Comments on: Stop Energy Going Down the Drain http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/ Science, Environment, and Nature in the SF Bay Area Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:39:48 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Jim Gunshinan http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/comment-page-1/#comment-62095 Jim Gunshinan Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:22:20 +0000 http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/#comment-62095 Correction: The diagram in my blog entry "Stop Energy Going Down the Drain," should have been credited to Carmine Vasile, who invented the original drain water heat recovery device, the GFX, in the 1990s. I regret the error. Vitale is the president of WaterFilm Energy, Inc. Go to www.gfxtechnology.com for more information about the GFX. Correction: The diagram in my blog entry "Stop Energy Going Down the Drain," should have been credited to Carmine Vasile, who invented the original drain water heat recovery device, the GFX, in the 1990s. I regret the error. Vitale is the president of WaterFilm Energy, Inc. Go to http://www.gfxtechnology.com for more information about the GFX.

]]> By: Daniel Beauchemin http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/comment-page-1/#comment-59684 Daniel Beauchemin Wed, 03 Sep 2008 13:04:16 +0000 http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/#comment-59684 Save up to 50% means that in the perfect case scenario, you will save 50% on your hot water bill. As Charles points out, this is in a perfect situation. The best way to calculate savings is by 1) Knowing the price of the heat exchanger and 2) Visiting the website that uses a calculator developed from the NRC testing to see what your particular payback would be. http://www.ceati.com/calculator/ If you have any more questions on drain water heat recovery devices, I am free to answer them. We are the manufactures of the ECO-GFX Daniel Beauchemin daniel.beauchemin@gfxstar.ca Eco-Innovation 888-881-7693 Save up to 50% means that in the perfect case scenario, you will save 50% on your hot water bill. As Charles points out, this is in a perfect situation. The best way to calculate savings is by
1) Knowing the price of the heat exchanger and
2) Visiting the website that uses a calculator developed from the NRC testing to see what your particular payback would be.

http://www.ceati.com/calculator/

If you have any more questions on drain water heat recovery devices, I am free to answer them. We are the manufactures of the ECO-GFX

Daniel Beauchemin
daniel.beauchemin@gfxstar.ca
Eco-Innovation
888-881-7693

]]> By: Stop Energy Going Down the Drain : jpgunshinan - Green Options http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/comment-page-1/#comment-56907 Stop Energy Going Down the Drain : jpgunshinan - Green Options Tue, 15 Apr 2008 18:57:45 +0000 http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/#comment-56907 [...] Stop Energy Going Down the Drain [...] [...] Stop Energy Going Down the Drain [...]

]]> By: Jim Gunshinan http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/comment-page-1/#comment-56906 Jim Gunshinan Tue, 15 Apr 2008 18:07:41 +0000 http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/#comment-56906 Steve, I forwarded your comments to Charles Zaloum, one of the authors of the Canadian DWHR study. Here is his response: "Manufacturers love using "save UP TO 50%"....I'm still waiting for my vehicle to get the posted gas-mileage! Our research has shown that, even with the best DWHR device, your standard family will save 25-30% on the hot water portion of their utility bill. Of course, if you have 4 teenagers, you'll be saving closer to 40-50%....since your hot water use is dominated by shower use. Agreed, reducing (as with garbage, and energy) is Step 1...the cut-off valve is probably the most cost effective measure. Step 2 is re-use...some "enviro-homes" now re-use filtered shower water to flush toilets... Step 3 is recycle, as in recycle (or recover) energy that would normally be wasted. The problem with this beautiful theory is PEOPLE. PEOPLE need to decide to reduce their hot water use...PEOPLE need to decide to use the cut-off valve....I could train by horse to talk before I could train a teenager to take a 5-minute shower or use a cut-off valve! The DWHR deals with the PEOPLE-factor by being invisible, simple and effective....PEOPLE, it would appear, don't like to put much effort in conserving energy..." Steve,

I forwarded your comments to Charles Zaloum, one of the authors of the Canadian DWHR study. Here is his response:

"Manufacturers love using "save UP TO 50%"….I'm still waiting for my vehicle to get the posted gas-mileage!

Our research has shown that, even with the best DWHR device, your standard family will save 25-30% on the hot water portion of their utility bill. Of course, if you have 4 teenagers, you'll be saving closer to 40-50%….since your hot water use is dominated by shower use.

Agreed, reducing (as with garbage, and energy) is Step 1…the cut-off valve is probably the most cost effective measure.
Step 2 is re-use…some "enviro-homes" now re-use filtered shower water to flush toilets… Step 3 is recycle, as in recycle (or recover) energy that would normally be wasted.

The problem with this beautiful theory is PEOPLE. PEOPLE need to decide to reduce their hot water use…PEOPLE need to decide to use the cut-off valve….I could train by horse to talk before I could train a teenager to take a 5-minute shower or use a cut-off valve!

The DWHR deals with the PEOPLE-factor by being invisible, simple and effective….PEOPLE, it would appear, don't like to put much effort in conserving energy…"

]]> By: Jim Gunshinan http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/comment-page-1/#comment-56754 Jim Gunshinan Mon, 07 Apr 2008 03:54:40 +0000 http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/#comment-56754 Steve, I reported on the study done by researchers at Natural Resources Canada. I believe their results, but, like you, feel very skeptical about "50% energy savings" claims. The Canada researchers found that that shower was the big saver, compared to other uses. I will forward your comments to the authors of the report though. Thanks for you thoughtful comments. Steve,

I reported on the study done by researchers at Natural Resources Canada. I believe their results, but, like you, feel very skeptical about "50% energy savings" claims.

The Canada researchers found that that shower was the big saver, compared to other uses. I will forward your comments to the authors of the report though.

Thanks for you thoughtful comments.

]]> By: Steve Ryan http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/comment-page-1/#comment-56753 Steve Ryan Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:54:03 +0000 http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2008/04/04/stop-energy-going-down-the-drain/#comment-56753 I believe that people should approach these particular devices with quite a bit of skepticism. I don't mean to say that recovering heat from a single heavily-used shower would not be useful, but supplier claims such as "WILL SAVE YOU UP TO 50% ON YOUR HOT WATER BILL" seem exaggerated. It would be more effective and a lot cheaper to install a simple cutoff valve by the shower head and reduce the water run time during those 12-minute showers to 6. To achieve 50% heat recovery would require most of your hot water to pass through the recovery device. The counterflow heat exchanger designs shown are good, but 100% efficiency is not possible. Effectiveness would be reduced any time cold water is used at the same time, reducing the temperature difference at the exchanger. Little or no heat would be recovered during short-duration uses of hot water. A choice must be made between an exchanger located at the most-used shower, sacrificing recovery from water used elsewhere, or redesigned sewage piping with some heat lost between the source fixtures and the heat exchanger. Again, nothing against the approach, but be careful of the claims. I believe that people should approach these particular devices with quite a bit of skepticism.

I don't mean to say that recovering heat from a single heavily-used shower would not be useful, but supplier claims such as "WILL SAVE YOU UP TO 50% ON YOUR HOT WATER BILL" seem exaggerated. It would be more effective and a lot cheaper to install a simple cutoff valve by the shower head and reduce the water run time during those 12-minute showers to 6.

To achieve 50% heat recovery would require most of your hot water to pass through the recovery device. The counterflow heat exchanger designs shown are good, but 100% efficiency is not possible. Effectiveness would be reduced any time cold water is used at the same time, reducing the temperature difference at the exchanger. Little or no heat would be recovered during short-duration uses of hot water. A choice must be made between an exchanger located at the most-used shower, sacrificing recovery from water used elsewhere, or redesigned sewage piping with some heat lost between the source fixtures and the heat exchanger. Again, nothing against the approach, but be careful of the claims.

]]>