EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

T OF ENERGY DEPARTMEN

U

E

N ITED STAT S OFA ERICA M

T OF ENERGY DEPARTMEN

U

E

N ITED STAT S OFA ERICA M

gies online at:

Office of Industrial TechnologiesEnergy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyU.S. Department of Energy

Hydraulic Institute uropump Europump 
e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Life Cycle Cost? . . . .3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

trol Valve . . . . . . . .12

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Improving Pump System Performance: An Overlooked

Opportunity?

Pumping systems account for nearly 20% of the world’s electrical energy demand and

range from 25-50% of the energy usage in certain industrial plant operations.

Pumping systems are widespread; they provide domestic services, commercial and

agricultural services, municipal water/wastewater services, and industrial services

for food processing, chemical, petrochemical, pharmaceutical, and mechanical

industries. Although pumps are typically purchased as individual components, 

they provide a service only when operating as part of a system. The energy and

materials used by a system depend on the design of the pump, the design of the

installation, and the way the system is operated. These factors are interdependent.

What’s more, they must be carefully matched to each other, and remain so throughout their working lives to ensure the lowest energy and maintenance costs, equipment life, and other benefits. The initial purchase price is a small part of the life

cycle cost for high usage pumps. While operating requirements may sometimes

override energy cost considerations, an optimum solution is still possible.

A greater understanding of all the components that make up the total cost of 

ownership will provide an opportunity to dramatically reduce energy, operational,

and maintenance costs. Reducing energy consumption and waste also has important

environmental benefits.

Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis is a management tool that can help companies 

minimize waste and maximize energy efficiency for many types of systems, including

pumping systems. This overview provides highlights from Pump Life Cycle Costs: 

A Guide to LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems, developed by the Hydraulic Institute

and Europump to assist plant owners/operators in applying the LCC methodology

to pumping systems. For information on obtaining a copy of the Guide, see page 15

of this summary.

1

Executive Summary

Initial costs

Energy costs

Other costs

Maintenance

costs

Typical life cycle

costs for a 

medium-sized

industrial pump

The life cycle cost

(LCC) of any piece of

equipment is the total

“lifetime” cost to 

purchase, install,

operate, maintain,

and dispose of that

equipment.
What is Life Cycle Cost?

The life cycle cost (LCC) of any piece of equipment is the total “lifetime” cost to

purchase, install, operate, maintain, and dispose of that equipment. Determining

LCC involves following a methodology to identify and quantify all of the 

components of the LCC equation. 

When used as a comparison tool between possible design or overhaul alternatives,

the LCC process will show the most cost-effective solution within the limits of the

available data.

The components of a life cycle cost analysis typically include initial costs, installation

and commissioning costs, energy costs, operation costs, maintenance and repair

costs, down time costs, environmental costs, and decommissioning and disposal

costs.

2

LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems

Pumping systems

acount for nearly

20% of the world’s

electrical energy

demand and range

from 25-50% of the

energy usage in 

certain industrial

plant operations

In some industrial plant operations, pumping systems account for 25 to 50% of

energy use.
Why Should Organizations Care About Life Cycle Cost?

Many organizations only consider the initial purchase and installation cost of a

system. It is in the fundamental interest of the plant designer or manager to evaluate

the LCC of different solutions before installing major new equipment or carrying

out a major overhaul. This evaluation will identify the most financially attractive

alternative. As national and global markets continue to become more competitive,

organizations must continually seek cost savings that will improve the profitability

of their operations. Plant equipment operations are receiving particular attention

as a source of cost savings, especially minimizing energy consumption and plant

downtime. 

Existing systems provide a greater opportunity for savings through the use of LCC

methods than do new systems for two reasons. First, there are at least 20 times as

many pump systems in the installed base as are built each year; and, second,

many of the existing systems have pumps or controls that are not optimized since

the pumping tasks change over time. 

Some studies have shown that 30% to 50% of the energy consumed by pump 

systems could be saved through equipment or control system changes.

In addition to the economic reasons for using LCC, many organizations are 

becoming increasingly aware of the environmental impact of their businesses, 

and are considering energy efficiency as one way to reduce emissions and preserve

natural resources. 

Getting Started

LCC analysis, either for new facilities or renovations, requires the evaluation of 

alternative systems. For a majority of facilities, the lifetime energy and/or 

maintenance costs will dominate the life cycle costs. It is therefore important to

accurately determine the current cost of energy, the expected annual energy price

escalation for the estimated life, along with the expected maintenance labor 

and material costs. Other elements, such as the life time costs of down time,

decommissioning, and environmental protection, can often be estimated based on

historical data for the facility. Depending upon the process, down time costs can be

more significant than the energy or maintenance elements of the equation. Careful

consideration should therefore be given to productivity losses due to down time.

This overview provides an introduction to the life cycle costing process. The complete

Guide expands upon life cycle costing and provides substantial technical guidance

on designing new pumping systems as well as assessing improvements to existing

systems. The Guide also includes a sample chart, examples of manual calculation

of LCC, and a software tool to assist in LCC calculation. 

Life Cycle Cost Analysis 

In applying the evaluation process, or in selecting pumps and other equipment,

the best information concerning the output and operation of the plant must be

3

Executive Summary

Some studies have

shown that 30% to 

50% of the energy 

consumed by pump 

systems could be saved

through equipment or

control system changes
established. The process itself is mathematically sound, but if incorrect or imprecise 

information is used then an incorrect or imprecise assessment will result. The LCC

process is a way to predict the most cost-effective solution; it does not guarantee a

particular result, but allows the plant designer or manager to make a reasonable 

comparison between alternate solutions within the limits of the available data. 

Pumping systems often have a lifespan of 15 to 20 years. Some cost elements will

be incurred at the outset and others may be incurred at different times throughout

the lives of the different solutions being evaluated. It is therefore practicable, and

possibly essential, to calculate a present or discounted value of the LCC in order to

accurately assess the different solutions. 

This analysis is concerned with assessments where details of the system design are

being reviewed. Here the comparison is between one pump type and another, or

one control means and another. The exercise may be aimed at determining what

scope could be justified for a monitoring or control scheme, or for different process

control means to be provided. Whatever the specifics, the designs should be 

compared on a like-for-like basis. To make a fair comparison, the plant designer/

manager might need to consider the measure used. For example, the same process

output volume should be considered and, if the two items being examined cannot

give the same output volume, it may be appropriate to express the figures in cost

per unit of output (e.g., $/ton, or Euro/kg). The analysis should consider all significant

differences between the solutions being evaluated. 

Finally, the plant designer or manager might need to consider maintenance or 

servicing costs, particularly where these are to be subcontracted, or spare parts are

to be provided with the initial supply of the equipment for emergency stand-by

provision. Whatever is considered must be on a strictly comparable basis. If the

plant designer or manager decides to subcontract or carry strategic spares based

entirely on the grounds of convenience, this criterion must be used for all systems

being assessed. But, if it is the result of maintenance that can be carried out only by

a specialist subcontractor then its cost will correctly appear against the evaluation

of that system. 

LCC = Cic + Cin + Ce + Co + Cm + Cs + Cenv + Cd

LCC = life cycle cost

Cic = initial costs, purchase price (pump, system, pipe, auxiliary services)

Cin = installation and commissioning cost (including training)

Ce = energy costs (predicted cost for system operation, including pump driver, 

controls, and any auxiliary services)

Co = operation costs (labor cost of normal system supervision) 

Cm = maintenance and repair costs (routine and predicted repairs)

Cs = down time costs (loss of production)

Cenv = environmental costs (contamination from pumped liquid and auxiliary 

equipment)

Cd = decommissioning/disposal costs (including restoration of the local 

environment and disposal of auxiliary services).

The following sections examine each element and offer suggestions on how a realistic

value can be determined for use in computing the LCC. It should be noted that this

calculation does not include the raw materials consumed by the plant in making a

product. 

4

LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems

Elements of the

LCC equation

The LCC process is a

way to predict the 

most cost-effective 

solution; it does not

guarantee a particular

result, but allows the

plant designer or 

manager to make a 

reasonable comparison

between alternate 

solutions within 

the limits of the 

available data
Cic - Initial Investment Costs 

The pump plant designer or manager must decide the outline design of the pumping

system. The smaller the pipe and fitting diameters, the lower the cost of acquiring and

installing them. However, the smaller diameter installation requires a more powerful

pump resulting in higher initial and operating costs. In addition, smaller pipe sizes

on the inlet side of a pump will reduce the net positive suction head available (NPSHA),

thus requiring a larger and slower speed pump, which will typically be more expensive.

Provisions must be made for the acceleration head needed for positive displacement

pumps or the depth of submergence needed for a wet pit pump. 

There will be other choices, which may be made during the design stage that can affect

initial investment costs. One important choice is the quality of the equipment being

selected. There may be an option regarding materials having differing wear rates,

heavier duty bearings or seals, or more extensive control packages, all increasing the

working life of the pump. These and other choices may incur higher initial costs

but reduce LCC costs.

The initial costs will also usually include the following items:

• engineering (e.g. design and drawings, regulatory issues)

• the bid process

• purchase order administration

• testing and inspection

• inventory of spare parts

• training

• auxiliary equipment for cooling and sealing water

Cin - Installation and Commissioning (Start-up) Costs 

Installation and commissioning costs include the following:

• foundations—design, preparation, concrete and reinforcing, etc.

• setting and grouting of equipment on foundation

• connection of process piping

• connection of electrical wiring and instrumentation

• connection of auxiliary systems and other utilities

• provisions for flushing or ‘water runs’

• performance evaluation at start-up

Installation can be accomplished by an equipment supplier, contractor, or by user

personnel. This decision depends on several factors, including the skills, tools, and

equipment required to complete the installation; contractual procurement requirements; work rules governing the installation site; and the availability of competent

installation personnel. Plant or contractor personnel should coordinate site 

supervision with the supplier. Care should be taken to follow installation instructions

carefully. A complete installation includes transfer of equipment operation and

maintenance requirements via training of personnel responsible for system operation.

Commissioning requires close attention to the equipment manufacturer’s instruction

for initial start-up and operation. A checklist should be used to ensure that equipment

and the system are operating within specified parameters. A final sign off 

typically occurs after successful operation is demonstrated.

5

Executive Summary
Ce - Energy Costs 

Energy consumption is often one of the larger cost elements and may dominate the

LCC, especially if pumps run more than 2000 hours per year. Energy consumption

is calculated by gathering data on the pattern of the system output. If output is

steady, or essentially so, the calculation is simple. If output varies over time, then a

time-based usage pattern needs to be established. 

The input power calculation formula is:

P = Q x H x s.g. [kW] (metric) 366 x ηp x ηm

P = Q x H x s.g. [hp] (U.S. units) 3960 x ηp x ηm

where: P = power

Q = rate of flow, m3/hr (US gpm)

H = head, m (ft.)

ηp = pump efficiency

ηm = motor efficiency

s.g. = specific gravity

The plant designer or manager needs to obtain separate data showing the performance

of each pump/system being considered over the output range. Performance can be

measured in terms of the overall efficiencies of the pump unit or of the energies

used by the system at the different output levels. Driver selection and application

will affect energy consumption. For example, much more electricity is required to

drive a pump with an air motor than with an electric motor. In addition, some

energy use may not be output dependent. For example, a control system sensing

output changes may itself generate a constant energy load, whereas a variable

speed electric motor drive may consume different levels of energy at different 

operating settings. The use of a throttling valve, pressure relief, or flow by-pass for

control will reduce the operating efficiency and increase the energy consumed. 

The efficiency or levels of energy used should be plotted on the same time base as

the usage values to show their relationship to the usage pattern. The area under

the curve then represents the total energy absorbed by the system being reviewed

over the selected operating cycle. The result will be in kWh (kilowatt-hours). If

there are differential power costs at different levels of load, then the areas must be

totaled within these levels.

Once the charge rates are determined for the energy supplied, they can be applied

to the total kWh for each charge band (rate period). The total cost of the energy

absorbed can then be found for each system under review and brought to a 

common time period.

Finally, the energy and material consumption costs of auxiliary services need to be

included. These costs may come from cooling or heating circuits, from liquid flush

lines, or liquid/gas barrier arrangements. For example, the cost of running a cooling

circuit using water will need to include the following items: cost of the water, booster

pump service, filtration, circulation, and heat extraction/dissipation. 

6

LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems

Energy consumption 

is often one of the 

larger cost elements 

and may dominate the

LCC, especially if 

pumps are run 

more than 2000 hours

per year
Co - Operation Costs 

Operation costs are labor costs related to the operation of a pumping system. These

vary widely depending on the complexity and duty of the system. For example, a

hazardous duty pump may require daily checks for hazardous emissions, operational

reliability, and performance within accepted parameters. On the other hand, a fully

automated non-hazardous system may require very limited supervision. Regular

observation of how a pumping system is functioning can alert operators to potential

losses in system performance. Performance indicators include changes in vibration,

shock pulse signature, temperature, noise, power consumption, flow rates, and pressure.

Cm - Maintenence and Repair Costs 

Obtaining optimum working life from a pump requires regular and efficient 

servicing. The manufacturer will advise the user about the frequency and the extent

of this routine maintenance. Its cost depends on the time and frequency of service

and the cost of materials. The design can influence these costs through the materials

of construction, components chosen, and the ease of access to the parts to be 

serviced.

The maintenance program can be comprised of less frequent but more major

attention as well as the more frequent but simpler servicing. The major activities

often require removing the pump to a workshop. During the time the unit is

unavailable to the process plant, there can be loss of product or a cost from a 

temporary replacement. These costs can be minimized by programming major

maintenance during annual shut-down or process change-over. Major service can

be described as “pump unit not reparable on site,” while the routine work is

described as “pump unit reparable on site.”

7

Executive Summary

Obtaining optimum

working life from a

pump requires regular

and efficient servicing

The cost of unexpected

downtime and lost 

production is a very 

significant item in the

total LCC and can rival

the energy costs 

and replacement parts

costs in its impact

Maintenance and repair is a significant component of pumping system life cycle

costs and an effective maintenance program can minimize these costs.
The total cost of routine maintenance is found by multiplying the costs per event by

the number of events expected during the life cycle of the pump. 

Although unexpected failures cannot be predicted precisely, they can be estimated

statistically by calculating mean time between failures (MTBF). MTBF can be estimated

for components and then combined to give a value for the complete machine. 

It might be sufficient to simply consider best and worst case scenarios where the

shortest likely life and the longest likely lifetimes are considered. In many cases,

plant historical data is available.

The manufacturer can define and provide MTBF of the items whose failure will 

prevent the pump unit from operating or will reduce its life expectancy below the

design target. These values can be derived from past experience or from theoretical

analyses. The items can be expected to include seals, bearings, impeller/valve/port

wear, coupling wear, motor features, and other special items that make up the

complete system. The MTBF values can be compared with the design working life

of the unit and the number of failure events calculated. 

It must be recognized that process variations and user practices will almost certainly

have a major impact upon the MTBF of a plant and the pumps incorporated in it.

Whenever available, historical data is preferable to theoretical data from the

equipment supplier. The cost of each event and the total costs of these unexpected

failures can be estimated in the same way that routine maintenance costs are 

calculated.

Cs - Downtime and Loss of Production Costs 

The cost of unexpected downtime and lost production is a very significant item 

in the total LCC and can rival the energy costs and replacement parts costs in its

impact. Despite the design or target life of a pump and its components, there will

be occasions when an unexpected failure occurs. In those cases where the cost of

lost production is unacceptably high, a spare pump may be installed in parallel to

reduce the risk. If a spare pump is used, the initial cost will be greater but the cost

of unscheduled maintenance will include only the cost of the repair. 

The cost of lost production is dependent on downtime and differs from case to case.

Cenv - Environmental Costs, Including Disposal of Parts 

and Contamination from Pumped Liquid 

The cost of contaminant disposal during the lifetime of the pumping system varies

significantly depending on the nature of the pumped product. Certain choices can

significantly reduce the amount of contamination, but usually at an increased

investment cost. Examples of environmental contamination can include: cooling

water and packing box leakage disposal; hazardous pumped product flare-off; 

used lubricant disposal; and contaminated used parts, such as seals. Costs for 

environmental inspection should also be included.

Cd - Decommissioning/Disposal Costs, Including 

Restoration of the Local Environment 

In the vast majority of cases, the cost of disposing of a pumping system will vary

little with different designs. This is certainly true for non-hazardous liquids and, 

in most cases, for hazardous liquids also. Toxic, radioactive, or other hazardous 

8

LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems
liquids will have legally imposed protection requirements, which will be largely the

same for all system designs. A difference may occur when one system has the 

disposal arrangements as part of its operating arrangements (for example, a hygienic

pump designed for cleaning in place) while another does not (for example, a

hygienic pump designed for removal before cleaning). Similar arguments can be

applied to the costs of restoring the local environment. When disposal is very

expensive, the LCC becomes much more sensitive to the useful life of the equipment.

Total Life Cycle Costs

The costs estimated for the various elements making up the total life cycle costs

need to be aggregated to allow a comparison of the designs being considered. This

is best done by means of a tabulation which identifies each item and asks for a

value to be inserted. Where no value is entered, an explanatory comment should

be added. The estimated costs can then be totaled to give the LCC values for 

comparison, and attention will also be drawn to non-qualitative evaluation factors.

There are also financial factors to take into consideration in developing the LCC.

These include:

• present energy prices

• expected annual energy price increase (inflation) during the pumping 

system life time

• discount rate

• interest rate 

• expected equipment life (calculation period)

In addition, the user must decide which costs to include, such as maintenance,

down time, environmental, disposal, and other important costs.

Pumping System Design

Proper pumping system design is the most important single element in minimizing

the LCC. All pumping systems are comprised of a pump, a driver, pipe installation,

and operating controls, and each of these elements is considered individually. Proper

design considers the interaction between the pump and the rest of the system and

the calculation of the operating duty point(s). The characteristics of the piping 

system must be calculated in order to determine required pump performance. This

applies to both simple systems as well as to more complex (branched) systems.

Both procurement costs and operational costs make up the total cost of an installation

during its lifetime. A number of installation and operational costs are directly

dependent on the piping diameter and the components in the piping system.

A considerable amount of the pressure losses in the system are caused by valves, in

particular control valves in throttle-regulated installations. In systems with several

pumps, the pump workload is divided between the pumps, which together, and in

conjunction with the piping system, deliver the required flow. 

The piping diameter is selected based on the following factors:

• economy of the whole installation (pumps and system)

• required lowest flow velocity for the application (e.g., avoid sedimentation)

• required minimum internal diameter for the application (e.g., solids handling)

9

Executive Summary

Proper pumping 

system design is the

most important single

element in minimizing

the LCC

By developing a 

model of the piping

system, one can easily

consider system 

alternatives, but the

model must first 

be validated to insure

that it accurately 

represents the 

operating piping 

system it is trying to

emulate
• maximum flow velocity to minimize erosion in piping and fittings

• plant standard pipe diameters

Decreasing the pipeline diameter has the following effects:

• Piping and component procurement and installation costs will decrease.

• Pump installation procurement costs will increase as a result of increased 

flow losses with consequent requirements for higher head pumps and larger 

motors. Costs for electrical supply systems will therefore increase.

• Operating costs will increase as a result of higher energy usage due to 

increased friction losses. 

Some costs increase with increasing pipeline size and some decrease. Because of

this, an optimum pipeline size may be found, based on minimizing costs over the

life of the system.

The duty point of the pump is determined by the intersection of the system curve

and the pump curve as shown in Figure 1.

A pump application might need to cover several duty points, of which the largest

flow and/or head will determine the rated duty for the pump. The pump user must

carefully consider the duration of operation at the individual duty points to properly

select the number of pumps in the installation and to select output control. 

Many software packages are currently available which make it easier to determine

friction losses and generate system curves. Most pump manufacturers can recommend

software suitable for the intended duty. Different programs may use different methods

of predicting friction losses and may give slightly different results. Very often such

software is also linked to pump-selection software from that particular manufacturer.

Methods for Analyzing Existing Pumping Systems

The following steps provide an overall guideline to improve an existing pumping

system.

• Assemble a complete document inventory of the items in the pumping system.

• Determine the flow rates required for each load in the system.

• Balance the system to meet the required flow rates of each load.

• Minimize system losses needed to balance the flow rates.

• Affect changes to the pump to minimize excessive pump head in the 

balanced system.

• Identify pumps with high maintenance cost.

10

LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems

System

curve

Pump curve

Duty point

Static

head

Q

H

Rate of flow

Head

Figure 1.

The duty point 

is the intersection

between the pump 

and system curves
One of two methods can be used to analyze existing pumping systems. One consists

of observing the operation of the actual piping system, and the second consists of

performing detailed calculations using fluid analysis techniques. The first method

relies on observations of the operating piping system (pressures, differential pressures,

and flow rates), the second deals with creating an accurate mathematical model of

the piping system and then calculating the pressures and flow rates within the model.

Observing the operating system allows one to view how the actual system is working,

but system operational requirements limit the amount of experimentation that

plant management will allow. By developing a model of the piping system, one can

easily consider system alternatives, but the model must first be validated to insure

that it accurately represents the operating piping system it is trying to emulate.

Regardless of the method used, the objective is to gain a clear picture of how the

various parts of the system operate and to see where improvements can be made

and the system optimized. 

The following is a checklist of some useful means to reduce the Life Cycle Cost

of a pumping system.

❏ Consider all relevant costs to determine the Life Cycle Cost 

❏ Procure pumps and systems using LCC considerations 

❏ Optimize total cost by considering operational costs and procurement costs 

❏ Consider the duration of the individual pump duty points 

❏ Match the equipment to the system needs for maximum benefit 

❏ Match the pump type to the intended duty 

❏ Don’t oversize the pump 

❏ Match the driver type to the intended duty 

❏ Specify motors to be high efficiency 

❏ Match the power transmission equipment to the intended duty 

❏ Evaluate system effectiveness 

❏ Monitor and sustain the pump and system to maximize benefit

❏ Consider the energy wasted using control valves 

❏ Utilize auxiliary services wisely 

❏ Optimize preventative maintenance 

❏ Maintain the internal pump clearances 

❏ Follow available guidelines regarding the rewinding of motors 

❏ Analyze existing pump systems for improvement opportunities 

❏ Use the showcases in the Guide as a source for ideas 

11

Executive Summary
Example: Pumping System with a Problem Control

Valve

In this example the Life Cycle Cost analysis for the piping system is directed at a

control valve. The system is a single pump circuit that transports a process fluid

containing some solids from a storage tank to a pressurized tank. A heat exchanger

heats the fluid, and a control valve regulates the rate of flow into the pressurized

tank to 80 cubic meters per hour (m3/h) (350 gallons per minute [gpm]). 

The plant engineer is experiencing problems with a fluid control valve (FCV) that

fails due to erosion caused by cavitation. The valve fails every 10 to 12 months at a

cost of 4 000 EURO or USD per repair. A change in the control valve is being 

considered to replace the existing valve with one that can resist cavitation. Before

changing out the control valve again, the project engineer wanted to look at other

options and perform a Life Cycle Cost analysis on alternative solutions.

How the System Operates

The first step is to determine how the system is currently operating and determine

why the control valve fails, then to see what can be done to correct the problem.

The control valve currently operates between 15-20% open and with considerable

cavitation noise from the valve. It appears the valve was not sized properly for the

application. After reviewing the original design calculations, it was discovered that the

pump was oversized; 110 m3/h (485 USgpm) instead of 80 m3/h (350 USgpm), this

resulted in a larger pressure drop across the control valve than originally intended.

As a result of the large differential pressure at the operating rate of flow, and the

fact that the valve is showing cavitation damage at regular intervals, it is 

determined that the control valve is not suitable for this process.

12

LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems

FCV@15%

Pump Heat exchanger

Storage tank

Presssure tank

2.0 bar

Figure 2. Sketch of

pumping system in

which the control

valve fails
13

Executive Summary

Figure 3. Pump and 

system curves 

showing the 

operation of the 

original system 

and the modified 

pump impeller

Head m

Rate of flow m3/hr

100

80

60

40

20

0

430 mm

375 mm impeller

Reduced speed pump

“System curve” option A & D

“System curve” option B

“System curve” option C

100

80

60

40

20

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

% Efficiency

The following four options are suggested:

A. A new control valve can be installed to accommodate the high pressure 

differential.

B. The pump impeller can be trimmed so that the pump does not develop as 

much head, resulting in a lower pressure drop across the current valve. 

C. A variable frequency drive (VFD) can be installed, and the flow control 

valve removed. The VFD can vary the pump speed and thus achieve the 

desired process flow.

D. The system can be left as it is, with a yearly repair of the flow control valve 

to be expected.

The cost of a new control valve that is properly sized is 5 000 Euro or USD. The cost

of modifying the pump performance by reduction of the impeller diameter is 2 250

Euro or USD. The process operates at 80 m3/h for 6,000 h/year. The energy cost is

0.08 Euro or USD per kWh and the motor efficiency is 90%.

The cost comparison of the pump system modification options is contained in

Table 1.
14

LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems

By trimming the impeller to 375 mm (Option B), the pump’s total head is reduced

to 42.0 m (138 ft) at 80 m3/h. This drop in pressure reduces the differential pressure

across the control valve to less than 10m (33 ft), which better matches the valve’s

original design point. The resulting annual energy cost with the smaller impeller is

6 720 EURO or USD per year. It costs 2 250 EURO or USD to trim the impeller. This

includes the machining cost as well as the cost to disassemble and reassemble the pump.

A 30 kW VFD (Option C) costs 20 000 EURO or USD, and an additional 1 500 EURO

or USD to install. The VFD will cost 500 EURO or USD to maintain each year. It is

assumed that it will not need any repairs over the project’s 8-year life.

The option to leave the system unchanged (Option D) will result in a yearly cost of

4 000 EURO or USD for repairs to the cavitating flow control valve.

LCC Costs and Assumptions

• The current energy price is 0.08 EURO or USD /kWh.

• The process is operated for 6,000 hours/year.

• The company has an annual cost for routine maintenance for pumps of this

size at 500 EURO or USD per year, with a repair cost of 2 500 EURO or USD 

every second year. 

• There is no decommissioning cost or environmental disposal cost associated 

with this project.

• This project has an 8-year life.

• The interest rate for new capital projects is 8% and an inflation rate of 4% is

expected.

The life cycle cost calculations for each of the four options are summarized in 

Table 2. Option B, trimming the impeller, has the lowest life cycle cost and is the

preferred option for this example.

Table 1. Cost 

comparison for 

Options A through D 

in the system with a 

failing control valve

Cost Change Control Trim Impeller VFD Repair Control

Valve (A) (B) (C) Valve (D)

Pump Cost Data

Impeller 430 mm 375 mm 430 mm 430 mm

diameter

Pump head 71.7 m (235 ft) 42.0 m (138 ft) 34.5 m (113 ft) 71.7 m (235 ft)

Pump 75.1% 72.1% 77% 75.1%

efficiency

Rate of flow 80 m3/h 80 m3/h 80 m3/h 80 m3/h 

(350 USgpm) (350 USgpm) (350 USgpm) (350 USgpm)

Power 23.1 kW 14.0 kW 11.6 kW 23.1 kW

consumed

Energy Cost/Year 11 088 EURO or 6 720 EURO or 5.568 EURO or 11 088 EURO or

USD USD USD USD

New Valve 5 000 EURO or 0 0 0

USD

Modify Impeller 0 2 250 EURO or 0 0

USD

VFD 0 0 20 000 EURO or 0

USD

Installation of VFD 0 0 1 500 EURO or

USD

Valve Repair/Year 0 0 0 4 000 EURO or

USD
15

Executive Summary

Option A Option B Option C Option D

Change Trim VFD and Repair

control impeller remove control

valve control valve valve

Input

Initial investment cost: 5000 2250 21 500 0

Energy price (present) 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080

per kWh:

Weighted average power of 23.1 14.0 11.6 23.1

equipment in kW:

Average operating hours/year: 6 000 6 000 6 000 6 000

Energy cost/year (calculated) 11 088 6 720 5 568 11 088

+ Energy price x Weighted

average power x Average

operating hours/year:

Maintenance cost (routine 500 500 1 000 500

maintenance/year:

Repair every 2nd year: 2 500 2 500 2 500 2 500

Other yearly costs: 0 0 0 4 000

Down time cost/year: 0 0 0 0

Environmental cost: 0 0 0 0

Decommissioning/disposal 0 0 0 0

(Salvage) cost:

Life time in years: 8 8 8 8

Interest rate (%): 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0%

Inflation rate (%): 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0%

Output

Present LCC value: 91 827 59 481 74 313 113 930

Table 2. LCC comparison

for the problem control

valve system
16

LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems

For More Information

To order Pump Life Cycle Costs: A Guide to LCC Analysis for Pumping Systems, contact

the Hydraulic Institute or Europump.

About the Hydraulic Institute

The Hydraulic Institute (HI), established in 1917, is the largest association of pump

producers and leading suppliers in North America. HI serves member companies

and pump users by providing product standards and forums for the exchange of

industry information. HI has been developing pump standards for over 80 years.

For information on membership, organization structure, member and user services,

and energy and life cycle cost issues, visit www.pumps.org. 

Hydraulic Institute

9 Sylvan Way

Parsippany, NJ 07054

973-267-9700 (phone)

973-267-9055 (fax)

About Europump

Europump, established in 1960, acts as spokesman for 15 national pump 

manufacturing associations in Europe and represents more than 400 manufacturers.

Europump serves and promotes the European pump industry. For information

regarding Europump work in the field of life cycle cost issues, please email: 

secretariat@europump.org. For information on Europump, visit www.europump.org.

Europump

Diamant Building, 5th Floor

Blvd. A Reyers 80, B1030

Brussels, Belgium

+32 2 706 82 30 (phone)

+32 2 706 82 50 (fax)

About the U.S. Department of Energy

OIT, through partnerships with industrial companies and trade groups, develops

and delivers advanced energy efficiency, renewable energy, and pollution prevention

technologies for industrial applications. OIT encourages industry-wide efforts to

boost resource productivity through a strategy called Industries of the Future (IOF).

IOF focuses on nine energy- and resource-intensive industries—agriculture, 

aluminum, chemicals, forest products, glass, metal casting, mining, petroleum,

and steel. Visit www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices to learn more about our programs and

services. 

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Industrial Technologies

1000 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20585

clearinghouse@ee.doe.gov

1-800-862-2086
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

T OF ENERGY DEPARTMEN

U

E

N ITED STAT S OFA ERICA M

T OF ENERGY DEPARTMEN

U

E

N ITED STAT S OFA ERICA M

gies online at:

Office of Industrial TechnologiesEnergy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyU.S. Department of Energy

Hydraulic Institute uropump Europump