Table 7 Economic study of proposed solutions
Solutions | Energy saving/generation (kwh) | CO2 emission reduction (kg) | Capital costs (US$) | Net annual cost savings (US$) | Payback time (year) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Roof thermal insulation | 32,820.15 | 11,164.1 | 60,700.0 | 8158.9 | 7.43 |
Walls thermal insulation | 30,233.26 | 5976 | 8671.37 | 7198.37 | 1.20 |
Low-emissivity film for the windows | 900.66 | 200 | 9750 | 210.49 | 46.32 |
Shading for windows | 40,594.75 | 10,827.07 | 39,875 | 9924.7 | 4.017 |
LED light bulbs | 999.8 | 389 | 3093.38 | 423.79 | 7.29 |
BMS | 20,679.49 | 3824 | 25,974.4 | 6923.6 | 3.75 |
Green walls | 9281.61 | 2062.92 | 4761.9 | 3389.9 | 1.40 |
Rooftop PV | 21,876 | 14,113 | 37,214.2 | 7208.5 | 5.1625 |
PV on facade | 6479 | 518.96 | 11,285.7 | 2842.61 | 3.97 |
Solar collector | 2752 | 1825 | 9047.61 | 758.59 | 11.5169 |
Solar absorption cooling | Considering the humid climate of Florida, the evaporative cooling tower will not perform effectively. Hence, an absorption cooling system is not suitable for the region | ||||
Greenhouse | The greenhouse slightly reduces the heating load, while causing a significant cooling load during nine warm months. Therefore, the solution is not suggested | ||||
Solar heat reservoir | Florida s climate is continuously warm, making the solution unsuitable for the region | ||||