While a 3C strategy is challenging, it is not unattainable.
I assume that the tower was not operationally tested on installation to confirm performance. Was the tower specified to be certified efficiency based mostly on Cooling Tower Institute or was the performance up to the tower supplier?
Certified implies that it is totally as much as the tower producer to make it right. “Supplier” implies that- with a purpose to sell the Shopper any more towers, this one will work as specified- once more at the supplier’s price.
18 months is certainly not an acceptable time for fill replacement.
How far away from specified performance is the tower? Will it throw away the rated heat, but with a better than desired leaving water temp OR is performance totally out of spec- reject heat AND leaving water?
Another choice to offer the tower manufacturer is to furnish compensation primarily based on the performance of the related load (I assume it’s a chiller)- ie: Present kW/Ton at rated capacity vs. RATED kW per ton at rated capacity instances annual equal full load hours occasions value of a kWh occasions 20 years (the conventional life of a tower). Instance- current is 0.Sixty eight kW/Ton vs. rated zero.Sixty five kW/ton, one thousand ton chiller with 1800 equivalent full load hours (based on recorded common day by day weather knowledge) and $0.127 per kWh (based on power value and demand price) = $6,858 per year occasions 20 years for a total of $137,160. (so much bigger than you thought for less than 0.03 kW/ton)
If they won’t improve the tower to run as specified, your client will sue them for the added costs that the Consumer is facing. Guess they repair the tower.