Tere is no direct drop-in R-22 replacement in an indirect


chiller or direct feed system. Tese HCFC systems are designed for specific refrigerants. Manufacturers of these systems have also designed the piping, compressors, selected oils, chiller barrels, condenser and refrigerant pumps based on R-22 properties.


Assuming a new drop-in refrigerant with different properties


will perform the same is not 100 percent accurate and those presenting as such may not have all the real-world data regarding the subject. For example, one drop-in refrigerant was originally presented to an arena owner as a complete swap with no modifications necessary. Shortly thereafter, however, it became evident this was not the case. Fortunately, the supplier corrected the problems encountered in a responsible manner.


REFRIGERANTS AND R-22 REPLACEMENTS


Let’s review the types and specific names of refrigerants used in ice rink chillers, with respective Ozone Depletion (ODP) and Global Warming Potential (GWP) ratings:


CFC Refrigerants (Contain chlorine and are no longer produced.) ODP GWP


R-12 R-502 1 0.33


10,900 4,657


HCFC Refrigerants (Contain chlorine/won’t be produced after Dec. 31.) ODP GWP


R-22 R-408A


0.055 0.024


1,810 3,152


HFC Refrigerants (Do not contain chlorine but have high GWP.) Not an R-22 placement:


R-134A


ODP GWP 0.0


1,430


Possible R-22 Replacements for Ice Rink Chillers: ODP GWP 0.0


R-404A R-407F R-434A R-449A


0.0 0.0 0.0


Ice rink chillers present specific characteristics that complicate the use of many of the R-22 alternatives:


• Operating pressures are lower than the typical R-22 air conditioning (A/C) systems that serve millions of our homes and businesses. R-22 replacement is considerably easier for A/C systems.


• Tey hold large charges of R-22, from 500 to 12,000 lbs. Swapping refrigerant is a costly and complicated task.


• Tey are most often “flooded evaporator” systems which, present oil return issues with new refrigerants that all dictate use of Polyolester (POE) oils versus the mineral oils serving R-22 systems. Te POE oils and R-22 are not compatible. Oil and oil return becomes a major issue.


• Direct liquid overfeed systems (refrigerant in the floors) present even larger obstacles for retrofit.


Note that all of the manufacturers’ drop-in replacements for


R-22 have high GWP, which places them in the crosshairs of another phaseout, perhaps in five to 10 years. Retrofitting now may lead to another retrofit in the near future.


Te benefit of replacing R-22 will be in the event you have a


catastrophic loss of refrigerant. Replacing the lost refrigerant with a (hopefully) cheaper drop-in alternative will save you money. However, there is no crystal ball to project the future cost of your drop-in. Be sure to weigh the following costs associated with the swap:


• New refrigerant, oil, seals, gaskets, and possibly compressors and other parts.


• Labor to complete the swap.


• Possible increase in utility costs as the drop-ins are generally not as efficient as R-22.


• Lost time you may experience during a swap.


REPLACE THE REFRIGERATION SYSTEM Options: Low-Charge Ammonia (considered a natural refrigerant)


3,922 (> R-22) 1,825 (> R-22)


3,245 (> R-22) RS-45 1,282 (XP 90)


HFO Refrigerants (Not R-22 replacements) ODP GWP


R-1234yf R-1234ze


0.0 0.0


4.0 (Mildly flammable) 6.0 (Mildly flammable)


Natural Refrigerants (Not R-22 replacements) ODP GWP


R-717 Ammonia 0.0 R-744 CO2


0.0 18 SUMMER 2 019


0.0 1.0


Certainly, we would like to keep the refrigerant charges in systems at a “low charge” for a number of reasons, including the cost to charge and recharge in case of a refrigerant loss, and in the event of a refrigeration leak, the risk to staff, the public and first responders is reduced. Low-charge charges are typically referred to as those having less than 500 pounds of ammonia. Local regulations per community vary based on rules and regulations. Te basic idea is to keep refrigerant charges below community and state thresholds to eliminate the requirement for a full-time (24/7 year-round) professional staff.


Pros: Natural refrigerant (nitrogen and hydrogen); inexpensive versus man-made refrigerants; self-leak detecting; readily available; has been in the marketplace for over a century; highly regulated; very efficient heat transfer.


Cons: Can be expensive to install an ammonia system; ammonia is a toxic material; requires extensive training to service and handle; not a replacement for CFCs, HFCs or HFO refrigerants; can be flammable.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42