7.2. ICESR 04-09-2013 Elk REQUEST FOR ACTION
River
To 1 ITEM NUMBER
Arena Commission 7.2
AGENDA SECTION MEETING DATE PREPARED BY
Action Item April 9, 2013 Rich Czech
ITEM DESCRIPTION REVIEWED By
Olympic Ice Plant / Arena Renovation Cal Portner
REVIEWED BY
ACTION REQUESTED
Provide direction
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The need to make the necessary repairs to the ice plants is reaching a critical state. We have found a
refrigeration leak in the Olympic Arena ice plant,which will require replacing at least 1,000 pounds of R-
22 Refrigerant this spring.
The valve on the bucket trap is rusted to the point where it will have to be replaced. Unfortunately, the
valve cannot be isolated so the refrigeration must be removed which will require hiring a contractor.
The valve regulates system pressure to divert heat from passing through the cooling tower, to a heat
reclaimer to the snow melt pit and the sub floor in below the ice surface. The system is operable without
the valve, however not as efficient and adds more costs to arena operations. This is the second time that
the valve has broken.
Further, the ice plant is insulated to prevent condensation and corrosion from warm air. The insulation is
old, drying out, and falling off. Insulation replacement was in the 2007 CIP at an estimated cost of
$27,000. It was removed because it was expected the system would be replaced.
The Olympic ice plant holds 6,000-6,500 pounds of R-22. R-22 costs $18 to $20 per pound, 50% more
than last year. A major leak would cost a minimum of$108,000. With the increasing limited availability
of R22, it is possible that we wouldn't be able to find enough refrigeration to fully charge the system.
The city does have insurance to cover lost revenue in case the arena is closed down for an extended
period of time.
The increasing number of problems we have experienced this year indicates that the system is in dire
need of replacement, especially with the upcoming phase out of R22 being less than 10 years.
Unfortunately the renovation or the replacement of the Arena has yet to be determined; however the plan
to replace the refrigeration system needs to be planned for the immediate future.
We are not alone in this situation, there are many arenas that have replaced or in the process of replacing
their refrigeration systems, including Parade Stadium, Chaska, Mankato, Eden Prairie, New Hope,
Brooklyn Park, Fogerty (Blaine), UMD, and Gustavus Adolphus. There is draft legislation under the
Mighty Ducks framework that proposes to appropriate $5 million in matching grants for air quality
IP 0 II E R E a al
C:\Users\rczcch\Desktop\ARENAMGR\Arena Commission\2013\April Commission Packet\(8) Action Requested NATURE
Olympic Ice Plant Arena Renovation.docx RF`
upgrades and replacement of R-22 in existing systems (max of$50,000 for replacement of refrigerant or
$200,000 for replacement of refrigeration system). It has passed committees in both houses and has a
good chance making it to the bonding bill.
ATTACHMENTS
• 2012 Ice System Evaluation
• HCFC Phase out Schedule
• Pictures of Olympic Ice Plant
C:\Users\rczech\Desktop\ARENAMGR\Arena Commission\2013\April Commission Packet\(8)Action Requested Olympic Ice Plant Arena
Renovation.docx
Ice System Evaluation and
Recommendations
Elk River Ice Arena
For:
City of Elk River, Minnesota
13065 Orono Pkwy NW
Elk River, Minnesota 55330-5600
April17, 2012
Submitted By:
Stevens
2211 O'Neil Road
Hudson,WI 54016
800.822.7670
0Stevens
File No.900.12.159
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Table of Contents
SECTION TOPIC PAGE
1 Project Information 1
2 Project Overview 4
3 Ice Systems 8
4 Alternative Energy Sources 26
5 Project Schedule 29
6 Financial Assistance Programs 31
Stevens
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Section 1
Project Information
eStevens 2
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Contact Information
Facility Address:
Elk River Ice Arena
1000 School Street N.W.
Elk River, MN 55330
Facility Manager:
Rich Czech
P. 763.635.1141
rczech@ci.elk-river.mn.us
Consulting Engineering Firms:
Stevens
2211 O'Neil Road
Hudson, WI 54016
P. 651.436.2075
F. 715.386.587
Scott A. Ward, P.E.
sward @stevensenaineers.com
Electric Utility:
Xcel Energy, 1518 Chestnut Avenue, 15'Floor, Minneapolis, MN
55403
Account No: Meter No:
Account Manager:
Gas Utility:
Certification
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and
that I am a duly registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
• 40921 4.17.12
Scott A.Ward,P.E. Registration Number Date
STEVENS
eStevens 3
ENWNEERS PLANNERS SURVEVgry
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Section 2
Project Overview
OStevens 4
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Background
The Elk River Ice Arena consists of two (2) ice arenas where both
ice rinks are served by individual Holmsten direct R-22
refrigeration systems. The refrigeration system serving the
original rink(Rink 1 or"The Barn") has a capacity of 80 tons and
the system for the new rink (Rink 2) has capacity of 135 tons.
The ice rink floor and dasher board systems were replaced in
Rink 1 in 2004.
Due to the age of the Rink 1,the City is interested in completing
an evaluation of ice system (rink floor and refrigeration system)
to determine the condition and to identify and recommend
improvements and/or replacement options to assist in future
planning for the facility. The evaluation includes improvement
recommendations and estimated project costs for the
improvements. To plan long term, it was also necessary to
include discussion on the future of Rink 2's ice system. The
HVAC, electrical, lighting and building systems were not part of
our scope of services and are being evaluated by other
consultants.
Purpose
As part of a continued effort to: improve operation and
efficiency of Elk River Arena;to plan for future improvements to
the facility; and to continue to provide high quality ice for its
user groups; Stevens was retained by the City to prepare an
evaluation of Rink 1 (The Barn).
The primary objectives of this evaluation are as follows:
• To evaluate the ice system for Rink 1 and provide
recommendations for improvements.
• To provide accurate cost estimates to assist the City in
making informed decisions on future projects.
• To recommend improvements that maximize energy
efficiency while incorporating sustainable design practices
that reduce the use of fossil fuels, the production of
greenhouse gas emissions and reduce total energy use.
It is recommended that the findings presented in this report be
used to improve the operations and maintenance of the facility
and to assist in planning and budgeting of the recommended
improvements.
eStevens 5
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Scope of Services and Approach
The Scope of the ice system evaluation includes an overall
evaluation of the physical conditions and improvement options
for the following systems:
• Ice systems in Rinks 1
• Related waste heat recovery systems
Investigation Methods and Documents
Various methods were used to evaluate the existing facility
including:
Visual Observations: A site visit was conducted on April 3, 2012
to observe the operation of the facility and its ice systems.
Interviews: During the on-site visit, an in-depth discussion was
conducted with the facility's management staff to document
existing issues with the facility and discussed historical
problems with the ice systems.
Research: Where applicable, additional research was
conducted to provide accurate and detailed information
regarding improvements or systems recommendations.
Documents: The following documents were received and
reviewed for the evaluation:
• None
OStevens 6
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Estimated Project Costs
The proposed cost estimates presented throughout this report
were developed by estimating the probable construction costs
based on similar types of construction projects and work
performed and bid in 2008-2012 and updated for 2013 costs
unless otherwise noted. The estimated costs include all
materials and labor for a complete installation unless otherwise
noted. Costs will vary depending on the time of year the
projects are bid, the current economic climate and the size of
project.
In addition to the probable construction costs of the proposed
work, other associated project costs are included to provide a
total estimate cost for the project. The Estimate, Design and
Construction Contingency line item in each cost table is included
during the evaluation phase of projects since the exact scope of
the project has not yet been determined. This percentage is
typically reduced from 15% to 5% during the final design phase
of the project.
The Engineering, Legal and Administrative line item in each cost
table is provided to cover all work performed by the design
team and all legal and administrative work required by the City
for projects of this type.
Applicable Codes and Standards
The following codes were considered during the evaluation:
• Minnesota State Building Code, 2007, including Chapter
1341 Accessibility Code
• International Building Code, 2006
• 2007 Minnesota State Fire Code (International Fire Code,
2006)
• International Mechanical Code,2006
• 2009 Minnesota State Mechanical Code
• NFPA 70(NEC), 2008
• Department of Labor & Industry— High Pressure Piping and
Code for Power Piping Systems, Chapters 326 (MN Statues
1999) and Chapter 5230(MN Rules 2001)
• ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 15-2007
• The City's CODE OF ORDINANCES were not reviewed or
referenced for this evaluation.
OStevens
ENGINEERS PLANNER SURVEYORS
•
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Section 3
Ice Systems
eStevens 8
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ICE SYSTEMS
General
The facility is served by two separate ice systems (including
refrigeration system and ice rink floor), one for each rink. The
ice systems for both Rink 1 and Rink 2 are direct refrigeration
type systems and were installed with the construction of the
buildings they serve, 1981 and 1997 respectively. This report
will discuss another common type refrigeration system used in
the ice industry; indirect type systems. The options for
replacing the direct ice systems, including replacing them with
indirect systems, are discussed in this section.
Definitions for each type of system are provided below:
Indirect System: In an indirect system the primary
refrigerant (R-22 for example) remains in the refrigeration
room. Heat is removed from the ice rink floor through a
secondary refrigerant (glycol/water solution for example)
that is circulated in the floor. The heat exchange between
the primary and secondary refrigerants takes place in the
refrigeration room.
Direct System: A direct refrigeration system circulates the
primary refrigerant (R-22 in this case) directly through the
ice rink floor and refrigeration system. There is no
secondary refrigerant and therefore, no secondary heat
exchange process.
Overall, both systems have been very well maintained by the
facility's operational and maintenance personnel.
eStevens 9
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
•
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Observations of Existing Conditions
We toured the ice systems for both Rink 1 and Rink 2 with the
facility's management and operating and maintenance staff and
have the following observations and comments.
Rink 1 (The Barn):
• The operational season typically runs from the middle of
September through middle of April.
• Rink 1 is served by a direct refrigeration system
manufactured by Holmsten Ice Rinks. The major of the
components include two (2) 4 cylinder York compressors,
one (1) low pressure receiver, two (2) pumper drum vessels
and one (1) motor control center. The 31-year old
refrigeration system has exceeded its expected life of 25-30
years. However, since this system only operates 6 months
per year, the life span of the equipment is likely to be
greater than 30 years. The system is in fair condition for its
age, but, it's becoming more difficult to maintain with its
outdated electrical and control systems, discontinued
compressors units, etc. Some improvements have been
performed on the refrigeration package over the years and
include rebuilding compressors, new valves and insulation,
new fill solenoids, float switches, top ends on compressors,
dryer cores, replaced relief valves, and new ASME certified
oil separator.
• The existing evaporative condensing tower, was replaced in
2010 and is manufactured by Baltimore Aircoil (BAC). This
system uses air and water to dissipate heat for the
refrigeration processes.
• There are no waste heat recovery systems on this
refrigeration system. The existing snowmelt pit that is
dedicated to Rink 1 is only used as a back-up and uses a
boiler system to heat the water and melt the ice shavings.
The primary pit is a common pit with Rink 2. There is no
subfloor heating system beneath the rink floor. All waste
heat is dissipated to the atmosphere, through the
condensing tower.
0Stevens 10
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
• The ice rink floor was replaced in 2004 with a new direct
refrigeration ice rink floor of similar design to the original
floor. The floor, which measures 85 feet x 185 feet, is
slightly smaller than the standard NHL size of 85 feet x 200
feet.The 8-year old rink floor consists of: 3-4 inches of floor
insulation; 'A inch steel tubing installed at 4 inches on-
center with welded connections; and a 5 inch of reinforced
concrete. It was very typical for the rink floors, in a
Holmsten Rink System, to be the first components to fail.
There are no reported problems with the existing rink floor
or with ice quality at this time.
• The existing dasher board system was installed new in
2004. It is a steel framed system with a supported tempered
glass system. The system is in very condition and should
have life expectancy of approximately 20-25 years.
• The existing refrigeration room for Rink 1 is very small.
The room is not equipped with mechanical ventilation and
refrigerant leak detection systems and there does not
appear to be an emergency stop switch or ventilation
switch near the exterior door as is required by code. These
systems are addressed in the mechanical system review.
Rink 2:
• The operational season is typically year round.
Approximately every other year the rink is taken down for
one month to perform maintenance on the ice rink floor
and system.
• Rink 2 is also served by a direct refrigeration system
manufactured by Holmsten Ice Rinks. The major of the
components include two (2) 8-cylinder York compressors,
one (1) low pressure receiver, three (3) pumper drum
vessels and one (1) motor control center. The refrigeration
was purchased used 15-years ago and is believed to be 28-
30-years old exceeding its expected life of 25-30 years. The
system is in fair condition. As with the Rink 1 Holmsten Ice
Rink system, it's becoming more difficult to maintain with
its outdated electrical and control systems, discontinued
compressors units, etc. There have also been some on-
going, fairly significant, problems with the system such as:
oil return problems which relates to ice quality concerns;
compressor shaft seal problems; R-22 leaks in the
refrigeration system;vent line damage; etc.
eStevens
FAWNERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
American Engineering Testing performed ultra sound
testing on the low pressure receiver to investigate the
effect of visible corrosion on the vessel. The test reportedly
showed no loss of vessel wall thickness.
• The existing evaporative condensing tower was replaced 5
years ago and is in good condition. It is manufactured by
Balitimore Aircoil Company (BAC). A variable frequency
drive was installed on the system when the new condenser
was installed.. This system uses air and water to dissipate
heat for the refrigeration processes.
• Waste heat is recovered and used for serving the snow melt
pit and the subfloor heating system beneath the rink floor.
The existing snow melt pit in the in-ground type which does
not work very well in terms of both allowing snow into the
pit and quickly heating and melting the snow. The
remainder of the heat is dissipated to the atmosphere,
through the condensing tower.
• The ice rink floor is a direct refrigeration ice rink floor. The
floor,which measures 100 feet x 200 feet, is larger than the
standard NHL size of 85 feet x 200 feet. The 15-year old rink
floor is likely constructed to the standard design: 3-4 inches
of floor insulation; %: inch steel tubing installed at 4 inches
on-center with welded connections; and a 5 inch of
reinforced concrete. The only reported problem with the
existing rink floor is that oil gets trapped in several of the
tubes causing streaks and sometimes poor ice quality in
those locations.
• The existing dasher board system was installed new in
1997. It is a steel framed system with a supported tempered
glass system. The system is in very condition and should
have life expectancy of approximately 20-25 years.
• The existing refrigeration room for Rink 2 is fairly large at
576 square feet. The room is equipped with mechanical
ventilation and refrigerant leak detection systems. It was
not verified whether an emergency stop switch or
ventilation switch was located near the exterior door as is
required by code.
eiStevens 12
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations
The main focus of this report is to evaluate the 31-year old ice
system in Rink 1 and provide recommendations to assist the
City in its planning and budgeting for its replacement. Given
that: the rink floor was replaced fairly recently in 2004; the
system is a direct system; and that the options for refrigerants
and systems in the ice rink industry are changing with the
phase-out of R-22 refrigerant; there isn't a clear, single
replacement option. This section outlines not only the options
for replacement, but for improvements to the existing ice
system as well. It is also prudent to consider the eventual
replacement of the ice system in Rink 2 and how combining
systems could maximize energy savings. Cost estimates are
provided for each option in the table at this end of section.
The following options will be discussed in this section:
Option 1: Do nothing. Continue to maintain existing systems.
Option 2: Make improvements to the existing direct system.
Option 3: Convert to an indirect, industrial grade, R-22 or
other HFC refrigerant based system using the
existing refrigeration equipment.
Option 4: New indirect, industrial grade, HFC refrigerant
based system.
Option 5: New indirect, industrial grade, ammonia based
system.
Option 6: Same as option 6 but includes future connection to
Rink 2.
Option 7: New carbon dioxide (CO2) based system.
Option 8: Alternate energy source system. See Section 6.
Stevens 13
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Before the system options are discussed in more detail, a
general discussions of six (6) major factors or considerations
that Stevens feels are most important to consider when
evaluating ice system options is presented below. A general
understanding of these factors, we believe, will aid the City in
making the best possible selection for improving or replacing
the existing ice system.
In a historically slowly-changing industry; recent breakthroughs
in new technology and cutting-edge design applications, and
changing environmental regulations have generated a laundry
list of design considerations for the City to evaluate when
renovating or replacing its direct ice systems. In general,this list
includes:
• Type of Refrigerant R-22 has been the most popular
refrigerant, used in ice rink applications, in recent history.
However, with the signing of the Montreal Protocol, the
United States Environmental Protection Agency
implemented the final rule of Section 604 of the Clean Air
Act, in July 1992 limiting the production and consumption of
a set of chemicals known to deplete the stratospheric ozone
layer as measured by their ozone depleting potential
(ODP). R-22 refrigerant, a hydrochlorofluorocarbon or
HCFC, is the next refrigerant on the list to be phased out.
Starting this year, R-22 can no longer be produced and
imported in to new packaged type refrigeration equipment
and will be banned from installing in existing equipment in
2020. The EPA is also proposing to significantly reduce
allowances to produce and/or import R-22 in the U.S.
ranging from 11-17% per year from 2012-2014.
These regulations are certainly affecting the price of R-22 as
it has risen from $7 per pound to $13 per pound since mid
March. Replacement or "drop-in" refrigerants for R-22 are
starting to be manufactured and currently cost around $15
per pound.
0Stevens 14
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
There is now pressure to consider phasing out refrigerants
that contribute to global warming as measured by their
global warming potential (GWP), in addition to those
affecting the ozone. This affects mainly hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs) like those used in blended refrigerants such as R-
507A and R-404A. Europe has been on the leading edge of
this change. The European Parliament passed legislation
called the F Gas Directive that became effective in 2007,
that requires very strict inspection of systems for leakage,
rigorous record keeping and mandatory training and
certification on systems using HFCs.
With the changing of environmental regulations, careful
consideration of all refrigerant options should be made.
The new refrigerants and replacements for R-22 are
"blended" HFC refrigerants meaning they are a mixture of
several different, individual refrigerants. Since refrigerants
have different properties, each one reacts differently to
changes in its properties such as pressure and velocity.
When a leak occurs, varying amounts of each refrigerant
may leak out, throwing the original mixture out of balance.
Ammonia refrigerant is making a comeback from when it
was pushed aside in the early 1970's for R-22. Ammonia's
low cost, high efficiency and zero ozone depleting and
global warming potential make it a very attractive option.
Large global companies, such as Coke Cola, are leading the
charge to ban HFCs and use natural refrigerants such as
CO2, hydrocarbons and ammonia. Many ice skating
facilities in Europe have switched over to CO2-based
systems. The first CO2-based ice system in North America
recently opened in Les Coteaux,Quebec, Canada.
• Quality of Materials and Equipment: Balancing the initial
cost of materials and equipment with energy savings can be
difficult during the budgeting process of the project. For
example, the phrases "commercial grade" and "industrial
grade" systems, used throughout the report, refer to quality
and operational efficiency differences in the refrigeration
system. Commercial grade systems are similar to
supermarket type refrigeration systems, built on a rack
package, and have a lower life expectancy (15-20 years).
These systems typically use copper and PVC pipe in place of
steel, disposable type compressors in place of rebuildable
ones, direct expansion type heat exchangers in place of
flooded type systems, etc. Industrial grade systems are
typically stick built on site, have a longer life expectancy
(25-35 years), and are generally more efficient to operate.
riStevens 15
ENGINEERS FANNERS SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
• System Design: The design of the system is critical to
maximizing its efficiency. For example, lowering the
condensing temperature of the refrigeration system
increases its efficiency but decreases the amount of waste
heat that is generated. Finding the balance between these
system elements is key to a successful and efficient design.
• Energy Source: As energy costs rise, alternative sources of
energy, such as geothermal, natural gas, or co-generation,
may look more attractive. Electricity still remains the most
practical energy source for these types of systems.
• Waste Heat Recovery: Refrigeration systems generate a
large amount of heat that is typically wasted into the
atmosphere. A refrigeration system for a single ice sheet
can typically generate enough waste heat to serve the
subfloor heating system, snowmelt pit,the dehumidification
system, and potentially preheat domestic water source or
in-coming air. Historically, ice rink facilities have only
captured and reused approximately 25% of the waste heat
generated. It has now become normal design practice to
capture 100% of the waste heat and reuse this "free
energy"throughout the facility.
• Sustainability: Sustainability goes hand-in-hand with all the
items in this list of considerations. Energy savings, through
smart design practices,translates directly into the reduction
of green house gas emissions such as carbon dioxide.
Stevens 16
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Option 1: Do Nothing—Maintain Existing Rink 1 Ice System
With a relatively new ice rink floor (8-years old) and no current
major problems with the 31-year old refrigeration system, the
City may elect to keep operating the existing system in the near
future and plan long term for its replacement.
The existing direct refrigeration ice systems in both Rinks 1 and
2, manufactured and installed by Holmsten Ice Rinks; were
commonly installed in arenas during the 1970's and 80's. The
design of this direct ice system is unique and has proven to
perform very well and be very efficiently. However,the system
is outdated and numerous concerns with the standard system
design and current code regulations have prompted facilities to
convert or change to indirect ice systems. These concerns
include:
• Aging equipment: Major improvements to the existing
refrigeration system will soon be required to extend its
safe and useful life.
• Safety: The direct ice system circulates R-22 refrigerant
in the ice rink floor, which is located in the occupied
space of the facility, potentially exposing spectators,
skaters and workers to leaking refrigerant as the floor
system ages.
• Environmental: The existing system uses a large volume
of R-22 refrigerant (approximately 4,000 Ibs) with a high
global warming potential (GWP) rating. R-22
refrigerant is scheduled to be phased out of production
in the near future.
• Cost and future availability: As the phase-out date for
R-22 approaches, the cost will continue to increase.
Since 2005,the cost of R-22 refrigerant has risen 850%.
Because of these concerns,we do not recommend replacing the
existing direct refrigeration system with a new direct
refrigeration system even though the rink floor is only 8-years
old. Replacing the rink floor in 2004 with the same system was
a good option at the time given the high operating efficiency
and performance of the Holmsten direct system and the quality
of construction of the refrigeration system. Unfortunately, the
phase-out of R-22 refrigerant started to accelerate shortly after
construction of the new floor was completed.
Stevens 17
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Some of the potential downsides, or risks, involved in
continuing to operate the existing direct systems for too much
longer are as follows:
• Continued Equipment Costs: The equipment and parts
on the refrigeration system will continue to require
replacement in the near term. It's similar to driving a
vehicle with high miles; the longer it runs, the more
costly it becomes to repair and the lower the return on
investment. Parts for the existing York compressors are
no longer manufactured and becoming extremely
difficult to find and costly to purchase. Some valve
manufacturers (like Sporlan) no longer manufacture
some of the valves used on the system.
• Risk of a Refrigerant Release: As the system ages, the
risk of a major release of refrigerant increases. The
existing direct systems contain approximately 4,000
pounds of R-22 refrigerant in Rink 1 and approximately
6,000 pounds for R-22 in Rink 2. Depending on the
availability of R-22 when this occurs, the City may be
forced to install a new blended refrigerant which will
require additional modifications to the system.
• Dependability: The risk of problems occurring with the
refrigeration system, and therefore, the risk of losing
the ice sheet, increases as the system ages.
Option 2 — Make Improvements to the Existing Rink 1 Ice
System:
Holmsten Ice Rinks provided good quality vessels (e.g. high
pressure receiver, pumper drums, etc.) with their systems. This
opens up the option of renovating the existing refrigeration
system to extend its useful, dependable, and safe life. This has
successfully been performed at several facilities such as
Gustavus Adolphus College, University of Minnesota-Duluth and
others.
If the existing refrigeration system is going to remain in place,
whether in its current operation as a direct system, or
converted into an indirect ice system, we recommend the
following improvements be performed on the existing
refrigeration system.
0Stevens 18
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommended minimum improvements include:
• Investigate the integrity of the existing steel vessels and
piping systems: The refrigeration system was re-insulated
and therefore the condition of the steel vessels and piping
systems could not be inspected. Corrosion along the
bottom of the low pressure receiver is common in these
systems. The extent of any corrosion cannot be
determined without removing the insulation. The
recommended repair includes: removing several sections of
the existing insulation on the system; conducting a visual
inspection of the vessels and piping; and conducting a non-
destructive ultra sound tests of the steel. If high levels of
corrosion are found, the entire insulation system should be
removed; the surface of the vessels and piping should be
sanded, primed, painted; and then the entire system should
be re-insulated.
If the steel vessels and piping systems are found to be in
good shape,this system could last another 15 or more years
with the other recommended improvements completed and
with continued proper maintenance.
If extensive corrosion is found, the vessels should be
repaired and recertified and/or replace and piping should
be replaced before reinsulating. Poor insulation can aid in
pre-mature corrosion and loss of efficiency.
• Replace vent solenoids on each pumper with same
materials: Inspect and replace the existing valve (typically a
Sporlan MA50) with same model. This valve cannot be
replaced with a higher quality valve as manufactured by
Hanson due to the inadequate space.
Table 2. Option 2—Minimum Improvements to Existing Rink 1 System
• Investigate Integrity of vessels and piping systems $3,000
Replace vent solenoid valves(2 total) $2,000
Subtotal of estimated construction costs $5,000
Estimate,design and constr.contingency(20%)' $1,000
Total estimated construction costs $6,000
Engineering,legal,and administrative(18%) $1,000
Total estimated project costs $7,000
1. See explanation in Section 2 of this report.
,Stevens 19
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Other recommended improvements to the existing refrigeration
system include:
• Replace compressors: Parts for the existing York
compressor can be difficult to find since they are no
longer in production. These compressors can be rebuilt
and reused for well over 30 years. However, the
existing 42-year old compressors are reportedly
showing wear on the main casting which would require
replacement in the near future. The compressors
should be replaced by compressors that can be used in
a future refrigeration system.
Table 3. Option 2—Other Improvements to Existing System
S1''teCi4L'S�.'h 'N,v:* ,. .. . ._
Replace compressors and motors $75,000
1. See explanation in Section 2 of this report.
2. Costs also include contingency,engineering,legal,and administrative.
Option 3: Convert existing Rink 1 system to an indirect industrial '-
grade system
Only recently has this option proven feasible for converting 1
Holmsten refrigeration packages from direct to indirect systems
while using the existing refrigeration equipment.
The option includes converting the existing refrigeration system
to an indirect system by installing a new heat exchanger and
rink pumps. This option includes reusing the existing low Photo P-1: The 2010 conversion of
pressure receiver, pumper drums and piping, and main motor University of Minnesota-Duluth's ice
on-campus ice rink system has proven
control center. The existing system would be updated as very successful. See Option 3.
recommended in Option 1. The existing ice rink floor would
require replacement under this option. The existing ice
equipment room would likely require expansion for the
additional equipment
This option will reduce the charge of R-22 in the system from
approximately 4,000 pounds to 1,000 pounds. The City could
store the extra R-22 refrigerant for future use. A reduction from
4,000 pounds of R-22 to 1,000 pounds of R-22 will noticeably
reduce the facility's carbon footprint.
Stevens 20
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Option 4: —New indirect industrial grade system: "'�...
This option includes replacing the entire refrigeration system
and concrete ice rink floor with an industrial grade flooded
chiller, new blended HFC refrigerant, reciprocating
compressors, pumps,and concrete rink floor.
Option 5: Same as Option 4 but replace Freon with ammonia.
This option is the same as Option 4 but replaces the use of a Photo P-2: An example of a"stick-built'
f gtrial grade,e foarsn,
new blended HFC type refrigerant with ammonia refrigerant. r efrigeration sys tem for a single le ice
This option also includes installing a new mechanical ventilation sheet,Andover,MN.See Option 5.
system to meet the current ventilation code requirements for
ammonia refrigerant and installing an exterior door for egress.
,yF
Option 6. Carbon Dioxide(CO2) Refrigeration System x
Continuing the discussion from the refrigerant discussion earlier s ( °$t
in the report, the use of CO2 refrigerant will likely be the next
substantial "innovation" in the ice rink industry. Currently
European countries are using CO2 as a secondary refrigerant in
ice rink applications. One rink in Canada just recently installed a
primary CO2 system. CO2 applications in the U.S are increasing Photo P-3: An example of a"skid package",
especially in the supermarket industry. However the selection industrial grade,ammonia refrigeration
of equipment is limited and the regulatory codes are still under system fora single ice sheet,Scottsdale,A2.
See Option 6.
development.
The cost information provide in the table at the end of this
section is very preliminary. Because this is a new technology
and application, there is fairly limited information on the
systems. The cost estimates should be updated as the desired
project date approaches.
It is recommended that a CO2 refrigerant based ice system be
seriously considered, as a replacement option for the current
system, especially if the replacement of the West Arena's ice
system will be more than two years from now.
Option 7. Combined Refrigeration Systems using Ammonia
This system option was included to provide an option for long
term planning, including the replacement of the 15-year old
refrigeration system in Rink 2.
A common refrigeration system that serves both Rinks 1 and 2
• offers advantages such as lower life cycle costs, higher
efficiency, and lower operation and maintenance costs
compared to two separate single ice systems.
Stevens 21
ENGINEERS PLANNERS-SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The one disadvantage of a common system is that if a major
•
problem occurs with the refrigeration system, both ice sheets i(
are down. However, most equipment and systems have •
backups, minimizing the chance that a total system failure will
occur.
A common ice system could be installed in phases as described
below:
Phase 1 includes the replaced of the existing ice rink floor and Photo P-4: The City of Alexandria instated a
new industrial grade common refrigeration
refrigeration system in the Rink 2 since the existing refrigeration system(for 2 rinks)in 2009 as discussed in
room is likely large enough for the common system. At that Option7. The system currently operates
time the refrigeration system would be designed and installed one ice rink but is designed to connects
second ice rink in the future.
with the capacity and accommodations to connect to Rink 2 at
some point in the future. The existing ice rink floor in Rink 2
would be replaced with a concrete rink floor of the same size. A
new mechanical ventilation system and refrigerant leak
detection system would be installed to meet code
requirements.
The R-22 refrigerant that is salvaged from Rink 2 can be used in
the refrigeration system for Rink 1 alleviating some concerns for
an R-22 shortage in the future.
Phase 2 includes installing the final compressor(s), pump(s),
piping and controls to serve Rink 1, replacing the existing ice
rink floor with a concrete rink floor, and change over the snow
melt system to use waste heat from the refrigeration system.
The cost estimates presented in the following table for Option 8
are shown in two phases as described above and include the
complete replacement of both ice systems including
refrigeration systems and ice rink floors.
The cost estimates do not include the following items:
• Building a new refrigeration room for a common
refrigeration system to serve both rinks.
• Improvements to the Rink 2 refrigeration system to
keep it operating.
• Expanding the length of the ice rink floor in Rink 1 from
185'to 200'. This would require a building expansion.
• Reducing the size of the ice rink floor in Rink 2 from
Olympic to NHL size and expanding the bleachers.
OStevens 22
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary of Ice System Replacement Options:
Table 4. Ice System Options-Cost Estimate Summary
cl `_L butttt LL `.,<
i_12r1 I'L-L L,, `\hint. --- L:yL i a:\;.L... ;
�... C h'Il, L`L".ILLw l LLLLt CL'L 'LICE C L I t
fi
Refrigerant type Ex.R-22 New HFC Ammonia CO2 Ammonia Ammonia
Grade of System Industrial Industrial Industrial Commercial Industrial Industrial
Removal&reinstall $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000
existing dasher boards
Demolition of existing $10,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $15,000
refrigeration system
Demolition of existing $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $20,000 $60,000
conc. ice rink floor
Replace mechanical N/A N/A $25,000 $25,000 $30,000 N/A
ventilation system
New exterior door and N/A N/A $20,000 $20,000 N/A N/A
concrete stoop
Repairs to Ex.System $5,000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
(From Table 2)
Other repairs to existing Not included N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
system(Table3) See Table 3
Expand refrigeration $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 N/A N/A
room approx.200 SF
New refrigeration $225,000 $475,000 $575,000 $725,000 $775,000 $180,000
system or equipment
New concrete Ice rink N/A $350,000 $350,000 $475,000 $420,000 $338,000
floor&subfloor
New snow melt pit heat N/A N/A N/A N/A $75,000 N/A
recovery system Size of future
Additional heat reclaim Not included Not included Not included Not included Not included Not included
systems See Table 3 See Table 3 See Table 3 See Table 3 See Table 3 See Table 3
Subtotal of estimated $400,000 $1,010,000 $1,155,000 $1,430,000 $1,375,000 $623,000
construction costs
Estimate,design and $60,000 $151,500 $173,000 $214,500 $206,300 $93,500
constr.Contingency
(15%)1
Total estimated $460,000 $1,161,500 $1,328,000 $1,644,500 $1,581,300 $716,500
construction costs
Engineering,legal,and $55,200 $139,500 $159,400 $197,500 $189,800 $86,000
administrative(12%)1
Total estimated project $515,200 $1,301,000 $1,487,400 $1,842,000 $1,771,100 $802,500
cost
Expected Useful Life- 15-25 25-30 25-30 TBD 25-30 25-30
Refrig System(yrs)
Expected Useful Life- 40-50 40-50 40-50 TBD 40-50 40-50
Rink Floor(yrs)
1. See explanation in Section 2 of this report.
Stevens 23
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Section 4
Alternative Energy
Sources
OStevens 26
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES
General
Ice arena facilities use large amounts of energy. With high
energy use come opportunities to apply new technologies that
may reduce energy use and the opportunity to explore
technologies that focus on sustainable and/or renewable energy
sources. This section briefly discusses several alternative energy
sources that the City may want to consider when the facility is
renovated.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions are increasingly being
considered when choosing between facility/process
alternatives. Although there is not currently a cost associated
with greenhouse gas emissions, there is the potential that there
will be. Alternatives with lower GHG emissions therefore have
the potential to have lower on-going costs. At the New Hope
Arena, the primary sources of GHG emissions are natural gas
combustion and electricity use. In addition, there are GHG
emissions associated with the manufacture and use of the
refrigerant R-22.
Geothermal
Geothermal exchange systems offer numerous opportunities for }„
energy savings in an ice arena application. Geothermal systems
are considered a renewable energy source and have been the t;_
focus of a recent wave of funding opportunities from the
•
Federal Government. A detailed analysis should be performed
when considering incorporating geothermal systems with the
ice system improvements.
Construction of several geothermal type ice systems have
recently been completed using traditional well type systems Photo P-31: Well drilling rig fora
geothermal system.
(e.g. Burnsville Ice Center in 2010) and non-traditional
geothermal systems (e.g. Brooklyn Park in 2010). The Brooklyn
Park Arena project used the City's well water source as a
geothermal sink in place of the traditional well field, saving over
$200,000 in construction costs and increasing the energy
savings. As these projects "season" or are "fine tuned",
extremely valuable information will be available on lowering
energy use and GHG emissions to apply to the next generation
of ice rink systems. The City will benefit from the information
collected on these projects.
,Stevens 27
ENGMEE0.5-PLANNERS-SURVEYORS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The cost to add a geothermal sink to the ice system
improvements options listed in Table 4 of this report could add
anywhere from $200,000 to $600,000 to the project costs.
Further investigation and analysis will be required to determine
if this is a feasible option for the City of Elk River.
MStevens 28
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Section 6
Financial
Assistance Programs
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA-ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FINACIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
There are several financial programs that Xcel Energy has
available that the City may wish it take advantage of. They •
include:
1. Engineering Assistance Study Program. The purpose of this
program is to provide the City with the necessary business
case justification to implement energy-saving opportunities.
This evaluation report can be expanded to identify energy
conservation opportunities, energy modeling, etc. to meet
the programs requirements. Xcel Energy will reimburse
the City up to fund up to 75%of the cost of this study. One
example where the City would benefit from this additional
energy analysis is in selecting a refrigerant (ammonia, CO2,
etc.) or refrigeration system to replacing the existing R-22
refrigerant or system. It is required that the program be
pre-approved by Xcel Energy prior to starting any work on
the study.
2. Rebate Programs. Rebate programs are available through
Xcel Energy for many energy improvement measures that
can be performed such as lighting replacement, motor
replacement, installation of variable frequency drives,
improving insulation systems, etc. Custom rebate
programs are also available and may apply to the
refrigeration system replacement depending on the type of
system selected. Xcel Energy should be contacted to
identify possible rebates prior to starting any improvement
project relating to energy savings. Some rebates require
preapproval prior to purchasing and installation.
State Appropriation Board
Programs should be reviewed for potential funding
opportunities.
Sports Commission
Programs should be reviewed for potential funding
opportunities.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
The initial program deadlines have pasted. However, new
programs continue to develop so this program along with other
Federal grant programs should be monitored for funding
opportunities.
There may be other grants or cost-sharing programs available.
eStevens 32
ELK RIVER ICE ARENA—ICE SYSTEM EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Alternate Project Delivery Method
Another delivery and funding option the City may consider for
this project is through guaranteed-savings contracts. Stevens
has teamed with several Energy Service Organizations to
successfully complete ice rink projects for the City of Brooklyn
Park, Northfield and Eden Prairie. We are currently working
with the City of New Hope on a guaranteed-savings contract
project at the New Hope Arena.
If the City is interested in learning more about this delivery
method we would be happy to discuss it in more detail with
you.
OStevens 33
ENGINEERS PLANNERS-SURVEYORS
HCFC Phaseout Schedule I Ozone Layer Protection- Regulatory Pro... file:///C:/Users/lestby/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary ...
Jump to main content.
= Togo) US
EPA
Ozone Layer Protection - Regulatory Programs
Recent Additions I Contact UsSearch: All EPA This Area Go j
• You are here: EPA Home
• Ozone Layer Protection
• Regulatory Programs
• Phaseout
• HCFC Phaseout Schedule
•
HCFC Phaseout Schedule
For more information
To learn more about the HCFC
phaseout, including frequently
asked questions, please visit
this link.
All developed (i.e., non-Article 5) countries are subject to caps on their consumption and production of
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), according to the terms of the Montreal Protocol and its
amendments. Under the Montreal Protocol, the U.S. and other developed nations must achieve a certain
percentage of progress towards the total phaseout of production and consumption of HCFCs, by certain
dates.
Consumption is calculated by the following formula: consumption=production plus imports minus
exports. The cap for developed countries is set at 2.8% of that country's 1989 chlorofluorocarbon
consumption + 100% of that country's 1989 HCFC consumption. The cap on production is set at the
average of a) 1989 HCFC production+ 2.8% of 1989 CFC production and b) 1989 HCFC consumption
+ 2.8% of 1989 CFC consumption. (Quantities of chemicals measured under the cap are ODP-weighted,
which means that each chemical's relative contribution to ozone depletion is taken into account.)
At the 19th Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol in September 2007, the Parties agreed to a
more aggressive phasedown of HCFCs in both developing and developed countries. More details about
the September 2007 adjustments to the Montreal Protocol are available here (PDF) (4 pp, 38K, About
I of 3 4/5/2013 2:03 PM
HCFC, Phaseout Schedule Ozone Layer Protection - Regulatory Pro... file:///C:/Users/lestby/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary ...
PDF). In addition, a graphical representation of the reductions for developing countries is found here.
The following table shows the U.S. schedule for phasing out its production and consumption of HCFCs
in accordance with the terms of the Protocol. The third and fourth columns of the table show how the
U.S. is meeting the international obligations described in the first two columns.
Comparison of the Montreal Protocol and United States Phaseout Schedules
Montreal Protocol United States
% Reduction in Implementation of
Year to be Consumption and Year to be HCFC Phaseout
Implemented Production, Using the Implemented through Clean Air Act
Cap as a Baseline Regulations
No production and no
2004 35.0% 2003 importing of
HCFC-141b
In addition to the
HCFC-141b restrictions,
no production and no
importing of
HCFC-142b and
2010 75.0% 2010 HCFC-22, except for use
in equipment
manufactured before
1/1/2010 (so no
production or importing
for NEW equipment that
uses these compounds)
In addition to the
HCFC-141b,
HCFC-142b and
HCFC-22 restrictions, no
2015 90.0% 2015 production and no
importing of any other
HCFCs, except for use as
refrigerants in equipment
manufactured before
1/1/2020
No production and no
2020 99.5% 2020 importing of
HCFC-142b and
HCFC-22
2030 100.0% 2030 No production and no
importing of any HCFCs
2 of 3 4/5/2013 2:03 PM
f/ i _w- . �,
-_ `/ i SNIP.
si ^
4 . 'd» I
y ±«»? 2
s .Ǥ
r
. . . . . ! :
\ y . . ?
.p . .
.
% \ , �
. ,,..
C . . .
i M
\
�/
1
I , UPS
I, iii
O
d
1
t ? !
r