GeoHuddle - Community Geothermal Heating and Cooling Systems

Shared Community
Geothermal Heating and Cooling Systems

3/24/2010
Climate Leadership Challenge at the University of Wisconsin - Madison
Author: Steve Faulkner, CEO and cofounder of GeoHuddle
Significant Contributor: Mike Major, CTO and cofounder of GeoHuddle
Project Overview
1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
1.1 Summary
GeoHuddle is a company founded by Steve Faulkner and Mike Major that develops large-scale ground source heat pump
systems to supply the heating and cooling needs of residential neighborhoods. Ground source heat pumps (GSHP) take
advantage of constant temperatures several feet underground to heat and cool homes, eliminating the need for high
cost, high energy use furnaces and air conditioning units. An average GeoHuddle customer can see annual utility bill
reductions of up to 79% and cost savings of up to $1900. GSHPs are currently used in a few commercial buildings and
residential units. They are not more widely used because of high equipment and installation costs. GeoHuddle
eliminates this barrier by supplying all of the capital needed for the installation of GSHP systems in a community.
Individual homeowners pay for the use of GeoHuddle systems similar to other utilities like natural gas, water, and
electricity. Even after charges from GeoHuddle, the customer will still see significant utility cost reductions. Further
details of GSHPs and GeoHuddle’s business plan can be found in sections 2 (Background Review), 4 (Financial Feasibility),
and 5 (Distribution).
1.2 Potential to Mitigate Climate Change

Many people are focused on improving methods to supply energy in order to achieve 50 to 80% emissions reductions
necessary to mitigate the effects of climate change (IPCC, 2007). Energy consumption and demand must also be
considered. As an efficiency measure, GSHPs have a huge potential to decrease the CO2 emitted by buildings by
decreasing total energy use. GSHPs do not directly produce any emissions or energy, but rather improve heating and
cooling efficiency by capturing a portion of thermal energy stored in the earth’s surface. The International Energy
Agency found that employing heat pumps worldwide has the potential to reduce global carbon emissions by 8%
(International Energy Agency Heat Pump Centre, 2008). In reality, GSHPs may never reach full dissemination, but it
illustrates the large impact that simple energy efficiency measures can have on CO2 emissions. Based on GeoHuddle’s
own analysis in section 3.3, the U.S. could potentially reduce its CO2emissions by 6.2% through the adoption of GSHPs.
Each individual household that installs a GeoHuddle GSHP system will cut their emissions by 15.7%. Detailed
examination of the environmental impacts can be found in section 3 (Environmental and Social Impact).
GeoHuddle Emissions Reductions Summary
6.2% of the U.S. CO emissions

National Potential: 2
Individual: 15.7% of the average household CO emissions 2
1.3 Implementation
GeoHuddle business plan initially will be implemented over one year using funds and office space provided to the
winner of the Climate Leadership Challenge. Initially the focus will be developing cost and pricing plans, customer
contracts, and professional media for pitching to investors and developers. After 3 months, we will begin meeting with
developers and investors interested in GeoHuddle. After 7 months, we plan to have the first contracts signed. After 9
months, the first system installations can begin. More details on implementation can be found in section 6 (Project
Timeline), 7 (Team), and 8 (Award Budget).
www.geohuddle.com 1 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

Background Review
2 BACKGROUND REVIEW
2.1 Simple Heat Pump Design
A heat pump is a device that moves heat from one location (source) to another (sink). A simple heat pump consists of
four components: evaporator, compressor, condenser, and expansion valve. A working fluid, such as water or glycol,
absorbs energy from the the source, which is subsequently removed in the condenser. Figure 2.1 shows a diagram of
how a basic heat pump operates.
Figure 2.1 Heat Pump Diagram
Source: (International Energy Agency Heat Pump Centre, 2008)
2.2 Ground Source Heat Pumps
2.2.1 Basic Design

A GSHP uses the earth as a constant temperature reservoir. The ground acts as both a heat source and a heat sink. This
allows GSHPs to cool and heat the air in a building. This results in annual net zero energy use from the ground, since any
energy removed during heating is reabsorbed by the ground during cooling. Ground temperatures are generally stable 6
feet below the surface. This temperature varies by region but is on average around 55 °F. There are many possible ways
to implement this system, but the four most common are: vertical loop, horizontal loop, slinky loop, and pond loop.
Figure 2.2 shows a sketch of all four common GSHP types.

Background Review
2.2.2 Working fluid

All GSHP systems utilize a coolant loop containing a working fluid. All GeoHuddle systems will use an environmentally
friendly glycol/water mixture. This choice will prevent freezing in colder climates and minimize environmental impact in
the unlikely event of a system leak.
Figure 2.2 Ground Source Heat Pump Types
Source: (Grand Valley State University, 2008)
2.2.3 Proven Technology

GSHP technology is well established in the world market and currently the U.S. has the largest number of installed
GSHPs of any country. There is an installed base of over 1,000,000 GSHPs in the US (DoE, 2009). In 2008, manufacturers
shipped 121,243 new GSHPs (EIA, 2009).
2.2.4 System Lifespan

Two systems, the heat pump, and the in-ground coolant loop components determine the lifespan of a GSHP. The heat
pump components are easy to repair and service, and have similar lifespan compared to other heating and cooling
equipment. The in-ground components are much more difficult to service, repair, and therefore require a much longer
lifespan. The main in-ground component, polyethylene tubing, comes with a standard 50-year warranty from the
manufacturer. Independent lab tests indicate that in-ground components have a useful lifespan of 200 years (Econar
GeoSystems, 2009).

Background Review
2.2.5 Performance Measurement

Coefficient of Performance (COP) and Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER) are two standard efficiency rating methods. The next
two sections explore the values of these metrics for GSHPs and their comparison to traditional heating and cooling
solutions.
2.2.5.1 Coefficient of Performance

COP is a measurement of the efficiency of a heat pump. For heating a residential home, it is the ratio of heating output
to the energy input (gas or electric) to drive the heat pump. A typical oil or gas furnace has an efficiency of only 90%,
which is equivalent to a COP of 0.9. A GSHP system can have COP values exceeding 5 (DoE, 2009) because the systems
utilize the earth’s capacity as a heat source and sink.
2.2.5.2 Energy Efficiency Ratio

EER is a measurement of efficiency of a heat pump in units of Btu per W-hr. EER is directly proportional to COP and is
calculated by multiplying the COP by 3.413, the conversion from 1 /Btu to 1/W-hr. The reason for using EER to measure
cooling efficiency is that most air conditioners are given a Seasonal Energy Efficiency Rating (SEER). SEER and EER are
not the same, but for a typical residential home, EER = SEER/0.85. The typical EER for a GSHP is 16 and can be as high as
30. Using the SEER to EER calculation, a typical value for a residential GSHP system is 15.3 and can be as high as 24.7
(DoE, 2009).
2.2.5.3 Thermal Storage Systems

GSHP systems can be combined with thermal storage systems to reduce electricity usage during demand peaks.
GeoHuddle can install chilled water tanks in addition to ground loops. These water tanks would store reserves of chilled
water for use during times of peak demand billing periods.
2.2.6 System Architecture

Two basic system configurations can support geothermal cooling and heating to individual homes on a fluid network. A
distributed system uses separate heat pumps at every home connected to the ground loop. A centralized system uses a
central heat pump and outputs chilled water. Both systems contain a central, shared coolant loop in thermal contact
with a thermal reservoir. The thermal reservoir can be a solid such as soil, sand or stone, or a liquid that is generally
unaffected by heat exchange with the coolant loop.
2.2.6.1 Distributed Heat Pump Equipment – Fond du Lac High School - Click for Link to Case Study
The first installed system has small-capacity heat pumps distributed to individual homes. Fond du Lac High School in
Wisconsin chose this approach and has 179 heat pumps located in classrooms. The heat pumps activate to meet
demand in individual classrooms. Similarly, heat pumps placed in individual homes only activate to meet demand for the
individual home.
2.2.6.2 Centralized Heat Pump Equipment – Luther College - Click for Link to Case Study
The second system has fewer large heats pump that deliver chilled water to the fluid network connected to the
individual homes. Individual homes can vary chilled water flows, while larger chillers modulate community-wide
demand. This system configuration can also be coupled to a thermal storage system to reduce or eliminate demand
charges. This system configuration has the added benefit of centralizing maintenance and reducing in-home noise.

Environmental and Social Impact
3 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT

3.1 Global Impact
The next few sections will explore GeoHuddle’s potential environmental and social impacts. The scope of the discussion
focuses on the U.S., as this will be GeoHuddle’s initial target market. As discussed in the market analysis section, there is
a large international market for GSHP systems as well, but GeoHuddle’s plan is to gain traction in the U.S. before
expanding internationally. International data is also highly dependent on the infrastructure and policies of individual
countries, making meaningful comparisons difficult. However, it is important to note that GSHP systems can potentially
play a large role in global efforts to mitigate climate change and reduce dependence on fossil fuels for residential
heating and cooling.
3.2 Environmental Impact

In the U.S., 43% of residential energy use arises from heating and cooling. Figure 3.1 shows a breakdown of the major
components of residential energy use with and without extensive use of GSHPs . GeoHuddle systems, being cheaper
and cleaner than current heating and cooling systems, have the potential to decrease the heating and cooling sector to
22%. It is highly unlikely that GSHPs ever achieve this scale of energy reduction, but it is helpful to know the total
potential capability of implementing GeoHuddle systems. The next sections will explore how the installation of
community GSHP systems could influence individual energy use.
Figure 3.1 U.S. Residential Energy Usage
Current With GeoHuddle
Space
Space Cooling
Space Heating 5%
Other Heating 13%
29% 27% Other
38%
Water
Heating
Space 14%
Cooling
Appliances
11%
13% Water Lighting
Lighting Heating Appliances 13%
11% 17%
9%
Total: 21.8 Quadrillion Btus Total: 16.0 Quadrillion Btus

Source: (DoE, 2008)
3.2.1 Individual
GeoHuddle systems are capable of significantly reducing an individual homeowner’s cooling and heating energy use.
Figure 3.2 shows the average annual energy use of a 3000 square foot home by census region. Each region is broken
into three possible heating and cooling systems: natural gas/AC, oil/AC, and GSHP. The use of GSHPs will save the
average homeowner 62% in energy use and a maximum of 71% in the West North Central region. This is due to the high

cooling loads in that region and the significant advantage GSHPs have over traditional AC systems. After installation of
GeoHuddle’s community based systems, we anticipate seeing similar energy savings.
Figure 3.2 U.S. Annual Heating and Cooling Energy Use of a Typical Home by Census Region
180.0
160.0
140.0
120.0
Million Btus/yr
100.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
Natural Gas/AC Oil/AC GSHP
Source: (DoE, 2009)
3.2.2 Energy Prices

The return on investment of a GSHP system is highly dependent on market energy prices. The previous two sections
have shown the favorable economics of GSHPs at current prices, which are only likely to improve as electricity, natural
gas, and fuel oil prices continue to rise. Figure 3.3 shows the inflation-adjusted costs of residential energy sources since
1973.

Figure 3.3 U.S. Residential Energy Prices

25
(1982-1984 Dollars)
20
$/Million Btu
15
10
0
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
Heating Oil Natural Gas Electricity
Source: (EIA, 2010)
3.3 CO2 Emissions

The capacity of GSHPs to reduce CO2 emissions depends on the existing method of electricity generation. Critics of
GSHPs claim that switching to a GSHP from a natural gas fired furnace will lead to an increase in CO2emissions (95%
efficient furnace vs. 30% efficiency for electricity). However, based on the calculations in section 3.3.1, GSHPs with COPs
of above 3.4 will see a decrease in CO2emissions or, at worst, be carbon-neutral. In the future, emissions will continue
to decrease as the emissions from electricity production become less fossil fuel intensive.
The most important thing to understand is that GSHPs conserve a significant amount of energy compared to tradition
heating and cooling systems. Delaying investment in GSHP infrastructure because of a few exceptional cases where
natural gas heating is comparatively carbon neutral is not advisable. As the country moves away from fossil fuels, the
impact of installed GSHPs will further decrease carbon emissions from electricity production. This effect exists in other
countries where coal is not as prevalent as in the U.S. In Canada, which emits roughly 1/3 of the CO2per GWh compared
to the U.S., carbon emission reductions from switching to GSHPs are 4.4 metric tons of CO2 (t CO2) per house per year
compared to only 2.8 tCO2 per house per year in the U.S. (EIA, 2007).
In conducting research for this project, the GeoHuddle team had some difficulty finding comprehensive data about
emissions reductions due to GSHPs. As a result, we have performed our own reduction analysis based on data from
Census, DOE and EIA reports. Doing this provides us with a high level of confidence in the results presented in section
3.3.2. Section 3.3.1 details the calculations used for this analysis.

3.3.1 Calculation of Carbon Emissions Reduction

Carbon emissions from a GSHP compared to a standard furnace and AC unit are calculated using the following formulas:
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 = 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 ∗ ( 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 − 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 )
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ∗1000 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 ∗1000
𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 ∗ ( − )
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ∗ 1000 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 ∗ 1000
𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡
Variables and Sources:

HL = 94.95 GJ/year = Average U.S. home heating load calculated from data in Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2
CL = 36.93 GJ/year = Average U.S. home cooling load calculated from data in Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2
FI = 50.3 kgCO2/GJ = Emissions intensity for natural gas (Supple, 2007)
EI = 168.8 kg/GJ = Average emissions intensity of electricity generation in the U.S. (Supple, 2007)
AFUE = 95% = Furnace efficiency for fuel fired furnace (DoE, 2009)
COP_GSHP = 5 =Coefficient of Performance of GSHP system (DoE, 2009)
COP_AC = 3.4 = Coefficient of Performance of AC system (DoE, 2009)
3.3.2 CO2 Emissions Reductions from GSHP

The potential impacts of GSHPs were calculated for three scenarios. The first scenario represents the potential impact if
every U.S. home installed a GSHP. The second scenario illustrates the expected impact based on the EIA’s estimate of
2.2 million GSHPs installed by 2030 (EIA, 2009). The last scenario demonstrates the impact of each installed GeoHuddle
system. No international estimate is included because of the extreme country-to-country variability of emissions
intensity from the production of electricity.
National Potential Reduction of CO2Emissions
 355 million tCO2 per year
 6.2% of the U.S. CO2 emissions (EIA, 2009)
 Equivalent emissions of 92 coal fired power plants (EPA, 2010)
National Expected Reduction of CO2 Emissions
 9.76 million tCO2 per year
 0.17% of the U.S. CO2 emissions (EIA, 2009)
 Equivalent CO2 reduction of 2.1 million acres of pine forest (EPA, 2010)
Single Home Reduction of CO2Emissions from a GeoHuddle GSHP System
 6.2 tCO2per year
 15.7% of the average household emissions
 Equivalent emissions of burning 694 gallons of gasoline (EPA, 2010)

3.4 Social and Economic Impact
3.4.1 Individual Costs

Figure 3.4 shows the average annual energy use of a 3000 square foot home by census region and system. The green
values represent the use of GSHPs. Similar to the chart in 3.2.2, this chart is broken down by census region to account
for different climates across the country. The average cost savings over traditional systems is 75%, with a maximum cost
savings of 79% occurring in the East South Central region. Dollar wise, the highest savings are available in the West
North Central region, with an average homeowner potentially saving over $1,919 on annual utility bills.
Figure 3.4 U.S. Annual Energy Costs of a Typical Home by Census Region
$3,000
$2,500
$2,000
Dollars/year
$1,500
$1,000
$500
$0
Natural Gas/AC Oil/AC GSHP
Source: (DoE, 2009)
3.4.2 Political Benefit and Social Benefit

In today’s political climate and with the growth of the environmental movement, GSHPs provide a great solution for
customers looking to “go green”. The use of GSHP systems will significantly decrease a homeowner’s reliance on grid
electricity and/or fossil fuels. Homebuilders can also take advantage of this additional value when selling GSHP
equipped homes. The political benefit of GSHP systems will become even greater as more pressure is placed on the U.S.
government to move away from fossil fuels and a reliance on foreign oil.

3.4.3 Zero Energy Homes and Communities

There is a niche market of individuals and communities that are striving to achieve zero net energy use. GeoHuddle is
poised to make a significant impact in this market. In combination with solar panels, wind turbines and other renewable
energy technologies, a community GSHP system can significantly reduce an individual’s energy use. The use of a GSHP
will also reduce the required capacity of installed solar panels and wind turbines required for a zero energy home. There
are several examples of these communities being built in Issaquah, WA and Denver, CO, and the U.S. Department of
Energy has collaborated with several contractors to build demonstration homes (DoE, 2010).
3.5 Indirect Environmental and Social Impacts
3.5.1 Combination with Solar Panels

GeoHuddle is very interested in exploring potential partnerships with solar panel installers and providers. The combined
use of a GSHP system and photovoltaic solar panels can create a completely energy neutral home. Connection to the
grid is required for peak demand use, but in several states, excess electricity generated by residential solar installations
can be sold back to the utility. The details vary by state and utility, but in Madison, WI, a homeowner can sell electricity
back to the grid if the system is less than 10kw in size (Madison Gas and Electric, 2010).
One company of particular interest to GeoHuddle is One Block off the Grid (OBOG). OBOG uses group discounts to buy
and install solar panels for communities. This is similar to GeoHuddle’s business model. It is our hope that as
GeoHuddle becomes established in the market, we can collaborate with OBOG to provide zero energy solutions to
communities across the country.
3.5.2 Carbon Offsets

GeoHuddle plans to look at the possibility of integrating carbon offsets into its business model. At a minimum, the
founders want to explore the option of buying carbon offsets for the installation of our GSHP systems. Additionally,
GeoHuddle could offer homeowners the option of buying carbon offsets for the electricity used by GSHP systems. This
would make the entire home heating and cooling process carbon neutral.
3.5.3 Reduced Peak Demand

Installation of GSHP systems has the potential to decrease peak energy demand from the residential sector. This greatly
benefits the utility by reducing the electricity that must be supplied to the grid during peak demand periods. According
to a study by Lienau, Boyd and Rogers,
“Residential GSHP system peak demand reduction compared to single-zone electric resistance heating for 13
case studies ranged from 5.3 kW to 10.4 kW with a mean of 7.2 kW” (Lienau, Boyd, & Rogers, 2008).
The reduction of peak demand also brings the possibility of extra financial incentives for the installation of
GSHP systems. According to focus on energy,
“A thermal storage system in combination with the geothermal setup will reduce peak demand significantly as the
geothermal pumps can be operated during off-peak hours and still provide adequate cooling during on-peak
periods. Incentive amounts will also greatly increase. In Wisconsin, Focus on Energy pays $200/kW demand
reduction for these types of measures” (Major, 2010).

Financial Feasibility
4 FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY
4.1 Pricing and Revenue
Pricing models for a GeoHuddle system show that we can be competitive at prices of $70-100 a month or $0.20-$0.25
per ton-hr of chilled water. The billing method we use will be determined by the installation of a centralized or
decentralized system. At these rates, we have targeted our annual revenue per customer at $1000 per year. This
amount is reasonable based on the savings seen in Figure 3.4. A target of $1000 annual revenue per customer provides
sufficient margins to make GeoHuddle profitable while still providing customers with average cost reductions of 23%.
4.2 Capital Requirements and Profitability

GeoHuddle will bear the installation costs of systems. This will constitute the bulk of the capital requirements to run
GeoHuddle. As a result, the required capital investment is highly dependent on the number of system installations. The
disadvantage of this approach is that if market estimates are exceeded, large amounts of additional capital to pay for
new systems may be required. Table 4.1 shows the capital requirements for low, medium, and high growth. Even the
highest growth model is still conservative with a market share just under 2%.
Table 4.1 Capital Requirements
Growth Installs (Year 3) Total Installs (Year 10) Market Percentage Capital Requirement
Low 5 75 0.63% $2,733,561
Medium 15 155 1.08% $4,110,309
High 30 281 1.98% $6,330,968
The years-to-profitability and break-even point are most highly dependent on the revenue that can be generated per
customer. Based on competitive pricing analysis, we anticipate generating $1000 per year per customer. Table 4.2
shows a breakdown of years-to-profitability and break-even by potential customer revenues.
Table 4.2 Profitability and Break-Even Points
Revenue Per Year Per Customer Profitability Year Break-Even Year
$500 14 21
$1000 9 13
$1500 7 9
The founders of GeoHuddle realize that investors typically prefer a shorter period for profitability and break-even point.
However, this model is unique because once the system is installed it poses a large guaranteed future value. For
example, if by year 10 there are 75 total installs (low growth), the value of those systems from year 10 to year 50 is 90
million dollars. This is virtually guaranteed because once the system has been installed, the customer is captive for the
lifetime of the home (50+ years). As a result, profitability and break-even year are less critical metrics. Even though
these periods may be longer than typical, both are guaranteed to happen. This poses a huge value for GeoHuddle’s
investors because they can leverage this “future value” when considering exit strategies.

Financial Feasibility
4.3 Government Incentives

Government funded incentives for the installation of GSHP systems are available at the federal, state, utility, and local
levels. These rebates and tax credits maximize the value of a GSHP system to the customer. GeoHuddle’s model of
financing the entire initial cost of the system makes these incentives especially attractive to customers. Depending on
location, the customers in the GeoHuddle community could see thousands of dollars in tax and rebate benefits
immediately following installation. With this in mind, the GeoHuddle team will focus sales and marketing efforts on
states and municipalities with the largest potential incentives for homeowners.
4.3.1 Federal Level

At the federal level, the U.S. Government provides significant tax incentives for energy efficiency measures. As of
December 1, 2009, the Department of Energy has significantly expanded its definition of qualifying GSHPs. All of
GeoHuddle’s installed systems will meet this new definition. Before December 1 2009, the system was required to be
integrated into the hot water heater to qualify for the full credit (DoE/EPA, 2009).
Federal Energy Efficiency Incentives for GSHPs (DoE, 2010)
 The United States Government provides federal tax credits to homeowners who install GSHP systems.
 Credit value is equal to 30% of the cost with no upper limit on the total cost.
 Available to both new and existing homes until 2016.
4.3.2 State, Utility, and Local Level

States, utilities, and local municipalities provide varying combinations of tax credits and customer rebates for energy
efficiency improvements, including the installation of GSHPs.
 States providing personal tax credits and rebate programs

 Personal Tax Incentives: Arizona, Idaho, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma,
South Carolina
 Rebate Programs: Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas,
Louisiana, Maine, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, Washington,
Wisconsin
 Both: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Oregon
 States providing utility level rebate programs
 All states except West Virginia
 States containing local level rebate programs
 Colorado, North Carolina, Pennsylvania
Note: Data does not include corporate tax incentives, sales tax,
property tax incentives, grants, or loans
Source: (North Caronlina State University, 2009)

Distribution
5 DISTRIBUTION
5.1 Business Model
5.1.1 Community Based Systems

The key to GeoHuddle’s business model is the installation of community-based GSHP systems. The vast majority of
residential GSHP systems are installed for single homes with a typical capacity of 3-4 tons. One ton, in reference to
heating and cooling systems, is a measure of thermal energy equal to 12,000 Btu. GeoHuddle plans to install community
scale systems with capacities of approximately 200 tons to provide heating and cooling to subdivisions of up to 70
homes.
5.1.2 Zero Initial Cost to Homeowner

As detailed in the market analysis section, the largest barrier to the residential installation of GSHP systems is the initial
equipment cost. Systems for individual homes can have payback periods up to 20 years (DoE, 2009). GeoHuddle will
eliminate this barrier by paying for the entire cost of a community GSHP system. GeoHuddle will generate revenue by
charging homeowners for the GSHP system use, while still passing on large cost and energy consumption reductions to
customers compared to traditional heating and cooling systems.
5.1.3 Decreased Installation Costs

Systems for individual homes have average costs of $3000 per ton of installed capacity and pay back periods up to 20
years. GeoHuddle will install large community systems and then charge homeowners for the use of the system.
Because of increasing the size of the system, costs are expected to drop to less than $2000 per ton of capacity and have
payback periods of less than 5 years.
5.1.4 Location
Typically, space is not a primary issue for residential GSHP installations. GeoHuddle plans to install large community
systems requiring larger areas of land, many communities already have sections of public land set aside for green space,
parks, roads and other infrastructure. GeoHuddle plans to locate GSHP loops under these common spaces. Parks and
community green spaces are ideal locations for this system, as the ground surface can be easily restored to its original or
intended state after installation. Ponds or other small bodies of water can provide even more cost effective placement
options because of waters high thermal conductivity compared to soil.
5.1.5 System Design

GeoHuddle will not have the capital to design and build the proposed GSHP systems initially, so design and engineering
activities will be subcontracted to engineering firms that have extensive experience with commercial-scale systems and
related geotechnical expertise. As the resource base grows and with additional capital investment, GeoHuddle will
develop the internal resources necessary to perform this work.
5.1.6 Revenue Model

There are two possible revenue models depending on the type of system installed. If a centralized heat pump system is
installed, GeoHuddle can charge homeowners directly for chilled water on a per ton-hr basis. If a distributed heat pump
system is installed, the customers will pay GeoHuddle a monthly access fee for the in-ground infrastructure. Having
explored both models, the founders discovered that either model could provide acceptable profit margins at

Distribution
competitive costs to consumers. Based on the cost reductions available with current GSHPs, our target annual revenue
is $1000 per customer per year.
5.1.6.1 Pricing
GeoHuddle’s business model allows for significant flexibility in its pricing to customers. The cost of a system for a given
home can be affected by a number of factors including: soil temperature, soil moisture conditions, time-of-day demand,
seasonal demand, and local electricity pricing. By collecting and analyzing local conditions, GeoHuddle can provide
individual customers with pricing that is competitive to other heating and cooling solutions. This will allow GeoHuddle
to maximize value, profit and energy savings of installed systems.
5.1.6.2 Performance Feedback

Data collected from installed systems will provide valuable feedback to GeoHuddle and customers alike. GeoHuddle will
be able to use this information to measure the performance of installed systems, which may lead to further cost
reductions in future installations as GeoHuddle refines its installation and control strategies. Customers will also benefit,
as GeoHuddle will be able to provide precise cost and energy savings compared to non-GSHP systems.
5.1.6.3 Minimal Complications for Homeowners

The GeoHuddle pricing scheme is similar to that of a utility company from the customer’s perspective. As with other
utilities, customers will receive a monthly bill charging a flat fee for service or a variable fee for chilled water supplied to
the home. This system is familiar system to nearly all homeowners and therefore adds minimal complexity to a
customer’s lifestyle.
5.1.6.4 Community Flexibility

A direct-sale model provides the most flexibility in the types, locations, and structures of communities where GeoHuddle
can install systems because there is no requirement for a community to have a homeowners’ association. It also allows
for the possibility of expanding systems. Installed systems can add capacity and new customers without modifying
agreements made with existing customers.
5.1.7 Scalability
One of the most attractive features of GeoHuddle’s business model is the scalability. GeoHuddle is able to generate
revenue regardless of the number of systems installed annually. Of course, with increased scale comes an increased
capital cost. Since GeoHuddle is covering the upfront cost of a system, it will take several years before the installed
system base is paid off and providing sufficient revenue to offset new system costs.

Distribution
5.2 Market Analysis
5.2.1 U.S. Market

There are two potential markets for community GSHP systems:
new construction and retrofits. New construction is Figure 5.1. Housing Market Sizes
GeoHuddle’s preferred market. By working with developers to
install systems before subdivisions have been built, there is a
80 Million
potential for huge cost reductions. Unfortunately, with the Homes in
current housing market, the development of new subdivisions the U.S
has significantly slowed. The retrofit market is much larger but 40 Million
comes with added cost and installation complexity. The Located in
following sections will explore the details of each market. the Suburbs
5.2.1.1 New Construction 1.35 Million

New construction is the most desirable market for GeoHuddle. New Homes
By installing systems with other subdivision infrastructure, the Built Each
founders anticipate large cost reductions compared to retrofit Year (10
installations. In 2009, 455,000 homes were built in the U.S. Year
Average)
(U.S. Census Bureau, 2009). Assuming potential revenues of
$1000 per customer, this represents a potential market of $455
million dollars annually. Source: (U.S. Census Bureau, 2009)
As most people are aware, the U.S. is currently in the largest
housing slump of the last 50 years. To account for this, GeoHuddle also considered the potential market using a 10-year
average from 1997-2007 of 1.35 million homes started each year. This equates to an annual market of $1.35 billion
dollars and a market of $13.5 billion dollars over the entire decade. It is important to note that the new construction
market is completely refreshed every year, which makes it different from many other sales or services markets.
5.2.1.2 Retrofit
The retrofit market is much larger than the new construction market, but also brings additional costs. Installation costs
for underground components will be much higher, and there will be a need to work around existing underground
utilities and structures. More effort will also be required to determine the eligibility of a subdivision. Space constraints
and existing utility complications may prohibit the use of a community GSHP system. Regardless of the barriers to
retrofits, it should still be considered because of the extremely large market size. As of 2007, there were 40 million
existing suburban homes representing a potential market of $40 billion dollars (U.S. Census Beaureu, 2008). This is
roughly 40 times the size of the new construction market.

Distribution
5.2.1.3 Long Term Predictions

Based on current economic and market conditions, the EIA releases an Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) report every year.
This was the prediction for GSHP installations by 2030:
“The stock of ground-source geothermal heat pumps reaches 2.25 million units in 2030 in the AEO2010 reference
case, 44 percent more than projected in the updated AEO2009 reference case. Even with the relatively large
increase in the number of ground-source heat pump installations, the 2.25 million units represent only 2.2
percent of the heating market for single-family homes in 2030.” (EIA, 2009)
The founders of GeoHuddle believe that this demonstrates how underutilized GSHPs are in the U.S. We hope that this
number will actually be much higher in 2030, but in order to remain realistic, we have used the AEO estimates for all
financial models.
5.2.1.4 Market Barriers

Two DOE studies on GSHP markets found that the largest barrier to entry was the high initial cost to the consumer
(Hughes, 2008), (DoE, 2009). A February 2009 study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy found three
secondary barriers to the widespread application of GSHP systems (DoE, 2009):
 Cost and difficulty of evaluating the suitability of individual installation sites
 Generally requires installation‐specific design and engineering of the ground loop
 Space requirements for ground coupling can be problematic in densely built areas
GeoHuddle will overcome these barriers by:
 Working with consulting firms with extensive GSHP design and installation experience
 Designing systems specific to community requirements
 Placing ground loops under parks, green, spaces, and other public areas of a development
5.2.2 International Market

The founders choose to focus their initial work on the U.S. market but are aware that there is a thriving international
market for GSHP installations. In the long term, it is our hope to expand GeoHuddle operations internationally. A
collection of international GSHP market statistics follows:
 100,000 GSHP units were shipped in Europe during 2006, with a 30% growth since 2004.
 Sweden leads all of Europe with 66% of the installed European GSHP base. GSHPs have over 75% penetration
for the Swedish retrofit market.
 Swiss public utilities have used a system called “energy contracting” to effectively provide an incentive for
the adoption of GSHPs, which involves planning, installing, operating, and maintaining GSHP systems at
their own cost and selling the heat (or cold) to the property owner at a contracted price in cents per
kilowatt‐hour.
 GSHPs have 75% market penetration for new construction in Switzerland.
 Since 2001, China and South Korea have both seen exponential growth in the market for GSHPs with the
creation of new government subsidies and incentives.

Project Timeline
6 PROJECT TIMELINE
6.1 One Year
6.1.1 Organization
GeoHuddle will initially have two co-founding employees. Steven Faulkner will hold a majority equity share and act as
Chief Executive Officer. Steve will work full-time over the next year for GeoHuddle. Mike Major will hold a minority
equity share and act as Chief Technical Officer. Mike will remain with his current employer and commit a minimum of
25% of his time to the company. After a few months, Mike will transition to a full-time employee of GeoHuddle.
6.1.2 Pricing and Cost Analysis

GeoHuddle will need to develop more in-depth pricing and cost models before any contracts can be signed with
developers. In this report, we have shown that the basic model for GeoHuddle is economically viable, but a much more
rigorous analysis will need to be completed before we can approach developers.
6.1.3 Website and Visual Development

When promoting GeoHuddle to developers and investors, having high quality graphics, literature, and websites will be
critical. It is very important investors and customers see GeoHuddle as a professional company. The creation of
professional media will establish GeoHuddle professionalism through solid first impressions.
6.1.4 Contracts Development

GeoHuddle will actively work with an outside attorney’s office to develop contracts for system installation and billing
customers.
6.1.5 Meeting with Home Builders and Investors

After the initial contracts and presentation media are complete, GeoHuddle will begin meeting with builders and
investors. We will attempt to complete installation contracts with developers and secure additional capital from
investors. By performing these activities at the same time, we hope to be able to achieve our first installation in less
time than if we only tried to find additional investors. We also hope that initial developer contracts will be an advantage
in investor meetings.
6.1.6 Seed Funding

While the CLC prize of $50,000 will be sufficient to start GeoHuddle, there will be much larger investments required
once contracts are signed with developers. In the first year, we hope to close a seed round of financing valued at a
minimum of $500,000. This will provide enough capital to meet installation goals for the first year. The founders hope
to receive this financing from the community of venture funds, angel investors, and private investors in Madison and the
Midwest.
6.1.7 System Design

As we find suitable communities and developers willing to work with GeoHuddle, we will begin to design the systems.
We have accounted for this cost in the funds provided by the CLC, but we hope to start system design near the closing of
our seed round.

Project Timeline
6.1.8 System Installations

In the first year, GeoHuddle plans to sign contracts for $300,000 in system installations. This is an estimated three
distributed systems of 20 homes each or two centralized systems of 20 homes each. The founders will attempt to install
one of each system. Initial systems will also have the following desirable attributes:
 20 homes or more.
 New subdivisions at pre-infrastructure installation stage.
 Developed in states with large financial incentives.
 Largest potential savings for consumers (electric, oil, and no natural gas infrastructure).
6.2 Timeline
Table 6.1 GeoHuddle Timeline
2010 2011
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Company Activities
GeoHuddle Founded
Cost and Price Model Development
Website and Visuals Development
Contracts Development
Seed Round Investor Meetings
Home Builder Meetings
System Design
System Installations
Employees
Steve Faulkner - Full Time
Mike Major - Part Time
Mike Major - Full Time
Funding
$30k from CLC
$25k from CLC
$500k from Seed Round
6.3 Long Term Plan

After the first year, GeoHuddle will focus on these areas:
 Increasing system installations.
 Hiring additional employees and bringing design services in-house.
 Additional venture capital funding.
 Expanding to international markets.

Team
7 TEAM
7.1 Climate Leadership Challenge Team
Steven Faulkner – CEO and Co-founder of GeoHuddle
Steve is a current student at University of Wisconsin taking classes in energy and sustainability. Steve completed
his degree from UW-Madison in December 2008 and graduated with a B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering and
Mathematics. After graduating, Steve travelled to the South Pole to work on the construction of the IceCube
neutrino detector. Since returning, he has started his own engineering consultancy, Red Frame Engineering LLC.
Through Red Frame, Steve has consulted for several local companies and now consults exclusively for SolidWorks’
education and marketing divisions. In 2009, Steve also briefly lived in Kuwait where he was working on military
vehicle suspensions with Oshkosh Defense Corporation.
Contribution: Steve is the author of the GeoHuddle CLC entry. All information, figures, tables, and data were a
direct result of his research, analysis and writing.
7.2 Major Contributors

Mike Major – CTO and Co-founder of GeoHuddle
Michael "Mike" Major is an Energy Services Engineer with Wisconsin's Focus on Energy. In this role, he analyzes
energy conservation and renewable energy measures for technical and financial merit. He has experience with a
wide variety of space conditioning and building systems and has determined grant amounts to make cutting edge
technologies cost effective to the end user. Mike is also the founder and president of another energy
conservation startup, Puri-3, LLC, which is developing a water treatment system. The Puri-3, LLC system is a clean
sheet design that will improve upon the savings claimed by competing systems. Prior to his work in the energy
conservation field, Mike was a Performance Development Engineer for Toyota Racing Development, Inc. He
designed optical and thermodynamic combustion optimization experiments for the NASCAR and IndyCar V8
programs. In addition to his practical experience, Mike completed a thesis based Masters degree at the UW -
Madison Engine Research Center in 2009 and earned his J.D. degree from the University of Wisconsin Law School
in 2009. Mike is admitted to practice law in WI and before the USPTO as a registered patent attorney.
Contribution: Mike was instrumental in reviewing Steve’s research, ideas, and writing. Mike was also responsible
for a large amount of technical advice, fact checking, proof reading, and idea brainstorming.

Award Budget
8 AWARD BUDGET
8.1 Office Space
$0 has been allocated, as the GeoHuddle founders plan to utilize the UW Research Park office space provided to winners
of the CLC.
8.2 Travel
$15,000 has been allocated to travel for the founding team. This includes taking advantage of the additional $5000
offered by the CLC for conference and promotional travel. In the first year, the founders will perform two travel
intensive activities: meeting with developers and presenting to early stage investors. We are also considering the
possibility of traveling to Europe to study the “energy contracting” model used by GSHP utilities in Switzerland.
8.3 Legal Fees

GeoHuddle anticipates incurring significant legal fees in the first
GeoHuddle Award Budget
year of operation. $2000 has been allocated for legal expenses in
starting up GeoHuddle. $10,000 has been allocated for Item Amount
developing contracts with homeowners and developers to cover Office Space $0
the installation and payment for use of GeoHuddle systems.
Travel $15,000
8.4 Web and Graphic Development
Legal Fees $12,000
$8,000 has been allocated for the purchase of graphic design and
web services. Web/Graphic Design $8,000
Consulting $10,000
8.5 Consulting
If GeoHuddle is able to contract with a developer before securing Salaries $0
seed funding for an initial system, we may need to cover some of Office Equipment $4,000
the initial design consulting fees. Including design, simulation, and
architectural consulting fees, the total cost is estimated to be less Misc $6,000
than $10,000. This will allow GeoHuddle to move forward with a Total $55,000
developer without having to acquire large amounts of capital in
advance.
8.6 Salaries
$0 has been allocated for salaries. Both founders have sufficient personal funds saved to cover a minimum of one year
of operation. GeoHuddle plans to acquire seed stage funding to cover minimal salaries for the founders after one year.
8.7 Office Equipment and Supplies

$4000 has been allocated to office equipment and supplies. This will cover purchase of one desktop computer, one
laptop, a projector, a printer, and other miscellaneous office supplies.
8.8 Miscellaneous
$6000 is allocated to miscellaneous expenses. This will cover any unplanned costs as well as over budget expenses in
other areas. Consulting for an in depth pricing analysis will fall under this category.

References and OUside ConsuLtants
9 REFERENCES AND OUSIDE CONSULTANTS

9.1 Works Cited
DoE. (2008). Energy Efficiency Trends in Residential and Commercial Buildings. U.S. Department of Energy.
DoE. (2009). Ground‐Source Heat Pumps: Overview of Market Status, Barriers to Adoption, and Options for Overcoming Barriers. U.S. Department
of Energy.
DoE. (2009). Ground‐Source Heat Pumps: Overview of Market Status, Barriers to Adoption, and Options for Overcoming Barriers. U.S. Department
of Energy.
DoE. (2010, January 14). Rebates, Tax Credits, & Financing. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy- Energy Savers:
http://www.energysavers.gov/financial/70010.html
DoE. (2010, January 4). Zero Energy Goals. Retrieved March 24, 2010, from U.S. Department of Energy:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/goals.html
DoE/EPA. (2009). Heat Pumps, Geothermal for Consumers. Retrieved March 15th, 2010, from U.S. Department of Energy/ Environmental Protection
Agency: http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=find_a_product.showProductGroup&pgw_code=HP
Econar GeoSystems. (2009). Frequently Asked Questions about Geothermal Heating and Cooling Systems. Retrieved Match 15th, 2010, from
ECONAR® GeoSource® Geothermal Heat Pumps: http://www.econar.com/faq.htm
EIA. (2009, December 8). Emissions of Greenhouse Gases Report. Retrieved March 25, 2010, from U.S.Energy Information Administration:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/carbon.html
EIA. (2009, December 14th). Energy Consumption by Sector. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from U.S.Energy Information Administration / Annual
Energy Outlook 2010: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/overview.html#consumption
EIA. (2010, February 26). February 2010 Monthly Energy Review. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from U.S.Energy Information Administration: February
2010 Monthly Energy Review
EIA. (2009, October). Geothermal Heat Pumps. Retrieved March 24, 2010, from U.S. Energy Information Administration:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/heatpumps/heatpumps.html
EIA. (2007). Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from U.S. Energy Information Administration:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/pdf/Appendix%20F_r071023.pdf
EPA. (2010, January 5). Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency:
http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html#results
Grand Valley State University. (2008). What is a geothermal heat pump, and how does it work? Retrieved March 22, 2010, from The Green House
on Watson: http://www.engineer.gvsu.edu/house/altenergy.html
Hughes, P. J. (2008). Geothermal (Ground-Source) Heat Pumps: Market Status, Barriers to Adoption, and Actions to Overcome Barriers. Oak Ridge
National Lab/ U.S. Department of Energy.
International Energy Agency Heat Pump Centre. (2008). Heat pumps can cut global CO2 emissions by nearly 8% - HPC-BR6. Retrieved 25th 2010,
March, from International Energy Agency Heat Pump Centre: http://www.heatpumpcentre.org/
IPCC. (2007). Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Retrieved March 25, 2010, from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spms5.html
Lienau, P. J., Boyd, T. L., & Rogers, R. L. (2008, November 17). Geo-Heat Center. Retrieved March 16, 2010, from Oregon Institute of Technology:
http://geoheat.oit.edu/pdf/hp1.pdf
Madison Gas and Electric. (2010). Clean Power Partner Program. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from Madison Gas and Electric:
http://www.mge.com/Home/rates/CleanPower.htm
Major, M. (2010, March 16th). Wisconsin Focus on Energy Incentives. (S. Faulkner, Interviewer)
North Caronlina State University. (2009). Financial Incentives for Energy Efficiency. Retrieved March 15th, 2010, from DSIRE: Databse of State
Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency: http://www.dsireusa.org/summarytables/finee.cfm

References and OUside ConsuLtants
Supple, D. (2007, April 15). Units and Conversion Factors Fact Sheet. Retrieved March 24, 2010, from MIT Energy Club:
http://web.mit.edu/mit_energy/resources/factsheets/Units&ConvFactors.MIT%20EnergyClub%20Factsheet.v8.pdf
U.S. Census Beaureu. (2008, December 19). American Housing Survey National Tables: 2007. Retrieved March 24, 2010, from American Housing
Survey: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/ahs/ahs07/ahs07.html
U.S. Census Bureau. (2009, November 4). New Residential Construction (Building Permits, Housing Starts, and Housing Completions). Retrieved
March 22, 2010, from U.S. Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov/const/www/newresconstindex.html
UBM Built Environment. (2009). Building Sustainable Design. Retrieved March 21, 2010, from United Business Media:
http://www.bsdlive.co.uk/story_attachment.asp?storycode=3110158&seq=1&type=G&c=1
Walser, M. L., & Nodvin, S. C. (2008, August 23). Carbon Footprint. Retrieved March 15th, 2010, from Encyclopedia of Earth:
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Carbon_footprint#Home_heating_and_cooling
9.2 Outside Consultants

Steve consulted two major outside sources for the project, Damon Bresenham and John Nelson. Damon and John have
been very helpful and we hope that they will continue to act as advisors to the founding team during GeoHuddle’s
infancy.
Damon Bresenham
Damon develops and operates early stage clean power businesses through Nomadic CleanTech Ventures, LLC. Damon
has a strong interest in commercializing clean energy technologies especially technologies spun-out of universities and
US Department of Energy national laboratories as early stage firms. Damon is the President of Rotating Sleeve Engine
Technologies, Inc., a University of Texas developmental diesel engine technology which improves fuel economy and
reduces air emissions. Previously, Damon performed market development activities at Virent Energy Systems and DCH-
Enable Fuel Cell. Damon’s academic background includes an MBA and M.S. in Mechanical Engineering (University of
Wisconsin-Milwaukee) and a B.S in Chemical Engineering (University of Tennessee).
Contribution: Steve consulted with Damon on business and technology development for new ventures. Damon’s
previous experience with clean energy ventures made him an extremely valuable resource.
John Nelson
John Nelson is a consultant to the design and construction industry, and an adjunct professor in the Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering at the University of Wisconsin – Madison. John consults with
both public & private organizations. During his tenure in industry, he served as Project Engineer, Department Head,
Project Manager, Vice President and Chief Executive Officer at Affiliated Engineers. His background includes design,
applications and research experience with dynamic building systems, along with business and project management.
Contribution: Steve consulted with John on the business and technical feasibility of GeoHuddle’s business model.
9.3 Climate Leadership Challenge Consultants

The GeoHuddle team consulted with several of the 2009 CLC participants about general information about the
competition and keys to a successful entry. They are:
Andy Braasch – Grand Prize Winner of the2009 Climate Leadership Challenge
Sean McMaster – Grand Prize Winner of the 2009 Climate Leadership Challenge
Ted Holby – Winner of the 2009 Climate Leadership Challenge
Timothy Miller – Finalist of the 2009 Climate Leadership Challenge

GeoHuddle - Community Geothermal Heating and Cooling Systems

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

GeoHuddle - Community Geothermal Heating and Cooling Systems

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Shared Community

Geothermal Heating and Cooling Systems

1.2 Potential to Mitigate Climate Change

6.2% of the U.S. CO emissions

Individual: 15.7% of the average household CO emissions 2

www.geohuddle.com 1 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

Source: (International Energy Agency Heat Pump Centre, 2008)

2.2 Ground Source Heat Pumps

2.2.1 Basic Design

www.geohuddle.com 2 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

2.2.2 Working fluid

Source: (Grand Valley State University, 2008)

2.2.3 Proven Technology

2.2.4 System Lifespan

www.geohuddle.com 3 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

2.2.5 Performance Measurement

2.2.5.1 Coefficient of Performance

2.2.5.2 Energy Efficiency Ratio

2.2.5.3 Thermal Storage Systems

2.2.6 System Architecture

www.geohuddle.com 4 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

3 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT

3.2 Environmental Impact

Total: 21.8 Quadrillion Btus Total: 16.0 Quadrillion Btus

www.geohuddle.com 5 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

Natural Gas/AC Oil/AC GSHP

Source: (DoE, 2009)

3.2.2 Energy Prices

www.geohuddle.com 6 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

Figure 3.3 U.S. Residential Energy Prices

Heating Oil Natural Gas Electricity

Source: (EIA, 2010)

3.3 CO2 Emissions

www.geohuddle.com 7 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

3.3.1 Calculation of Carbon Emissions Reduction

Variables and Sources:

3.3.2 CO2 Emissions Reductions from GSHP

www.geohuddle.com 8 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

3.4 Social and Economic Impact

3.4.1 Individual Costs

Natural Gas/AC Oil/AC GSHP

Source: (DoE, 2009)

3.4.2 Political Benefit and Social Benefit

www.geohuddle.com 9 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

3.4.3 Zero Energy Homes and Communities

3.5 Indirect Environmental and Social Impacts

3.5.1 Combination with Solar Panels

3.5.2 Carbon Offsets

3.5.3 Reduced Peak Demand

www.geohuddle.com 10 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

4.2 Capital Requirements and Profitability

www.geohuddle.com 11 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

4.3 Government Incentives

4.3.1 Federal Level

4.3.2 State, Utility, and Local Level

 States providing personal tax credits and rebate programs

www.geohuddle.com 12 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

5.1.1 Community Based Systems

5.1.2 Zero Initial Cost to Homeowner

5.1.3 Decreased Installation Costs

5.1.5 System Design

5.1.6 Revenue Model

www.geohuddle.com 13 ©2010 GeoHuddle LLC

5.1.6.2 Performance Feedback