Most retailers comfortable with CO2 US end-user experience, FMI

A session dedicated to end-user experience with CO₂ refrigeration at the FMI Energy and Store Development Conference, heard from executives from Singh360, Target, Sobeys and Fresh & Easy. Whilst presentations by Target and Sobeys revealed very different experiences with CO₂ refrigeration, the consensus was the same: CO₂ is viable for supermarket refrigeration. In this first article we look at key take home messages, and presentations by Target and Singh360.

At the FMI’s Energy & Store Development Conference, organised in Phoenix, Arizona from 9 – 12 September 2012, the key take away messages from Wednesday’s session dedicated to end-user experience with CO₂- based refrigeration systems were:

There is growing interest in CO₂ based refrigeration system in North-America;
Retailers need to understand business drivers when investing in CO₂ systems;
The carbon footprint is a "no brainer", no matter which CO₂ system you use;
Retailers need to invest in CO₂ to learn from their experiences.

CO₂ has many advantages:

CO₂ has low GWP
CO₂ gas is inexpensive: $1-2/lb (€0.7- €1.5/0.45kg) or CO₂compared to $8-10/lb (€6-€7.6/0.45kg) for HFC
CO₂ has better thermophysical properties
CO₂ has higher COP
CO₂ is non toxic and non flammable

Target Corporation: “Improving with each system”, Paul Anderson

As with the introduction of any new technology, the implementation of CO₂ refrigeration entails a learning curve, but Minneapolis-based Target Corporation is improving with each system installation. So far, Target has remodelled over 1,100 of its 1,755 stores, including the following CO₂ installations:

St. Paul, Minnesota: Installed in July 2010, the system features high side R404A, medium temperature Glycol, and low temperature CO₂ pumped liquid;
San Clemente, California: Installed in October 2011, the system features high side R134a, medium temperature Glycol and low temperature CO₂ DX. This store was awarded GreenChill Gold;
Conyers, Georgia: Installed in June 2012, this system features high side R134a, medium temperature R134a, and low temperature CO₂ DX;
Los Angeles, California: Installed in October 2012 this systems features high side R134a, medium temperature glycol, and low temperature CO₂ DX.

With regards to the metrics used by Target to calculate the Total Cost of Ownership, Target’s learning experience has resulted in reducing the energy consumption increase compared to R404A from 24% for the first CO₂ installation in St Paul to 10% for the second CO₂ installation in San Clemente. “Attention to detail is critical during installation and start up of these systems,” said Paul Anderson, Target Corporation, referring to some of the key lessons learned.

For capital investment, Target reports that the St Paul CO₂ installation involved an 18% increase in equipment and a 21% increase in installation costs compared to R4041 DX, whilst the San Clemente CO₂ equipment was 35% more expensive and 18% more expensive to install compared to R4041 DX. For CO₂ transcritical equipment the cost is 175% higher.