<source id="3oodw" ><sup id="3oodw" ></sup></source>

      1. <s id="3oodw" ><th id="3oodw" ><small id="3oodw" ></small></th></s>
        <i id="3oodw" ><optgroup id="3oodw" ></optgroup></i>

            <input id="3oodw" ><bdo id="3oodw" ><cite id="3oodw" ></cite></bdo></input>
            <delect id="3oodw" ><ruby id="3oodw" ></ruby></delect>

            <em id="3oodw" ><progress id="3oodw" ></progress></em><input id="3oodw" ></input>
            <strike id="3oodw" ></strike>

            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