Ultra-low temperature (ULT) freezers form the backbone of biorepositories, safeguarding high-value, irreplaceable biological samples that underpin critical research. The reliability of these systems can determine the integrity of stored materials and, by extension, the success of the research programs that depend on them.
Yet, when it comes to buying new cold storage units, procurement decisions often hinge on the upfront price. Although this can seem practical in the short term, a narrow focus on purchase price can risk the buying of inadequate units with hidden costs that ultimately make them more expensive.
Here, we explain why the upfront cost of cold storage isn’t the full picture, and what biorepositories can do to ensure their cold storage purchases deliver lasting value, without breaking the budget.
Why Upfront Costs Don’t Tell the Whole Story
Purchasing low-cost units can seem like the right choice when budgets are tight or capacity needs are growing quickly. However, unit sticker price doesn’t capture a unit’s true cost. While a low purchase cost may look appealing on paper, it can hide multiple factors that contribute to total cost of ownership (TCO).
Energy Use
ULT freezers are among the most energy-intensive pieces of equipment in a laboratory, with some models using as much energy as an average household every day.1 It’s no surprise, then, that energy use can be the biggest contributor to TCO.
Energy use can vary widely between different models, with factors like insulation quality and compressor technology impacting a unit’s energy efficiency. Lower-cost units can be more likely to feature less effective insulation, outdated compressor systems, and minimal energy-saving controls, resulting in lower efficiency and higher lifetime energy costs. In fact, high-efficiency cold storage equipment has been shown to save between 20% and 66% of energy used compared to an average ULT freezer—an energy saving that can offset the price difference (between a standard and high efficiency unit) in as little as three years (depending on ULT model and local energy rates).2
Reliability and Robustness
The reliability and robustness of a ULT can have long-term implications for both cost and scientific integrity. Lower-cost units may use lower-quality components, making them more prone to failures such as compressor breakdowns, electronics malfunctions, or degraded door seals. Each failure can lead to costly repairs and replacement, and risk the loss of valuable samples and materials.
Sample losses can not only bring large financial consequences, but also risk devastating scientific repercussions. In 2012, for example, a failure of a ULT’s digital monitoring system at the Harvard-affiliated McLean Hospital led to the loss of a third of the world’s largest collection of autism-related brain tissue, an incident that reportedly set autism research back a decade.3
By buying a lower-cost unit that may have poorer reliability and robustness, biorepositories could put themselves at higher risk of such incidents, resulting in losses that extend well beyond budget lines.
Maintenance Requirements
ULTs require regular maintenance, such as defrosting and filter cleaning, to maintain stable performance and prevent costly breakdowns. These maintenance activities require staff time, contributing to indirect TCO, and require the handling of stored samples, risking their integrity.
Low-cost ULTs may require more frequent maintenance due to poorer construction (for instance, weaker door seals and poorer insulation could mean they need defrosting more often). Over time, the repeated maintenance, staff time, and interruptions can all add to the unit’s TCO.
HVAC Load
Every ULT freezer generates heat as it operates, placing additional demand on a facility’s HVAC system to maintain stable ambient temperatures. The more heat a freezer expels, the harder the building’s cooling system must work, driving up indirect energy use and, ultimately, utility costs.
Inefficient or poorly designed models may release more heat into the laboratory environment, amplifying these hidden energy demands. Over time, this added load can make a difference to TCO, particularly in facilities running large numbers of freezers.
Floor Space Requirements
Laboratories can have high costs per square foot. Freezers with larger footprints or those that require wide clearance for ventilation occupy more valuable real estate and therefore have a higher TCO.
Lower-cost units may be less space-efficient, using older designs with poor airflow that demand greater clearance around the cabinet. Over time, this inefficiency could inflate TCO.
How to Choose the Right ULT to Ensure Long-term Value
After understanding where lifetime costs accumulate, the next step is to focus on how to manage them. For biorepositories, this means approaching procurement with a TCO mindset; weighing lifetime factors alongside purchase price. To achieve this, there are several steps teams can take.
Check Performance Data
Understanding how a freezer performs under real-world conditions can reveal how much it could truly cost to operate and maintain over time.
Energy Efficiency
To evaluate a ULT’s energy efficiency performance, procurement teams can use ENERGY STAR® ratings as a useful benchmark to compare models using standardized, third-party data. Beyond this, there are several design features teams can look for that typically improve efficiency. These include:
- High-quality insulation, such as vacuum-insulated panels, that improve temperature stability
- Advanced compressor technology, like inverter compressors, which dynamically adjust cooling output to reduce power draw
- Efficient airflow or heat rejection systems that minimize strain on both the freezer and the building’s HVAC infrastructure
Reliability and Robustness
Comparing reliability and robustness across models can be more challenging due to a lack of standardized data. To evaluate these factors effectively, procurement teams can take several practical steps:
- Ask vendors for information on component failure rates and the length and conditions of their testing practices—for example, whether equipment has been run continuously for extended periods, or only assessed under short trials
- Check that testing reflects real-world laboratory conditions. Ambient temperature, accessory use, and placement of temperature probes can all influence performance data. Data gathered under ideal test conditions may not accurately represent daily operation, giving a poor picture of how a unit will truly perform
- Speak directly with colleagues, facilities teams, or service technicians who have hands-on experience with different models
- Consult professional networks and forums to identify common problems or red flags with certain units
Assess Service and Warranty Coverage
Strong service and warranty coverage can help reduce costs when units are in need of repair. To help minimize unexpected expenses and downtime, procurement teams should:
- Favor warranties that cover both parts and labor (rather than parts alone), as labor is often the largest repair expense
- Look for vendors that offer transparent warranty terms and access to industry-trained service technicians. Reliable technical support helps prevent minor issues from escalating into major costs, protecting uptime and the long-term value of the equipment.
- Ask manufacturers about the cost of commonly replaced or critical repair parts before purchasing. Critical components can be expensive, and these expenses often aren’t factored into initial budgeting. Understanding these costs early helps avoid unpleasant surprises later and ensures that any apparent upfront savings aren’t offset by high repair expenses down the line.
Factor in Maintenance Design
Design features that make maintenance easier can deliver cost savings over a freezer’s lifetime. Reducing the frequency or complexity of upkeep lowers staff time spent on routine tasks, minimizes disruption to research activities, and can keep units running at optimal efficiency for longer.
When reviewing options, look for features that simplify ongoing care. Frost-reduction technology, for instance, limits ice build-up inside the chamber and cuts down on the need for manual defrosting, a task that can be time-consuming and potentially disruptive. Filterless designs also reduce maintenance demands, requiring fewer routine cleans and checks to keep airflow systems functioning efficiently.
Look for Units with Robust Monitoring Features
Reliable alert and connectivity features allow biorepositories to detect and respond to problems before they escalate. Look for ULTs equipped with comprehensive alarm systems and remote monitoring connectivity, rather than relying solely on local or manual checks. Early detection of temperature excursions or equipment faults enables timely intervention, reducing the risk of sample loss and avoiding high costs associated with compromised materials.
Look for Space-efficient Designs
Choosing space-efficient designs, such as upright units with high storage density or models that allow zero-clearance installation, can help reduce overall footprint and make better use of available space.
It’s also important to anticipate future storage needs. Planning ahead avoids the expense and inefficiency of ad-hoc purchases, and investing in scalable, well-planned storage solutions can help ensure the facility’s cold storage infrastructure remains cost-effective and efficient for years to come.
Making Every Cold Storage Investment Count
Reliable ULTs are not a luxury; they are a necessity for safeguarding irreplaceable samples and supporting research continuity. Focusing solely on upfront cost can lead to the purchase of units that consume more energy, require more frequent maintenance, and ultimately cost more in the long term.
Having a TCO mindset to procurement can help biorepositories invest in equipment that delivers lasting reliability and efficiency, reducing operational burden while protecting the collections that drive discovery.
References
- https://mygreenlab.org/resources/energy/
- https://mygreenlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/cs_-_dept_of_energy_field_demonstration_of_energy_efficient_ult_freezers.pdf
- https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jun/11/brain-tissue-autism-freezer-fault
About the Author
Jason Cook
Jason Cook is the Product Manager for Cold Chain at PHC Corporation of North America, bringing over a decade of hands-on experience in ultra-low temperature (ULT) refrigeration, product development, and technical support. Starting his career as a refrigeration service engineer, Jason quickly advanced through the ranks, managing technical service teams and eventually stepping into product management for PHCbi’s cold chain solutions. In his current role, Jason serves as the go-to expert on cold storage technologies and cryogenic systems. He supports cross-functional teams by providing in-depth technical guidance, customer training, and product lifecycle insights. Known for bridging the gap between engineering and end-user needs, Jason plays a critical role in shaping product strategy, ensuring performance, and driving innovation across PHCbi’s portfolio.
