The Benefits of a Heat-Pump Water Heater

In , we had the nasty old fossil-gas, natural-draft water heater removed. (That&#;s it in the photo below.) Outside of running a gasoline-powered generator or kerosene space heater inside a house, this kind of water heater is probably the No.1 source of carbon monoxide in homes. Yes, the hot water is cheap, but how much is your health worth? So my replacement for this fossil was a heat-pump water heater (HPWH). It&#;s a Rheem Performance Platinum, and I love it!

Please visit our website for more information on this topic.

Choosing a heat-pump water heater

I am not an expert in heat-pump water heaters, and I don&#;t know the range and availability of products all that well. But I have friends who keep up with that stuff, so I asked one of them. John Semmelhack of Think Little is a big proponent of all-electric homes, and he recommended the Rheem model that I ended up buying. Manufacturers are always changing their models, though; I bought the Gen 4 but what&#;s available now is the Gen 5 model (I think). Also, when you&#;re searching for information, Rheem uses the term &#;hybrid water heater&#; because it has two sources of heat. The main source is the heat pump, but it also has built-in electric resistance heating to supplement the heat pump.

One of the choices you have to make when buying any water heater is size. I sprang for the 80-gal. model for a simple reason: If I&#;m going to use a heat-pump water heater, I want it to use the heat pump all the time. I don&#;t want to use the electric resistance heating element at all unless the heat pump fails. The smaller the tank you buy, the more likely it is you&#;ll have to use some electric resistance heating.

The bigger tank has the other advantage of having more hot water available. My 80-gal. model has an 89-gal. first-hour rating. Did I go overboard? Yeah, probably. I do that sometimes. In September, we put it to the test, as we had family in town for my 120th birthday party.* The larger tank provided all the hot water we needed with five people in the house, and it stayed on heat pump&#;only mode the whole time.

The Rheem app

The Rheem HPWH connects to WiFi and has a nice app for your smartphone. The screenshot below shows the main screen for the water heater, with the basic info about the Gen 4 model including water temperature setting (120°F), mode (heat pump&#;only), and links to other data (schedules, usage report, and WiFi settings).

It has one annoying feature I wish Rheem would change: That green bar is ALWAYS there because I&#;ve set the mode to heat pump&#;only. Their so-called Energy Saving mode would actually use more energy because it would use electric resistance heat sometimes.

Monitoring energy use

We fired up, so to speak, our new water heater on September 14, , so we&#;ve passed the two-year mark. How much electricity have we used in that time? The chart below shows our first full year of data. The total was 486 kilowatt-hours (kWh). The lowest month was August at 23.75 kWh, and the highest was December at 68.6 kWh.

Notice the pattern? Water heating energy use is low in summer and high in winter. The main reason for that is the entering water temperature. As everything cools down in the fall, the municipal water supply cools down, too. That means it takes more heat pumped into the water to raise the temperature to 120°F.

A second reason is that we use more hot water in winter, although I haven&#;t measured that yet. Next year, however, I&#;m going to set up flow meters and temperature sensors on my all-new hot water plumbing when I remodel my basement. Then I&#;ll have the data to prove it, at least in my house. Those data will also tell me how many kilowatt hours it takes to get a gallon of hot water, by each month of the year and averaged over the whole year.

A third reason we use more energy in the winter is that the HPWH pulls heat out of the air, and our basement air is cooler in winter. In my case, we currently don&#;t heat or use the basement much, so it&#;s not a big deal. In cold climates, it can be a big deal.

Another nice feature of the Rheem app is that it can show your current usage compared to usage for the previous period. The chart above shows it by month for , compared to the corresponding months in . It also does daily by hour, weekly by day, and monthly by day.

Our annual consumption

Since it&#;s been over two years since I started up the HPWH, I can tell you how much energy we used in that time and how much it has cost us. From September 14, to September 14, , we used kWh. I also track our electricity use in a spreadsheet (doesn&#;t everybody?), and over that period, our average rate from Georgia Power has been almost exactly $0.10 per kWh (excluding taxes and fees). So, we&#;ve paid just a bit (two bits actually) over $100 for two years&#; worth of hot water.

How does that compare to our old fossil-gas water heater, you ask? We lived with it for less than three months, so I don&#;t have full data. But based on the little I do have, it looks like the gas-fueled water heater would have cost close to the same amount (again, excluding taxes and fees). So, there&#;s no direct economic benefit to switching from a gas water heater to a heat-pump water heater&#;when I look at the cost based on rates only.

I had already made the decision to get rid of our gas furnace, however, and that meant our only remaining gas appliance would be the water heater. At about $38 per month (screenshot above), the fees just to have gas would make the HPWH a big money saver. Based on a marginal cost of $, the extra $450 per year would give me a simple payback of about 3-1/2 years!

If I had replaced our gas water heater with an electric-resistance water heater, we still would have saved money; just not as much. The efficiency of water heaters is rated by something called the Uniform Energy Factor (UEF). Higher numbers are better, and my HPWH has a UEF of 3.7. (You can see it on the EnergyGuide above.) A standard electric water heater has a UEF of about 0.9, making my HPWH about 4.1 times as efficient.

Instead of 501 kWh per year, I would have used about kWh per year with an electric-resistance water heater. At $0.10 per kWh, I would have saved about $150 per year on water heating. With a simple payback of about 10 years in this case, it wouldn&#;t be hard to justify this purchase for economic reasons, assuming a 15- or 20-year lifetime and minimal maintenance costs.

Noise, ducting, and filtration

One thing people have complained about with some HPWHs is that they&#;re too noisy inside the house. Some probably are, so I measured mine using the NIOSH SLM app on my . Here are my results:

• 53 dBA &#; 1 ft. straight out from the exhaust port
• 48 dBA &#; 1 ft. to the side of the exhaust port
• 46 dBA &#; 5 ft. away, at the mechanical room door
• 37 dBA &#; 4 ft. to the side of the mechanical room door with door open

That&#;s pretty quiet. For reference, here are some other noise levels on this scale:

• 60 dBA &#; normal conversation
• 50 dBA &#; rainfall
• 40 dBA &#; refrigerator hum
• 30 dBA &#; soft whisper

Another nice feature of the Rheem model I bought is that it allows for the intake air and exhaust air to be ducted. You can see the exhaust port in the lead photo. It&#;s to the right of the digital display screen. My water heater is in the basement, so I could run a duct up to the encapsulated attic to bring in warmer intake air and make the heat pump more efficient. But it&#;s probably more trouble than it&#;s worth in my case.

I will need to run a short duct to the mechanical room wall, though. After I remodel the basement and put a door on the mechanical room, the HPWH won&#;t have much air in that space, so the duct will bring in air from the rest of the basement.

Even without ducting air from another place, the ability to duct intake air allows for putting a better filter on the system. The filter that comes with it is one of those paper-thin, see-through filters that mostly catches larger stuff. I haven&#;t done it yet, but when I remodel and move the water heater, I&#;ll also add a decent filter to the system and get it all sealed up to eliminate bypass. I want to keep that coil as clean as possible.

Is it worth it?

In my case, it certainly was worth it. We have low rates for fossil gas here in Georgia, but they come with high fees. Getting rid of the backdraftable gas water heater was a high priority for me. Not having to worry about low-level carbon monoxide poisoning (or worse) brings a peace of mind that&#;s priceless. And I&#;m doing my part to decarbonize my existing home by going all-electric. I could have saved on first cost by going with a standard electric-resistance water heater. Had I been ready to put photovoltaics on my roof, I might have done that.

I am really happy with my HPWH. It&#;s quiet, efficient, and gives us all the hot water we desire. It even provides a little bit of cooling and dehumidification&#;the topic of an upcoming article.

_________________________________________________________________________

Allison Bailes of Atlanta, Georgia, is a speaker, writer, building science consultant, and the founder of Energy Vanguard. He has a PhD in physics and writes the Energy Vanguard Blog. He is also writing a book on building science. You can follow him on Twitter at @EnergyVanguard.

* OK, it wasn&#;t my 120th birthday party alone. My wife and I will be a combined 120 years old on Saturday. I turned 80.5 and she 39.5&#;or something like that.

Weekly Newsletter

Get building science and energy efficiency advice, plus special offers, in your inbox.

Signing you up...

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

You will get efficient and thoughtful service from Forlssman.

Learning Objectives

• Analyze water-source heat pumps and compare them to alternative systems.
• Examine how water-source heat pumps can reduce building energy consumption.
• Implement a water-source heat pump system to meet simultaneous heating and cooling demand.

The first commercial energy code was promulgated in with the ASHRAE Standard 90-: Energy Conservation in New Building Design. Since then, subsequent efforts have led to more stringent energy efficiency standards, as shown in Figure 1.

A complete and uniform adoption of these energy codes would have resulted in approximately a 50% reduction in normalized energy use between and . In reality, total energy consumption per square foot in commercial buildings has decreased from 114 kBtu/sq ft in to 79.9 kBtu/sq ft in &#;a 30% decrease.

While this is a significant achievement, adoption and enforcement of standards by different states has not been uniform, and buildings continue to account for a large percentage of energy consumption in the U.S. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, commercial buildings consumed 7 quadrillion Btus of energy. Further, HVAC accounts for 44% of the commercial building energy demand, as shown in Figure 2. This includes space heating, ventilation, and cooling, but excludes refrigeration.

Commercial heat pumps

A heat pump is a refrigeration circuit that can cool spaces during warm weather and heat spaces during cool weather. With a heat pump, you can cool or heat a space by only using electricity. By not burning fuel for heating, as in a traditional central furnace, a flammability risk is eliminated.

Commercially available heat pumps can be categorized into two broad types:

• An air-source or air-cooled heat pump
• A water-source heat pump (WSHP).

An air-source or air-cooled heat pump is a type of heat pump that operates by rejecting heat to outside air during the summer or by absorbing heat from outside air during the winter. A WSHP is a type of heat pump that operates by rejecting heat to a water-pipe system (or water loop) during the summer or by absorbing heat from the same water loop during the winter. If multiple units of WSHPs are installed, they can all be serviced by a common water-loop system (or header).

Advantages of water-source heat pumps

For WSHPs, since the heat is transferred via a heat exchanger into a pipe that is carrying water, the operation is quieter and the system footprint is smaller since water is more efficient at carrying away heat than air. In an air-source system, the limiting heat-transfer coefficient is on the air side and typical forced convection air-side heat-transfer coefficients is in the range of 25 to 250 W/m2 K. In contrast, the forced convection heat-transfer coefficient on the water side is between 50 to 20,000 W/m2 K. This makes WSHP equipment more efficient and smaller in size than air-source heat pumps.

Traditional air source units can require each air handling unit to have a separate condensing unit. For a large, multi-unit system, which is common in a commercial building, multiple condensing units would be needed that are not only noisy but also present a challenge to install since they require a lot of free space. With a multi-unit WSHP installation, heat exchange can be accomplished with a single, central evaporative cooling tower or dry cooler located on the ground or the rooftop. The WSHP units can be placed in dropped ceilings or hidden away from occupied spaces in mechanical rooms or utility closets. Placing the units in ceilings, near to the point of use, also results in less ductwork and less fan-energy consumption. Fan-energy consumption can be among the largest energy components of an HVAC system, and a good overall system design will attempt to minimize it.

WSHPs also offer some of the highest efficiencies in the HVAC industry. ASHRAE sets the minimum efficiency requirements for WSHPs to be higher than traditional air-cooled heat pumps and VRF systems. Tables 1 and 2 show efficiency values for the most directly comparable units and is derived from ASHRAE 90.1-: Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. This comparison shows that WSHPs meet the highest minimum energy efficiency ratio (EER) and coefficient of performance (COP) requirements.

WSHPs also are more efficient at heating when compared with packaged furnace air conditioners. In a furnace unit, the maximum efficiency for heating by burning natural gas is about 95% (for a COP of 0.95); electrical heat is 100% (COP = 1.0). With a water-source heat pump in heating mode, not only is the thermal energy from the water loop being extracted and used, but also the heat of compression in the refrigerant circuit is captured and used as a source of heating. Due to this capability of extracting heat from a heat source (i.e., the water loop) and using the heat of compression, the WSHP can easily provide 4 to 6 units of heating for every unit of energy consumed. Clearly, this is a more efficient system.

Simultaneous heating and cooling with WSHPs

Depending on the orientation of the buildings and the demands of different kinds of tenants in a multi-use location, it is common for some of the occupants to demand cooling while others are demanding heat at the same time. Or, there is demand for hot water in a restaurant while the ice cream store next door is demanding cooling. Even within a single office building&#;for example, in winter&#;there is usually a need for heating at the perimeter that is exposed to the elements and cooling needed at the core of the building due to heat given off by the occupants and equipment as shown in Figure 3.

This diversity of energy demand exists everywhere. WSHPs can take the heat out of an area that is rejecting it and use it in another area that is demanding it. Energy recovery and transport is an area where WSHPs truly excel. Water is nonflammable, nontoxic, and has a high specific heat value of 4.2 KJ/kg C. It is an ideal medium to transport energy without any of the negative consequences of using a synthetic or flammable refrigerant to move energy, especially in the vicinity of occupied spaces.

The Btus of cooling load and the heat of compression in the refrigeration circuit of a traditional air-source unit is rejected to the atmosphere through the outdoor condensing unit. The quality of heat is low, and it is not economical in an air-source heat pump to recover this energy. This energy is blown into the atmosphere, thus it is wasted. In a WSHP, these Btus are rejected into a common water loop that acts as a reserve of this energy, which can be easily transported to the place that is demanding heat. As water is physically moved through a water pump to different areas of the same building or a group of buildings, thermal energy is also being simultaneously transported. Even though the quality of heat is low, it is efficiently captured and transported to where it is needed due to the high heat-transfer coefficients achievable with water and due to its high specific heat. The energy that is normally wasted in an air-source heat pump is now recovered and used somewhere else, thus offsetting new energy demand. The overall building energy consumption is decreased and no Btu is left behind.

One of the biggest advantages of a WSHP is that thermal energy can be economically, efficiently, and safely transported to wherever water can be pumped. Since moving water is easy and safe, the WSHP can be applied to any situation&#;from a single condo unit to a large office campus.

The advantages of a WSHP deployment become even more apparent when compared with another popular system, the VRF system. This system has limited ability to transport energy over long distances because it uses refrigerant close to the saturation temperature, or with limited subcooling, in copper pipes as the transport medium. There also are compressor power and pressure drop concerns with pumping so much refrigerant. Most VRF vendors place limits on refrigerant tubing lengths such as how far the indoor units can be from the outdoor units, the total length of system piping allowable, the length from the first separation tube or branch controller to the farthest indoor unit, or the total vertical pipe length.

In addition, there is also a large number of copper pipe connections that have to be made in the field in a VRF system. If there is a refrigerant leak anywhere along the path, it is extremely difficult to detect, isolate, re-braze, re-vacuum, and re-commission the system. In a WSHP, all refrigerant lines are contained within the unit and installed and leak-tested in a controlled factory setting. The energy in a WSHP system is moved by water in normal plumbing systems, with which every HVAC contractor is familiar. This is much safer and easier to maintain, and there are no piping-distance limits.

Another advantage of WSHPs is its ability to achieve highly efficient operation and perform heat recovery while operating with a limited amount of refrigerant charge. High system refrigerant charges are a potential safety hazard, as refrigerant can displace oxygen in closed rooms and cause asphyxiation without warning. ASHRAE Standard 15-: Safety Standard for Refrigeration Systems and ASHRAE Standard 34-: Designation and Safety Classification of Refrigerants defines the refrigerant concentration limit (RCL) and oxygen deprivation limit (ODL) for different refrigerants, and these can be used to calculate the smallest-sized room where a refrigeration system can be safely installed. For the most commonly used refrigerant, R-410A, the RCL is 26 lbs/1,000 ft3 and the ODL is 140,000 ppm. For institutional buildings, such as hospitals, the threshold is only half of the nominal value (institutional buildings are defined where occupants cannot readily evacuate without the assistance of others).

The small quantity of refrigerant charge needed in a WSHP is contained completely within the factory-tested unit, in comparison with a VRF system that requires higher quantities of refrigerant charge. In a VRF system, refrigerant is not only used within the central units and their internal mini-split units, but it also is present in the extensive pipework and branch controllers between these internal and external units. Some VRF systems require two or three pipe-network designs to work, and all of the pipes carry refrigerant. This complex maze of copper piping presents increased safety and maintenance risks due to the higher refrigerant charge in the system, the higher number of connection points that are potential points of failure, and the hazard it poses if there is a leak. As the industry considers moving to flammable refrigerants to meet the low global warming potential refrigerant requirements, driven by climate change concerns, the safety considerations of using VRF become even more acute. In a VRF system, the RCL/ODL thresholds can be easily exceeded in small offices, hotel rooms, bathrooms, and utility rooms.

WSHP system implementation

A typical WSHP implementation in a large commercial building consists of several WSHPs that are installed close to the areas of demand and fed by a common water loop. The cooling tower, pumps, and boiler are located away from occupied spaces.

In a WSHP implementation, the control schemes generally limit the water-loop temperature to be in the range of 60° to 95°F, depending on the season. Keeping the water-loop temperature in this range is a matter of economics and engineering judgment. The heat pumps can operate with water temperatures outside this range, but their efficiency will be lower. For example, the heat pump has to work harder in heating mode with the water-loop temperature at 55°F than at 60°F. Is it better to let the heat pumps work harder at 55°F (consuming more electricity) or using the gas-fired boiler to raise the temperature of the loop to 60°F? The answer depends on the relative costs of gas and electricity as well as the relative efficiencies of the boiler and heat pumps at these operating points.

When the heating and cooling loads are nearly equal, the WSHPs extract the heat from the areas rejecting it and provide the heat to the WSHPs that are demanding it through the common water loop. Small temporary imbalances in the loads between heating and cooling are taken care of by allowing the water-loop temperature to float within the 60° to 95°F range. In this scenario, there is no need for any net inputs to the system of either heating Btus or cooling Btus and both the cooling tower and boiler can be turned off to improve system efficiency. Due to the large specific heat of water in the loops, a 35°F range in water-loop temperature implies there is a large amount of thermal energy available to take care of demand imbalance. Just 1,000 ft of 6-in. pipe can hold 875 KBtus of thermal energy over a 35°F span of temperature. Over a 1-hour period, this equates to more than 70 tons of refrigeration that can be moved around.

In cases where there is an increase in cooling demand than heating demand&#;like summer, for example&#;a central cooling tower is provided for net cooling to keep the water-loop temperature from exceeding 95°F (see Figure 4). Alternatively, the excess Btus can be used to generate hot water using a water-to-water WSHP.

The reverse is true in winter when the heating demands exceed the cooling demands. A central boiler is provided to add Btus to the water loop to make sure that the water-loop temperature does not go below 60°F (see Figure 5). Since the cooling tower and boiler are sized to handle only the maximum net cooling and heating demand, as opposed to sizing for maximum total cooling and heating demand, their sizes can be reduced to result in cost savings.

The WSHP industry continues to make strides in improving efficiency, even at part-load conditions. Technologies like microchannel heat exchangers, variable-speed compressors, building management software integration, wireless thermostats, and occupancy sensors are being tested or have already been implemented to further reduce energy usage and stay at the higher end of the efficiency spectrum.

WSHPs are efficient solutions that have been effectively deployed in commercial buildings. They are especially effective in reducing energy consumption where there is diversity in energy demand, resulting in smaller sizes of cooling towers and boilers. By using water as a heat-transport medium in a common water loop, WSHPs can move thermal energy across large distances safely and more efficiently as compared with alternative solutions on the market. They are smaller and offer design flexibility by allowing the placement of towers, boilers, and pumps in locations remote from occupied spaces. WSHPs eliminate flammability risk associated with furnace heating and they accomplish highly efficient operation using much smaller quantities of refrigerant as compared with VRF systems.

Naveen Halbhavi, PE, is director of marketing for ClimateMaster. He has worked in roles of process engineering, control systems design, product management, business development, and general management.

Do you have experience and expertise with the topics mentioned in this content? You should consider contributing to our WTWH Media editorial team and getting the recognition you and your company deserve. Click here to start this process.

If you are looking for more details, kindly visit Air Source Heat Pump To Heat Water.