Blog – Construction Drying, Temporary Climate Solutions

Permanent HVAC vs Temporary Climate Solutions: How Much Can You Save?

For General Contractors (GCs) running a busy commercial construction site, avoiding delays, saving money, and keeping the client happy are three crucial concerns. However, climate control is necessary to a construction crew’s comfort, and often essential in expediting specific tasks, such as drying recently poured concrete or the glue used in carpet and flooring installations. Prior to construction completion, though, it’s best to employ a temporary climate solution rather than switching on the permanent HVAC (house system) that is built into the structure.

The Risks of an Early Start-Up

Employing the permanent house HVAC system during construction can lead to several liability risks:

  1. When employed during construction, a permanent HVAC’s filters are unable to sufficiently protect against excessive amounts of dust and debris, and the system is forced to ‘inhale’ far more of these particles than it was designed to handle, leading to reduced equipment life, lower operating efficiency, and potential equipment damage which may not be covered by the warranty.
  2. HVAC systems are extremely expensive, and warranties help keep repair costs manageable. Warranties initiate when HVAC operation commences; therefore, if your crews uses the house system prior to client move in, site owners are left with shorter than expected warranty periods. And because they are not made for use in harsh construction environments, utilizing these systems for temporary heating, cooling, and dehumidification that falls outside the HVAC’s normal operating parameters may void the warranty before the building is even completed.
  3. Dust and debris collected within the house system during construction can result in problems that can continue long after a structure has been completed. These somewhat harmful fragments and smidgens left over from the build out can make their way into tenant spaces, and lead to ongoing health-related claims and complaints.
  4. Using the house system during construction will also typically result in higher running costs when compared to temporary systems, as it is far less efficient to switch on a building wide system, particularly in an unfinished building where insulation and sealing have not been completed. In fact, an operating cost comparison between a commercial HVAC system and a temporary climate solution within a 70,000 sq.ft. building with 15’ ceilings over a 30-day period reflects a house system cost of $38,500 vs. that of the $32,300 use and rental rate for temporary equipment, resulting in more than $6000 in monthly savings.


The Temporary Solution

The use of temporary heating and cooling systems reduces the contractor’s job-related risk and liability by effectively keeping all temperature and air quality related problems under control. Rather than possibly damaging the house system or voiding its warranty, you can actually save a great deal of money by choosing a temporary climate solution from Polygon to keep your crews working comfortably through project completion.

By utilizing energy efficient and environmentally friendly equipment designed for specific applications, Polygon provides advanced temporary climate solutions to relieve extreme temperatures in any building situation, ensuring that HVAC shutdowns and voided warranties are a thing of the past, all while providing the optimum climate to cure coatings, manufacture products, and operate comfortably. Not only are Polygon’s temporary conditioning systems portable and versatile, they provide clean, continuous ventilation, and can be used for oil, gas, and electric heating. Polygon also provides easy, inexpensive installation and on-site servicing.

Temporary climate systems from Polygon are far less risky and costly when compared to permanent HVAC systems. To learn more about Polygon, and receive a complimentary cost comparison for your construction site(s), visit today!

Related articles