Today’s industrial cooling systems need the most cost-effective methods to stay competitive. In fact, many companies still use anhydrous ammonia refrigeration because of its benefits. However, some companies consider other systems like R-143a, but is this a good choice? Let’s take a closer look at the issue to see.
Installation Costs Vs Lifetime Costs
If you choose an industrial chiller using R-134a refrigerant, you’ll pay less for the equipment and installation. This is an important consideration for the short-term. However, it’s important to figure in the costs of running a system for years, and this is where an ammonia refrigerant system like R-717 is worth considering.
The Cost of Moving Refrigerant
R134a is low-pressure, and it takes more gas to do the same job as an anhydrous ammonia refrigeration system using R717. In fact, you’ll need to pump about thirty-five percent more R-134a than R-717. Also, it takes more R-134a because it needs additives like POE oils. Because R-134a is a low fluorocarbon refrigerant, it needs polyester oils for lubrication, and these oils absorb moisture. This can add more stress to a compressor.
R-717 doesn’t need additives and won’t absorb moisture if the system is kept closed and properly maintained.
A high-efficiency R-134a system can compete with anhydrous ammonia refrigeration when it runs at full-load. However, under partial load conditions, R-717 is more efficient.
Final Considerations
Given the initial R-717 costs, R-134a is a viable option. However, when you figure in the environmental effects, ammonia is the better choice. Also, R-717 efficiency is greater when used with efficient heat exchanger equipment.
If cost is the most important issue, R-717 is the better long-term choice. Also, since so many companies care about natural refrigerants and ecological issues, the balance swings toward R-717 because it’s natural and does not damage the ozone or contribute to global warming.