top of page
This site was designed with the
.com
website builder. Create your website today.Start Now

conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the current heating system at the SLO Swim Center (a.k.a. Sinsheimer Pool), we have evaluated a multi-step plan that would be most cost efficient and maximizes carbon pollution. Scenario 1 is the first, and should be immediately implemented, step to exchange the current pool pumps to variable flow pumps (VFP). This allows the heating system to conserve electricity during non-business hours and only run at maximum speed when needed. Scenario 2 is the next step in replacing the largest carbon emitter in the current heating system, the boilers, with a heat pump. This immensely reduces the reliance on natural gas and, instead, consumes a greener alternative, electricity, from the SLO Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) grid (aka SLO Smart Grid). Scenario 3 is an alternative to scenario 2 where instead of using grid electricity to power the heat pump we rely entirely on the cogeneration system to power electricity for the buildings, VFP and heat pumps. Although this is a cost efficient alternative to scenario 2, it will increase carbon emissions compared to scenario 2, but it will still be half as much as the current system and scenario 1.

​

Below is a comparative charter of our summarized data on electricity consumption, natural gas consumption and carbon dioxide consumption of each scenario.

Energy Consumption

table 1.PNG

Cost of Energy

table 1.PNG
table 1.PNG

Carbon Emission

table 2.PNG
table 1.PNG

Net Summary and Extra

table 1.PNG
table 2.PNG

Numerical Assumptions

BAU natural gas consumption: 3,403,091.71 kWh/yr.

BAU cogeneration electricity production: 83,349 kWh/yr.

Pool size: 600,000 US gal.

Cost of variable flow pump renovation: $6,000

Cost of heat pump: $20,000

Cost of grid electricity: $0.27/kWh

Cost of natural gas: $0.0215/kWh equiv.

Carbon intensity of electricity: 0 tons CO2e/kWh

Carbon intensity of natural gas: 0.0001817 tons CO2e/kWh

Electricity production efficiency of cogeneration: 25%

Heat utilization efficiency of cogeneration: 45%

Heat production efficiency of boiler system: 88%

Another scenario (possible scenario 4) to consider would be to take out the cogeneration system and entirely run the VFP and heat pumps on grid electricity. However, we considered the recently installed cogeneration system as part of the analysis and chose to use the cogeneration system for the rest of its “life.” Its waste heat is usable and can contribute to a carbon-friendler heating system. In conclusion, the VFP (scenario 1) should be installed immediately and the boilers should be replaced by heat pump (scenario 2) as soon as possible. The next decision is to either run the heat pumps on grid electricity or cogeneration generated electricity based on if the swim center would want to implement the most carbon-friendly option (scenario 2) or cost efficient option (scenario 3). In order to be carbon-free by 2035, the swim center can use the new cogeneration system until the end of its useful “life” then change to an all grid powered heating system (possible scenario 4) to achieve the ultimate goal of being carbon-free.

bottom of page