Armin Hafner Professor Refrigeration Technology, NTNU Department of Energy and Process Engineering Professor Dr.-Ing. Armin Hafner has recently started at NTNU in Trondheim, Norway, as a professor in refrigeration technology. During the past two decades, Armin has been working at SINTEF with research topics related to CO2 refrigeration technology applied in various applications. His focus is in the fields of refrigeration and heat pump technology in general, as well as CO2 technology for various applications such as supermarkets, industrial heat pumps, and transport refrigeration. Additionally, he is involved with system design for refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pumps, including working fluid with an emphasis on natural working fluids, C02, NH3, and hydrocarbons. He has over 100 international and national publication with the area of refrigeration and process engineering. 1
Back to the future. Alternative solutions for the phase-down of HFCs: available options Identification of low-gwp alternatives to HFCs-based technologies PHASE-IN of natural refrigerants Prof. Dr. Armin Hafner NTNU Norway
Content Refrigeration Technology Alternative solutions Risk continuing on the HFC Path Examples of successful introduction of Natural Refrigerant Technology Summary 202x 2017 3
Working fluids history Until 1930 1930-50 1987 1987 1997 2006/2007 2015 Use of natural working fluids Air, ethyl ether, SO 2, methyl chloride, ammonia, propane, isobutane, CO 2, etc. Introduction of synthetic working fluids, like CFC12 and HCFC22 Montreal protocol established, CFC and HCFC ozone depletion due to chloride/bromine. Phasing out CFC (1995) and HCFC (2010) Hydrogen-Fluor-Carbons (HFC) introduced Kyoto protocol established, HFC regulated due to high GWP factor EUs F-gas directive Phase down of high GWP fluids EU F-gas regulation 1990-now Increasing focus on use of natural working fluids, especially ammonia, hydrocarbons and CO 2
1998 Children s Painting Competition by UNEP LARGE NEED FOR NEW SOLUTIONS!! Image taken from the 2001 UNEP DTIE OzonAction Programme Children's Painting Competition. Painting by Laila Nuri, aged 8, Indonesia
Image taken from the 2001 UNEP DTIE OzonAction Programme Children's Painting Competition. Painting by Mariam Salman Al Oraibi, aged 12, Bahrain
F-gas Regulation (example: Supermarkets) Present conventional supermarket refrigeration systems are not future long-term solutions: Ban refrigerants GWP>150 from 2022 (centralized refrigeration system >40 kw, Primary Cycle in Cascade configuration >1500) 79% Reduction of GWP related emission by 2030 Which options are available for stakeholders?» Business as usual until 2020 and then usage of recycled gas until 2030; Availability/cost of the gas and equipment Future ban of service and maintenance Stricter leak detection and refrigerant recovery processes» Convert/retrofit with new synthetic low-gwp refrigerants; Total environmental impact un-known, future regulation? Cost of the refrigerant?» Natural Refrigerant business orientation. Long term solution Investment cost no longer higher than traditional HFC 7
Clever strategy after Paris COP, Kigali & Marrakech Meetings: Companies focusing on Natural Working Fluids will face no risk to invest into technologies being on the phase out agenda in the future <=> Safe & sustainable investment
Back to the future. Alternative solutions for the phase-down of HFCs: available options Fishery sector Light commercial refrigeration Commercial refrigeration Domestic hot water heat pumps Mobile Air Conditioning Etc.
Premium quality fish from vessels equipped with R744 refrigeration technology
Premium quality fish from vessels equipped with R744 refrigeration technology
Premium quality fish from R744 equipped vessels One Vessel equipped with CO 2 RSW unit was in operation around the Canary Islands and is now outside Mauretania!
Light commercial ref. units / standalone units Important players have made an alliance: They have installed more than 4 million units using natural refrigerants both in developing and industrialised countries. This is real PHASE-IN of natural refrigerants! CONGRATULATIONS
Market trends from Asia: Japan HFC R744-27% energy usage Source: http://www.atmo.org/events.details.php?eventid=36 More than 2000 stores with R744 in 2017!!
Market trends from Asia: Indonesia 12 stores with R744 in Indonesia! Source: http://www.atmo.org/events.details.php?eventid=36
Temperature [ C] Water heating heat pumps Example Japan: First EcoCute* system in the market May 2001 1.700.000 units installed between 2001 and 2008 By the end of 2013: 4.000.000 units installed 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Throttle Valve 5 6 4 4 Evaporator Receiver 3 5 Int. Heat Exchanger 1 3 2 Compressor Gas Cooler p= 150 bar 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 Entropy, [kj/kg K] 6 1 2 p= 20 bar Large market potential for other regions towards 2020. [Storage of renewable energy] * natural refrigerant heat pump water heater 24
Mercedes-Benz S-Class Since autumn 2016: Available with CO 2 AC (1 st serial production car with R744 MAC) more cars also from other suppliers will follow 25
Commercial Refrigeration (Supermarkets) By 2016 www.supersmart-supermarket.org SuperSmart is a EU funded H2020 project 26
Commercial Refrigeration (Supermarkets) In future: supermarket refrigeration system provides entire energy flow and demand in the building (and surrounding) Air Conditioning (direct or chilled water) Heat recovery: hot water production, space heating, ice protection Heat pump function & export of heat CO 2 (R744) is the preferred alternative of the end-users across Europe for new installations (also globally) Predictable no restrictions CO 2 booster units are proven technology with potential to further improve COP (parallel compression + ejector technology) in areas with hot ambient temperatures Promising global perspectives for a successful Phase-in of CO 2 27
Non-Technological Barriers hinder diffusion of already existing energy efficient and naturalrefrigerant based solutions Awareness barrier Knowledge barrier; Systems complexity increases, Interdisciplinary knowledge is required training Social barrier; i.e. Some planners may not want to move from technology they are very experienced in training Organisational barrier Legislative barrier; i.e. No strong legislative incentive towards energy efficient systems as a whole and neither against inefficient ones. 28
Thanks for your attention! Questions are welcome Contact: Prof. Dr. Armin Hafner NTNU Trondheim Norway E-mail: armin.hafner@ntnu.no 29