Building owners need a better cooling solution that is more efficient than district cooling.
District cooling plants (DCPs) have been constructed as an option to bring a comfortable temperature inside large buildings. However, DCPs also have some disadvantages, such as significant initial investment, expensive maintenance expenses, and costly operational expenditures.
Not to mention that it is not as easy as ABC to make district cooling more efficient. So, is there a better option for district cooling?
The time is now for Cooling as a Service
A newer method of cooling known as Cooling as a Service (CaaS) has become available in the past few years. CaaS uses chilled water systems to cool buildings, which are more efficient than older methods and use less energy overall.
Why should building owners choose CaaS to cool their facilities when they may use other centralised cooling system options?
It’s more efficient, which helps to lower the energy consumption of a building. Also, CaaS providers construct, own, and operate the chilled water systems for building owners. As a result, building owners only have to pay for cooling on a pay-as-you-use basis. In other words, CaaS makes a more adaptable and cost-effective alternative than district cooling for building owners.
The best types of buildings for Cooling as a Service
Any building that requires a lot of cooling would be an ideal building to opt for CaaS. CaaS providers use a chilled water system best suited as a building cooling system for medium to large facilities. For example, office buildings, shopping malls, hotels and data centres are all on the list of clients for CaaS providers.
When compared to district cooling, what are the additional advantages of Cooling as a Service?
There are several advantages to using a CaaS system instead of a traditional centralised cooling system or district cooling model. They include lower upfront costs, reduced maintenance expenses, and more predictable operational expenditures.
One significant perk of CaaS is that it helps customers to bypass the pricey preliminary fees associated with constructing a district cooling plant or agreeing to a district cooling contract. That is possible because CaaS providers typically build and operate chilled water plants for their clients and all clients have to pay for is the cooling service—similarly to how they would pay for electricity or water bills. This business model tends to be quite appealing to those who don’t have the capital to join a district cooling agreement.
The additional benefits of CaaS include the fact that it may assist customers in lowering their maintenance expenses. Maintenance is included in the price charged by CaaS providers. This may help building owners avoid the costly repairs and maintenance necessitated by the district cooling contracts.
Finally, the CaaS providers can assist clients in predicting and managing their operational expenditures. Clients may budget for their cooling expenses using data from CaaS providers, which enables them to predict these costs in a more accurate manner than the traditional centralised cooling approach.
If you’re on the fence about which route to take for your building cooling system, CaaS may be a wiser choice than district cooling. Compared to traditional methods of large building cooling, CaaS boasts more affordability for those who don’t want to invest in their own plants. As well, customers can benefit from lowered maintenance expenses and greater ability to predict operational expenditure when they choose CaaS.
