When a chiller fails, the clock starts immediately. The temporary chiller cost will be exorbitant.

There’s no committee. No long-term planning cycle. No strategic sourcing exercise. Just one question:

How fast can we get cooling back online?

And in that moment, most facilities unknowingly walk into a $500,000+ decision—not because they chose it, but because urgency made the decision for them.

The Real-World Scenario: How Temporary Chiller Cost Actually Happens

Picture a 250,000 sq. ft. facility in July. It could be a hospital, a manufacturing plant, or a large school district building.

The central chiller fails.

Within hours:

• Indoor temperatures begin rising 
• Production slows or stops 
• Occupant comfort and safety concerns arise
• Leadership demands immediate resolution 

The only viable short-term option?

A temporary chiller rental.

What 6–12 Month Temporary Chiller Costs Add Up to

Temporary chillers are not just “plug and play.” They are complex, resource-intensive deployments that often last far longer than initially expected.

Typical Temporary Chiller Costs Breakdown (6–12 months):

• Equipment Rental: $25,000–$50,000/month 
• Delivery & Rigging: $20,000–$50,000 
• Installation & Integration: $30,000–$75,000 
• Fuel / Power Costs: $10,000–$30,000/month 
• Maintenance & Monitoring: $5,000–$10,000/month 

Total Estimated Temporary Chiller Costs:

$300,000 to $700,000+

Temporary solutions are NEVER cheap solutions. For more specific information supporting these numbers please reference the US Department of Energy and ASHRAE directly. And more specifics can be found at The Cooling Technology Institute.

The Hidden Problem: Urgency Drives Bad Decisions

When systems fail, decisions shift from optimal to immediate.

That creates three predictable outcomes:

1. Overpaying for temporary solutions 

2. Rushed capital purchases without proper evaluation 

3. Deferred strategic thinking until it’s too late 

These outcomes result in three main options:

• continue renting
• Capital Replacement (The Traditional Path)
• Energy-as-a-Service (The Pre-Decided Path)

Option 1: Continue Renting

Renting Feels safe but is financially expensive and builds zero long-term asset value

Option 2: Capital Replacement (The traditional Path)

Let’s set aside for a moment the fact that had “The Traditional Path” been utilized months ago the company wouldn’t be in this position. Meaning it’s original “plan” didn’t work. Capital replacement presents the challenges that every facility manager realizes long before the real-time crisis occurs. The challenges that now require movement to their undesirable “Plan B”. The “Plan B” the facility manager has been trying to avoid but didn’t because the decision matrix decided to roll the dice on another quarter or two before replacement. Despite this, we still have even more challenges ahead with our “Plan B”:

• Large upfront capital requirement ($500K–$1M+) 
• Budget delays 
• Approval bottlenecks 

Now let’s address the elephant in the room. “The Traditional Model” is the reason we are sitting here in the first place. It supports the idea that, while HVAC is important, THAT important until its crucial and becomes everything. “The Traditional Model” supports the notion that facilities managers should not only be highly competent generalists who keep our infrastructure in total up and running, but also highly competent specialists that know the “ins and outs” of bleeding edge HVAC technology. (Which, mostly due to time constraints, will often not even get the most basic of training.) HVAC Technology today, like most things in the world, require specialized skills that senior leadership are simply not investing in. “The Traditional Model” is sucking the life out of most of the efficiencies that this incredible technology should be enabling.

Option 3: Energy-as-a-Service (The Pre-Decided Outcome)

For over a half a century high intensity energy using industries have been buying electricity. They haven’t been building power plants and generating energy. It is time for the “as-a-Service” economy to come to HVAC and building mechanicals as well. It solves ALL the problems:

• No upfront capital means new equipment “as-planned” not “when crisis” occurs
• Risk transfer outside the organization
• Pay for outcomes, not equipment
• Reduce the necessary decision-making matrix 
• Often cash-flow positive 

Why Pre-Deciding Matters

Reactive: Failure → Rental → Capital scramble → High cost 

Proactive: Plan → Fund → Replace → Controlled outcome 

The $500,000 Question

Most facilities don’t realize they’ve made a $500,000 decision until after the temporary chiller is already running.

—

A Better Way Forward

Temporary chillers should be a bridge—not the destination.

To learn more, explore our website a bit more or give us a call.