premier vrf ventilation...

1©2016 Mitsubishi Electric US, Inc.ME XX I 08.16 OA I Printed In The U.S.A

PREMIER VRF VENTILATION

SOLUTIONS

PREMISYS® FUSION ENERGY SAVINGS STUDY

PremiSys® Family of Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Product Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Energy Savings Study Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Scenario A: 2500 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline . . . . . . 4

Scenario B: 2500 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline . . . . . . . 6

Scenario C: 2500 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline . . . . . 8

Scenario D: 2500 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline . . . . . 10

Scenario E: 4000 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline . . . . . 12

Scenario F: 4000 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline . . . . . . 14

Scenario G: 4000 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline . . . . 16

Scenario H: 4000 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline . . . . . 18

Table of Contents

3 1

The PremiSys family of rooftop ventilation products is a premier solution for conditioning

outdoor air for commercial buildings. Designed to handle 100% outdoor air with energy

recovery models, PremiSys systems offer premium features ideal for handling ventilation air

in variable refrigerant flow (VRF) applications.

PremiSys Fusion is the latest addition to the family of dedicated outdoor air systems.

The MPF-1 and MPF-2 models (split system with energy recovery) are pre-engineered to

provide semi-custom flexibility while maintaining the quality, consistency, and value of a

standardized product. Take advantage of the split-system design to further enhance the

flexibility of applying Mitsubishi Electric products to any building.

Premisys® Family of Products

2

• Direct-drive plenum fans with factory-mounted variable frequency drives (VFD) to handle up to

5,000 CFM and 3 in. wg external static pressure.

• Pre-painted cabinet with 2-inch double-wall construction.

• Downturn intake hood with aluminum mesh filters.

• Microprocessor controls for stand-alone functionality or communication through

Mitsubishi Electric’s M-Net. Additional components are required for communication via

other protocols, such as BACnet®, LonWorks®, or Modbus®.

• Multiple filter options: MERV 8 (standard), MERV 13 or a combination MERV 8/13.

• Optional accessories include smoke detectors, heating options (indirect gas fired, electric, or

hot water), and condenser hail guards (CITY MULTI outdoor unit).

Unit SizeNominal Tonnage

(tons)Height Width Length Intake

Nominal Weight

(lbs)

Outdoor Intake

Supply Discharge

Exhaust Discharge

MPF-1 5 – 12 58 53 148 22 2200

EndBottom or Side

Side

MPF-2 10 – 20 71 64 163 22 2800

Key Features

5 3

Energy Savings Study Overview

Scenarios

• All data was generated using a commercial building energy modeling tool alongside typical meteorological

year weather BIN data.

• In total, 320 separate building energy models were run, with each iteration consisting of an 8,760 hour

analysis where prorated loads are calculated on an hourly basis and the corresponding hourly equipment

performance is summed in order to generate annual results.

• Half of the scenarios used a 12-hour occupied/unoccupied schedule (6 AM – 6 PM) in an effort to simulate

the occupancy pattern of a school or office building, for example.

• Half of the scenarios used a 24-hour occupancy schedule in an effort to simulate the occupancy pattern of

a hotel or hospital, for example.

• Half of the scenarios feature a full-load system efficiency (baseline system) of 11 EER. This is intended to

represent the performance of new DOAS equipment with digital scroll compressors.

• Half of the scenarios feature a full-load system efficiency (baseline system) of 9 EER. This is intended to

represent a comparison to end-of-life DOAS equipment that is in need of replacement.

The following pages contain energy usage and savings scenarios between a baseline DOAS system and

a PremiSys® Fusion system based on varying operating conditions. This study considers cooling only

applications. Below you will find a summary of the methodology Mitsubishi Electric Cooling & Heating

used to develop the eight scenarios.

Utility rate data was sourced from OpenEI.org and is intended to represent blended commercial electric

rates in each of the 21 cities chosen for the study. Please note that job specific factors such as rates from a

specific utility and customer consumption patterns may affect actual observed rates.

*Simulations performed July 2016

4

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)

Baseline Electrical Cooling Usage (kWh)

Fusion Electrical Cooling Usage (kWh)

Cooling Savings ($)

Simple Payback (years)

Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 11,106 7,525 $357.03 9.1 11 5.76%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 8,387 5,554 $325.80 10.0 12 4.30%

Boston, MA 15.8 6,276 4,102 $343.49 4.8 6 13.51%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 10,689 7,185 $278.92 11.6 14 2.26%

Chicago, IL 8.5 7,755 5,351 $204.34 8.1 10 8.37%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 8,381 5,514 $289.57 11.2 14 6.16%

Dallas, TX 7.61 15,506 10,272 $398.31 4.9 6 13.17%

Denver, CO 9.16 5,416 3,575 $168.64 9.9 12 5.33%

Detroit, MI 10.4 6,148 4,077 $215.38 7.7 9 3.78%

Houston, TX 7.61 18,512 12,549 $453.78 7.2 8 0.56%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 18,618 12,333 $810.77 4.0 5 15.54%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 12,354 8,095 $566.45 2.9 4 27.20%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 10,141 6,356 $342.92 9.5 11 1.58%

Madison, WI 10.9 7,059 4,645 $263.13 12.3 15 2.41%

Miami, FL 8.72 25,273 17,098 $712.86 2.7 3 4.22%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 6,735 4,363 $207.08 15.7 20 2.65%

Nashville, TN 10.3 11,469 7,813 $376.57 8.6 10 2.36%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 19,928 13,257 $547.02 3.5 4 5.62%

New York, NY 20 7,886 5,334 $510.40 3.3 4 14.62%

Portland, OR 8.75 3,915 2,518 $122.24 13.6 17 3.27%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 10,716 6,993 $279.60 6.9 8 3.93%

* Assumed energy escalation rate of 2%.

* Assumed discount rate of 4%.

* Equipment first cost price differential based on $12 – $14/CFM for baseline system and a 5% – 10% premium for PremiSys Fusion (price varies by model).

Scenario A: 2500 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline

7 5

Scenario A: 2500 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline

Assumptions

• 2500 CFM, nominal tonnage listed

• Baseline nominal EER: 11

• Building occupied/DOAS on from 6 AM–6 PM

• 60% wheel effectiveness (Fusion & baseline)

• Dehumidication/Cool trigger: 55° F

• Dehumidification leaving coil target: 55/54° F (db/wb)

• Energy rates taken from OpenEI.org for each city listed

6

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 13,574 7,525 $603.09 5.4 6 2.16%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 10,251 5,554 $540.13 6.0 7 5.73%

Boston, MA 15.8 7,671 4,102 $563.85 3.0 4 26.62%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 13,064 7,185 $467.99 6.9 8 3.71%

Chicago, IL 8.5 9,478 5,351 $350.80 4.7 6 15.93%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 10,243 5,514 $477.67 6.8 8 5.85%

Dallas, TX 7.61 18,952 10,272 $660.53 2.9 4 27.53%

Denver, CO 9.16 6,620 3,575 $278.88 6.0 7 6.50%

Detroit, MI 10.4 7,514 4,077 $357.47 4.7 6 18.13%

Houston, TX 7.61 22,626 12,549 $766.84 4.2 5 9.28%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 22,755 12,333 $1,344.48 2.4 3 17.19%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 15,099 8,095 $931.58 1.8 2 6.63%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 12,395 6,356 $547.09 5.9 7 7.09%

Madison, WI 10.9 8,628 4,645 $434.11 7.5 9 7.21%

Miami, FL 8.72 30,889 17,098 $1,202.59 1.6 2 18.35%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 8,232 4,363 $337.73 9.6 11 0.05%

Nashville, TN 10.3 14,018 7,813 $639.08 5.1 6 8.25%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 24,356 13,257 $910.15 2.1 3 33.07%

New York, NY 20 9,638 5,334 $860.89 1.9 3 46.39%

Portland, OR 8.75 4,785 2,518 $198.36 8.4 10 5.20%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 13,097 6,993 $458.44 4.2 5 9.59%




Scenario B: 2500 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline

9 7

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 13,574 7,525 $603.09 5.4 6 2.16%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 10,251 5,554 $540.13 6.0 7 5.73%

Boston, MA 15.8 7,671 4,102 $563.85 3.0 4 26.62%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 13,064 7,185 $467.99 6.9 8 3.71%

Chicago, IL 8.5 9,478 5,351 $350.80 4.7 6 15.93%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 10,243 5,514 $477.67 6.8 8 5.85%

Dallas, TX 7.61 18,952 10,272 $660.53 2.9 4 27.53%

Denver, CO 9.16 6,620 3,575 $278.88 6.0 7 6.50%

Detroit, MI 10.4 7,514 4,077 $357.47 4.7 6 18.13%

Houston, TX 7.61 22,626 12,549 $766.84 4.2 5 9.28%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 22,755 12,333 $1,344.48 2.4 3 17.19%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 15,099 8,095 $931.58 1.8 2 6.63%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 12,395 6,356 $547.09 5.9 7 7.09%

Madison, WI 10.9 8,628 4,645 $434.11 7.5 9 7.21%

Miami, FL 8.72 30,889 17,098 $1,202.59 1.6 2 18.35%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 8,232 4,363 $337.73 9.6 11 0.05%

Nashville, TN 10.3 14,018 7,813 $639.08 5.1 6 8.25%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 24,356 13,257 $910.15 2.1 3 33.07%

New York, NY 20 9,638 5,334 $860.89 1.9 3 46.39%

Portland, OR 8.75 4,785 2,518 $198.36 8.4 10 5.20%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 13,097 6,993 $458.44 4.2 5 9.59%




Scenario B: 2500 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline

Assumptions



• Building occupied/DOAS on from 6 AM–6 PM





8

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 13,574 7,525 $603.09 5.4 6 2.16%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 10,251 5,554 $540.13 6.0 7 5.73%

Boston, MA 15.8 7,671 4,102 $563.85 3.0 4 26.62%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 13,064 7,185 $467.99 6.9 8 3.71%

Chicago, IL 8.5 9,478 5,351 $350.80 4.7 6 15.93%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 10,243 5,514 $773.36 6.8 5 10.21%

Dallas, TX 7.61 41,267 27,198 $1,070.65 1.8 2 5.36%

Denver, CO 9.16 13,478 8,803 $428.23 3.9 5 19.06%

Detroit, MI 10.4 16,296 10,737 $578.14 2.9 4 29.83%

Houston, TX 7.61 47,354 31,752 $1,187.31 1.6 2 16.85%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 48,151 31,841 $2,103.99 0.9 1 4.53%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 30,251 19,434 $1,438.66 1.2 2 64.67%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 25,464 16,189 $840.32 3.9 5 19.75%

Madison, WI 10.9 17,438 11,260 $673.40 4.8 6 14.07%

Miami, FL 8.72 66,694 44,296 $1,953.11 1.0 2 92.21%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 16,920 10,828 $531.83 6.1 7 4.11%

Nashville, TN 10.3 16,920 10,828 $627.48 5.2 6 6.29%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 50,702 33,360 $1,422.04 1.4 2 39.95%

New York, NY 20 21,787 13,973 $1,562.80 2.1 3 36.21%

Portland, OR 8.75 9,238 5,949 $287.79 5.8 7 9.91%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 13,097 6,993 $458.44 4.2 5 9.59%




Scenario C: 2500 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline

11 9

Scenario C: 2500 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline

Assumptions



• Building occupied/DOAS on 24 hours per day, 7 days per week





10

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 36,315 20,038 $1,622.78 2.0 3 41.44%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 26,862 14,384 $1,434.97 2.3 3 25.07%

Boston, MA 15.8 19,256 10,237 $1,425.02 1.2 2 63.11%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 34,908 19,133 $1,255.68 2.6 3 9.45%

Chicago, IL 8.5 23,948 13,286 $906.27 1.8 2 3.73%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 27,203 14,600 $1,272.90 2.6 3 10.95%

Dallas, TX 7.61 50,437 27,198 $1,768.52 1.1 2 74.04%

Denver, CO 9.16 16,473 8,803 $702.58 2.4 3 19.47%

Detroit, MI 10.4 19,917 10,737 $954.75 1.7 2 9.28%

Houston, TX 7.61 57,877 31,752 $1,988.12 1.6 2 16.64%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 58,851 31,841 $3,484.32 0.9 1 3.20%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 36,973 19,434 $2,332.75 0.7 1 34.80%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 31,123 16,189 $1,352.99 2.4 3 17.93%

Madison, WI 10.9 21,313 11,260 $1,095.79 3.0 4 26.13%

Miami, FL 8.72 81,515 44,296 $3,245.49 0.6 1 61.25%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 20,680 10,828 $860.08 3.8 5 22.57%

Nashville, TN 10.3 20,680 10,828 $1,014.76 3.2 4 16.80%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 61,969 33,360 $2,345.95 0.8 1 16.55%

New York, NY 20 26,629 13,973 $2,531.11 0.7 1 46.25%

Portland, OR 8.75 11,291 5,949 $467.42 3.6 4 4.96%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 33,956 17,989 $1,199.11 1.6 2 18.01%




Scenario D: 2500 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline

13 11

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 36,315 20,038 $1,622.78 2.0 3 41.44%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 26,862 14,384 $1,434.97 2.3 3 25.07%

Boston, MA 15.8 19,256 10,237 $1,425.02 1.2 2 63.11%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 34,908 19,133 $1,255.68 2.6 3 9.45%

Chicago, IL 8.5 23,948 13,286 $906.27 1.8 2 3.73%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 27,203 14,600 $1,272.90 2.6 3 10.95%

Dallas, TX 7.61 50,437 27,198 $1,768.52 1.1 2 74.04%

Denver, CO 9.16 16,473 8,803 $702.58 2.4 3 19.47%

Detroit, MI 10.4 19,917 10,737 $954.75 1.7 2 9.28%

Houston, TX 7.61 57,877 31,752 $1,988.12 1.6 2 16.64%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 58,851 31,841 $3,484.32 0.9 1 3.20%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 36,973 19,434 $2,332.75 0.7 1 34.80%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 31,123 16,189 $1,352.99 2.4 3 17.93%

Madison, WI 10.9 21,313 11,260 $1,095.79 3.0 4 26.13%

Miami, FL 8.72 81,515 44,296 $3,245.49 0.6 1 61.25%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 20,680 10,828 $860.08 3.8 5 22.57%

Nashville, TN 10.3 20,680 10,828 $1,014.76 3.2 4 16.80%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 61,969 33,360 $2,345.95 0.8 1 16.55%

New York, NY 20 26,629 13,973 $2,531.11 0.7 1 46.25%

Portland, OR 8.75 11,291 5,949 $467.42 3.6 4 4.96%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 33,956 17,989 $1,199.11 1.6 2 18.01%




Scenario D: 2500 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline

Assumptions








12

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 17,770 12,040 $571.28 6.9 8 4.95%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 12,869 8,772 $471.16 10.3 12 0.89%

Boston, MA 15.8 10,331 6,652 $581.28 8.3 10 5.69%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 17,102 11,495 $446.32 8.8 10 0.57%

Chicago, IL 8.5 12,788 8,537 $361.34 13.4 17 4.66%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 13,410 8,822 $463.39 8.5 10 4.42%

Dallas, TX 7.61 24,291 16,440 $597.46 6.1 7 4.31%

Denver, CO 9.16 8,496 5,667 $259.14 11.9 14 0.33%

Detroit, MI 10.4 10,116 6,610 $364.62 13.3 16 0.31%

Houston, TX 7.61 30,016 20,120 $753.09 4.8 6 13.77%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 30,175 19,832 $1,334.25 2.7 3 3.72%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 19,352 12,924 $854.92 3.6 4 3.92%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 15,603 10,112 $497.48 9.8 12 6.53%

Madison, WI 10.9 10,829 7,301 $384.55 12.6 15 0.10%

Miami, FL 8.72 41,018 27,270 $1,198.83 3.0 4 23.07%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 10,329 6,852 $303.54 16.0 20 0.64%

Nashville, TN 10.3 18,350 12,500 $602.55 6.5 8 10.69%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 30,755 21,021 $798.19 4.6 5 1.45%

New York, NY 20 12,991 8,569 $884.40 5.5 6 0.20%

Portland, OR 8.75 6,352 4,037 $202.56 15.2 19 1.66%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 16,799 11,162 $423.34 8.6 10 2.63%




Scenario E: 4000 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline

15 13

Scenario E: 4000 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline

Assumptions



• Building occupied/DOAS on 6 AM-6 PM





14

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 21,719 12,040 $964.99 4.1 5 14.00%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 15,729 8,772 $800.03 6.1 7 4.75%

Boston, MA 15.8 12,627 6,652 $944.01 5.1 6 6.95%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 20,902 11,495 $748.83 5.2 6 5.15%

Chicago, IL 8.5 15,629 8,537 $602.82 8.1 10 9.60%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 16,390 8,822 $764.37 5.1 6 7.33%

Dallas, TX 7.61 29,689 16,440 $1,008.25 3.6 4 3.50%

Denver, CO 9.16 10,384 5,667 $432.08 7.1 8 1.12%

Detroit, MI 10.4 12,364 6,610 $598.42 8.1 10 8.80%

Houston, TX 7.61 36,686 20,120 $1,260.69 2.9 4 29.42%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 36,881 19,832 $2,199.26 1.7 2 15.08%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 23,652 12,924 $1,426.88 2.2 3 31.34%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 19,070 10,112 $811.63 6.0 7 6.26%

Madison, WI 10.9 13,235 7,301 $646.85 7.5 9 6.85%

Miami, FL 8.72 50,133 27,270 $1,993.66 1.8 2 4.32%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 12,624 6,852 $503.92 9.6 12 7.91%

Nashville, TN 10.3 22,428 12,500 $1,022.56 3.8 5 20.80%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 37,589 21,021 $1,358.61 2.7 3 5.61%

New York, NY 20 15,878 8,569 $1,461.78 3.3 4 12.54%

Portland, OR 8.75 7,764 4,037 $326.07 9.4 11 2.01%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 20,532 11,162 $703.70 5.2 6 6.31%




Scenario F: 4000 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline

17 15

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 21,719 12,040 $964.99 4.1 5 14.00%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 15,729 8,772 $800.03 6.1 7 4.75%

Boston, MA 15.8 12,627 6,652 $944.01 5.1 6 6.95%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 20,902 11,495 $748.83 5.2 6 5.15%

Chicago, IL 8.5 15,629 8,537 $602.82 8.1 10 9.60%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 16,390 8,822 $764.37 5.1 6 7.33%

Dallas, TX 7.61 29,689 16,440 $1,008.25 3.6 4 3.50%

Denver, CO 9.16 10,384 5,667 $432.08 7.1 8 1.12%

Detroit, MI 10.4 12,364 6,610 $598.42 8.1 10 8.80%

Houston, TX 7.61 36,686 20,120 $1,260.69 2.9 4 29.42%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 36,881 19,832 $2,199.26 1.7 2 15.08%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 23,652 12,924 $1,426.88 2.2 3 31.34%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 19,070 10,112 $811.63 6.0 7 6.26%

Madison, WI 10.9 13,235 7,301 $646.85 7.5 9 6.85%

Miami, FL 8.72 50,133 27,270 $1,993.66 1.8 2 4.32%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 12,624 6,852 $503.92 9.6 12 7.91%

Nashville, TN 10.3 22,428 12,500 $1,022.56 3.8 5 20.80%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 37,589 21,021 $1,358.61 2.7 3 5.61%

New York, NY 20 15,878 8,569 $1,461.78 3.3 4 12.54%

Portland, OR 8.75 7,764 4,037 $326.07 9.4 11 2.01%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 20,532 11,162 $703.70 5.2 6 6.31%




Scenario F: 4000 CFM, 12-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline

Assumptions



• Building occupied/DOAS on 6 AM-6 PM





16

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 47,540 32,060 $1,543.36 2.5 3 11.51%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 35,165 23,015 $1,397.25 3.5 4 7.57%

Boston, MA 15.8 25,931 16,606 $1,473.35 3.3 4 13.43%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 45,698 30,612 $1,200.85 3.3 4 14.58%

Chicago, IL 8.5 32,306 21,254 $939.42 5.2 6 6.43%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 35,612 23,360 $1,237.45 3.2 4 18.07%

Dallas, TX 7.61 64,643 43,460 $1,612.03 2.3 3 25.31%

Denver, CO 9.16 21,140 13,940 $659.52 4.7 6 17.98%

Detroit, MI 10.4 26,816 17,415 $977.70 5.0 6 10.77%

Houston, TX 7.61 76,774 50,953 $1,964.98 1.9 2 2.82%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 78,044 51,193 $3,463.78 1.1 2 81.24%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 47,394 30,921 $2,190.91 1.4 2 35.75%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 39,225 25,606 $1,233.88 3.9 5 17.61%

Madison, WI 10.9 26,739 17,695 $985.80 4.9 6 11.69%

Miami, FL 8.72 108,226 70,799 $3,263.63 1.1 2 70.77%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 25,955 16,973 $784.13 6.2 7 2.66%

Nashville, TN 10.3 47,339 31,975 $1,582.49 2.5 3 14.34%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 78,245 52,796 $2,086.82 1.7 2 9.19%

New York, NY 20 33,408 21,921 $2,297.40 2.1 3 33.93%

Portland, OR 8.75 14,988 9,537 $476.96 6.4 8 11.62%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 43,562 28,584 $1,124.85 3.2 4 15.47%




Scenario G: 4000 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline

19 17

Scenario G: 4000 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 11 EER baseline

Assumptions








18

Climate Location

Assumed Energy

Rate (¢/kWh)



Cooling Savings ($)


Year W/ Positive

ROI

ROI @ Year End

Atlanta, GA 9.97 58,104 32,060 $2,596.63 1.5 2 26.29%

Baltimore, MD 11.5 42,979 23,015 $2,295.91 2.1 3 33.85%

Boston, MA 15.8 31,693 16,606 $2,383.82 2.0 3 38.97%

Charlotte, NC 7.96 55,853 30,612 $2,009.19 1.9 3 45.17%

Chicago, IL 8.5 39,485 21,254 $1,549.64 3.1 4 19.30%

Cincinnati, OH 10.1 43,526 23,360 $2,036.74 1.9 3 47.16%

Dallas, TX 7.61 79,008 43,460 $2,705.21 1.3 2 41.55%

Denver, CO 9.16 25,838 13,940 $1,089.84 2.8 3 0.32%

Detroit, MI 10.4 32,775 17,415 $1,597.45 3.0 4 22.98%

Houston, TX 7.61 93,835 50,953 $3,263.31 1.1 2 70.75%

Jacksonville, FL 12.9 95,387 51,193 $5,701.04 0.6 1 50.60%

Los Angeles, CA 13.3 57,926 30,921 $3,591.67 0.9 1 12.35%

Las Vegas, NV 9.06 47,942 25,606 $2,023.61 2.4 3 17.97%

Madison, WI 10.9 32,681 17,695 $1,633.47 3.0 4 25.76%

Miami, FL 8.72 132,276 70,799 $5,360.81 0.7 1 41.61%

Minneapolis, MN 8.73 31,723 16,973 $1,287.66 3.8 5 22.74%

Nashville, TN 10.3 57,859 31,975 $2,666.03 1.5 2 29.66%

New Orleans, LA 8.2 95,633 52,796 $3,512.62 1.0 2 83.80%

New York, NY 20 40,832 21,921 $3,782.20 1.3 2 48.42%

Portland, OR 8.75 18,319 9,537 $768.40 4.0 5 15.64%

St. Louis, MO 7.51 53,242 28,584 $1,851.85 2.0 3 43.95%



* Equipment first cost price differential based on $12–$14/CFM for baseline system and a 5%–10% premium for PremiSys Fusion (price varies by model).

Scenario H: 4000 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline

21 19

Scenario H: 4000 CFM, 24-hour occupancy, 9 EER baseline

Assumption








20

Mitsubishi Electric Cooling & Heating is here to help you make a smart choice when it

comes to the important task of selecting an HVAC system for your building. Mitsubishi

Electric’s inverter-driven variable refrigerant flow (VRF) systems provide long term owner

satisfaction alongside occupant comfort, energy efficiency, and simple maintenance. But

why stop there? Take your HVAC system to the next level by combining a VRF system

with a PremiSys® Fusion Dedicated Outdoor Air System for ultimate efficiency and superior

indoor air quality.

Mitsubishi Electric’s knowledgeable team of industry professionals can help perform a

full-scale, detailed project analysis tailored to the needs of a specific building and system

design. Components of the full project analysis include the ability to model and adjust

multiple parameters for the PremiSys Fusion system alongside baseline analyses such as:

▶ Alternate fresh air design amounts

▶ Modified climate and weather locations

▶ Modified energy rates

▶ Adjust energy recovery efficiency

▶ Modified peak fan power and efficiencies

▶ Dehumidification trigger points

▶ Cooling coil and heating coil discharge set points

▶ Demand control ventilation

▶ Customized time-of-day occupancy

…and more!

Please contact your Mitsubishi Electric

representative to obtain additional information and

get started simulating your building today!

Conclusion and Next Steps

23 21

Premisys® Energy Savings Study: Disclaimer

The information contained in this report is the result of simulated data and operations and is provided for informational purposes only. Actual savings and operating costs may vary depending on location, actual site installation, operating characteristics, and other factors. No guarantee or warranty, express or implied, is made based on the data and information contained in this report, and the data and information contained in this report should not be relied on in making purchasing or operating decisions.

24

For more information, visit www.mitsubishipro.comMitsubishi Electric Cooling & Heating

1340 Satellite Boulevard Suwanee, GA 30024, Phone: 800-433-4822

© 2016 Mitsubishi Electric US, Inc. CITY MULTI® is a registered trademark of Mitsubishi Electric. Mitsubishi Electric is a

registered trademark of Mitsubishi Electric Corporation. The three-diamond logo is a registered logo of Mitsubishi Electric

Corporation. PremiSys® is a registered trademark of Greenheck Fan Corporation. Used with permission

Please recycle.

For more information visit www.mitsubishipro.com

AMERICA’S #1 SELLING BRAND OF VRF TECHNOLOGY

MAKE COMFORT

SKU: ME-PREM-STUDY | Printed in the U.S.A.

premier vrf ventilation...

Documents