Vienna 18-20 February 2008

Current Status of Absorption

Refrigeration Technology

as an

Alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

Dr. Alaa Olama

Vice Chairman, GasCool

HCFC Phase-out Seminar

Contents

1.0- The theory of Absorption

2.0- Classification of Absorption systems

3.0- Absorption technology today

4.0- Is Absorption a viable alternative to HCFC based systems?

5.0- Summary table & points system

6.0- Refrigeration applications

7.0- Conclusions

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

1.0 The theory of Absorption

- In an Absorption system, the electrical

compressor is substituted with a thermo-

chemical compression system.

- Accordingly, a small amount of mechanical work

is required, and a heat source drives the system.

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

1.1 Comparison between a V.A.S. & M.V.C.

Low Side

MECHANCIAL VAPOUR COMRESSIONHigh Side

Evaporator

CondenserPOWER

(kW)

Compressor

E.D.

CondenserHEAT (Q):Natural GasDiesel Steam Hot Water

High Side

Low Side

VAPOUR ABSORPTION MACHINEGenerator

AbsorberEvaporator

E.D.

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

• As Lithium Bromide becomes dilute it loses its capacity to absorb water vapour. It thus needs to be re-concentrated using a heat source. Heat source may be Steam or Flue gases or even Hot water.

2.0 Classification of Absorption systems

2.1 Lithium Bromide-Water systems

2.2 Water-Ammonia systems

- Both systems use water or ammonia as a refrigerant.

Absorbents are Li.Br or water.

- Two firing types are available:

Direct fired or Indirect fired.

- Lithium Bromide-water systems cannot be air cooled,

water cooling is imperative.

- Water-Ammonia systems can be air cooled or water

cooled.

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

3.0 Absorption Technology today

3.1 Historical perspective

USA, Domestic Shipment of L.T Chillers

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Absorption Chiller Shipment in USA

TR

/yea

r

Source: ASHRAE J, April 2001

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

3.2 Absorption Refrigeration in the world

Future ProjectionFIG. 18: The Future of Absorption Demand

1995

2000

2005

2010

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000

TR

Yea

r

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

3.3 Absorption Refrigeration in the world

World Absorption Chiller Market Absorption 100RT≧

By Amount (M U$)Total $637 M

By Qty Total 6550 units

180

2560

2050

900

860

USA China Japan Korea Rest

20

283

205

60.268.8

USA China Japan Korea Rest

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

3.4 Absorption Market (by Qty) Excluding Japan, China, Korea, USA

BrazilItaly

India

Iran

Pakistan

Egypt

Hungary

Turky

Singapore

Thailand

Bulgaria

Taiwan Indonesia

Malaysia

Country QtyTaiwan

Singapore 5Indonesia 10Thailand 50Malaysia 20Pakistan 120Iran 150Egypt 20Hungary 10Bulgaria 10Italy 100Brazil 20India 315Turky 10

20

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

4.0 Is Absorption a viable alternative to HCFC based systems?

4.1 Refrigeration capacities available

4.2 Technical suitability & applicability

4.3 Indicative prices of Absorption systems

4.4 Absorption systems operating costs & services

including energy consumption

4.5 Environmental impact (Ozone depletion & global

warming)

4.6 Safety issues

4.7 Technological, design & equipment changes

required for conversion

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

AbsorptionSystems

H2O – NH3

Direct fired

Air Cooled

Modular Production

17-100 kW(5 to 30 TR

Indirect fired

Water Cooled

Custom made

700- 35,000 kW(200-10,000TR)

LiBr – H20

Direct fired Indirect fired

Incorporating a CT

Modular Production

17-100 kW(5 to 30 TR

Not Incorporating a CT

Modular Production

Modular Production

100-4,200kW(30-1200TR)

280-7000 kW(80-2000TR)

4.1 Refrigeration capacities available:

Cat. I Cat. II Cat. III Cat. IV Cat. V

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

4.1 Refrigeration capacities available (Cont.):

There are five capacity categories of Absorption

units available:

Cat. 1 H2O-NH3 17-100 kW ( 5 to 30 TR ) Cat. 2 H2O-NH3 700-35,000 kW (200 to 10,000 TR)

Cat. 3 LiBr-H2O 17-100 kW (5 to 30 TR )

Cat. 4 LiBr-H2O 17-100 kW (5 to 30 TR )

Cat. 5 LiBr-H2 280-7,000 kW ( 80 to 2,000 TR )

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

S.NItem

Refrigeration Capacity

H2O – NH3LiBr - H2O 17 – 100 )5 – 30(

700 – 35000 )200 – 10,000(

17 – 100 ) 5 – 30(

100-4200)30-1,200(

280-7000)80-2,000(

Cat . 1Cat . 2Cat . 3Cat . 4Cat . 5

4.1Refrigeration capacities available

1010101010

4.2Technical suitability & applicability

69869

4.3Indicative prices of a b systems

37469

4.4Operating cost & savings ind. energy

consumptions

8108810

Current Status of Absorption Refrigeration Technology as

an alternative to HCFC based Mechanical Vapour Compression Technology

4.5Environmental impact

) ozone depletion & global warning

1010101010

4.6Safety issues558810

4.7Technological . Design & equipment .

changes required for conversion

76866

4.8Total ( out of 70 pts )4957565464

4.9 %age compared to m v c

70% 81% 80% 71% 91%