© 2006 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (www.ashrae.org). Published in ASHRAE Journal (Vol.

48, April
2006). For personal use only. Additional distribution in either paper or digital form is not permitted without ASHRAE’s permission.

Large Commercial, Institutional, Industrial Facilities

Water-to-Water Heat Pumps

Using Waste Heat

For Energy Savings
By Edward Temos, P.E., Member ASHRAE A heat pump uses a vapor compression
cycle to take heat from a low-tempera-

M
any large commercial, institutional, industrial (CII) facilities ture source and raise its temperature to
a useful level. Air conditioners, chillers,
need hot water in the range of 115°F to 170°F (46°C to and refrigeration systems fit this defini-
tion, but the heat they generate usually
77°C) for domestic hot water or hydronic heating. This range usually is discarded. The term “heat pump”
typically is reserved for equipment that
is generated by fossil fuel water heaters. Simultaneous to producing creates higher temperature heat for ben-
eficial purposes.1
this heat, the air-conditioning system rejects low-temperature heat. For instance, in residential applica-
tions, an air-to-air heat pump pulls heat
One method to make productive use of this waste heat is to use
About the Author
water-to-water heat pumps (WTWHP). They offer significant energy Edward Temos, P.E., is an application specialist in
the large-tonnage chiller department at YORK/A
savings and reasonable return on investments. Johnson Controls Company, York, Pa.

28 ASHRAE Journal ashrae.org April 2006

 Water-to-water heat pumps offer sig-
nificant energy savings and reasonable
return on investment.
from the outside air during the heating season and raises the
temperature of the heat to a level that can be used to warm the
interior space. A residential, ground source heat pump pulls
heat from the ground for the same purpose.2
In large CII applications, a WTWHP offers another heat
pump choice. A WTWHP can be a field assembled collection
of components, or a factory packaged unit. The latter could be
a water-cooled liquid chiller that has been modified to produce
hot water at a specified temperature, rather than chilled water
at a specified temperature. In a chiller, the useful work is heat
removal done in the evaporator. In a WTWHP, the useful work
is the heat output done in the condenser (although WTWHPs
are sometimes used simultaneously as water chillers). This
article will focus on factory packaged WTWHPs large enough
to provide more than 500 MBtu/h (145 kW) of heat.
WTWHPs operate at higher condenser temperatures than
chillers, so not all water-cooled chillers are capable of this
duty. Absorption chillers cannot operate effectively as heat
pumps, but mechanical chillers can. In this article, the discus-
sion is limited to the application of single-stage and multi-
stage centrifugal compressor WTWHPs, and single-stage
screw compressor WTWHPs.
Centrifugal WTWHPs (Photo 1) can provide typical hot-
water temperatures ranging from 115°F to 170°F (46°C to
77°C) and typical capacities from 3,000 to 74,000 MBtu/h
(880 to 21 700 kW) of heat rejection. Screw WTWHPs (Photo
2) are available in a narrower range, with typical hot-water
temperatures up to 130°F (54°C) and typical capacities from
500 to 5,600 MBtu/h (145 to 1640 kW) of heat rejection.
Performance of both types is based on a minimum heat source
of 40°F (4°C).
The WTWHP’s sequence of operation is shown in Figure 1.
Water from the heat source carries the heat into the heat pump
evaporator (1). The refrigerant in the evaporator extracts the
low-temperature heat from the water (2), which then returns to
the source to pick up more heat (3). The refrigerant carries the
heat into the compressor (4), where the compression process
raises its temperature and pressure (5). The refrigerant then
carries the high-temperature heat into the condenser (6). Water
from the heat sink enters the condenser (7), picks up the heat
Photo 1 (left): Centrifugal WTWHPs typically can provide 115°F
to 170°F (46°C to 77°C) leaving hot-water temperatures, and 3,000
to 74,000 MBtu/h (880 to 21 700 kW) of heat rejection, based on a
minimum heat source of 40°F (4°C).
April 2006
(8) and carries it to the sink (9), while the refrigerant returns
to the evaporator to pick up more heat (10).
What types of heat sources exist in a CII facility? ANSI/
ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1- 2004, Energy Standard for
Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings 3 specifies
that exhaust airstreams and condenser water flows be used
as heat sources in certain circumstances. Another pos-
sible source is process fluid flows. Heat sinks may include
outside airstreams, domestic hot-water flows, and process
fluid flows.
Economics
The best way to evaluate the efficiency of a WTWHP vs. a
water heater is to compare the WTWHP’s coefficient of per-
formance (COP) with the water heater’s thermal efficiency.
Simply stated, both measurements are equal to “energy out
divided by energy in.”4 In both a WTWHP and a water heater,
the energy in is the energy supplied to the equipment, and the
energy out is the useful heat generated.
As shown in Figure 2, an 85% efficient water heater has a
thermal efficiency of only 0.85, by definition.
However, the large WTWHP shown in Figure 3 has a COP
of more than 3.8, at the conditions shown.
Heat Produced in Condenser =
1,300 gpm × (150 – 120°F) 1 Btu 62.3 lb 60 min
× × ×
lb – °F ft 3 hour
7.48 gallons × 1,000 Btu
ft3 MBtu
= 19,500 MBtu
Input Power = 1,490 kW × 3.415 MBtu/h/kW = 5,088 MBtu/h
COP = 19,500 / 5,088 = 3.83
That means that this heat pump is four and one-half times
more efficient than the given water heater. Many heat pumps
can be even more efficient.
However, WTWHPs and water heaters typically have
different energy sources: electricity for heat pumps, and
oil or natural gas for water heaters. How do their differ-
ent COPs and energy sources translate into energy costs?
Table 1 shows some heat values and average costs for these
energy sources.
ASHRAE Journal 29
 9 7

Condenser

10 5

Compressor
Photo 2: Screw WTWHPs typically can provide up to 130°F (54°C) leav-
ing hot-water temperature and 500 to 5,600 MBtu/h (145 to 1640 kW) 4
of heat rejection, based on a minimum heat source of 40°F (4°C).

Given that data, here are the comparable costs to generate

100,000 Btu/h.
Fuel-Oil Water Heater Evaporator
100,000 Btu/h ÷ 0.85 efficiency × 1 gallon/140,000 Btu × 2
$1.79/gallon × 1 hour = $1.50

Natural-Gas Water Heater

100,000 Btu/h ÷ 0.85 efficiency × 1 ft3/1,000 Btu × 1 3
$10.75/1,000 ft3 × 1 hour = $1.26
Figure 1: WTWHP’s sequence of operation.
Electric WTWHP
100,000 Btu/h ÷ 3.83 COP ÷ 3415 Btu/kWh × 1 h × $0.07/
kWh = $0.54
Therefore, the energy cost to generate the heat with the heat
pump can be as much as 65% lower than with a fossil fuel water
heater. If the COP of the WTWHP is higher, the energy cost
can be even lower! Figure 2: Thermal efficiency of water heater.

Application Examples
At a time when fossil fuel costs are high and continue to 120°F 1,300 gpm 150°F
rise, the cost effectiveness of an electric drive WTWHP is
increasingly favorable because electricity costs have been
more stable. With WTWHPs, facility designers and owners Condenser

are realizing higher HVAC energy utilization, lower utility

bills, and attractive returns on investments, as described in
the following examples of systems that have been designed
and/or installed. Compressor
1,490 kW

Application 1: Hospital in Texas

A Texas hospital has a year-round need for domestic hot
Evaporator
water at 150°F (66°C). To generate the hot water, the hospital
has been running a fossil fuel water heater. Because of the
warm Texas weather, three water chillers ran at the same time. 61.7°F 3,164 gpm 52.6°F
The condenser heat from the chillers was rejected to the atmo-
sphere via cooling towers. However, could the heat in the chill- Figure 3: COP of a water-to-water heat pump.

30 ASHRAE Journal ashrae.org April 2006

ers’ condenser water be used to heat the
domestic water?
The answer is yes, but the tempera-
ture of the heat is too low. The con-
denser water leaves the chillers, headed
to the cooling towers, at temperatures
that vary between 61°F and 93°F (16°C
and 34°C). As shown in Figure 4, a por-
tion of the condenser water from each
chiller could be diverted to a compound
centrifugal WTWHP, which has two
compressors in series. The WTWHP
would remove heat from the condenser
water, which is then returned to join the
water leaving the cooling tower. The
WTWHP, which can output more than
19,500 MBtu/h (5710 kW), raises the
temperature of the heat so that it can
heat the domestic hot water from 120°F
to 150°F (49°C to 66°C). The COP
of the heat pump would range from Figure 4: Schematic of WTWHP system for a hospital in Texas.
3.8 to 5.7, depending upon the water
temperature leaving the chiller condensers. Energy Source Heat Value Cost of Source

Natural Gas 1,000 Btu/ft3 $10.75/1,000 ft3

No. 2 Fuel Oil 140,000 Btu/gallon $1.79/gallon

Electric 3,415 Btu/kWh $0.07/kWh

Table 1: Heat values and costs of various energy sources.

Advertisement formerly in this space.

Figure 5: Schematic of WTWHP system at hospital in Ontario.

The hospital has not yet decided whether to invest in the

WTWHP, but the economic analysis that was performed dem-
onstrates the potential energy savings. The following data was
supplied by the hospital.
The analysis was performed with a chiller system energy
software program, using weather data from the hospital’s city
and an assumed load line similar to what the hospital’s operating
logs indicated. Here are the results of the analysis.
Annual cost of natural gas used by water heater: $2,294,000
Annual cost of electricity used by the WTWHP: $ 814,000
Annual energy savings offered by the WTWHP: $1,480,000

32 ASHRAE Journal ashrae.org April 2006

 And, because the capital cost of the WTWHP was estimated
to be only $408,000 more than the water heater (assuming
similar installation costs), the return on investment would be
very attractive.

Application 2: Hospital in Ontario

A hospital in Ontario was incurring high energy costs to heat
large quantities of ventilation air taken in by the air-handling
system during the winter months. The 130°F (54°C) water used
to heat the intake air was being generated by a water heater
using purchased steam.
At the same time, the air-handling system was discarding
large quantities of exhaust air. In addition, the hospital needed
a new water chiller to satisfy an increased air-conditioning
demand in the summer months. Could these needs be met in
a manner that would increase the HVAC energy utilization in
the hospital?
The solution was a compound centrifugal WTWHP, operating Figure 6: Schematic of WTWHP system at hospital in Arkansas.
as a water chiller in the summer months and as a WTWHP in
the winter months. In the summer, with only one compressor system passes over water coils installed in the exhaust ducts. It
operating, the unit can provide 650 tons of refrigeration (2285 heats water from the WTWHP evaporator from 40°F to 52°F
kW). In the winter, with both compressors operating in series, (4°C to 11°C). The heat pump raises the temperature of the heat
it can output more than 10,000 MBtu/h (2930 kW) of heat at to 130°F (54°C). The water from the heat pump condenser is
130°F (54°C). then pumped to water coils located in the air intake ducts, where
As shown in Figure 5, air exhausted from the air-handling it heats the incoming ventilation air to 70°F (21°C).

Advertisement formerly in this space.

34 ASHRAE Journal ashrae.org April 2006

 This WTWHP system is installed and operating satisfactorily, References
but detailed performance data is not available yet. However, a 1. 2004 ASHRAE Handbook—HVAC Systems and Equipment,
simple economic analysis has indicated that the energy savings Chapter 8.1.
should cover the added capital cost of the WTWHP in about 2. 2004 ASHRAE Handbook—HVAC Systems and Equipment,
six months. Chapter 45.8.
3. ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004, Energy Standard
Application 3: Hospital in Arkansas for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, Section 6.5.6,
The hospital wanted to reduce their heating costs by using a p. 41.
compound centrifugal WTWHP to simultaneously chill water 4. Van Wylen, G.J. Thermodynamics. 1961. pp. 123 – 124.
for air conditioning, and produce 155°F
(68°C) hot water year-round. As shown
in Figure 6, the WTWHP/chiller is placed
upstream of the dedicated water chill-
ers, so that the WTWHP can control the
leaving hot-water temperature at 155°F
(68°C), while the evaporator leaving
temperature is uncontrolled. However,
since the WTWHP evaporator is up-
stream of the dedicated water chillers,
the evaporator’s leaving temperature be-
comes the inlet temperature to the water
chillers. The downstream water chillers
maintain a controlled leaving chilled
water temperature of 40°F (4°C).
Because the hospital needs 170°F
(77°C) hot water during the winter, the
155°F (68°C) water leaving the WTWHP
is diverted to a water heater, where it
enters the heating loop at 170°F (77°C).
During the summer, when 170°F (77°C)
is not required, the 155°F (68°C) water
from the WTWHP is sent directly into
the heating loop. Advertisement formerly in this space.
This WTWHP has not yet been in-
stalled, so detailed performance data is not
available yet. However, a simple economic
analysis has indicated that the energy sav-
ings should cover the added capital cost of
the WTWHP in about 12 months.
In addition to the three applications
described previously, similar WTWHPs
are also being installed at a university in
Texas, at a pharmaceutical manufacturing
plant in Puerto Rico, and an aluminum
manufacturing plant in Iceland.

Conclusion
Water-to-water heat pumps can cost
effectively increase HVAC energy uti-
lization in large CII facilities. They can
generate heat at useful temperatures more
efficiently than a fossil fuel water heater
can. Working installations have proved
the concept, and they promise very at-
tractive return on investments.

April 2006 ASHRAE Journal 35