4-i CHAPTER 4. SCREENING ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

..................................................... 4-1

4.1.1 Stakeholder Comments

............................................ 4-1

4.2 DISCUSSION OF DESIGN OPTIONS

..................................... 4-3

4.2.1 Design Options Used in the Engineering Analysis

.......................... 4-3

4.2.1.1 Heat Traps

............................................... 4-4

4.2.1.2 Plastic Tank

.............................................. 4-5

4.2.1.3 Increased Jacket Insulation

................................... 4-5

4.2.1.4 Insulating the Tank Bottom (Electric Only)

........................ 4-6

4.2.1.5 Improved Flue Baffle/Forced Draft

............................. 4-6

4.2.1.6 Increased Heat Exchanger Surface Area

......................... 4-7

4.2.1.7 Flue Damper (Electromechanical)

.............................. 4-8

4.2.1.8 Side Arm Heater

........................................... 4-9

4.2.1.9 Electronic (or Interrupted) Ignition

.............................. 4-9

4.2.2 Design Options Eliminated from Further Consideration

.................... 4-10

4.2.2.1 Flue Damper (Buoyancy Operated)

............................ 4-11

4.2.2.2 Submerged Combustion

.................................... 4-11

4.2.2.3 Directly Fired

............................................ 4-12

4.2.2.4 Condensing Option

........................................ 4-12

4.2.2.5 Condensing Pulse Combustion

................................ 4-13

4.2.2.6 Advanced Forms of Insulation

................................ 4-14

4.2.2.7 U-Tube Flue

............................................. 4-15

4.2.2.8 Thermophotovoltaic and Thermoelectronic Generators

.............. 4-15

4.2.2.9 Reduced Burner Size (Slow Recovery)

......................... 4-16

4.2.2.10 Heat Pump Water Heater Options

............................ 4-16

4.2.2.11 Timer Controlled

......................................... 4-29

4.2.2.12 System Application Options

................................ 4-29

4.2.2.13 Sediment Removal Features

................................ 4-30

4.2.2.14 Two-Phase Thermosiphon (TPTS) Design

...................... 4-30

4.2.2.15 Air-Atomized Burner (Oil-Fired Only)

......................... 4-31

4.3 RESULTS

........................................................... 4-31

TABLES

Table 4.1 Design Options Used in the Engineering Analysis

......................... 4-32

Table 4.2 Design Options Eliminated from Further Consideration

.................... 4-33a Water heaters fueled by natural gas and LPG are considered as one product class for the purpose of identifying

design options. They are treated separately with respect to manufacturing cost, markup, retail price, and fuel price in

the Life-Cycle Cost and subsequent analyses.

4-1 CHAPTER 4. SCREENING ANALYSIS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The screening of design

op tions is the first step in the water heater rulemaking process. The

purpose of screening is to identify those design options that the Department will consider for the engineering

analysis. The screening analysis also provides a discussion of the criteria for eliminating certain design

options from further consideration. On July 15, 1996, the Department issued the Process Improvement

(Interpretive) Rule. 1 Section 4 of the Interpretive Rule articulates factors to take into account in screening

design options. These factors are as follows:

C Technological feasibility,

C Practicability to manufacture, install and service,

C Adverse impacts on product utility or product availability,

C Adverse impacts on health and/or safety.

This chapter discusses various design options for improving the energy efficiency of electric, gasfired (natural gas and LPG), a and oil-fired storage-type w ater heaters. Building on past analysis and

incorporating public comments to the 1994 NOPR, a draft screening analysis was prepared and presented

at the Water Heater Standards Rulemaking Workshop held in Washington, D.C., on June 24, 1997, for

review and comment from stakeholders. This chapter addresses comments received at three different

stages of the rulemaking process sin ce that initial draft was issued. These later comments have been

incorporated into the technical review of all design options. Based on this technical review, the design

options have been screened and pared down to a list of options used by DOE for the engineering and

economic analyses.

4.1.1 Stakeholder Comments

Section 4 of the Interpretive Rule, which establishes the process for developing energy conservation

standards, provides for greater and more productive interaction between DOE and stakeholders throughout

the process. It is also designed so that key analysis is performed earlier in the process, with early

opportunities for public review and comment on that analysis. The process is consistent with the procedural

requirements of the law, but adds some important enhancements.

There have been se veral opportunities for public comment on the residential water heating

standards process. DOE has considered all the comments it has received and presents below those4-2

comments that specifically discuss DOE’s screening of design options.

After the June 1997 workshop, DOE received several written comments from stake holders

pertaining directly to the design options discussed. There were a total of 15 sets of comments from

manufacturers, associations, gas and electric utilities, a consumer group, and a consumer. (All comments

are available for viewing in DOE’s Freedom of Information Reading Room.)

Laclede Gas Company and the American Gas Association (AGA) advised DOE to follow statutory

requirements and not to screen out any design options. 2, 3 Section 4 of the Interpretive Rule articulates

factors DOE will take into account in screening design options, selecting candi date standard levels for

further analysis, and selecting proposed and final standard levels. Therefore, DOE is following the criteria

listed in the Interpretive Rule and will proceed to reject certain design options from the analysis based on

these considerations. In reference to Section 4(a) of the Interpretive Rule, the Gas Appliance

Manufacturers Association (GAMA) provided a list of design options to keep and a list to screen out and

included reas ons for screening them out. 4 Bradford White Corporation supported the GAMA design

options discussed at the workshop. 5 Edison Electric Institute (EEI), Southern Company, and Virginia

Power supported DOE’s screening analysis and list found in Appendix B, Supplement to the Water

Heater Rulemaking

Framework. 6, 7, 8, 9

In accordance with the Interpretive Rule, the Department published the results of a preliminary

screening of the water heater design options in Technology Assessment and Screening Analysis,

Appendix B Supplement to the Water Heater Rulemaking Framework

, in January 1998. 9 Stakeholders

were notified of the availability of this document in the Federal Register on January 14, 1998. 10 The

Notice further requested comments on the Technology Assessment and Screening Analysis document.

DOE received

28 comments on the Technology Assessment and Screening Analysis document.

Six stakeholders including GAMA supported, with modifications, the Department’s position regarding the

screened design options. These comments addressed air atomized oil burners, power vents, and tank

bottom insulation for gas- or oil-fired water heaters.

The majority of comments dealt with the Department’s decision to eliminate the heat pump water

heater design option from consideration. AGA claims DOE must consider all design options because DOE

is mandated by law to consider all technologically feasible design options. AGA further claims that DOE

disregarded the position it took in 1994 on heat pump water heaters. 11 Okaloosa Gas District, Clearwater

Gas System, the City of Mesa, Arizona, Milza S. Barley and thirteen gas utilities recommend that DOE

consider all design options, including heat pump water heaters. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Laclede Gas objects to the

elimination of the heat pump water heater from s tandards consideration because it claims that DOE is

protecting electric utility market domina nce and it could lead to fuel substitution away from gas water

heaters. 17 Laclede Gas further claims that heat pump water heaters should be considered as a design

option because DOE is introducing a new heat pump water heater which may overcome several critical4-3

market barriers including cost. 18 Okaloosa Gas District believes that DOE should screen-in heat pump

water heaters because a recently published GAMA directory lists five models. 12 AGA and Okaloosa Gas

District claim that DOE relied on unsubstantiated st atements by Southern Company regarding product

reliability and inadequate infrastructure to eliminate heat pump water heaters. 11, 12 AGA claims that heat

pump water heaters are technically feasible and that reliability and infrastructure issues are not a sufficient

reason to eliminate the m. 19 DOE eliminated design options based on the criteria in the process

improvement rule (see the 61 FR 36974, section III. 4). 1 DOE believes that the heat pump water heater

is technically feasible but DOE eliminated th e heat pump water heater design option because it is not

practicable to manufacture, install, and service heat pump water heaters on the scale necessary at the time

of the effective date of this standard and because of adverse impacts on product utility.

GAMA claims DOE was justified in screening out heat pump water heaters and the decision is

supported by criteria listed in

42 USC 6295(o). 20 Furthermore, GAMA supports DOE’s decision to

eliminate specific design options. 4, 21

. EEI, Southern Company and Virginia Power agree with DOE’s

decision to screen out heat pump water heaters. 7, 22, 23, 24 DOE has continued to screen out heat pump

water heaters and several other design options listed in the screening document.

In October, 1998, DOE published Results and Methodology of the Engineering Analysis for

Residential Water Heater Efficiency Standards. 25 This document, an overview of the preliminary

engineering analysis for Residential Water Heater Efficiency Standards, was available to the public prior

to the November

1998 Water Heater Rulemaking Workshop. The document contained a section updating

the design options screening process based on comments received on the Technology Assessment and

Screening Analysis

. DOE did not revise its position on heat pump water heaters, but further elaborated

on the rationale for eliminating heat pump water heaters as a design option.

4.2 DISCUSSION OF DESIGN OPTIONS

The design options considered here are grouped in two categories. The first category is design

options used

by DOE in the engineering and economic analyses. The second category contains design

options that have been eliminated from further consideration. The discussion under this second category

also includes the screening criteria used by DOE.

4.2.1 Design Options Used in the Engineering Analysis

DOE used the nine design options listed below in the engineering and economic analyses because

they are currently (or have been recently) applied to commercial or residential water heaters and pass all

of the screening criteria. In the engineering analysis phase, certain of these design options were combined

to meet an efficiency level based on a simple payback estimate.4-4

• Heat Traps

• Plastic Tank

• Increased Jacket Insulation

• Insulating the Tank Bottom (Electric Only)

• Improved Flue Baffle/Forced Draft

• Increased Heat Exchanger Surface Area

• Flue Damper (Electromechanical)

• Side Arm Heater

• Electronic (or Interrupted) Ignition.

4.2.1.1 Heat Traps

The heat conducted and convected through the fittings (water pipes, drain valve, pressure relief

valve, and thermostat) accounts for about 15% of the total standby loss in a typical residential-size gas-fired

water heater. 26 A heat trap is a device or arrangement of piping that keeps the buoyant hot water from

circulating through the piping distribution system because of natural convection. When there is no draw of

hot water, this device prevents water in the hot water outlet line from getting back into the tank as it cools

off; and prevents hot water in the tank from circulat ing back into the cold water inlet line. Thus, by

containing the hot water in the storage tank, the heat trap minimizes standby loss. These devices can be

integral to the tank design or independently attached to the inlet and outlet pipes during installation at the

site. Paul e t al . have shown that heat traps can increase the energy factor (EF) of residential-size water

heaters by 1%. 26 Also, the effectiveness of a heat trap can be increased by insulating its exposed portion.

Conventional heat traps are currently made in two styles. In the first style, a floating plastic ball

blocks the cold water inlet. The buoyancy of the plastic holds it in place until water is drawn. The force

of water is strong enough to push the ball out of the way as water enters the tank. The second style is used

for the hot water outlet. In this heat trap, the ball is denser than water, and the weight of the ball seals the

outlet until hot water is drawn and the water pressure lifts it out of the way. 27 A small bypass channel is

left for water to escape back into the inlet line from the tank as it expands after a large draw fills the tank

with cold water. Heat traps could also be of metallic design. Manufacturing costs appear to be roughly

comparable between the metal and plastic heat traps, but plastic heat traps are considerably more effective

in reducing water heater standby losses.

Other heat trap designs have also been invented and produced. These include U-shaped pipes, 28

flexible seals, 29 flaps, springs, and other mechanisms.

Bradford White Corporation concludes that heat traps are not a design option because they are

noisy and viewed as a deterrent for product utility by consumers and cost more than the energy savings can

repay. 5 On the other hand, GAMA recommends that heat traps be considered in the DOE analysis4-5

because this technology is already implemented in most models. 30

DOE agreed with GAMA’s comment and considered this design option in the engineering analysis.

4.2.1.2 Plastic Tank

Plastic water heater tanks can be constructed using a seamless, blow-molded polybutylene inner

tank with a filament-wound fiberglass outer tank, similar to the fabrication of tanks for water softeners. 31

A second method consists of constructing a thin steel shell with an internal plastic tank. The steel exterior

is constructed first; then, plastic powder is injected into the shell, and the tank is rotated in a furnace to coat

the interior with the plastic. The steel exterior serves as the primary structural support for the tank. The

lower heat conductivity of plastic compared to metal reduces the amount of heat conducted through the

tank wall to the insulation and to the feed-throughs.

However, the plastic tank cannot be used with standard center-flue gas-fired water heaters or with

oil-fired water heaters, because the plastic cannot withstand the high temperatures produced by the flames.

This option can be used only with electric water heaters or with indirect water heating techniques (e.g., the

side arm water heater or heat pipe technologies) that avoid flame temperature problems.

GAMA recommends eliminating plastic tank water heaters because it is not an efficiency improving

design option. GAMA believes DOE should rely on increased insulation thickness for efficiency

improvements. 4

DOE believes that the plastic tank construction method enables an improved process of insulating

the tank bottom. Therefore, this design option may, in fact, reduce standby losses in certain applications

and should be investigated further. DOE considered this design option in the engineering analysis.

4.2.1.3 Increased Jacket Insulation

Manufacturers insulate water heaters by filling the cavity between the jacket and the tank (top and

sides) with polyurethane foam insulation or fiberglass insulation. Because polyurethane foam is a more

effective insulation than fiberglass, it is more widely used. Most water heaters on the market today have

at least 1-inch thick foam insulation, while some models have 2- or 3-inch thick insulation. The baseline

electric unit for the present analysis has 1.5 inches of insulation in order to achieve the minimum EF levels..

The Gas Research Institute (GRI) reports that for a gas-fired water heater with a 40-gallon storage

tank with 1-inch polyurethane foam insulation ar ound the jacket and fiberglass insulation around the

combustion chamber, the jacket losses are about 50% of the total standby losses. 32 For a tank with more

than 40 gallons of storage volume, the jacket losses as a percent of the total standby losses will be even

higher. Although increasing the insulation thickness reduces the standby loss, the increase in the overalla In June 1999, Allied Signal and Honeywell announced their merger; in October 2000, GE acquired the newly

combined company. 33, 34

4-6 diameter o f the water heater may pose some installation problems. There may also be an increase in

shipping costs because fewer water heaters will fit in a truck.

B radford White Corporation commented that the uncertainty over the blowing agent for foam

insulation be handled by limiting the cavity size. 5 DOE has limited cavity size to 3 inches.

DOE has used the blowing agent HFC-245fa in its analysis. On September 13, 1999, Allied

Signal a announced in a press release that it was plann i ng to manufacture HFC-245fa at its Geismar,

Louisiana facility. 35 Allied Signal has received EPA approval for HFC-245fa. At the July 23, 1999

workshop Allied Signal announced a plant would be online by mid 2002. 36 It appears that HFC-245fa will

be available by the effective date of this rulemaking, therefore, DOE chose this blowing agent for the

engineering and economic analyses.

4.2.1.4 Insulating the Tank Bottom (Electric Only)

The bottom of the tank of an electric water heater can be insulated as an alternative design option

to reduce the standby heat loss. This is not conventionally done. As evidence see the losses visible in the

infrared thermograph presented by NIST at the November

1998 workshop. 37 DOE believes tank bottom

insulation will significantly reduce these losses. DOE included this design option in the engineering and

economic analyses.

4.2.1.5 Improved Flue Baffle/Forced Draft

The standard flue baffle is a twisted strip of metal inserted into the flue that increases the

turbulence of flue gases and improves heat transfer to the walls of the flue. The geometry of the flue baffle

can be modified to increase its effectiveness. One manufacturer uses a flue with many small rectangular fins

attached on its inside surface. The arrangement and size of the fins in various models increases the recovery

efficiency of the water heater. Other baffle configurations that increase recovery efficiency are also

available.

A research project funded

by the GRI reviewed technical literature, manufacturers' literature, and

patents to determine what new technologies are applicable to heat exchangers that involve flue gases from

combustion of natural gas. 38 The conclusion was that significant increases in the convective heat transfer

coefficient could be achieved with the use of heat transfer enhancement devices. The study suggested that

in some cases, an increase in heat transfer coefficient might be accompanied by an increase in the pressure

drop (due to an increase in the friction factor). The study identified twisted-tape inserts as a potential heat

transfer enhancement device for water heaters.4-7

Beckermann and Goldschmidt 39 investigated experimentally and empirically the effects of velocity

of the flue gases, the twist (i.e., number of turns) of the tape, and the surface emissivities on the total heat

transfer (convection and radiation) in a fuel-fired water heater. They reported that compared to an empty

tube, the flue tube with twisted tape enhances the overall heat transfer performance by as much as 50%.

This design option of an improved flue baffle can increase the recovery efficiency to about 80-85%,

depending on the specific geometry. At the upper end of the recovery efficiency range, the water heater

would require power venting or induced draft and corrosion resistant flues for safe operation. Because of

the potential for condensation caused corrosion, recovery efficiencies above 80% were not considered in

this analysis.

In addition to an increase in efficiency, there is also a reduction in standby loss. The off-cycle

standby loss is reduced by the additional restrictions to airflow due to the increased baffling.

Several manufacturers currently make water heaters with induced-draft blowers. However, this

feature is usually added to allow sidewall venting and may not be accompanied by any increase in flue

baffling.

Some manufacturers make water heaters with induced draft fans that, in addition to pulling the

combustion products through the water heater, also draw excess air into the flue gases prior to venting.

The additional air cools flue gases leaving the water heater to a low enough temperature so standard plastic

piping can be used for venting. This eliminates any problems with corrosion. Plastic piping is often cheaper

and easier to install than sheet metal or masonry chimneys.

While this technique of flue gas dilution does not necessarily increase water heater efficiency by

itself, when combined with an improved flue baffle that increases recovery efficienc y, it can help avoid

venting problems. DOE included the improved flue baffle/forced draft design option in the engineering

analysis.

4.2.1.6 Increased Heat Exchanger Surface Area

There are two fundamental ways to improve the heat transfer from the flue gas to the water

including the use of increased heat exchanger surface area and improved flue baffle. The improved heat

transfer leads to an increase in the thermal efficiency of the water heater. However, the thermal efficiency

is limited to about 84%, at which point condensation of the flue gases begins to occur in the flue or vent

pipe that may cause corrosion of the surfaces. To avoid such problems, use of this design option will be

limited to an 80% recovery efficiency (or about 82% thermal efficiency) level.

The design option of increased heat exchanger surface area can be achieved using, among others,

the following two modifications of the basic design of the standard gas-fired sto rage water heater: (1)4-8

submerged combustion chamber and (2) multiple flues. The first is to surround the combustion chamber

with water; the other is to use a number of smaller flue tubes instead of one large flue to vent the exhaust

gases from the combustion process. This design option can increase recovery efficiency sufficiently so that

condensation (and hence corrosion) is likely to occur in venting systems so in our analysis we limited the

recovery efficiency to 80% or lower.

Submerged Combustion Chamber. The combustion chamber in a standard gas-fired storage

water heater is below the water tank, and the bottom of the tank (below the burners) is seldom insulated.

Therefore, the water heater loses heat from the bottom of the tank. The sides and bottom of the

combustion chamber are not surrounded by water. By inserting the combustion chamber into the storage

tank, more of the combustion energy can be recovered. Standby losses are reduced somewhat because

of restrictions on the air flow through the combustion chamber and flue.

Multiple Flues. The multiple-flue design uses several smaller flues in place of one large central flue

in the middle of the storage tank. The increased surface area for heat exchange between the flue gases and

the water in the tank yields an increase in recovery efficiency. One manufacturer is currently offering this

design in a residential gas-fired water heater.

DOE considered the use of these design modifications in the engineering analysis.

4.2.1.7 Flue Damper (Electromechanical)

Gas-fired storage water heaters are equipped with a draft hood connecting the flue pipes to a vent

pipe or chimney. During off-cycle, the water heater loses heat by natural convection and conduction

through the vent pipe or chimney. A damper can be installed either at the flue exit or in the vent pipe to

minimize the off-cycle heat losses. A flue damper is installed upstream of the draft diverter, while the vent

damper is installed downstream of the draft diverter.

Electric flue dampers are activated by an external source of electricity. The dampers open when

combustion starts and close immediately after combustion stops. Therefore, there is a greater reduction

in off-cycle losses compared to buoyancy activated dampers [see Flue Damper (Buoyancy Operated)].

When the damper reaches the open position, an interlock switch energizes the solenoid and enables the gas

ignition circuit. Therefore, the burner cannot be ignited when the damper is in the closed position. Because

the dampers open and close immediately, no bypass is needed. A knockout is provided to vent the flue

gases from a standing pilot. The electric flue damper needs a 24-volt electric source and consumes about

5W when the gas supply is off.

Flue/vent dampers have no effect on the steady-state performance of the water heater. However,

in a field test of a 70-gallon gas-fired storage water heater with rated input capacity of 36,000 Btu/h, the

addition of an electric flue damper reduced the standby loss from 113,000 Btu/day to 46,000 Btu/day.

The overall system service efficiency increased from 61% to 65%, a significant increase in energy4-9

efficiency. 40

It should be noted there is an increased installation cost for electrical supply and maintenance costs

are expected to be higher. DOE included the design option of the electromechanical flue damper in the

engineering analysis.

4.2.1.8 Side Arm Heater

The side arm heater design avoids large flue losses by removing the flue from the center of the tank.

Water is withdrawn from the bottom of the tank and heated over a burner in a small, separate heat

exchanger. Water is returned to the top of the tank. A small circulation pump moves water through the

heat exchanger when the burner is on. The burner could have electronic ignition, which would reduce the

pilot light losses. Auxiliary power is supplied by a low-voltage plug-in transformer.

A water heate r using this design in combination with electronic ignition and a plastic tank was

commercially available until 1999. DOE included this design option in the engineering analysis.

4.2.1.9 Electronic (or Interrupted) Ignition

The most commonly used ignition system in storage water heaters is a standing pilot ignition system.

The disadvantage is it burns gas continuously at a rate of about 450 Btu/h, and only part of this heat is

converted to useful energy. In addition to a standing pilot, three electronic ignition devices are commonly

used in gas-fired equipment:

Intermittent Pilot Ignition

. This is a device that lights a pilot by generating a spark, which in turn

lights the main burner.

Intermittent Direct Ignition. This system lights the main burner directly by generating a spark.

Hot Surface Ignition. This is a system that lights the main burner directly from a very hot surface.

Unlike standing pilot ignition systems that consume gas continuously, these devices operate only

at the beginning of each on-period. Although there is no increase in the steady-state efficiency with use of

electronic ignition devices, the overall fuel consumption may be reduced. Burner on-time may increase to

make up for the heat the standing pilot would have supplied during standby periods.

The “interrupted ignition” system for an oil-fired burner activates the spark only until a steady flame

is established. The oil consumption is not affected by interrupted ignition, nor is there an improvement in

the recovery efficiency of the water heater. However, this design option not only reduces the igniter’s

electricity consumption, but also reduces its maintenance costs because the electrodes do not have to be

replaced as often. In addition to changes in controls, the igniter can be made from solid-state electronics,4-10

instead of an iron core transformer. This improves performance and also reduces power consumption.

DOE included the electronic ignition design option in the engineering analysis.

4.2.2 Design Options Eliminated from Further Consideration

DOE may eliminate design options in accordance with the mandate of the process improvement

(Section 4 of the Interpretive Rule, “Process for Developing Efficiency Standards and Factors to be

Considered”) per the Interpretive Rule. 1 Technologically feasible design options (i.e., those design options

that are already in use

by industry or options that are proven by research and progressing towards the

development of a prototype) have been identified in this report. In addition to technological feasibility, the

other screening criteria for the design options are:

• Practicability to manufacture, install, and service,

• Impacts on product utility or product availability, and

• Impacts on health and safety.

If p roduction of a technology in commercially available products and reliable installation and

servicing of the technology could be achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the

time of the effectiv e date of the standard, then that technology will be considered practicable to

manufacture, install and service. If a technology is determined to have significant adverse impact on the

utility of the product to significant subgroups of consumers, or if adoption of a technology results in the

unavailability of any covered product type with performance characteristics (including reliability), features,

sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as products generally available in the U.S. at

the time, it will not be considered further. If it is determined that a technology will have significant adverse

impacts on health or safety, it will not be considered further.

DOE eliminated the following design options from further consideration because they do not meet

the screening criteria as described in each of their individual discussions. Some of the issues are highlighted

by the fact that the design options, if implemented, can conflict with national building codes, plumbing

codes, or other technical testing criteria. Also, in some cases, they do not meet the criteria of practicability

to install and service, they have adverse impact on product utility or product application, or they are not

an efficiency improvement feature.

• Flue Damper (Buoyancy Operated)

• Submerged Combustion

• Directly Fired

• Condensing Option

• Condensing Pulse Combustion

• Advanced Forms of Insulation4-11

• U-Tube Flue

• Thermophotovoltaic and Thermoelectronic Generators

• Reduced Burner Size (Slow Recovery)

• Heat Pump Water Heater Options

• Timer Controlled

• System Application Options

• Sediment Removal Features

• Two-Phase Thermosiphon (TPTS) Design

• Air-Atomized Burner (Oil-Fired Only)

4.2.2.1 Flue Damper (Buoyancy Operated)

This flu e damper is a small, very lightweight aluminum dome-shaped poppet that slides up and

down in an enclosure placed at the top of the flue of a gas-fired water heater. The buoyancy of the

combustion products lifts the poppet, allowing flue gases to enter the venting system. Working prototypes

have been tested by AGA.

This design option would reduce off-cycle standby losses, but would have no effect on recovery

efficiency. This flue damper may not work with high recovery efficiency water heaters because there may

not be enough waste heat in the combustion products to provide sufficient buoyancy to lift the poppet.

The standard for gas water heaters 41 requires the burner to shut off if the flue gets blocked for

some reason. Thus the effects of a failure of the flue damper to open should be mitigated by the burner

controls. More field tests, however, are planned to address other safety and operational concerns.

GAMA states that the buoyancy operated flue damper is only a concept that needs more research

and testing to determine that it will not cause safety problems. A water heater with a buoyancy operated

flue damper must also demonstrate compliance with existing appliance safety standards. 4

DOE agreed with GAMA and believes that additional information on safety issues and long-term

use is required.

4.2.2.2 Submerged Combustion

In this design option, the flue products are bubbled through a small volume of water by the pressure

from the burner blower. This small amount of water is heated by direct contact with the flue products. The

heated water is re-pressurized by a circulating pump and returned to the storage tank.

The direct contact

h eat exchange process as described above is a more efficient means of

transferring heat than in a conventional tube-an d-shell heat exchanger, but can also lead to the4-12

contamination of the domestic water by the flue products. This can cause health and safety problems for

the end users. This design option can also cause conflict with local plumbing codes (e.g., International

Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) 1991 42 ) with respect to water quality. Local

code restrictions for health reasons may also conflict with the atmo spheric emissions from the unit.

Therefore, DOE eliminated this design option because of its likely adverse impacts on health and safety.

4.2.2.3 Directly Fired

In this design option, water is sprayed through a series of baffles above the burner. Flue products

are in direct contact with the water, which is re-pressurized by a circulating

pump and returned to the

storage tank.

The dire ct contact heat exchange process as described above is a more efficient means of

transferring heat than in a conventional tube-and-shell heat exchanger, but can also lead to the

contamination of the domestic water by the flue products. This can cause health and safety problems for

the end users. This design option can also cause conflict with local plumbing codes (e.g., IAPMO 1991)

with respect to water quality. Therefore, DOE eliminated this design option because of its likely adverse

impacts on health and safety.

4.2.2.4 Condensing Option

Condensing the combustion products in the flue gas extracts more heat in the form of latent energy,

leading to an increase in the thermal efficiency of the water heater. The flue-gas condensate is corrosive

and often contains acids. Therefore, special corrosion resistant heat exchangers and vent linings are

required for safe and reliable operation of the water heater. A number of studies and field tests have been

conducted to quantify the corrosion characteristics of condensing gas appliances. 43 Since 1979, Battelle

has conducted research on corrosion-resistant heat exchangers for condensing appliances for GRI and

DOE. Based on this research, a set of guidelines was developed for the design of condensing heat

exchangers. The guidelines consist of minimizing condensation in noncondensing regions of heat

exchangers, reducing the corrosiveness of flue-gas condensate and using materials having a high corrosion

resistance to flue-gas condensate in the con densing region. 44 European experience with condensing

appliances has also shown that in addition to metal corrosion, problems could occur in rubber seals and

in flue pipes. 45 Corrosion due to condensation of combustion gases limits the thermal efficiency of a fuelfired water heater with a standard flue and vent system to 84%. Using corrosion resistant heat exchangers

or side-wall venting, or lining the vent/masonry systems with corrosion resistant material, can extend the

thermal efficiency limit beyond 84%.

Condensing gas appliances can be of two types: fully-condensing or near-condensing. Fullycondensing appliances will have flue gas temperatures less than the dew point (130 / F to 140 / F) of the flue

products. Condensation is expected in both the heat exchanger and the vent system. Near-condensing4-13

appl iances will have flue gas temperatures greater than the dewpoint of the flue gas. Condensation is

expected in the vent system but not in the heat exchangers. The thermal efficiency of fully condensing water

heaters can be as high as 99%; for near condensing water heaters, it is generally between 84% and 90%.

Several manufacturers offer near-condensing water heaters and a few offer fully-condensing types.

Currently these are all commercial water heaters. A large-scale field test, sponsored by GRI, compared

the performance characteristics of condensing with conventional non-condensing commercial water heaters

46 . A detailed inspection of the nine prototype units after 2 years of field operation uncovered no serious

concerns regarding reliability or durability . The overall results confirmed the technical feasibility of the

condensing design and that it provided a substantial efficiency improvement over conventional equipment.

Although the field test showed no corrosion in the heat exchangers after 2 years of field operation,

Lennox Industries noted, for certain regions of the country, a high incidence of problems with heat

exchangers in their condensing pulse combustion warm-air furnaces. 47 The secondary heat exchangers

(primarily used to extract latent heat) had very high sulfur concentrations because of the high sulfur content

in the supply fuel. Similar limitations may exist in gas-fired condensing water heaters. DOE is co-funding,

with GRI and American Water Heater Pro ducts, a research project into inexpensive residential-sized

condensing water heaters. The objective of the research is to find a low cost method to resolve problems

with corrosion in the condensing heat exchangers. Completion date for this research is April 2001.

There are also limitations with respect to the servicing and maintenance infrastructure in retrofit

situations. To install a condensing flue gas water heater, the vent systems have to be replaced or modified

to prevent corrosion or damage from flue-gas condensate. When two or more gas appliances are vented

through the same flue, replacing the standard gas water heater with a condensing gas water heater could

orphan a standard gas furnace. Essentially, the flue becomes oversized for the remaining appliance.

DOE is not aware of any commercially available residential size condensing water heaters, or of

any prototypes and doesn’t expect information on whether commercially viable products are possible until

its research project is completed in April 2001. Mass production of this technology in commercial products

on the scale necessary to serve the gas-fired residential water heater market at the time of effective date

of this standard is not possible. Therefore, this product is not considered further.

4.2.2.5 Condensing Pulse Combustion

Pulse combustion burners are another condensing technology. Pulse combustion burners operate

on self-sustaining resonating pressure waves that alternately rarefy the combustion chamber (drawing a

fresh fuel/air mixture into the chamber) and pressurize it (causing ignition by compression heating of the

mixture to its flash point). This process is initiated by a blower supplying an initial fuel and air mixture to

the combustion chamber. The mixture is ignited with a spark. Once resonance is produced, the process

becomes self-sustaining. 48 Pulse frequencies are on the order of 100 cycles per second. Pulse combustion

systems feature hi

gh heat transfer rates, are capable of self-venting, and can draw outside air for4-14

combustion even when installed inside. The emissions from pulse combustion burners are 50% to 66%

lower than those of a conventional burner. 48 Because the pulse combustion process is highly efficient, the

burners are generally used with condensing appliances. AGA Laboratories built several prototypes as part

of a study of pulse combustion residential water heaters. 49 They reported that the prototype models had

a recovery efficiency of more than 90%. However the costs of pulse combustion control systems and

conde nsing heat exchanger materials were too high for manufacturing water heaters for the residential

market, and no further development activities were considered.

This technology has not been developed for oil-fired equipment. Also, as noted in the condensing

option discussion, Lennox Industries has experienced problems with heat exchangers in their condensing

pulse combustion warm-air furnaces. The primary concerns with using this design option are the likely

condensation of flue gases and the need to reline or replace vent systems to prevent corrosion.

While prototype residential size pulse condensing water heaters have been built, DOE is not aware

of any commercially available residential size pulse condensing water heaters, or of any plans to develop

them. Without further research and development mass production of this technology in commercial

products on the scale n

ecessary to serve the gas-fired residential water heater market at the time of

effective date of this standard is not possible. Therefore, this product is not considered further.

4.2.2.6 Advanced Forms of Insulation

Alternate ways of reducing the jacket losses without increasing the diameter of the water heater

include the use of advanced insulation materials or the use of evacuated panels. Some of the advanced

materials or methods of insulation considered here involve the use of vacuum, inert gases, aerogel, or partial

vacuums.

Vacuum Insulation. A “hard” vacuum between internal reflective surfaces is a very good

insulator. It has been used for years in Thermos bottles and Dewar tanks for cryogenic applications.

Durability and the difficulty of maintaining the seal over the life of the water heater are some problems with

this technology that have to be resolved.

Gas-filled Panels. Gas-filled panels are thermal insulating devices that retain a high concentration

of a low-conductivity gas, at atmospheric pressure, within a multilayer infrared reflective baffle. The thermal

performance of the panels depends on the type of gas fill an d the baffle configuration. Calorimetric

measurements have shown total resistance levels of about R-12.6 for a 1-inch thick krypton panel, R-25.7

for a 2-inch krypton panel, and R-18.4 for a 1-inch xenon panel. Gas-filled panels are flexible, selfsupporting, and can be made in a variety of shapes and sizes to thoroughly fill most types of cavities. This

technology has not been demonstrated for water heater applications.

Aerogel Insulation. An example of advanced insulation materials is silica aerogel, which is

composed of 96% air and the remaining 4% of a wispy matrix of silica (silicon dioxide). Aerogels are morea

A torr is a unit of measure for vacuum levels. 1 torr equals 133 Pascals (0.0193 psi).

4-15 efficient and weigh less than the polyurethane foam that is currently used in most water heaters. The Rvalue of the aerogel at atmospheric pressure is comparable to that of the polyurethane foam, but when 90%

of the air is evacuated from a plastic-sealed aerogel packet, its resistance nearly triples. Another advantage

of the aerogel insulation over foam insulation is avoiding the use of chlorofluorocarbons to blow the

polyurethane foam into the heater jacket. New manufacturing processes have been developed that can

produce flexible blankets or clamshell forms of this material. The aerogel material is vulnerable to shock

and vibration, however, and material handling becomes an issue. Because it is hygroscopic, it also requires

a thorough sealing of the cavity between the water heater tank and the outside cover. The material has not

been demonstrated for use with water heaters.

Evacuated Panels. In addition to aerogels, other materials with a lightweight open structure can

create very good insulators at “soft” or low vacuums. The materials can be enclosed with metals or plastic.

At least one company sells evacuated panels for use with special purpose , marine applications,

refrigerators. 50 A vacuum (10 -3 torr a ) is drawn in this panel before sealing, and a lightweight, rigid foam

keeps the vacuum from compressing the panel. This technology has not been demonstrated for curved

surface applications, such as water heater tanks.

GAMA recommend s elimination of advanced insulation materials because it would require the

industry to completely restructure their production lines to acc ommodate a radically different way of

insulating water heaters. GAMA claimed that manufacturers have not established methods to manufacture

water heaters with these types of materials. 4 DOE agrees with GAMA on the issue of manufacturability,

particularly in the context of restructuring water heater production lines. Moreover, reliability and durability

over the life of the water heater of some of these advanced forms of insulation for water heater applications

have not been demonstrated. Nor has such insulation been applied to water heaters as prototypes or in

commercially available products. Therefore, these have not been demonstrated to be technically feasible.

4.2.2.7 U-Tube Flue

One comment on the 1994 NOPR mentioned an old water heater design that used an inverted Ushaped flue within the tank of the water heater 51

. This design could increase the recovery efficiency and

would reduce standby losses. No working prototypes or commercially available products are currently

available and DOE believes that this design would not meet modern safety standards, because of possible

flue-gas condensation in the U-tube. Lack of working prototypes precludes DOE from testing the option

further and validating the applicability or usefulness of this particular design option. Therefore, this design

option is considered not technologically feasible.4-16

4.2.2.8 Thermophotovoltaic and Thermoelectronic Generators

A thermophotovoltaic water heater uses a special light-emitting bu rner coupled with silicon

photovoltaic cells that generate auxiliary power to run a fan, operate the electronic ignition and controls,

and charge a battery. This avoids the requirement of auxiliary electrical supply, while offering the efficiency

advantages of ele ctronic ignition and forced-draft combustion. DOE has funded the development of

prototypes of this design option in the past, but there has been no recent activity. This technology has not

been demonstrated for widespread applications, such as in water heaters.

Another method of generating electricity at the water heater is based on thermocouple technology.

Thermoelectric generators are available, but none has been used in water heaters. Furthermore, DOE

understands this option and the thermophotovoltaic generator option need further development for common

day-to-day applications before prototypes for water heaters can be developed and tested. Therefore, this

design option is considered not technologically feasible.

4.2.2.9 Reduced Burner Size (Slow Recovery)

Reducing burner size while keeping flue baffle and tank geometry the same will increase the ratio

of heat transfer surface area per Btu of input, thereby increasing the recovery efficiency. The lower input

means that recovery would be slower than with conventional burners. The first hour rating would probably

be reduced, as well, although some of this first hour rating reduction could possibly be offset by changing

the dip tube design, to better stratify the water in the tank and thereby reduce mixing. Slower recovery also

implies reduced product utility by the consumer and hence will not meet one of the key screening criteria.

GAMA believes that slow recovery is another name for derating. 4 By derating, the water heater

is not able to provide as much hot water. This is particularly an issue for households larger than three

persons because normal hot water use may result in frequently running out of hot water. Therefore, DOE

eliminated this design option from further consideration because of the adverse impact on product utility.

4.2.2.10 Heat Pump Water Heater Options

Because the vast majority of electric water heaters use resistance elements to heat the water, there

are few available options for substantially improving efficiency. With current technology, a heat pump can

achieve the greatest efficiency improvement for heating water. A heat pump water heater can double the

EF of a resistance water heater but it uses heat from the surrounding air, which, depending on the location

of the air heat source, may need to be made up by the household heating system.

In its Technology Assessment and Screening Analysis, Appendix B Supplement to the Water

Heater Rulemaking Framework of January 1998, DOE eliminated heat pump water heaters as a design

option based on poor reliability and lack of an infrastructure for servicing of heat pump water heaters. 94-17

DOE received the following comments on heat pump water heaters from the Technology

Assessment and Screening Analysis docume nt. AGA claimed DOE must consider all technologically

feasible design options. 11 Okaloosa Gas District, Clearwater Gas System, the City of Palo Alto, the City

of Mesa Arizona, Milza S. Barley and 13 gas utilities recommended that DOE consider heat pump water

heaters in its standards analysis. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 LaClede Gas claimed DOE is protecting electric utility market

dominanc e and it could lead to fuel substitution away from gas water heaters. 17 LaClede Gas further

claimed that heat pump water heaters should be considered as a design option because DOE is researching

a new heat pump water heater which may overcome sev eral critical market barriers including cost. 18

Okaloosa Gas District claimed DOE must explain why it eliminated heat pump water heaters since the

recent GAMA directory lists five models. 12 Following the November 1998 workshop, AGA claimed that

neither Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) nor American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy

(ACEEE) identified any infrastructure or reliability problems in their public information on heat pump water

heaters and that reliability and infrastructure issues are not a sufficient reason to eliminate them. 19

GAMA, EEI, Southern Company and Virginia Power agreed with DOE’s decision to screen out

heat pump water heaters. 4, 7, 8, 20, 21, 22, 23 Southern Company claimed that heat pump water heaters should

be eliminated as a design option because of product reliability issues and an inadequate infrastructure. 7

The 1994 rulemaking process produced a litany of comments describing problems with establishing

an electric water heater standard based on heat pump water heaters (see docket EE-RM-90-201). Many

of the comments discussed issues that the screening process was designed to address early in the

rulemaking process. Among the comments received:

• 216 comments cited the immature infrastructure for manufacturing, sales and repair,

especially in rural areas.

• 107 comments feared increased electric rates due to loss of revenues in rural electric

cooperatives.

• 66 comments questioned the inconvenience and possible price hikes for larger tank size

due to the lower recovery rate, 40 % slower than conventional electric water heaters.

• 33 comments questioned the reliability of heat pump water heaters.

• 33 comments expressed concerns about increased noise.

• 22 comments claimed under-the-counter applications would not be cost effective.

• 21 comments believed it would distort the marketplace and lessen competition among fuel

sources.

• 15 comments cited the space restrictions of small homes, and the increased payback time

due to reduced electricity use.

DOE has reviewed these comments as well as other issues associated with the installation and use

of residential heat pump water heaters. The following issues form the basis of DOE's decision to screen

out heat pump water heaters as a design option pursuant to10 CFR 430, Subpt. C, App. A Section 5(b): 524-18

• Practicability to Manufacture (on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the

time of the effective date of the standard),

• Practicability to Install (reliably on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the

time of the effective date of the standard),

• Practicability to Service (reliably on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the

time of the effective date of the standard), and

• Impacts on Product Utility to Consumers (significant adverse impact to significant

subgroups of consumers).

Description of Technology. A heat pump water heater represents a merging of two otherwise

unrelated technologies: an electric resistance water heater with tank and controls, and a refrigeration circuit

similar to that found in a residential air-conditioner. To understand the issues confronting manufacturers

in bringing a heat pump water heater into the market, it is important to understand how the heat pump water

heater is similar to and how it is different from other residential appliances. What follows is a description

of how a heat pump water heater works and how it differs from the standard electric resistance water

heater.

Heat pump water heaters transfer heat from air, typically at room temperature, to water at a higher

temperature. The heated water can then be used to provide the residential hot water supply. Since heat

does not naturally transfer from a low temperature to a higher temperature, a “heat pump” is used. The

terminology “heat pump” is used here to mean a mechanical system consisting primarily of a closed

refrigeration loop containing a refrigerant vapor compressor, an evaporator (a type of heat exchanger), a

condenser (another heat exchanger), and an expansion device. These are the four basic components of

standard vapor-compression refrigerant circuitry that exist in any household refrigeration or air-conditioning

system.

The refrigeration process normally removes heat from a heat source and pushes that heat to another

location. A good example is the household refrigerator. The refrigerator removes heat from the contents

of the refrigerator box and rejects it to the surrounding kitchen air. In common parlance, we refer to the

system as a refrigerator, but the thermodynamic cycle upon which it is based is often referred to as a “heat

pump.” A heat pump is a system which can extract heat from a low temperature heat source (i.e., the

refrigerator contents) and reject it to a higher temperature “sink” (the surrounding air). Note that the heat

pump is usually designed to help in moving heat from a low temperature heat source to a higher temperature

heat sink. However, it can also be used to simply speed up the rate of heat transfer from a high

temperature heat source to a low-temperature heat sink.

So, how does the system work? The refrigeration process relies on the behavior of the refrigerant

fluids. Like most fluids, refrigerants can exist as both a liquid and as a vapor. Which state they are in

depends on their temperature and the pressure to which they are subjected.

A common starting point in analyzing the refrigerant loop is the compressor. The compressor uses4-19

electrical energy to turn the compressor motor and compress refrigerant vapor. As the compressor does

mechanical work

on the refri

gerant vapor, the vapor’s temperature rises. The refrigerant leaves the

compressor as a hot, high pressure gas. This gas moves to the condenser. The condenser is a heat

exchanger which allows the hot gas to lose heat to a heat sink. Typically, it does this by passing the gas

along one side of a metal wall while some other, cooler fluid (air or water depending on the appliance in

question) absorbs the heat across the metal wall. As the high pressure refrigerant vapor is cooled in the

condenser, it condenses into a liquid. This high pressure liquid moves from the condenser to the expansion

device.

As the high pressure liquid flows through the expansion device, it quickly moves from a region of

high pressure to low pressure. Some of the liquid evaporates in the process, drastically cooling the rest of

the liquid to the liquid’s saturation temperature. The saturation temperature is the temperature at which

liquids evaporate or condense at a specified pressure. Since the suction side of the compressor keeps the

pressure low at this point, the saturation temperature will also be correspondingly low (typically below 20 / F

in a household appliance). The mixture of cold, saturated liquid and vapor moves onto another heat

exchanger, the evaporator.

In the evaporator, heat transfers from a warmer surrounding flu i d to the cold refrigerant liquid,

which causes the remaining refrigerant to evaporate. The temperature of the refrigerant remains

approximately constant until all the refrigerant is evaporated, and the heat transfer takes place as long as

the heat source is at a higher temperature than the saturation temperature of the refrig erant. Thus the

evaporator is what is used to remove heat from the heat source (like the air inside a refrigerator), with the

heat absorbed by the refrigerant.

The vaporization in the evaporator occurs under low pressure and the volume of the resultant vapor

is high and the temperature relatively cool. The cool, low pressure vapor flows from the evaporator to the

suction side

o f the compressor. As it enters the compressor, it is recompressed again, restarting the

refrigeration cycle. Throughout the operation of the system, heat is transferred from the fluid surrounding

the evaporator to the fluid surrounding the condenser.

In a heat pump water heater, the evaporator is a refrigerant-to-air heat exchanger and the

condenser is a refrigerant-to-water heat exchanger. The refrigeration cycle is used to remove heat from

ambient, household air at room temperature and use that heat to heat a tank of stored water to a much

higher temperature (typically 120 / F or greater). Electricity powers the compressor which enables the heat

pump water heater to operate. At the evaporator and condenser temperatures used for a typical heat pump

water heater, the “heat pump” extracts approximately twice as much energy from the air (in the form of

heat) as is used to operate the compressor (in the form of electricity). Additionally, much of the electrical

energy used to operate the compressor eventually winds up heating the refrigerant directly and is transferred

to the water in the condenser. When used continuously, typical heat pumps appear to heat water at roughly

2.5 to 3 times the rate of energy input (in the form of electricity).4-20

Electric resistance water heaters, in contrast, directly produce heat in electric resistance elements.

The conversion from electrical energy to heat energy occurs at essentially 100% efficiency, i.e., the energy

leaving the electric resistance elements in the form of heat is essentially equal to the electrical energy input

to the elements. This is in contrast with what appears to be greater efficiency in the heat pump water

heater. However, the fundamental difference between the two designs is that the majority of heat that

enters the tank from a heat pump water heater is heat that has been extracted from some other source such

as room air. Comparison of the apparent efficiency of the two products is not possible without establishing

the cost to heat the air that the heat pump water heater eventually transferred to the hot water.

Note, in practice, actual tested residential heat pump water heater designs typically yield an energy

factor of about 2.0. This lower energy factor accounts for cycling losses, heat escaping from the heat pump

water heater system, piping, or storage tank, and any use of backup electric resistance heat in the system.

This compares with typical energy factors of about 0.86 for electric resistance systems. Note the EF of

2.0 in the heat pump water heater design does not account for where the original heat came from. A direct

comparison of the EFs of the two water heater designs only makes sense if the heat extracted from the air

by the heat pump water heater is free and extracting this heat does not produce another energy penalty on

the household. This is the case in some very warm climates (e.g., Hawaii). In most of the U.S., homes are

heated for substantial portions of the year and operating a heat pump water heater that extracts heat from

the household air increases the load on the home heating system during these periods. For this reason,

accounting for the net energy or energy cost impact of the heat pump water heater requires analyzing the

energy cost impact on the entire house, not just the electrical energy input to the water heater.

There are two basic designs for residential heat pump water heaters: add-on and integral. An addon heat pump water heater is a product designed to be added to a separately manufactured storage-tank,

often a standard electric resistance water heater. A small pump circulates water from the tank through the

heat pump.

The second type of heat pump water heater is an integral heat pump water heater. In an integral

design, the heat exchanger (condenser) is built into t he storage tank. This eliminates the need for a

circulation pump and increases efficiency.

Both designs have a refrigeration subsystem composed of, at a bare minimum, an expansion device,

evaporator, compressor, and a fan (to force air over the evaporator and enhance heat transfer). The

refrigerant condenser, also part of the refrigeration loop, can be located with the rest of the subsystem as

a separate unit (as is done with the add-on type heat pump water heater) or located integral to the tank as

with the integral heat pump water heater design. In the add-on heat pump water heater, cold water is

removed from the tank, heated and pum ped back into the tank. In the integral design, the heat pump

compressor moves refrigerant from the condenser coil, located in the tank to the evaporator coil located

outside the tank. Regardless of design, the expansion device, evaporator, fan and compressor have to be

located outside the tank proper. With the integral design, these components are most commonly located

on top of the water tank. With the add-on design, they can be mounted on top of the tank or as a4-21

completely separate unit that can be placed on the floor or hung on the wall. For good efficiency, the addon heat pump water heater should be placed relatively close to the tank. As the unit is placed farther from

the tank, the water heating efficiency is degraded due to piping losses, predominantly the result of warm

water left in the piping between on-cycles.

Another component that is incorp orated in most residential heat pump water heater designs is

electric resistance heating elements. These are needed because, for cost and space considerations with

practical residential heat pump water heaters, the heating capacity of the refrigeration system in heat pump

water heaters is limited. Existing residential designs have between 40% and 80% of the heating capacity

of typical electric resistance water heaters. To compensate for this and allow faster water heating and

shorter recovery periods for the heat pump water heater during periods of high use, electric resistance

heaters are employed that can heat the water in the tank faster than the heat pump unit. Larger capacity

heat pump systems can be constructed, but the cost o f larger systems generally outweighs the energy

efficiency benefits to the average consumer. Instead, practical systems are designed to heat water gradually

using the higher efficiency heat pump, but can, when required by the heating load, use a higher capacity

electric resistance backup.

Practicability to Manufact u re. From our analysis of the water heater industry, DOE has

determined that water heater manufacturers would not have the lead time to ramp up heat pump water

heater production to present sales levels in the three-year time frame established by the NOPR. Since the

late 1970s, sales of heat pump water heaters have not exceeded 10,000 per year (<0.33% of electric

water heater sales, <0.17% of all water heater sales). Sales have declined drastically since the mid-1980s.

Presently, two manufacturers of residential heat pump water heaters produce less than 4,000 residential

water heaters a year in categories covered by the present rulemaking. None of the five major

manufacturers of residential water heaters currently have a heat pump design in their residential product line,

and only two (State and Rheem) have had a heat pump water heater in their product lines in the last 10

years.

Reliability issues are an ongoing concern that have not yet been adequately solved by manufacturers. As

evidence of reliability problems, Northeast Utilities (NU) claims they are the only utility to place a

substantial (2,000 units) order (in 1996) for heat pump water heaters in the last five years. NU states it has

only installed 600 heat pump water heaters because of a failure rate in excess of 10%. 53

Although most manufacturers could develop, either alone or in partnership with others, a working

heat pump water heater design in the next few years, there are significant difficulties in capitalizing and

building heat pump water heater manufacturing facilities to provide for the present 4 million plus electric

water heater sales annually.

Heat pump water heaters would require the introduction of a completely new product to the market

with a market volume greater than that of all room air-conditioner shipments in the U.S. 54 In a 1994 Arthur

D. Little report, the estimated investment cost to convert to heat pump water heaters was $750 million.4-22

Given the current levels of profitability of the water heater industry and the limited capital resources, some

manufacturers will not be able to finance these costs. 55

In addition, given the high initial cost for heat pump water heaters, poor reliability with past heat

pump water heater designs, and anticipated impact on consumer utility, initial sales of electric water heaters

after a heat

p ump water heater standard may be low as consumers look for other alternatives. These

alternatives could be switching to gas or oil-fired or solar or photovoltaic water heaters or simply replacing

the existing tank with a replacement electric resistance storage tank as allowed in the current DOE test

procedure.

With a government imposed time frame for shifting all production to heat pump water heaters and

a shifting market size, it is unclear how the electric water heater industry could plan to satisfy an unknown

final market volume.

The gas industry has commented that DOE should not screen heat pump water heaters out as a

design option because it is presently supporting the development of a residential heat pump water heater

product. 18 The heat pump water heater design being pursued by DOE is an integral heat pump water

heater design which uses a small compressor with 40% less heating capacity than any used in existing heat

pump water heater products (and has about 25% of the heating capacity of a typical electric resistance hot

water heater). This should assist in installation in smaller spaces as it will physically use smaller components

(particularly the compressor and evaporator/fan system), and will likely be quieter in operation. Present

designs re-inject condensate back into the air to be recondensed in the evaporator. This may simplify

installation, at some expense to system capacity, efficiency and dehumidification of the residence. The

integral heat pump water heater design proposed by DOE uses a 50-gallon tank, but even the small

compressor and heat exchanger used in that design adds approximately a foot in height to that tank. The

attached 50-gallon storage tank is sized to provide ample water for a typical day’s use in most residences.

Smaller tank sizes are not being proposed, as the cost effectiveness of the heat pump decreases rapidly with

smaller tank sizes and characteristic lower water usage. Presently, the smallest integral heat pump water

heater design available in the U.S. is an 80-gallon unit. The design proposed by DOE would still need

access to th

e same amount of household heat any heat pump water heater would require to serve the

residenc e load, however the lower heat extraction rate of the DOE unit may allow for installation in

locations with smaller surrounding air volume than is required for existing designs.

The unit is being developed with input from DOE, Arthur D. Little, and Oak Ridge National

Laboratory and has been designed from the outset to address many of the known market barriers facing

the adoption of residential heat pump water heaters. Preliminary field tests of the DOE design are likely

to start in the spring of

2000. Larger scale utility testing is slated for late 2000 to 2001. Accelerated

reliability testing is also scheduled sometime after initial field testing has resulted in a more or less stable

product. If field and reliability testing are positive, limited commercial production and sales are possible

by 2003. Actual production and sales would be through an existing air-conditioning equipment

manufacturer who would likely purchase storage t anks from an existing water heater manufacturer.4-23

Because of the issues that have plagued heat pump water heaters in the past, DOE is requiring its partners

to introduce the product cautiously, correcting problems encountered during field testing and fully testing

the corrections. A market study done by Arthur D. Little projected potential sales for the DOE design up

to 300,000 units/year

10 years after commercial introduction, or 7.5% of present electric water heater

sales. 56 It is important to note that the time scales established for the DOE development effort represent

typical product design and production ramp-up schedules for newly introduced residential appliances.

Whether this unit is successful will depend on how well it addresses both the marketplace and

technical issues facing heat pump water heater products and the final cost to the consumer. However, at

no time did developers believe this design to be a replacement for all electric water heater applications.

Its future marketplace success will save some energy directly, but more importantly will serve to introduce

consumers to benefits and successful applications of the technology, will begin the development of a limited

installation and service infrastructure for heat pump water heaters, and may point other manufacturers to

successful product designs and marketing niches for heat pump water heaters.

There is also the additional cumulative burden on the manufacturers of both gas and electric water

heaters who have to redesign and retool their manufacturing processes to address the issues of preventing

ignition of flammable vapors (for gas units) and the phaseout of HCFC-141b insulation blowing agent.

Considering these issues with regard to manufacturability and achieving a scale of production

necessary to serve the electric water heater market at the time of the effective date of the standard, DOE

has concluded that the screening criterion of “practicability to manufacture” will not be met and has

eliminated heat pump water heaters as a design option from further consideration.

Practicability to Install. Heat pump water heaters cannot be used as direct replacements for

existing electric water heaters in many applications. For example, small electric resistance water heaters

are often used in mobile homes, under-counter applications, apartments , small condos and other

applications where space is limited. Approximately 30% of all electric water heater installations are in

residences smaller than 1,000ft 2 in size (average size: approximately 760 ft 2 ). 57 In many of these

installations, space restrictions would make it impossible to simply replace the existing electric resistance

water heater with any of the existing heat pump water heater designs sold today or with future designs, such

as that being proposed by DOE.

The physical size of the heat pump water heater is necessarily larger to accommodate the placement

of the heat pump unit. A small (4,000-6,000 Btu/h) heat pump unit mounted on top of a tank will add

approximately 8-12 inches on top of the tank for compressor, evaporator coils, and evaporator fan. In

addition, to match the same water use profiles, the size of the storage tank itself may need to be larger to

compensate for the smaller heat input rate of the heat pump water heater and the particular control strategy

used in the heat pump water heater design. Even assuming no change in tank size from the electric

resistance model, this extra height of the heat pump design will present installation problems where the

existing water heater enclosure is height limited, such as is the case with many existing lowboy water heater4-24

installations. It is estimated that lowboy electric water heaters make up approximately 18% of all water

heater sales according to GAMA estimates, 58 and may make up as much as 25% of the market in particular

regions. 59 Since there is a cost premium attached to a lowboy design, it is believed that most of these sales

reflect some type of height restriction in the space. Additionally, the space in which the heat pump water

heater is located must be large and must provide ready access to change the air filters on the heat pump

evaporator coil. Lack of regular filter changes has been reported as a primary reason for product failure

in field studies of heat pump water heaters. 60

As mentioned previously, it is possible to install the heat pump components of the add-on heat

pump water heater away from the tank and pipe water between the heat pump unit and the tank. In

practice, this introduces efficiency losses from the connecting piping and does not remove the need for a

place to put the heat pump unit.

Hiding the plumbing between tank and heat pump unit may require extensive remodeling expenses

for many residences, and cannot be considered a practical installation. In addition, finding a location for

the refrigeration subsystem is more complicated than simply finding the physical space to place the unit.

The refrigeration subsystem of a heat pump water heater needs sufficient flow of warm air across the

evaporator coils to serve as a heat source. Without this heat source, the heat pump cannot function and

must revert to electric resistance operation. Placing the heat pump water heater in a non-ventilated closet

will not provide an adequate heat source. Operation in heat pump mode will generally require on the order

of 100 cfm or more of warm air turnover between house and closet; unlikely to be achieved with natural

ventilation through a closet door. A heat pump water heater installed behind even a fully louvered closet

door is likely to experience short cycling of cold exhaust air, affecting efficiency and capacity, and thus

performance of the unit.

Additionally, one must deal with condensate produced at the evaporator coil. Like all refrigeration

devices, the temperature of the evaporator coil must be cold to extract heat from the surrounding air. When

air blows across the coil, moisture in the air is condensed to liquid. The amount of liquid produced is a

function of the humidity in the air blown across the coil, the temperature of the evaporator coil, and the hot

water load. Heat pump water heaters installed in unconditioned spaces in the south, east, and midwestern

U.S. can be expected to produce between several quarts to several gallons of condensate per day during

the cooling season. Locating the heat pump in the conditioned space will not eliminate all the condensate

buildup unless the air conditioning system can be counted on to dehumidify all house air, to a dewpoint

below the coil temperature. Since this is hard to ensure in practice, a condensate drain is essentially

required in present heat pump water heater designs. The need for a drain complicates installations where

the existing water heater is located in a hall closet, attic, garage , or other location where access to a

plumbing drain is not readily available. A pump can be used to move condensate to a drain if needed.

However, this represents not only added expense, but a potential source of failure and consequent

household damage.

There has been some discussion of techniques for re-evaporating the condensate, but no existing4-25

heat pump water heater models incorporate this option and no prototypes exist. While perhaps simple in

concept, re-boiling of the condensate may dramatically reduce (by as much as 30-50%) the efficiency of

the heat pump water heater under humid conditions. The extent that this impacts the annual average

efficiency will depend on climate; however, the above figures could repr esent a common performance

degradation in southern and coastal regions of the U.S.

Siting constraints are expected to be less severe with larger apartments, where it is anticipated that

the greater available space has encouraged both larger rooms and more “traditional” looking water heater

design and placement, such as separate laundry/utility rooms.

Siting of heat pump water heaters is expected to be less of a problem with traditional single family

housing. With single family housing, the water heater is commonly installed in a basement or garage, or,

when installed inside the residence, in a utility room where access to condensate drainage is available and

where cool air from the heat pump water heater is not likely to negatively impact the main living space.

How ever, installations under stairwells and in closets remain common and are expected to generate

installation and performance problems. Since these locations may be centrally located in the residence,

condensate pumps may be a necessary part of heat pump water heater installations in these areas.

With manufactured housing, c ondensate drainage is generally not a problem, however finding

workable locations for the water heater and a heat pump unit may be difficult. This is particularly true in

smaller, older manufactured housing units, where the housing design focused on optimal use of space and

height- restricted closet installations were common. More modern manufactured housing relies on fullheight closets or utility rooms. Approximately 62% of existing manufactured housing less than 1000 ft 2 in

size was built before 1980. 50

Surveys from the Georgia Power and Alabama Power companies reported that between 20% and

30% of water heaters in their service territory are installed in locations unacceptable for heat pump water

heaters, primarily due to a ir volume constraints. 55 It is anticipated that specific subgroups, such as

apartment units, should expect even higher incidence of installation problems.

DOE believes that heat pump water heaters can be installed in most locations. However, 18% of

sales of electric water heaters, or about 700,000 per year, are lowboy models. An integral heat pump

water heater would not fit into these locations. Perhaps 50% of the lowboy sales are for new construction

leaving 350,000 units per year that would require an add-on heat pump unit. Additionally, over one million

standard sized electric water heaters per year are installed in residences of 1,000 ft 2 or less. Perhaps as

many as 500,000 of these installations would also require an add-on heat pump unit. This is a total of

850,000 add-on heat pump water heaters per year. These add-on heat pump units require a space with

at least 100 cubic feet per minute of warm air and wiring and plumbing connections (probably through one

or more walls) for water pipes and a condensate drain. We would characterize this installation as

“difficu lt.” Without an extensive survey, we are unable to determine how many of these difficult

installations would be feasible, although costly, and how many would result in loss of product utility as4-26

discussed later in this section.

Since we have determined that almost a million households could be aff e cted each year, we

eliminated heat pump water heaters as a design option from further consi deration because of issues

concerning practicability to install on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time of the

effective date of the standard.

Practicability to Service. Two hundred sixteen comments to the 1994 rulemaking process

(docket EE-RM-90-201) claimed that “ . . . the infrastructure to service heat pump water heaters is not

capable of handling a large quantity of heat pump water heater units.” The issues faced in service and

maintenance of heat pump water heaters have not changed since 1994.

The present service and maintenance infrastructure for electric resistance water heaters, consists,

for the most part, of plumbers. Service and maintenance of a heat pump water heater is, however, more

complex than service and maintenance of an electric resistance water heater. In addition, where most

electric resistance water heaters are similar in design, there are several different cla sses of heat pump

designs (integral versus add-on designs, ambient air versus exhaust air heat source) that all have different

service and maintenance requirements and are likely to be available in a mature market.

A plumber will likely be the primary installer of a residential heat pump water heater. Any water

he ater installation typically utilizes a plumber to attach the plumbing to the water heater. In most

jurisdictions, t

he electrical connection (a hard-wired 220 Volt connection) requires either a separate

electrician or a plumber with some electrical wiring skill and certification.

However, if there is a problem with an installed he at pump water heater unit, a plumber may

currently not have the background to troubleshoot either the refrigeration system or controls. Note that

you really cannot reliably test the refrigeration system or controls of an integrated heat pump water heater

until the tank is full of water and the plumbing is connected, which means that replacement with a new water

heater is also an expensive option at that point.

A further complication with heat pump water heater products is t he distribution structure for

residential water heaters. Presently, several of the major residential water heater manufacturers distribute

their products through a distribution chain that extends through wholesale suppliers directly to plumbers

installing their products. Approximately 50% of the residential water heater market follows this pattern.

This distribution method provides a natural link from the manufacturer to the installation and product service

personnel through which training could be accomplished.

The other 50% of water heaters are sold primarily through retail outlets (hardware stores and some

major department stores). Particularly for sales through hardware stores, there is little link between the

manufacturer and the product service personnel. This will complicate training of product service personnel

for any given manufacturer’s products.4-27

The distribution through hardware stores would also complicate repair and service of heat pump

water heaters. Heat pump water heaters are more complex in design and based on fundamentally different

technology from electric resistance water heater designs. Because of this, they require a broader range of

skills to service the units. The typical electric water heater requires two screw-in electric resistance

elements, a tank, and thermostat controls. The add-on heat pump water heater, the most common design

produced in the past, is composed of a refrigerant compressor, expansion device, water pump, piping,

refrigerant-to-air heat e xchanger (evaporator), refrigerant-to-water heat exchanger (condenser), fan,

sensors and controls that can: turn the pump, compressor, and fan on together or independently, defrost

the evaporator, or even to provide freeze protection. This is in addition to the need for electric resistance

backup elements and controls that have to operate in conjunction with the heat pump controls. In addition

to the mechanical components, there is the refrigerant itself, which can leak out from the system gradually,

resulting in poor performance, or leak out of the system catastrophically, resulting in system failure.

Any one of these system components can fail and cause the water heater to stop functioning as a

heat pump water heater. This is in contrast to the simple, relatively maintenance-free, gas or electric water

heater. Once installed, the most likely failure mode of either electric or gas water heaters is a leak from the

tank wall, leading to complete replacement of the water heater. There is little “service” necessary.

The add-on heat pump water heater, however, would arguably be one of the more mechanically

complex, and possibly more expensive, appliances found in a residence. The integral heat pump water

heater design simplifies the system by dispensing with the pump, water piping, and pump controls; however,

they are still substantially more complex than an electric resistance water heater. For these reasons, where

repair of heat pump water heater com ponents is possible, it may be an attractive alternative to simple

replacement. Repair of heat pump water heaters, however, will likely be costly. Since the heat pump

water heater is plumbed and hardwired into the residence, and since there really isn’t a “down period” for

hot water consumption in a residence, most repairs will have to be made in the field. This is particularly

true of existing integrated heat pump water heaters, where it may be impossible to separate the upper heat

pump section from the tank itself without breaking into the refrigeration circuitry.

Plumbers generally do not have training or background in repair of appliances like a failing heat

pump water heater, nor would plumbers likely be a logical source of labor to do these repairs since they

are among the highest paid residential contractors. Premature (non-tank) heat pump water heater failures

are typically caused by the electrical components (fans, pumps, electronic controls, or wiring) or through

loss of refrigerant. Generally, this type of repair work is done by small appliance repair personnel who

repair refrigerators, freezers, room air conditioners, and other “white” goods (e.g., washing machines).

These repair personnel have backgrounds in troubleshooting fans, pumps, wiring and controls and are often

certified to repair low and high pressure, hermitically sealed, refrigeration equipment. According to the

Bureau of Labor and Statistics, of the approximately 71,000 home appliance repair workers in the U.S.,

2 out of 3 work directly for department stores or household appliance stores, where they service the same

products that they sell retail. 61 These stores represent a fraction of sales of water heaters, but might be

logical sales outlets for heat pump water heaters. However, for some existing water heater manufacturers,4-28

this would require opening up new distribution channels for electric water heater products.

Another possible option for repair and service of heat pump wa ter heaters is air-conditioning

contractors. This is a vertically oriented industry that is completely separate and distinct from the water

heater industry. However, if the residential air-conditioning industry chose to build heat pump water

heaters, they could choose to sell these products through their already established distribution channels.

This would simplify the service and maintenance infrastructure for these companies. Installation, however,

would require contracting with or hiring of local plumbing professionals. It is unknown if present water

heater manufacturers could have access through these same residential air conditioning industry distribution

channels to distribute and service their own heat pump water heater designs.

To date, long term reliability in add-on heat pump water heater prod ucts has not been well

established in field studies of available products. In the U.S., the greatest field experience with residential

heat pump water heaters has been through utility demand side management or U.S. mili tary housing

programs. In both cases, poor reliability, in programs and product designs going back 20 years has been

the single biggest reason for the demise of virtually all such programs. Additionally, NU claims they have

trained over

80 installers during two years of the program but only 19 continue to install the units at

reasonable prices. NU lists number of call-backs because of failures among the reasons contractors have

dropped out of the program. 53

Presently, no mass-market installation and servicing infrastructure for heat pump water heaters

exists. It is noted that while there are several potential candidate industries who could provide servicing

capabilities, none have relationships with major water heater manufacturers or with plumbers who install

water heaters. There is no precedent in the history of the U.S. major appliance industries to suggest that

a new service and repair infrastructure could develop, on the scale of several million units per year, in a

roughly three-year time frame. This is particularly true given the virtual absence of available products in the

next two years from major manufacturers, the radical changes required in the existing water heater market

simply to develop heat pump water heater products, and the absence of any present consumer demand for

such products. A complete reversal of this situation would be required for an energy efficiency standard

at the heat pump water heater level to succeed.

Therefore, DOE eliminated heat pump water heaters as a design option from further consideration

because of problems concerning practicability to service on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market

at the time of the effective date of the standard.

Impacts on Product Utility to Consumers. Manufacturers of present ambient-air heat pump

water heaters recommend locating the evaporators in spaces of at least 1,000 ft 3 in volume to provide

adequate air circulation and minimize overcooling of the space which can impact performance.

Approximately 14% of all residences are smaller than 1000 ft 2 and presently use electric water heaters.

A 10' x 12' room with an 8' ceiling (1,000 ft 3 ) is 12% or more of the floor area in a 1,000 ft 2 residence.

For many residences of this size, this would force evaporators to be located in what is presently living space4-29

of the residence, causing additional fan, compressor, and pump noise. Cold air from the heat pump water

heater located in the living space may also cause some dissatisfaction. This is particularly a concern in small,

slab-on-grade housing, mobile/manufactured homes, or apartments.

If there is no space to incorporate both the water tank and the refrigeration subsystem in the same

location , a reduced tank size may have to be installed. This could cause a 20% to 25 % loss of tank

volume on a standard 50 gallon water heater. Any substantial reduction in the tank size to accommodate

the heat pump would reduce the first hour rating, since first hour rating depends on tank size and reheat

capacity. The first hour rating is, “an estimate of the maximum volume of “hot” water that a storage-type

water heater can supply within an hour that begins with the water heater fully heated.”. 62 We interpret lost

first hour rating as a loss of product utility.

Because of this significant adverse impact to significant subgroups of consumers, the Department

has concluded that the screening criterion of “impacts on product utility to consumers” will not be met and

eliminated heat pump water heaters as a design option from further consideration.

In summary, DOE has eliminated residential heat pump water heaters as a design option for this

rulemaking. It fails to meet the screening criteria listed earlier, namely, practicability to manufacture, install,

and service and it has adverse impacts on product utility. There is no foreseeable means for the technology

to advance enough in the short term to allow heat pump water heaters to fill market needs and to continue

to provide a reasonable level of consumer utility.

4.2.2.11 Timer Controlled

This design option limits the time of day when the elements of an electric storage-type water heater

may be energized. This is most often used as part of an electric utility demand-side management program

for load shifting (“demand avoidance strategy”). Field tests show a few percent energy savings, because

the water in the tank remains at a reduced temperature for part of the day. However, the actual energy

savings will depend on the end-use profile, lifestyle of the consumer, and a basic desire to save energy.

GAMA claims that timer controls are used as a demand avoidance device to allow consumers to

use lower priced electricity. 4 Although this design reduces standby losses, it does not improve efficiency

because it only shifts the electric consumption from on-peak to off-peak times. Therefore, DOE did not

include this in its analysis.

4.2.2.12 System Application Options

The following three techniques are applicable to the water heating system rather than to individual

water heaters and, as such, are not considered in DOE's definition of water heaters. Therefore, DOE does

not consider these add-ons as design options and hence, they are not relevant for the present screening

considerations.4-30

Solar Pre-Heat. This and the following two techniques may be relevant on a site-specific basis,

and are applied at a system level as opposed to an equipment level. Individual water heater manufacturers

do not control their use. This technique uses solar collectors as pre-heaters for a standard electric storagetype water heater. Many designs are currently available, with a wide range of installed costs.

Drain Water Heat Recovery System. This technique uses a heat exchanger to recover waste

heat from the drain. In effect, this becomes a pre-heater for a standard storage type water heater. A few

designs are currently available. 63, 64 However recent water conservation measures, such as low-flow

showerheads, may lead to fewer benefits than previously thought.

Tempering Tank. A tempering tank is an un-insulated storage tank plumbed in the water line

before the water heater. When installed in a conditioned or semi-conditioned space, it may raise the inlet

water temperature to the ambient temperature.

GAMA states that solar pre-heat, drain water heat recovery systems, and tempering tanks are

installation options independent of the water heater design. 4 DOE agrees with GAMA and considers these

as syste m installation features and not necessarily as enhancing the design nor the individual appliance

efficiency.

4.2.2.13 Sediment Removal Features

Several manufacturers offer models with dip-tubes designed to create turbulent water flow that

prevents or reduces the buildup of sediment on the bottom of the tank. This may reduce the degradation

of efficiency and prolong the life of the water heater. This design feature relates more to equipment

reliability than efficiency improvement.

GAMA cla ims that sediment removal features are not a design option applicable to meeting a

minimum efficiency specification. 4 DOE agrees with the comment and believes this only preserves asdesigned efficiency over time but does not increase energy efficiency of the water heater. Therefore, DOE

did not consider this design option for engineering analysis.

4.2.2.14 Two-Phase Thermosiphon (TPTS) Design

This is a heat-pipe mechanism to transfer heat from the burner to the storage tank. The TPTS is

a closed loop device consisting of an evaporator in which the working fluid (water) is heated, percolating

liquid and vapor into the co ndenser where heat is transferred into the water storage tank. 65 At the

condenser, the vaporized working fluid is condensed and drains back through a separate restricted tube

to the evaporator, where it is reheated. The restriction prevents the heated vapor and liquid from flowing

to the condenser through the return path. During off-cycle, there is very little heat transfer through the

TPTS system. This reduces standby losses to levels similar to those of electric water heaters.4-31

GAMA believes the TPTS system would cause a drastic redesign of all gas water heaters with little

increase in efficiency. 4 DOE understands that working prototypes of the heat exchanger design have been

developed and delivered to Rheem Corporation for detailed performance and life testing. However, DOE

is aware that some designs of heat pipes used in furnace applications posed safety problems due to

contamination of the working fluid. DOE concludes that large scale production of these devices has not

be en satisfactorily demonstrated. Therefore, DOE did not include this design option in the engineering

analysis on the basis of practicality to manufacture.

4.2.2.15 Air-Atomized Burner (Oil-Fired Only)

This is a different type of burner for oil-fired equipment. Instead of relying on pressure to create

a spray of fine oil

droplets prior to combustion, this burner uses a stream of air to atomize the oil.

Compared to conventional burners, this design allows better control of droplet size and mixing with air at

lower oil flow rates. Downsizing the burner with the same flue and baffle geometry will give a higher

recovery efficiency. 66 The combustion process is also cleaner with this burner.

Furnace prototypes have been made with this design option. There could be a slight improvement

from cleaner combustion. Even if the first hour rating were reduced because of the smaller burner, it would

still be larger than that of a gas-fired water heater. Other impacts on manufacturability, installation, and

service of a water heater are yet to be determined.

GAMA believes that air-atomized burner technology is not yet sufficiently developed, especially

for a water heater application, to include it as a design option. 4 DOE agrees and did not include this design

option in the engineering analysis on the basis of practicality to manufacture.

4.3 RESULTS

Based on the above discussion, the design options used in the Engineering Analysis are listed in

Table 4.1, and those that have been eliminated from further consideration are listed in Table 4.2.4-32

Table 4.1 Design Options Used in the Engineering Analysis

Design Option Description Electric Gas Oil

Heat Traps X X X

Plastic Tank X X *

Increased Jacket Insulation X X X

Insulating the Tank Bottom (Electric Only) X

Improved Flue Baffle/Forced Draft X X

Increased Heat Exchanger Surface Area X X

Flue Damper (Electromechanical) X

Side Arm Heater X

Electronic (or Interrupted) Ignition X X

* used in conjunction with the Side Arm Heater option4-33

Table 4.2 Design Options Eliminated from Further Consideration

Design Option Description Criteria for Elimination

Flue Damper (Buoyancy Operated) Safety issues and lack of long-term use data

Submerged Combustion Conflict with health and safety codes

Directly Fired Conflict with health and safety codes

Condensing Option Fails practicability to manufacture test

Condensing Pulse Combustion Fails practicability to manufacture test

Advanced Forms of Insulation Not technically feasible within next few years

U-Tube Flue Not technically feasible within next few years

Thermophotovoltaic and Thermoelectronic

Generators Not technically feasible within next few years

Reduced Burner Size (Slow Recovery) Adverse impact on product utility

Heat Pump Water Heater Options Fails practicability to manufacture, fails

practicability to install, fails practicability to

service, and has negative impacts on product

utility to consumers

Timer Controlled Not an efficiency improvement option

System Application Options System installation feature

Sediment Removal Features Not an efficiency improvement option

Two-Phase Thermosiphon (TPTS) Design Fails practicability to manufacture test

Air-Atomized Burner (oil-fired units) Fails practicability to manufacture test4-34 REFERENCES

1. U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Procedures,

Interpretations and Policies for Consideration of New or Revised Energy Conservation

Standards for Consumer Products; Final Rule

. Federal Register , 1996. 61(136): p. 36974-

36987

2. Krebs, M., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 9, July 31

, 1997, Laclede Gas Company.

3. Kalisch, B., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 10, July 31

, 1997, American Gas Association.

4. Mattingly, J. and F. Stanonik, Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number

EE-RM-97-900, comment No.5, July 31

, 1997, Gas Appliance Manufacuturers Association.

5. Lannes, E. M., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No. 6, July 31

, 1997, Bradford White Corporation.

6. Foster III, C. R., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No. 7, July 31

, 1997, Edison Electric Institute.

7. Burleson, J., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 12, July 31

, 1997, Southern Company Services, Inc.

8. Bernadowski Sr, T. A., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EERM-97-900, comment No. 14, July 31

, 1997, Virginia Power.

9. U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Codes and Standards, Technology Assessment and

Screening Analysis: Appendix B Supplement to the Water Heater Rulemaking

Framework, 1998. (Last accessed November 5, 1999).

<http://www.eren.doe.gov/buildings/codes_standards/reports/whdsgn12/index.htm>

10. U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Conservation and Renewable Energy, Water Heating

Standards: Design Options; Notice of Availability

. Federal Register , 1998. 63(91): p. 2186,

January 14

11. Kalisch, B., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 28, March 2

, 1998, American Gas Association.4-35

12. Pryor, F., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 29, March 3

, 1998, Okaloosa Gas District.

13. Warrington, C. S., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM97-900, comment No.5, March 4

, 1998, Clearwater Gas System.

14. Hughes, S., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 34, March 3

, 1998, City of Mesa, AZ.

15. Barley, M. S., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No. 32, March 6

, 1998.

16. Miscellaneous gas companies, Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number

EE-RM-97-900, comment No.31, February-March

, 1998, Letters from various gas utility

companies.

17. Krebs, M. E., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No. 25, February 18

, 1998, Laclede Gas Company.

18. Krebs, M., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 47, December 11

, 1998, Laclede Gas Company.

19. Ranfone, J., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 49, December 11

, 1998, American Gas Association.

20. Stanonik, F. A., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No. 51, December 11

, 1998, GAMA.

21. Stanonik, F. A., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No. 33, March 16

, 1998, GAMA.

22. McGrath, M., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No. 36, April 14

, 1998, Edison Electric Institute.

23. Brundage, D. M., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No.42, December 9

, 1998, Southern Company Services, Inc.

24. Bernadowski Sr, T. A., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EERM-97-900, comment No.45, December 11

, 1998, Virginia Power.

25. U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Codes and Standards, Results and Methodology of the4-36

Engineering Analysis for Residential Water Heater Efficiency Standards, 1998. (Last

accessed June 26, 1999).

<http://www.eren.doe.gov/buildings/codes_standards/reports/index.htm>

26. Paul, D. D., W. J. Sheppard, G. R. Whitacre, R. D. Fisher, A. L. Rutz, D. W. Locklin, J. J.

Crisafulli, G. H. Stickford, J. G. Murray, D. K. Landstrom, S. G. Talbert, A. R. Buhr, D. W.

DeWerth, C. A. Farnsworth, R. L. Loria, and J. A. Pietsch, Assessment of Technology for

Improving the Efficiency of Residential Gas Water Heaters, 1991, Gas Appliance

Technology Center, Gas Research Institute. Chicago, IL. Report No. GRI-91/0298.

27. U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Codes and Standards, Technical Support Document:

Energy Efficiency Standards for Consumer Products: Room Air Conditioners, Water

Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment, Mobile Home Furnaces, Kitchen Ranges and Ovens,

Pool Heaters, Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts & Television Sets, 1993. Washington, D.C.

Report No. DOE/EE-0009.

28. Nisson, J. D., Simple Heat Trap for Water Heaters

. Energy Design Update , 1994. 14(10): p.

14

29. Harvey, J. A., Making Your Water Heater More Efficient

. Home Mechanix , 1994. March: p.

14

30. Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900, comment

No.1J, Transcript of 6/24/97 Meeting, 1997.

31. Rheem Manufacturing Company, Marathon High Performance, High Efficiency, Lifetime

Gas Water Heater, Form No. 101-41, 10-93 BP, 1993, Water Heater Division.

Montgomery, AL.

32. Paul, D. D., G. R. Whitacre, J. J. Crisafulli, R. D. Fischer, A. L. Rutz, J. G. Murray, and S. G.

Holderbaum, TANK Computer Program User's Manual with Diskettes: An Interactive

Personal Computer Program to Aid in the Design and Analysis of Storage-Type Water

Heaters, July

, 1993, Battelle Memorial Institute. Prepared for the Gas Research Institute

. Report No. GRI-93/0186.

33. Honeywell Inc., Press Release: AlliedSignal and Honeywell to Merge Creating $25 Billion

Global Technology Company, June 7

, 1999.

34. General Electric Company, Press Release: GE to Acquire Honeywell, October 22

, 2000.

35. Allied Signal Inc., 1999. (Last accessed November 4, 1999). <http://www.4-37

alliedsignal.com:80/corporate/media_kit/press_releases/1999/sep13_99.html>

36. U.S. Department of Energy, Water Heater Energy Efficiency Standards Workshop,

Transcript, July 23

, 1999. Washington, DC.

37. U.S. Department of Energy, Workshop on Standards for Water Heaters, Transcript,

November 9-10

, 1998. Washington, DC.

38. Bergles, A. E., M. K. Jensen, E. F. C. Sommerscales, and R. M. Manglik, Literature Review

of Heat Transfer Enhancement Technology for Heat Exchangers in Gas-Fired

Applications, 1991, Gas Research Institute. Chicago, IL. Report No. GRI-91/0146.

39. Beckermann, C. and V. W. Goldschmidt, Heat Transfer in the Flueway of Water Heaters

. ASHRAE Transactions , 1986. 92(2): p. 485-495

40. Nevitt, R. and V. Stefanson, Evaluating the Performance of a New High Efficiency Commercial

Tank Water Heater. In 1998 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings

. 1988. Asilomar, CA, August 23-28, 1998: American Council for an Energy-Efficient

Economy. 2: p. 2.155-158.

41. American National Standards Institute, Gas Water Heaters, Volume 1: Storage Water

Heaters with Input Ratings of 75,000 Btu per Hour or Less, 1993. New York, NY.

Report No. ANSI/AGA Z21.10.1-1993.

42. International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, Uniform Plumbing Code, 10,

Section 1002, 1991. Walnut Creek, CA.

43. Gas Research Institute, Proceedings of the 1987 International Symposium on Condensing

Heat Exchangers, 1987, Gas Research Institute. Chicago, Ill. Report No. GRI-87/0091.1.

44. Stickford, G. H., S. A. Talbert, and D. W. Locklin, Condensate Corrosivity in Residential

Condensing Appliances, 1987, Gas Research Institute. Chicago, IL. Report No. GRI87/0091.1.

45. Kobussen, A. G. C., A. Oonk, and R. J. M. Hermkens, Corrosion for Condensing Heat

Exchangers and Influence of the Environment. In Proceedings of the 1987 International

Symposium on Condensing Heat Exchanger . 1987. Chicago, IL: Gas Research Institute.

46. Demetri, E. P. and B. L. Walters, Field Testing of a Condensing High-Efficiency Commercial

Water Heater

. ASHRAE Transactions , 1987. 93(2): p. 1485-15004-38

47. Lennox Launches Inspection of Pre-1990 Pulse Furnaces

. Air Conditioning, Heating &

Refrigeration News , 1997. June 9

48. Vishwanath, P. S., Design Recommendations for Pulse Combustion Burners

. ASHRAE

Transactions , 1987. 93(2): p. 1606-1618

49. Thrasher, W. H., Pulse Combustion Residential Water Heater, 1986, Gas Research

Institute. Chicago, IL. Report No. GRI-86-0225.

50. Technautics Inc, personal communication. Conversation with Randy Simkins of Technautics,

Inc. Product literature also available via company website at http://www.technauticsinc.com.

November 5, 1999.

51. Weingarten, L., Energy Conservation Standards for Eight Types of Consumer Products,

DOE Docket Number EE-RM-90-201, comment No. 496, 1994, Elemental Enterprises.

52. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 430- Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products, Section 430, Subpt. C, App A Section 5(b), January 1

, 1998.

53. Morante, P., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-900,

comment No. 40, December 7

, 1998, Northeast Utilities.

54. U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Codes and Standards, Technical Support Document:

Energy Efficiency Standards for Consumer Products: Room Air Conditioners, Water

Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment, Mobile Home Furnaces, Kitchen Ranges and Ovens,

Pool Heaters, Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts & Television Sets, 1993. Washington, DC.

Report No. DOE/EE-0009.

55. Dieckmann, J. T., R. F. Topping, and C. E. Shorey, Technical Analysis of the Proposed

DOE Electric Heat Pump Water Heater Energy Efficiency Standard, August 31

, 1994,

Arthur D. Little Inc,. Prepared for the Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association

.

56. Barbour, C. E., J. T. Dieckmann, and B. J. Nowicki, Market Disposition of High-Efficiency

Water Heating Equipment, Final Report, November

, 1996, Arthur D. Little, Inc. Prepared

for the Office of Building Equipment, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC

. Report

No. 46230.

57. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration, Residential Energy

Consumption Survey: Household Energy Consumption and Expenditures 1997, 1999.

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs97/publicusefiles.html>4-39

58. Stanonik, F. A., personal communication. Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association

. Conversation with Terry Logee, DOE

. August 11, 1999.

59. Lannes, E. M., Water Heater Standards Rulemaking, DOE Docket Number EE-RM-97-

900, comment No. 74, July 1

, 1999, Bradford White Corporation.

60. Samp, E., personal communication. Snohomish Utilities

. telephone conversation with Dave

Winiarski, PNNL

. April, 1999.

61. U.S. Department of Commerce-Bureau of Labor and Statistics, 1998-1999 Occupational

Outlook Handbook, 1998. < http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos193.htm>

62. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 430- Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products, Appendix E to Subpart B- Uniform Test Procedure for Measuring

the Energy Consumption of Water Heaters, January 1

, 1998.

63. NAHB Research Center, Drainwater Heat Recovery, 1999. (Last accessed September 29,

1999). <http://www.nahbrc.org/homebase/xtechinv.html>

64. Waterfilm Energy Inc, Product literature on GFX waste water heat recovery system, 1996.

65. Topping, R. F., Development of a Long-Life, Stand-Alone Residential Gas Water Heater,

1988, Arthur D. Little, Inc. Prepared for the Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois, (revised

1991)

. Report No. GRI-88/0261.

66. Butcher, T. A., R. Krajewski, L. R., Y. Celebi, F. L., and B. Kamath, Residential Oil Burners

with Low Input and Two-Stage Firing

. ASHRAE Transactions , 1997. 103, No. 1(PH-97-13-

4)