ENERCHRON ® Sets New Standards in Reducing Cooling and Lighting
Energy Consumption.
Its performance is
still unequaled after 16 years
of testing.
This technology if used on every residential building in U.S. could
reduce national energy consumption for cooling by $18.4
billion per year
(based on buildings achieving ENERCHRON’s lowest tested long
term savings performance).
The results which
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) and the California Institute
for Energy Efficiency (CIEE) obtained from the testing of
ENERCHRON® showed air conditioning consumption was lowered 50 to
100 percent in short term testing and 46 to 69 percent in long
term testing. ENERCHRON® also set new performance standards for
keeping building surfaces cool when covered with dirt, which is
the most critical element in reducing long energy consumption.
In a day lighting
test performed under the Department of Energy Rebuild America
Program, it showed that ENERCHRON® raised measurable light
levels by an average of 48 percent with the lights turned on
(original T12 lights were replaced with T8 lights), and 62
percent with the lights turned OFF. Skylights were installed as
the only daylight source (no windows).
Here are the facts
over the past 15 years about the testing and history of
ENERCHRON® V40.
In the summer of
1991, Helios Energy Products, Inc. was introduced to a test
being performed by Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) for the
Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) with funding from
The California Institute for Energy Efficiency (CIEE). The CIEE
is a research unit of the University of California and is funded
by the seven largest Utility Companies in California.
The test being
performed was on reflective materials for building surfaces and
shade trees. It was to determine how much a coating product
could reduce air conditioning run-time. LBL was to pre-test
approximately 100 products for the lowest surface temperature at
the highest daily albedo level (albedo is the solar reflectance
of a material. It is defined as the hemispherical reflectivity
integrated over the solar spectrum.). The product that showed
the highest level of performance (lowest surface temperature and
highest albedo) would be tested for a minimum of 4 years. We
submitted 1 gallon of ENERCHRON® for the pre-testing (Item
A).
The testing would
include the monitoring of all climate, building and equipment
conditions (A/C equipment run-time, interior and exterior
surface temperatures, wind speed, solar load, inside and outside
air temperatures, dew point and humidity levels, etc.). These
conditions were to be monitored before and after the buildings
were coated. We were told that the test reports would be
released to the public after a period of 4 years. These results
were to show how dirt buildup and coating degradation affected
performance. The reports would name products tested and the
levels of air conditioning savings for all of the buildings
tested. The cost of the testing was to be 5 million dollars,
which was to be paid by the CIEE.
Helios Energy
Products, Inc. (HEP, INC.) was called by SMUD to give price
quotes for coating a number of buildings with ENERCHRON® V40.
They were told that the group had decided to use ENERCHRON®
because in pre-testing ENERCHRON® was twice as effective as any
of the other products they tested. They paid for the ENERCHRON®
and the labor to apply it to the test buildings.
In April of 1992
SMUD reported in the C&RE BULLETIN (Department of Energy Western
Area Power Administration Publication) (Item
B) that the initial results of their testing showed 50%
and 100% reductions for albedo improvements (albedo improvements
were referencing ENERCHRON). The Western Area Power
Administration used photographs taken by Helios Energy Products,
Inc. of ENERCHRON test surfaces and buildings in the C&RE
BULLETIN.
In May of 1992
American Painting Contractor did an article (Item
C) on ENERCHRON® and referenced the findings of the C&RE
BULLETIN.
In December 1992 the
CIEE, LBL & SMUD released a report LBL-33342 (Item
D) (Full
Report LBL-33342) naming ENERCHRON as the only product
they tested on the Marian Anderson Elementary School buildings
(later to by referred by LBL as the “school bungalows”) and on a
SMUD employee’s residence showing air conditioning savings of 50
and 100% respectively.
In February of 1993
the Florida Solar Energy Center FSEC-CR-596-93 (Item
E) republished the findings of the December 1992 CIEE,
LBL & SMUD report (ENERCHRON’s testing) and also published the
testing of a ceramic white reflective coating in Florida where
the indicated savings were only 10.5%.
In August of 1993, a
story was published in the Sacramento Bee and the San Francisco
Chronicle (Item
F), which was subsequently picked up by News services
across the country. In the article, SMUD and LBL reported that
in a test project at Marian Anderson Elementary School in
Sacramento, CA. (an ENERCHRON® test building) that merely
painting the roof and east wall white resulted in a savings of
cooling costs of 50%.
In August of 1994, a
story was published in the San Francisco Chronicle (Item
G) with comments from LBL stating that white roof
coatings provided a 70% energy savings in residences (ENERCHRON
test results).
September 28, 1994 (Item
H) LBL works on their national plan to market cool
construction materials.
September 11, 1995 (Item
I) a memo from LBL discussed their development of
measurements standards to ASTM.
April 1 1996, LBL
released another test report on ENERCHRON's performance (Item
J). In this test report LBL reports how ENERCHRON
reduced interior attic temperatures by 30 to 40 degrees F.
The Testing
In June of 1994 LBL
put out their final Report ((LBL-34974)
Item
K) on Durability of High Albedo Roof Coatings and
Implications for Cooling Energy Savings. In this report they
state that it is not cost effective to clean roofs of dirt
buildup. They explain that roofs they took measurements
(Non ENERCHRON Roofs) on can
lose up to 70 percent of their ability to reduce surface
temperatures in as little as the first 2 – 3 months after
washing the surface.
ENERCHRON's surface temperatures (see
pictures (Item
L) and (Item
L1)), on surfaces that were aged and covered with dirt,
were dramatically colder than white roof coating they tested new
and clean.
In the case of Cool
Roof Study - Austin, Texas Research Highlights: LBNL Heat
Island Group (Item
M) a white thermoplastic membrane, which is currently
being marketed through the Energy Star roof products program,
reduced air conditioning consumption by 11%. The report states
that the testing of the product was for 28 non-continuous
operating days (August - September) when the white thermoplastic
membrane was in a new state. Its tested temperature reached
from 127 to 150 degrees where ENERCHRON’s tested temperature
reached from 89 to 99 degrees. In the beginning of this report, they report ENERCHRON’s test buildings as showing
the highest savings to date.
November 2000 LBL
released report LBNL-47075 (Item
N) on three buildings with metal roofs, which were
painted white, LBL reported that the white paint would not save
enough money to pay for the application of the white paint. In
this report the test results of ENERCHRON are used to
show the highest level of energy savings which are possible.
Profile of Success,
Energy Star Labeled Roof Products Case study (Item
O) the savings by white paint are shown at 10 percent.
Daylight Testing
JULY 24 – SEPTEMBER
2, 2003, ENERCHRON was tested (Item
P) under the direction of the Department of Energy
Rebuild America Program. ENERCHRON was tested for how it would
increase measurable light levels. ENERCHRON® raised measurable
lighting levels by an average of 48 percent with the lights
turned on (original T12 lights were replaced with T8 lights) and
62 percent with the lights turned OFF. Skylights were installed
as the only daylight source (no windows).
Mr. David McIntyre,
(a Rebuild America Partner) who was asked by the DOE Rebuild
America to donate ENERCHRON for the test project, was promised
by Rebuild America that if the ENERCHRON worked they would
inform the public of its performance at their seminars or
conferences.
The principal of
Blacow School sent a letter (Item
P) of how happy they were with ENERCHRON’s performance.
