 and 51: Energy Star, the average premium fo
Page 52 and 53: holding period for minimizing cost
Page 54 and 55: 7.3 Policy ImplicationsThis researc
Page 56 and 57: 8 BibliographyAHRI. (2008). 2008 St
Page 58 and 59: Kim, H. C., Keoleian, G. A., & Hori
Page 60 and 61:
AppendixA.1 Energy IntensityMuch of
Page 62 and 63:
A.2 LCO Results of Standard Efficie
Page 64 and 65:
A.3 Comparison of Optimal to Typica
Page 66 and 67:
Table A.0.7: LCO Results for 16 SEE
Page 68 and 69:
Table A.0.9: LCO Results for 15 SEE
Page 70 and 71:
Table A.0.11: LCO Results for 17 SE
Page 72 and 73:
Table A.0.13: Comparison of Optimal
Page 74 and 75:
2008 Energy 2008, 2012, 1,448,000 2
Page 76 and 77:
SouthCarolina1992 Energy(MJ)GHG(CO2
Page 78 and 79:
2017Cost (2009$) 2003, 2013 $7,770
Page 80 and 81:
A.8 High Efficiency CAC Rebate Surv
Page 82:
Memphis Light, Gas and Water Memphi
show all

Life Cycle Optimization of Residential Air Conditioner Replacement

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?