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 CostA 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
esco logo esco medical logo esco healthcare logo esco pharma logo vaccixell logo tapestlerx logo esco ventures logo