Industrial Cooling System Companies
Cooling tower, closed-loop, and hybrid cooling providers integrated with water treatment programs.
1 specialist provider · 39 related · 9 countries
Qualified suppliers come to you.
Filter results
Country
Industry
Technology
Not sure where to start?
Showing 1-20 of 40
Related providers
Listed for overlapping capabilities, not for industrial cooling system specifically.
Sidonwater S.L.
VerifiedSpain · 1-50 employees · 5 case studies · 3 datasheets
Sidon Water is a water technology company specialised in non-chemical water treatment and system optimisation. We develop and deploy advanced solutions that prevent and remove limescale, reduce fouling and corrosion, and improve the performance of cooling towers, industrial water systems, and reverse osmosis and desalination installations. Sidon Water works with industrial clients, commercial building owners, OEMs and EPC partners to deliver measurable improvements in energy efficiency, operational reliability and asset lifetime. Our activities cover the full cycle from analysis and pilot projects to system integration, commissioning and long-term performance optimisation.
Buyer's guide
The buyer's guide to industrial cooling system
Industrial Cooling System Design: Cooling Tower Selection, Water Chemistry, and Legionella Control
Industrial cooling systems reject process heat via evaporative cooling towers (wet, dry, or hybrid), direct-contact condensers, or closed-loop fluid coolers. Evaporative cooling towers achieve wet bulb approach temperatures of 3 to 5 degrees C (cooling to within 3 to 5 degrees C of the ambient wet bulb temperature) and are the most efficient heat rejection method at 0.5 to 0.6 kWh of fan and pump energy per kWh of heat rejected.
Cooling tower sizing parameters: range (temperature difference between hot inlet and cold outlet, typically 5 to 12 degrees C), approach (difference between outlet temperature and wet bulb), and L over G ratio (liquid to gas flow ratio, typically 0.75 to 1.5). Tower fill selection (film fill vs splash fill) depends on water quality: splash fill for silty or biofouling-prone water, film fill for clean water with lower approach temperatures.
Cooling water chemistry control prevents scale (calcium carbonate, calcium sulphate, silica), corrosion (carbon steel, copper alloys, galvanised steel), and biological growth. Cycles of concentration (COC) determine blowdown rate: COC of 4 to 6 minimises make-up water consumption. Langelier Saturation Index (LSI) maintained between -0.5 and +0.5 prevents both corrosion and scale.
Chemical treatment programmes typically include: corrosion inhibitor (azole for copper protection, molybdate or phosphonate for steel), scale inhibitor (polyacrylate or phosphonate anti-scalant dosed at 5 to 20 mg per L), biocide (oxidising biocide: sodium hypochlorite at 0.5 to 1.0 mg per L free chlorine continuous, or non-oxidising biocide: isothiazolone, DBNPA at quarterly shock dose 25 to 50 mg per L).
Legionella pneumophila control in cooling towers is a legal obligation in the UK under HSE ACOP L8 and HSG274 Part 1: towers must be registered with local authority (under Notifiable Cooling Towers regulations 1992), risk assessment conducted by a competent person, and monthly Legionella culture samples with action limit of 1,000 CFU per L (trigger for immediate corrective action) and target below 100 CFU per L. HSE reports approximately 200 to 500 UK Legionnaires' disease cases annually, with cooling towers implicated in 20 to 30 percent of community-acquired outbreaks. US ASHRAE 188 (2018) provides risk management programme requirements for building water systems including cooling towers.
Frequently asked questions
What is cycles of concentration in a cooling tower and why does it matter?
Cycles of concentration (COC, also called concentration ratio) is the ratio of dissolved solids in the circulating cooling water to dissolved solids in the make-up water supply. If make-up water conductivity is 500 microS per cm and circulating water is 2,500 microS per cm, COC equals 5. Running at higher COC reduces make-up water consumption (make-up rate equals evaporation rate divided by (COC minus 1)) but increases scaling and corrosion risk. At COC 6, 80 percent of make-up is retained versus lost at COC 1; at COC 3, only 67 percent is retained. Maximum achievable COC is limited by the scaling tendency of the worst scaling salt (usually CaCO3 or silica). Anti-scalant dosing typically allows COC 4 to 6 versus COC 2 to 3 without treatment. Each additional COC saves approximately 25 percent of blowdown water, directly reducing sewer disposal costs.
What is Legionella and how is it controlled in cooling towers?
Legionella pneumophila is a waterborne bacterium causing Legionnaires' disease (severe pneumonia) when aerosolised water droplets are inhaled. Cooling towers are high-risk because they generate fine aerosol, maintain water at 20 to 45 degrees C (optimal growth range), and can accumulate biofilm, scale, and sediment (providing nutrient and protective environments). UK HSE ACOP L8 requires: monthly Legionella culture samples (action limit 1,000 CFU per L requires immediate corrective action), free chlorine maintained at 0.5 to 1.0 mg per L continuous, annual clean-and-disinfect (biocide shock at 5 mg per L free chlorine for 1 hour or equivalent), and drift eliminators to below 0.002 percent of recirculating water flow. Tower should be decommissioned and clean-disinfected before any extended shutdown.
How much water does an evaporative cooling tower use?
Water consumption of a cooling tower has three components: (1) Evaporation (dominant): approximately 1.8 L per kWh of heat rejected at typical summer conditions (0.5 percent of circulating water flow per degree C of range); (2) Blowdown: evaporation rate divided by (COC minus 1); at COC 4, blowdown equals evaporation divided by 3; (3) Drift: aerosol carryover, typically 0.0005 to 0.002 percent of circulating flow with modern drift eliminators. Total make-up equals evaporation plus blowdown plus drift. For a 1,000 kW process cooling duty at COC 5 and 35 degrees C ambient wet bulb: evaporation approximately 1,800 L per hr, blowdown 450 L per hr, drift 5 to 20 L per hr, total make-up 2,255 to 2,270 L per hr. Water efficiency improvements: increase COC (with water treatment), install drift eliminators, and implement rain water harvesting for cooling tower make-up.
What is the difference between an open and closed cooling system?
An open (evaporative) cooling system circulates water through a cooling tower where a portion evaporates to atmosphere, removing latent heat. It achieves low approach temperatures (3 to 5 degrees C to wet bulb) and high efficiency but requires significant make-up water, water treatment, and Legionella management. A closed cooling system circulates glycol or water through an air-cooled heat exchanger (dry cooler or fluid cooler) where heat is rejected to air by sensible cooling only, with no evaporation and no water loss. Closed systems require no water treatment and have no Legionella risk, but approach temperature is limited to ambient dry bulb plus 5 to 10 degrees C, meaning higher process cooling temperatures in summer and higher chiller energy consumption. Hybrid systems combine dry cooling with adiabatic cooling (evaporative pre-cooling of air) to achieve intermediate water consumption (50 to 70 percent reduction vs fully evaporative) with near-wet-bulb performance.
Illustrative scenario · Food and beverage manufacturing
A composite drawn from typical projects in this category, not a single client engagement. Figures are indicative.
- Challenge
- A large food processing site in the North West of England operated a 4,000 kW evaporative cooling system running at COC 2 to 3 due to hard make-up water causing chronic CaCO3 scale. Water consumption was 8,000 m3 per month and three Legionella action limit exceedances had occurred in 12 months, triggering HSE correspondence.
- Approach
- Installed a water softener (duplex cation exchange, treating 100 percent of make-up water to below 5 mg per L hardness) enabling COC to increase to 6 without scaling risk. Replaced the Legionella risk management contractor, introduced weekly biocide shock dosing with DBNPA, installed continuous chlorine monitoring, and implemented an electronic logbook aligned with HSG274 Part 1. Drift eliminators were replaced on all three towers.
- Outcome
- Make-up water consumption reduced from 8,000 to 4,200 m3 per month (47 percent reduction), saving 45,000 GBP per year in water and sewer charges. Legionella culture results remained below 100 CFU per L for 18 consecutive months after the programme. Blowdown volume reduction also reduced sewer trade effluent volume, cutting consent charges by a further 8,000 GBP per year.
Questions to ask shortlisted providers
5
- 01
What cycles of concentration does your proposed water treatment programme support, and what is the expected annual water savings versus our current COC?
Each additional COC reduces make-up water consumption significantly and directly reduces water and sewer charges. A proposal that maintains COC 3 versus one achieving COC 6 can represent a 40 percent difference in water consumption. Ask for a water balance calculation showing predicted make-up, blowdown, evaporation, and drift at the proposed COC.
- 02
How will the Legionella management programme comply with HSG274 Part 1, and what are the monthly sample turnaround times and action limit response procedures?
HSE ACOP L8 requires monthly Legionella culture samples with an action limit of 1,000 CFU per L triggering immediate corrective action. The speed of culture result turnaround (typically 10 to 14 days for standard culture) and the action plan for levels between 100 and 1,000 CFU per L are critical. Ask to see the written scheme and confirm that the contractor holds appropriate qualifications (Legionella Control Association registration or equivalent).
- 03
What inhibitor chemistry are you proposing and is it approved for use in a food production environment where aerosols may reach the production area?
Cooling tower biocides and corrosion inhibitors (azoles, phosphonates, isothiazolones) must be approved under the Biocidal Products Regulation (BPR) PT2 for cooling water. In a food facility, aerosol drift from cooling towers landing on intake air handling units can carry chemical residues into the production area. Confirm the chemistry is food-grade compatible and that drift eliminators meet standard EN 13741.
- 04
What is the expected corrosion rate on our carbon steel heat exchangers at the proposed treatment chemistry, and how will you monitor this?
Corrosion inhibitor programmes are validated by corrosion coupon monitoring (coupons installed in the cooling water circuit, removed and weighed after 30 to 90 days). Target carbon steel corrosion rates: below 2 mils per year (mpy) at optimised chemistry. Without monitoring, corrosion is undetected until heat exchanger failure or pitting is found during planned inspection.
- 05
What is the make-up water quality test frequency and how quickly will the programme respond to seasonal water quality changes?
UK mains water hardness and chemistry varies seasonally (particularly in areas using a blend of groundwater and surface water). A cooling water programme optimised for summer water quality may over- or under-dose inhibitors in winter, causing scaling or corrosion. Confirm that make-up water is tested monthly and that the treatment doses are adjusted based on incoming water analysis.
What drives cost in this category
4
- Make-up water and sewer charges
- Water consumption is the dominant operating cost for an evaporative cooling system. At COC 3, make-up equals 1.5 times evaporation; at COC 6, make-up equals 1.2 times evaporation. For a 1,000 kW system evaporating 1,800 L per hr, the difference between COC 3 and COC 6 is 600 L per hr (5,256 m3 per year). At UK water and sewer rates averaging 5 to 8 GBP per m3, this represents 26,000 to 42,000 GBP per year in direct savings from improving COC.
- Water treatment chemical programme
- Annual chemical cost for a 1,000 kW cooling system at COC 5 runs 5,000 to 20,000 GBP per year depending on make-up water hardness, system metallurgy, and biocide programme intensity. Bleed conductivity controllers and automated dosing pumps (capital 2,000 to 8,000 GBP) pay back within 1 to 2 years by eliminating manual dosing error and optimising inhibitor consumption.
- Legionella compliance and monitoring
- Monthly Legionella culture sampling (4 to 8 samples per site per month), written scheme preparation, and Legionella risk assessment typically cost 5,000 to 15,000 GBP per year for a 3-tower site. An action limit exceedance (above 1,000 CFU per L) triggers hyperchlorination, emergency sampling, and potential HSE reporting costs of 5,000 to 20,000 GBP per incident. The cost of a confirmed Legionnaires' disease outbreak with litigation exposure is orders of magnitude higher.
- Energy and scale cleaning
- Scale on heat exchanger surfaces acts as insulation: a 1 mm CaCO3 scale layer increases heat exchanger fouling resistance by approximately 10 percent, requiring chiller head pressure to rise to compensate, increasing compressor energy by 5 to 10 percent. Acid descaling of a scaled cooling system (decommission, chemical clean, recommission) costs 5,000 to 30,000 GBP per event. Proper scale inhibition eliminates this cost.
Key regulations and standards
4
- HSE ACOP L8: Legionella Control in Cooling Towers
- The Health and Safety Executive's Approved Code of Practice L8 (Legionnaires' disease: the control of Legionella bacteria in water systems) is the primary UK regulatory document for cooling tower Legionella management. It requires: written risk assessment by a competent person, a written control scheme, monitoring (monthly Legionella culture, continuous residual biocide monitoring), records kept for at least 5 years, and nominated responsible person accountable for the programme. Failure to implement ACOP L8 requirements is an absolute defence in HSE prosecution; no need to prove breach caused harm.
- HSG274 Part 1: Technical Guidance for Cooling Towers
- HSE guidance document HSG274 Part 1 (Evaporative cooling systems) provides detailed technical guidance implementing ACOP L8 for cooling towers and evaporative condensers. It specifies: Legionella action levels (immediate investigation at 100 to 999 CFU per L, remedial action at above 1,000 CFU per L including hyperchlorination), clean-and-disinfect intervals (minimum annually and before extended shutdown), biocide programme requirements, and drift eliminator specification (below 0.002 percent drift rate).
- Notifiable Cooling Towers and Evaporative Condensers Regulations 1992
- UK Regulation SI 1992/2225 requires that all owners of cooling towers and evaporative condensers notify the local authority (environmental health department) of the existence, location, and nature of the system. Notifications must be updated when a system is commissioned, decommissioned, or substantially altered. This provides local authorities with information to trace potential sources of Legionella outbreaks to cooling towers in their jurisdiction during outbreak investigations.
- PSSR 2000: Pressure Systems Safety Regulations
- The Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000 apply to cooling systems containing pressurised water or steam above 0.5 bar gauge and above 250 bar-litres stored energy. Evaporative cooling towers themselves are not pressure vessels, but associated chiller condensers, pressurised refrigerant systems, and high-pressure hot water circuits fall under PSSR. A Written Scheme of Examination (WSE) prepared by a competent person is required, with periodic inspection by an inspection body (Lloyd's, Bureau Veritas, TUV) at intervals specified in the WSE.