Esco | Energy Savings Comparison

Energy Savings Comparison

Comparison between Conventional Fume Hood and Ductless Fume Hood
			Conventional Ducted Hood	Energy Efficient Ductless Fume Hood (Integrated Fan & Filter)	Remarks
Initial Capital Cost	A	Ductwork	US$ 1500	None	Efficient carbon filtration system means potentially complex ducting systems are not required.
	B	External Exhaust Blower	US$ 800	None	Compact integrated fan is sufficient to overcome the pressure drops across carbon filters.
	C	Make-up Air System	US$ 2000	None	No exhaust means conditioned air is not drawn out of the lab expensive make-up air system with chiller/heater and dehumidifier is not required.
	Net Initial Capital Cost Savings: US$ 4300
Annual Rating Cost	D	External Exhaust Blower	US$ 2000	None	Energy requirements for small integrated blower is significantly less than that of large external exhaust blower.
	E	Integrated Exhaust Blower	None	US$ 100
	F	Make-up Air Sytem	US$ 3000	None	Conventional fume hoods consistently draw conditioned air out, giving rise to high energy consumption of make-up air system.
	G	Carbon Filter	None	US$ 600	Assuming customer changes filters once a year, running cost are still low in comparison.
	Net Annual Running Cost Savings: US$ 4300