Reduce HVAC and electricity costs through intelligent control of heat pumps, chillers and major electrical loads
In Australia, electricity pricing is increasingly shaped by wholesale market volatility, network tariff structures, demand charges and solar-driven price swings.
In parts of the Australian market, wholesale prices can change in very short settlement intervals, while the actual way a site is billed depends on the state, retailer, network tariff and contract structure.
This means that electricity is no longer something that should be managed as a flat, fixed operating cost. For many sites, the timing of electrical load now matters almost as much as the total consumption itself.
Large electrical systems such as heat pumps, chillers, refrigeration compressors, thermal storage systems, HVAC plant and process loads often continue operating on static schedules – even when electricity is expensive, solar export value is low, or demand charges are being triggered unnecessarily.
That is where intelligent optimisation creates measurable value.
Our optimisation logic takes into account:
With proper optimisation, many sites can achieve:
For many commercial and industrial sites, realistic savings are in the range of 15% to 30% of electricity cost related to HVAC, cooling, thermal loads or other major electrical systems.
The chart reflects a typical electricity pricing pattern observed in New South Wales (Sydney region), where high solar generation reduces midday prices while evening demand drives price peaks. This creates a strong opportunity for load shifting and operational optimisation. Actual cost outcomes depend on tariff structure, demand charges and retailer arrangements.
This chart illustrates a typical market pattern that is increasingly relevant in Australia: lower daytime prices driven by high solar generation, followed by a sharp rise later in the day when solar output falls and grid demand increases.
Depending on the market structure, state and tariff arrangement, the cost signal seen by the end user may come from a combination of wholesale price, retailer structure, network tariff and demand exposure.
For larger electrical systems, manually responding to these signals is usually unrealistic. The financially optimal operating window changes from day to day based on price forecasts, weather, occupancy, production needs and system constraints.
That is why cost reduction increasingly depends on automation. Effective control logic should determine when a system should pre-cool, pre-heat, charge thermal mass, reduce load or shift operation into lower-cost periods.
For larger HVAC and thermal systems, this can translate into material annual savings without compromising comfort or process stability.
A 100 kW load could represent a commercial heat pump system, a chilled water plant, a refrigeration compressor, a cold room load, a process cooling loop or another flexible electrical asset.
The example below shows how daily operating cost changes when the same energy demand is shifted into the lowest-cost hours available.
This is a simplified demonstration of the core principle behind optimisation: same function, lower electricity cost.
The value of optimisation depends strongly on how much operational flexibility a system has.
If a load only needs to run during a narrow window, there is less room to avoid high-cost periods. If the system can shift more freely, a larger share of consumption can be moved into lower-cost time windows.
This is especially valuable for systems with:
| Operating Time | Without Optimisation | Optimised | Savings | |
| per day | per year | |||
| 6 h / day | $41.95 | -$2.41 | $44.36 | $11,090 |
| 8 h / day | $55.93 | $9.48 | $46.45 | $11,613 |
| 10 h / day | $69.91 | $21.38 | $48.53 | $12,133 |
These figures are illustrative and designed to show the economic effect of load shifting. Actual results depend on tariff design, equipment flexibility, operating profile, weather conditions and site constraints.
This type of optimisation is especially relevant for sites with significant HVAC, refrigeration or thermal process loads, including:
In many cases, the biggest opportunity is not reducing energy use alone – but reducing the cost of when and how that energy is used.
Send us a recent electricity bill, the main equipment details and a few basic notes about your site. We will review whether your building or facility is a strong candidate for optimisation.
Usually not. In many cases, meaningful savings can be achieved by improving the operating logic and schedule of the existing system.
No. The same optimisation logic can also apply to chillers, chilled water systems, refrigeration loads, thermal storage systems and other major electrical loads.
No. Solar helps create more opportunity, but optimisation can still deliver value without on-site generation.
Yes. For many sites, one of the biggest opportunities is avoiding unnecessary demand peaks and reducing exposure to expensive tariff periods.
For suitable commercial and industrial sites, savings of around 15% to 30% are often achievable on the electricity cost associated with flexible electrical loads.
This is generally most relevant for sites with meaningful electrical demand, typically where HVAC, cooling or thermal loads represent a material part of the electricity bill.
Not if implemented properly. The objective is to preserve required performance while reducing cost through smarter scheduling and control.
A typical first review includes:
For many suitable projects, the expected payback is within 3 years, and often faster where large flexible loads already exist.
This solution is generally most relevant for sites with:
Heat pumps and HVAC systems are often highly efficient from an engineering perspective, but still economically inefficient in the way they are operated.
If the system runs at the wrong time, it can still create unnecessary cost even if the equipment itself is technically efficient.
That is why the next stage of energy efficiency is not only what equipment you have, but also when and how that equipment runs.