~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    Study 1 : Cost Savings Comparison   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We had secured a retrofit treatment system project by converting a chemical treatment system to a pulsed-power non-chemical treatment system for cooling tower waters in a commercial building in Wanchai, Hong Kong. Steps were taken to collect data of both systems operating in a period of 4 years with an objective to see how well the saving of energy from the conversion based on kWh of electricity used for both systems matches the theoretical estimate. In fact this exercise is to find out the comparison between the chemical and pulsed-power non-chemical treatment systems which is probably the first of this kind for such a retrofit project at least in Hong Kong and probably in the world. Similar exercises were also carried out to find the savings of water and chemicals used in the project.

Following are the summaries of the scenario as well as the results:

Case_hk scenarios

Case_hk results

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    End of Study 1    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    Study 2 : Cooling Tower Conditions Comparison   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other than cost savings, user would also concern about the conditions of cooling tower after treatment for a period of time. Following is a comparison between a pulsed power treated tower and a chemically treated tower. Both inspections were made after 1 year of operations before cleaning.

Tower condition

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    End of Study 2    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    Study 3 : Bacteria Control Performance   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the water samples of cooling tower system using Pulsed Power Technology monitored by us, we collect them and then send them to The Hong Kong Productivity Council for testing the Total Bacteria Count (TBC) and Legionella Bacteria Count on a monthly and quarterly bases respectively. These two parameters are most important among all the parameters in Hong Kong.

The following table is a summary of the test results from all of our installations in Hong Kong. As you can see, we have tested a total of 544 samples,

  • 100% of the samples have met the EMSD TBC requirement of 100,000 cfu/ml;
  • 94% of the samples have EXCEEDED the EMSD TBC requirement by 10 times;
  • 76% of the samples have EXCEEDED the EMSD TBC requirement by 100 times;
  • 22% of the samples have EXCEEDED the EMSD TBC requirement by 1000 times;
  • 100% of the samples have met the EMSD Legionella Bacteria Count requirements

Bacteria performance

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    End of Study 3    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~