CryoGenX4 Validation Pilot Project Overview
March-May 2021
Energy Efficient Technologies (EET) and a major national brewer (MNB) began jointly conducting a performance pilot on the chiller cooling system supporting the fermentation process within the one of their Ohio facilities. The primary purpose of the pilot project was to demonstrate the financial savings, increased efficiency, and carbon footprint reductions achieved by implementing the energy control measure, (ECM) CryoGenX4.
Invented by a former member of the Mobil-1 Synthetic Motor Oil development team, CryoGenX4 is a one-time chemical treatment. It requires no downtime for installation and quickly restores the capacity and efficiency lost over time in any HVAC and refrigeration system. In newer equipment, it prevents the efficiency loss common to all systems from ever occurring. These losses add up to 30% or more, as documented by the American Society of Heating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). These are mainly the result of oil-fouling and thermal degradation of the internal heat exchange surfaces. By improving performance, CryoGenX4 reduces the cost to operate any cooling equipment – regardless of age, size, or refrigerant type – while at the same time increasing capacity.
Using four different methods to validate improvements, results show:
- An average efficiency improvement of 18.55%
- Return on Investment of 932% over the estimated remaining life of the chiller
Comparison Method 1
Isolated Single Chiller Operation to Compare Chiller 1 and 2 Under Identical Loads
The screenshots on the next page show conclusively that Chiller 1 is outperforming its Chiller 2 counterpart after being treated with CryoGenX4. The yellow box highlights the performance improvement achieved while each pertinent measurement is listed on the right of each screenshot.
Comparison Method 2
Maintained Glycol Loop Temperature
This method is the easiest way to observe the ability of CryoGenX4 to increase cooling capacity while reducing energy usage at the same time. With only one chiller working to satisfy the load on the cooling loop and all the other equipment temporarily turned off, Chiller 1 (treated with CryoGenX4) was able to maintain the leaving glycol set temperature of 25° for nearly 30 minutes.
When the situation was reversed, Chiller 2 (untreated) was unable to hold the 25° loop temperature, allowing it to increase by 1.5° or 6% over the 30 minutes it was operating on its own. The four yellow stars highlight these two scenarios in the screenshots above.
This method clearly shows Chiller 1 has increased performance capabilities due to CryoGenX4.
Comparison Method 3
Performance of Chillers 1 & 2 Working Together
For this comparison, all four plant chillers (the ammonia trim chiller included) were briefly turned off by the Plant Operators, with management’s approval, allowing the glycol loop to continue to warm up to 31°F from the point where it was when Comparison 1 / Chiller 2 operation was completed.
Just prior to the 31°F supply temperature being reached, the plant was put back into normal operating mode. Simultaneously, the setpoint for the glycol loop supply was dropped to 21°F (vice normal set point of 25°F). This action allowed Chillers 1 & 2 to both load up to 100% for a short period of time to quickly begin lowering the supply loop temperature. The objective was achieved in less than 25 minutes (i.e., 100% capacity on both chillers), and plant setpoints returned to normal.
The screenshot below shows just how much better the treated Chiller 1 is performing compared to Chiller 2. The pertinent measurements are highlighted or listed on right of the screenshot.
Comparison Method 4
Operational Comparison of Chillers 1 and 2 Following CryoGenX4 Installation Using Data Directly from BMS
This Comparison Method is less accurate than Comparison Methods 1, 2 & 3 since variables such as flow rates, valve percentages, or the trim chiller's impact are not tracked. However, the average efficiency improvement shown in this data reflects very closely with the results of the other three more scientific methods.
The first week of the data was dropped from the analysis as that was the period when CryoGenX4 was doing most of its work improving the performance of Chiller 1. Any hourly entry missing any portion of data, and all data entries when either Chiller 1 or Chiller 2 were operating at 25% capacity or less were removed from the analysis. This ensured that any data when Chillers 1 or 2 were not running, or just starting up / powering down, does not adversely affect the overall performance averages.
The chart below highlights the BMS readings in the month following the installation of CryoGenX4.
