The Power-Pipe For Homes

[gmortensen]

Originally Posted by Brian A. MacNeish

Did they have an outer insulation layer/system installed so they don't take house heat to warm the water?

Nope.

[Brian A. MacNeish]

Originally Posted by mgratton

Brian,

So what you're saying is that this system will not produce a reasonable pay back on investment for residential application?

IMO, not unless you have several children taking 20+ minute showers!!! I'm not rushing out to buy one.

Here are some selected text from researchers:

OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABS (ORNL):

Multifamily buildings with large hot water consumption patterns are an ideal application for the GFX. In cases where hot water is provided by resistance water heaters, operating cost savings should be sufficient to justify GFX installation with short simple payback times. The payback time for a specific
application obviously depends on installed cost, the amount of hot water consumed daily and the cost for delivering hot water using the conventional water heater.

FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM:

"To capture heat from wastewater produced by all sources in a dwelling and put it to use would require a regenerator-type, double-walled heat exchanger

—one that can capture heat from wastewater generated by one fixture or appliance (e.g., a clothes washer) and apply this heat to assist another hot water demand that may occur at a later time."

"The impact on overall hot water energy consumption depends on the fraction of total hot water consumption that simultaneously produces warm rainwater. Good candidates for GFX application in the Federal sector would be dormitories and barracks, health facilities, and commercial and industrial facilities that produce waste heat that could otherwise be used for reheating water."

"In general, buildings that require large amounts of hot water for showers (e.g., homes of families with several children, multifamily apartments, or barracks with showers on a common drain line) would be ideal candidates for the GFX and would lead to shorter paybacks."

[Charles R. N. Crooker]

"In general, buildings that require large amounts of hot water for showers (e.g., homes of families with several children, multifamily apartments, or barracks with showers on a common drain line) would be ideal candidates for the GFX and would lead to shorter paybacks."
But still a bay back, the builder here used seperate drains and in 2-4 bedroom homes.

[Brian A. MacNeish]

Originally Posted by ccrooker

"In general, buildings that require large amounts of hot water for showers (e.g., homes of families with several children, multifamily apartments, or barracks with showers on a common drain line) would be ideal candidates for the GFX and would lead to shorter paybacks."
But still a pay back, the builder here used seperate drains and in 2-4 bedroom homes.

You want to know where best to spend your $$$. Would a solar panel system be better if it could produce 60-70% of all hot water needed for a year at a system cost of $4,000; or would a system that recovers only 10-15% of all heat in hot water drained at a system cost of $1,200; or would a HP/AC unit with hot water heating, be better? I like the last one as it takes rejected heat (that you're paying to get rid of anyways) from cooling and puts it into your hot water.

The ACEEE seems only to comment on this technology for industry:

GFX drainwater heat recovery (cross-cutting)

Very little of the heat in hot water is actually used; the vast majority of the energy goes down the drain after the water is used for such tasks as crystal rinsing and drying applications . Economical recovery of the heat for reuse has been a goal of many inventions over the years using various heat exchange and storage devices. The GFX falling-film heat exchanger uses a vertical five-foot piece of 3" copper drainpipe wrapped with a spiral of 1/2" copper water supply pipe. As the drain water from a shower falls down the drain it forms a falling film on the inside surface of the drain. This results in very high exchange efficiency with the incoming water in the 1/2" line with typical efficiencies on the order of 40 to 75 percent. This technology crosscuts many industrial sectors, but has particular usage in process with relatively hot wastewater streams. The chemical and food processing industries may benefit from the use of this technology. Precise energy savings are unknown.
Nadel, S., L. Ranier, M. Shepard, M. Suozzo, and J. Thorne. 1998.

Emerging Energy-Saving Technologies and Practices for the Buildings Sector. Washington, D.C.: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

[Marcel Gratton]

More details on turning drain water into wealth from CMHC and NRC attached...

[Bob Elliott]

I am underwhelmed

[jkogel]

You'd get more heat from that coil by laying it on the roof, IMO.
Where's the saving in something that costs so much?
Doesn't the gov't need that copper for penny production?

John Kogel
www.allsafehome.ca

[dbolduc]

Probably took more energy to manufacture and install than it will save in a serviceable lifetime. Good to sell to yuppies to make them feel good about themselves though.

[Marcel Gratton]

From the research document you save about $100 per year in utilities but the pipe costs about $1200 so 12 years before you start to get a payback...bad investment!