Trends in Supermarket Refrigeration

Architectures

E360 Annual Conference • Atlanta, Ga. • April 11

Mike Saunders Ani JayanthSenior Lead Innovation Technologist Director, Product Marketing Emerson Emerson

This presentation is intended to highlight changing developments in the law and industry topics. The law is frequently evolving and information and publications in this presentation may not reflect the latest changes in the law or legal interpretations. The statements and information provided in this presentation should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion regarding any specific facts or circumstances, but is intended for general informational purposes only. The views and statements expressed during this presentation are the personal opinions of the presenter and do not represent those of Emerson Climate Technologies, Inc. or its affiliated companies. You should consult an attorney about your situation and specific facts and you should not act on any of the information in this presentation as the information may not be applicable to your situation. Although all statements and information contained herein are believed to be accurate and reliable, they are presented without warranty of any kind. Information provided herein does not relieve the user from the responsibility of carrying out its own tests and experiments. Statements or suggestions concerning the use of materials and processes are made without representation or warranty that any such use is free of patent infringement and are not recommendations to infringe on any patents. This presentation may not be copied or redistributed without the express written consent of Emerson Climate Technologies, Inc.

Disclaimer

2

Supermarket Architecture Trends Begin Here: the Kigali Amendment

to Montreal Protocol

3

• October 15, 2016

• “38th Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer”

• Global agreement on HFC phase-down reached by 197 countries of the world in Kigali, Rwanda

Supermarket Refrigeration Architectures for the Future Are Linked to Global Regulatory Changes in Selecting Refrigerants With Low Ozone Depletion and GWP.

A Global Agreement Like the Kigali Amendment Can Help Eliminate Patchwork

of Refrigerant Regulations Happening Independently by Some Regions

F-Gas (EU)

Effective April 20, 2014

CARB: Short-lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy

Proposal April 1, 2016

Environmental Canada (EC)**

Proposal March 23, 2016

ApplicationGWP

LimitDate

Self-contained and

Stationary Refrigeration2,500 2020

Centralized Refrigeration 150 2022

Top-side Cascade 1,500 2022

ApplicationGWP

LimitDate

All Refrigerant Sales* 2,500 2020

Commercial Refrigeration

Top-side Cascade

150

1,500

2020

2020

AC (Non-residential and

Residential)750 2021

*Phase-down (NAP) option also proposed (2019 —

90%; 2024 — 65%; 2030 — 30%; 2036 — 15%;

baseline 2011–2013)

*Comment period closed; final rule expected in 2017

ApplicationGWP

LimitDate

Centralized Systems

(MT/LT Racks)1,500 2020

Refrigeration — LT

Stand-alone1,500 2020

Refrigeration — MT

Stand-alone650 2020

**Documents distributed in EC communication with

stakeholders; contact HRAI (Canada) or AHRI (USA)

for copies

4

55

Supermarket Refrigeration Today in the U.S. Has Moved to R-407A for New Rack Architectures;Considerable Amount of Existing Architectures Today for Service Still Use R-22/R-404A.

EPA’s Final Rule, July 20, 2015, and September 26, 2016,Changed Listing Status of Certain HFCs*

6

F-Gas Regulations Cause a Comprehensive Review of Refrigerant and Architecture Selection

A1

–N

on

fla

mm

ab

le

A2

L –

Mil

dly

Fla

mm

ab

le

A3

–F

lam

ma

ble

B2L

–T

oxic

Similar

R-410A

Similar

R-404A

R-407A/F

Similar

R-134aGWP

< 1,500

~600

150–300

1234yf/ze

R-410A

R-407C

R-407A/F

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Vo

lum

etr

ic C

ap

ac

ity/P

res

su

re

R-448A/

R-449A

R-32/HFO Blends(DR5, L41, ARM71)

R-134a

CO2

R-404A

R-290

NH3

(3,922)

HFO Blends(XL20/40, HDR110, L20)

R-450A,

R-513A

2,500

400–675

2020

Units below 40 kW

2022

Indirect expansion

systems

2022

Centralized packs

above 40 kW;

Hermetically sealed

2030 2024

2017

Rack Architecture

Systems

7

Propane systems with glycol loop

150g charge at case — “Green”

Maintenance ease

Full CO2 natural refrigerant loop

Eliminate all HFC

Improved efficiency

Common Supermarket Refrigeration Architectures

Cen

traliz

ed

HF

C

Dis

tribu

ted

HF

C

Cas

ca

de H

FC

/CO

2

Se

co

nd

ary

HF

C/G

lyc

ol o

r CO

2

Bo

os

ter

Fu

ll CO

2

Adding heat exchangers and glycol

or CO2 pumps

Reducing refrigerant charge

Shorter line sets to cases

Lower leaks

Rejecting CO2 LT compression heat

with HX to MT compressors

Eliminates HFC on LT

Reduced refrigerant charge

Isolate MT with 134a or low-GWP

refrigerantHFO A1

R-407A/FR-744

HFO A2L <300

R-290

HFO A1

HFO A2L

CO2, HFO A1

HFO A1

HFO A2L

R-407A/F

A1 Non-Flammable

A2L Mildly Flammable

A3 Flammable

Mic

ro-D

istrib

ute

d

HF

C/P

rop

an

e

R-290

8

Refrigerant Charge

First Cost

Regulatory Compliance

Applied Cost

Refrigerant Cost

Energy

Ease of Installation

Maintenance Cost

Ease of Maintenance

Decomm. Cost

Supermarket Format

Knowledge and Training

Cen

traliz

ed

HF

C

Dis

tribu

ted

HF

C

Cascade HFC/CO2

Secondary

HFC/Glycol or CO2

Booster

Full CO2

USA 2017

50%

45%

2%

2%

1%

EU 2017

Cen

traliz

ed

HF

C

40%

Dis

tribu

ted

HF

C 35%

Cascade HFC/CO2 3%

Secondary

HFC/Glycol or CO23%

Booster

Full CO215%

Decision

InfluencersC

en

traliz

ed

HF

C

Dis

tribu

ted

HF

C

Cascade HFC/CO2

Secondary

HFC/Glycol or CO2

Booster

Full CO2

USA 2025?

35%?

30%?

5%?

10%?

15%?

Decision

Drivers

• F-Gas

• Local codes

• Charge limits

• Energy mandates

Regulatory Compliance

• Mechanical

• Electronics

• Refrigerant charge

Investment

• Annualized power intake

• Peak power intake

Energy Savings

• Operating costs

• Uptime

• Energy

Return on Investment

Supermarket Architectures Today and the FutureInstalled Base

Micro-Dist - Propane <1%Micro-Dist - Propane 4%

Notes: not to scale;

illustrative only

Micro-Dist - Propane 5%

9

Low-GWP Options Refrigerant Charge Leaks Complex Initial Cost Maintenance Cost Efficiency

Centralized

Distributed

Secondary

Cascade

CO2 Booster

System Features Comparison

“Perfect Architecture” Dependent on Multiple Characteristics

10

Low-GWP Refrigerant Options

• Lower-GWP refrigerants tend to be A2L (except for naturals)

• Large systems with large refrigerant charges are not conducive to A2L’s

• Secondary systems could be used with A2L’s with proper design

• CO2 option for booster-type and cascade systems

• Propane an option for small self-contained (<150g charge)

Refrigerant Options and Charge by System Architecture

11

Refrigerant Options and Charge by System Architecture (cont’d.)

Refrigerant Charge

Centr

aliz

ed

Dis

trib

ute

d

Secondary

Cascade

Cha

rge (

lbs)

Boo

ste

r

Self-

Conta

ined

⅔ cup

32,000+ cups

12

Sources of Supermarket Refrigerant Leaks

• Larger systems with more pipes, joints and components have the potential to leak more.

• The higher the pressure, the more potential for leaks.

• System efficiency can also be affected by leaks.

Leak Sources for a Regional Supermarket Chain*

Compressor Racks

Display Cases

Remote Air Cooled Condensers

Field-Installed Piping

Walk-In Evaporators

AC Units

Condensing Units

Remote Headers

* Source: GreenChill Best Practices Guideline, May 2011

13

Leaks and System Impact

Causes of Leaks*• Poor brazing techniques

• Improperly tightened fittings

• Valve caps and seals missing

• Material incompatible with oil

or refrigerant

• Vibration

• Thermal expansion and

contraction

• Corrosion

• Metal-to-metal contact of tubing

• Improper support of tubing

Time frame shortens with smaller systems

14

Complexity, Initial Cost, Maintenance

• Established architectures, e.g., centralized/distributed

– Suppliers readily available for new and replacement parts

– Technician training programs well-established

– Initial costs are known

• Newer architectures, e.g., secondary/cascade/booster

– Newer to the industry

– Initial costs tend be higher

• Supply base not well-established

– Specialized training required to operate

• Complexity

– Require additional components, controls and dependencies

• Pumps, EXV’s, new controllers and algorithms, etc.

0

50

100

150

200

250

2010 2015

244

184

60K

Shortage

Th

ou

sa

nd

s o

f Te

ch

s

0

50

100

150

200

250

HFC CO₂

$K

Optional

Mechanical

Electronics

15

LCCP/Energy Analysis

• Compare different system architectures

– Centralized, distributed, secondary, cascade, booster

– Refrigerants

• R-404A – baseline centralized

• R-407A, R-448A – centralized and distributed

• R-407A, R-448A, R-444B (A2L) – secondary

• R-134a, R-513A and CO2 – cascade

• CO2 – Booster

– LT: 300 MBH, MT: 900 MBH

– Assumed 15% leak rates for all but secondary system (2%)

– Two different climate zones

• Minneapolis, Minn. – Zone 6

• Phoenix, Ariz. – Zone 2

16

Annual Emissions and Peak Power ConsumptionMinneapolis, Minn.

Peak Power Consumption

Cen

trali

ze

dD

istr

ibu

ted

Se

co

nd

ary

Cas

ca

de

Bo

os

ter

Power \ CO2

Annual CO2 Emissions

Analysis tool: https://apps.emersonclimate.com/LCCP/PerformEnergyCalc.htm

17

Annual Emissions and Peak Power ConsumptionPhoenix, Ariz.

17

Peak Power Consumption

Cen

trali

ze

dD

istr

ibu

ted

Se

co

nd

ary

Cas

ca

de

Bo

os

ter

Power \ CO2

Annual CO2 Emissions

Analysis tool: https://apps.emersonclimate.com/LCCP/PerformEnergyCalc.htm

18

Annual and Peak Energy for U.S. (Centralized R-404A System)

Peak Power Consumption (kW)

Analysis compares centralized R-404A system. Trends will be similar for other architectures.

Annual Energy Consumption (kWh)

19

Refrigerant Charge

First Cost

Regulatory Compliance

Applied Cost

Refrigerant Cost

Energy

Ease of Installation

Maintenance Cost

Ease of Maintenance

Decomm. Cost

Supermarket Format

Knowledge and Training

Cen

traliz

ed

HF

C

Dis

tribu

ted

HF

C

Cascade HFC/CO2

Secondary

HFC/Glycol or CO2

Booster

Full CO2

USA 2017

50%

45%

2%

2%

1%

EU 2017

Cen

traliz

ed

HF

C

40%

Dis

tribu

ted

HF

C 35%

Cascade HFC/CO2 3%

Secondary

HFC/Glycol or CO23%

Booster

Full CO215%

Decision

InfluencersC

en

traliz

ed

HF

C

Dis

tribu

ted

HF

C

Cascade HFC/CO2

Secondary

HFC/Glycol or CO2

Booster

Full CO2

USA 2025?

35%?

30%?

5%?

10%?

15%?

Decision

Drivers

• F-Gas

• Local codes

• Charge limits

• Energy mandates

Regulatory Compliance

• Mechanical

• Electronics

• Refrigerant charge

Investment

• Annualized power intake

• Peak power intake

Energy Savings

• Operating costs

• Uptime

• Energy

Return on Investment

Supermarket Architectures Today and the FutureInstalled Base

Micro-Dist - Propane <1%Micro-Dist - Propane 4%

Notes: not to scale;

illustrative only

Micro-Dist - Propane 5%

Questions?

DISCLAIMER

Although all statements and information contained herein are believed to be accurate and reliable, they are presented without guarantee or warranty of any kind, expressed or

implied. Information provided herein does not relieve the user from the responsibility of carrying out its own tests and experiments, and the user assumes all risks and liability for

use of the information and results obtained. Statements or suggestions concerning the use of materials and processes are made without representation or warranty that any such

use is free of patent infringement and are not recommendations to infringe on any patents. The user should not assume that all toxicity data and safety measures are indicated

herein or that other measures may not be required.

Thank You!

20